AMD RyZen CPU Reviews

[Deleted member 2197]

AMD Ryzen 5 1400 Linux Benchmarks: 27-Way CPU Comparison On Ubuntu
6 July 2017
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd-ryzen5-1400&num=1

 

[digitalwanderer]

The six-core Ryzen 5 1600 as such offers tremendous value for money. Tweak it a little and this 219 USD processor is as fast in gaming as the 499 USD Ryzen 7 1800X is.

I missed it to save 20 bucks, silly me.

The Ry5 1600 is the one I'm aiming for, they got a great deal for it with a mobo at microcenter and I heard the spire cooler that comes with it isn't bad. Glad to hear it's a fun one to play with!

 

[Cyan]

The Ry5 1600 is the one I'm aiming for, they got a great deal for it with a mobo at microcenter and I heard the spire cooler that comes with it isn't bad. Glad to hear it's a fun one to play with!

the wraith spire is pretty good. The Ryzen 1500X -my computer's CPU- comes with it for free too and it does a fine job, you can even oc the CPU to a decent amount with it. It is a 95W tdp heatsink and your future CPU just hast a 65W tdp

 

[Silent_Buddha]

AMD Ryzen 5 1600 review
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-5-1600-review,1.html

Damn, that is really nice perf/price. But wow does it get bad perf/watt when you overclock it high enough for the pref/price to become really good.

The 1600x is really nice, you get default clock speeds that are about as good but without power consumption ramping up so drastically and the price bump over the 1600 isn't that much. So the savings in electricity costs should make it the cheaper CPU to have after a couple of years.

Right now I'm trying to decide over the 1700x, 1700 or 1600x. All depends on whether I really want those 2 extra cores. It'd be really nice but is it nice enough to pay the price premium?

I think I may go with the 1600x just because I think the 2nd generation of Zen based CPUs might be significantly better. If so I'll be replacing it relatively quickly and I'll get an 8 core when the 2nd gen CPUs come out.

Regards,
SB

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Bleh, lag = double post.

Regards,
SB

 

[Rurouni]

My review for Ryzen 1700 (not mine, office property). I oc'ed it to 3.6. Can definitely go higher, but right now I'm settling for this @1.25v. For the RAM part tho, I'm using a relatively cheap 2x16GB 3200 TEAM branded RAM. It can't run at 3200 (not at its default timing, it can boot into Windows tho), but it is stable at 2933. Then I lower the timing from the default 16-18-18-18 something to 16-16-16-16 and using Corona Renderer benchmark, it became around 10% faster! Nice
With 1.0.0.6 bios, the RAM compatibility is really good compared to before it. My friend was using Ryzen with 2x8GB 3200 G.Skill RAM and it can only ran at 2133 or 2400 (definitely not higher than that!).
Overall, the experience with Ryzen is much nicer than my own Kaveri. With Kaveri the RAM compatibility is really bad and that was with the proven DDR3. All sorts of nightmare trying to make a RAM ran stable especially with cheap RAM. At the very least when I ran the RAM at 3200, it boots, while on Kaveri when I ran the RAM at its rated 2400, it requires clearing the BIOS making trial and error rather painful.
This Ryzen is paired with ASRock AB350 Pro4 mainboard (probably the cheapest B350 mainboard that has 4 RAM slots in case I need to add more RAM).

 

[Davros]

AMD Launches Ryzen PRO CPUs: Enhanced Security, Longer Warranty, Better Quality - The AMD Ryzen PRO lineup of processors consists of six SKUs that belong to the Ryzen 7, Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 3 families
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11591...anced-security-longer-warranty-better-quality

 

[xEx]

Better quality as inn lower TDP or higher OC?

Tittle:
AMD launches ryzen PRO CPUs.

Botton line:

AMD promises to share more information about their Ryzen PRO CPUs and supporting platforms on August 29. The company is not saying that actual systems will be available on this date(...)

 

[Rurouni]

Btw, just to add to my review, I just did a test with i7-4790 to see whether ram speed/latency will impact its performance as much as on Ryzen. I did 2 test. 1st one was lowering the RAM speed form 1600 to 1400, the 2nd one was adding the latency from the original 9-9-9-9 to 11-11-11-11 while keeping the 1600 speed. Both resulted in lower performance on Corona Renderer Benchmark and the result for both are pretty much the same, almost 3% slower vs the original RAM speed and timing.
It seems that Ryzen does like a good RAM (fast and lower latency) and a good RAM can affect its performance greater vs an i7-4790.

 

[Davros]

Im quite shocked at the effect ram speed has on price

 

[Clukos]

Different bins of b-die, the first two are Samsung B-die, the third one is not. It's essentially better ram. B-die is usually more expensive when it comes to ram but it's worth it for both AMD and Intel.

 

[xEx]

Different bins of b-die, the first two are Samsung B-die, the third one is not. It's essentially better ram. B-die is usually more expensive when it comes to ram but it's worth it for both AMD and Intel.

Worth depends on ur budget. No matter what you will be better spending a 100 more on a VGA than on ram or on a better display or on a better sound system, unless you have enough budget to buy all without problems.

TBH One could simply buy a monster VGA and then a mid-tier system and play at 4k with the GPU max out @ 60FPS, it wont be a balance system but it will let you play with higher image quality. I for one prefer a more balance system but this kind of system has its advantages also(you can simply sell ur MoBo and CPU and buy new ones w/o much spending to keep updated with new tech while VGA tech have longer life time, so you could still have a system with all the new stuff every few years and you could just need to buy a new VGA from time to time.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Worth depends on ur budget. No matter what you will be better spending a 100 more on a VGA than on ram or on a better display or on a better sound system, unless you have enough budget to buy all without problems.

TBH One could simply buy a monster VGA and then a mid-tier system and play at 4k with the GPU max out @ 60FPS, it wont be a balance system but it will let you play with higher image quality. I for one prefer a more balance system but this kind of system has its advantages also(you can simply sell ur MoBo and CPU and buy new ones w/o much spending to keep updated with new tech while VGA tech have longer life time, so you could still have a system with all the new stuff every few years and you could just need to buy a new VGA from time to time.

Except for the past few years GPUs have advanced far more rapidly than CPUs. I'm still using an i5 2500k (@4.4 Ghz) because newer CPUs offer only small increases in performance for most games. Newer GPUs, however, often dramatically increase the performance in games.

I'll be upgrading my CPU sometime this year finally, as good performance 6 and 8 core CPUs are finally affordable. With the GTX 1070 which has crippled performance at 100% CPU usage, I'm finding the 2500k to be unpleasant now compared to when it was paired with an R9 290 (at 100% CPU usage). More cores should alleviate pressure on the CPU allowing the 1070 to operate as it should.

Regards,
SB

 

[Alexko]

Perhaps there ought to be a dedicated EPYC hardware review thread, but here's a review of a dual-EPYC platform, performing pretty damn well for a "glued" solution:

https://www.servethehome.com/dual-amd-epyc-7601-processor-performance-and-review-part-1/

The following remark would perhaps more properly belong in the AMD Execution thread, but I think EPYC will make a world of difference to the company's balance sheet.

 

[Clukos]

NDA for Threadripper lifts today in about 6 hours, this will be interesting.

Some early results at 4.1 GHz with an AIO:

 

[Davros]

I've seen plenty of benchmarks comparing ryzen to intel
but anyone know how it compares to previous amd cpu's ?

 

[xEx]

As far as I know the 1200 outperforms the 8350.

 

[Davros]

from the comparison ive seen
ryzen : 25% faster single core performance, 27% faster quadcore performance
but the fx is 34% faster when an app is written to make use of as many cores as are available
and as sebbi reckons most games from this point on will be written to use as many cores as they can find
someone who would have to make a system last as long as possible (like myself) would be better going for the fx

 

[Malo]

someone who would have to make a system last as long as possible (like myself) would be better going for the fx

I don't think there's any situation where an FX would end up as the better choice for a CPU.

 

[Davros]

your in a situation where you can only afford the one of the 2 cpu's and it's going to have to last you maybe 10 years