I opened that video thinking it was going to be someone else crapping all over AMD's Ryzen about the questionable performance in games, but I was pleasantly surprised and found it interesting.Originally Posted by moffen666
Ryzen is definitely a beast and I applaud AMD for making this comeback, but it's going to need some software updates to fully support it, since, like he said in the video, Intel has been the top performer for the last several years because "Bulldozer was crap," and what that equates to is that most things have been optimized for Intel's architecture.
On the surface of any standard, single-game benchmarks we usually only see FPS numbers, and that's it. Some review sites might mention it, but I don't know of any that consistently give the overall load being produced on a CPU across its threads when benchmarking games. However, in the video, he points out that in another review it was shown that the R1700 and 7700K can achieve the same framerate (in BF1), but when looking at the load being put on the threads, the 7700K is maxed out, while the R1700 still has breathing room. This is obviously just one single example, but I find it to be a very interesting example since BF1 handles multi-threading very nicely.
I don't have a horse in the race, so to speak, since I'm locked into an Intel platform at the moment, but it's no secret that multiboxers benefit from more cores/threads* when available (assuming you aren't GPU bottlenecked), and for anyone looking to upgrade in the near future who has the need for heavily multi-threaded workloads (playing multiple game clients, recording, streaming, etc.), then Ryzen looks to be the answer at this time.
* AMD's older 8-core chips were not really 8 standalone cores.
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us