AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Official Benchmarks Appear In Passmark Database

wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-official-benchmarks-passmark/

Other urls found in this thread:

pcgamer.com/new-amd-ryzen-details-and-pricing-leaks/
amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/electronics/229189/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>currytech
POO

I guess you don't like this then it had to post.

When compressing your 7zips

What the hell is sorting

> can't do numbers

I guess they do physics on the gpu.

I'll buy ryzen + vega no matter what. Fuck these benchmarks.

based on plain old math

>Fuck these benchmarks that show it better in some things but not in 100% of things.
do you like living with delusions?
that's how you get buyer's remorse

>What the hell is sorting
read a book, nigger

Does prime number generation performance have any impact on crypto currency mining?

Er, there's no way they didn't hit a bug with this one

At least they got intel to lower their prices?

Don't they always do that with GPUs nowadays? Or is it about certain coins like litecoin?

new instruction set senpai

I have a i5-3450 + gtx660. everything is an upgrade to me.

My honest opinion, AMD fucked up with not going 4core + 4hyper-threading like Intel. The 7700K is still a sweet spot for 95% of power users.

>double the cores
>20% more performance

kek

pcgamer.com/new-amd-ryzen-details-and-pricing-leaks/

Pretty much exactly what we saw with an earlier 1700X sample.

Prime Numbers, Physics, and CPU Mark metrics are very sensitive to memory timings.

I'm buying ryzen 1700 because I want dem cores, dat cache, and dat low power consumption. I don't really care about playing games

also gonna upgrade a bunch of stuff in my system to the new standards when I upgrade mobo. DDR4, m.2 SSD, bunch of 3.1 USB's and shit

Your honest opinion is retarded. Raven Ridge is a 4c/8t APU.

Welp I'm going with 7700k

>apu
talking about desktop

Does that CPU support 4K Netflix?

The i7 7700k is an APU.
Deal with it, kid.

>The 7700K is still a sweet spot for 95% of power users.
no, no its really not

I'm waiting for r5 series to see how it is for gaming. AMD knew people have been dying to upgrade, so they released the higher core more expensive cpus first since they're more profitable.

And then in the real world

single core performance is only measuring a single core
nothing to see here, amd has twice as many

right. weird it even works then.

This.

No way in hell am I gonna pay more for a Ryzen CPU that has worse performance in games and the apps I use the most.

> I only read the first post of a thread.

The 4 channel memory on the Broadwell helps in this case.

>at stock speed and within 3fps of an 5ghz 7700k

>more expensive CPUs
>more profitable

Are you sure about that? How many people are gonna buy a $350+ CPU?

They should've released something that competes with Intel's i3 and i5, but I think the truth is starting to become clear...they don't have anything like that.

1700 is only 65 tdp, go away
compare 1600x instead

Let me end this stupid "discussion" once and for all:

If you'd rather have faster performance with CPU intensive processes, go Ryzen.
Else, go Intel.

Ye I mean, it's like they are stubborn about it, take Sup Forums for example where most AMD people are "underdogs". Of course they would be better off with the "7700K" route. They would pay like $200 max and they would get in practice something like a 7700K from AMD.

This

>buy AMD GPU
>physics must be done on the CPU
>buy AMD CPU
>it can't into physics

>single thread

what is this, 2010?

>How many people are gonna buy a $350+ CPU?
amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/electronics/229189/

>CPU intensive processes
are you selling beauty products? what does that even mean? all processes that need a good cpu are "intensive".

It's not just CPU intensive processes, it's specifically apps optimized for multi-threading

There are plenty of CPU heavy apps/games that will not do well with Ryzen

>Ryzen CPU that has worse performance in games and the apps I use the most

Ok.

>Ryzen gets like 4 or 3 fps less in games using less than 4 cores than the 7700k
>ryzen gets 15+fps in games that use more cores than cpus better than the 7700k.

So now that you sum this facts what will come from them you fucking retard?

Exactly, you get almost non-existent worse performance in older games and much better peformance in new games.

MUH VIDYA

fuck off to Sup Forums please

They fucked up with not going 4core + 4hyperthreaded threads like intel. They would give a "7700K" from AMD to the people of Sup Forums for like $200. Everyone would be happy and Intel would be hurt/get to its senses too.

>much better peformance in new games

Source? I have yet to see a single game where Ryzen beats a 7700k

It's interesting, the only cpu the intel shills will show is the 7700k, and that's only because its leading in single thread performance. It's like they pretend the rest of intels lineup doesn't exist. the r7 lineup is supposed to go up against cpus like the 6800, 6850, 6900 etc.

should slow down dh key generation, bitcoin mining, etc

not going to affect hashing/etc AFAIK

not really going to reduce its value as an x86 chip

Battlefield 1

if you're getting a 7700k, you probably care more about multi-threaded performance rather than single threaded
why else would you get hyper threading?????????????
therefore 7700k is obsolete and useless

Post the benchmark

QUICK, somebody dig up SuperPI from the grave!

*shoves you out the way*

You don't get it, the 7700k is better than all of those, especially when you look at the price

If Ryzen can't beat a 7700k in apps used by an average user, then it is shit.

Because there's no actual gaming tests out yet, wait for the 3rd.

As for 'muh gams only 4 cor...'
Observe a older architecture with more cores at a 30% clock deficit beat the highly clocked 4 core.

You might be retarded m8

Fuck AMD for not giving us ryzen with 8cores/8threads

Why do people call it Currytech when it's mostly staffed by Arabs?

...

If i post it you will say they are touched up by AMD, you know what i would post. Truth is its a fact the more cores the app uses the better Ryzen will be and worse 7700k. Remeber when people who bought a 970 said 3.5 will be enough? Now they get in Resident evil 7 10fps while a 960 4GB gets like 20-30 on 2k high details

just because its not number one in games doesn't mean much. It's good enough to be within a few fps and the money you save can be put towards a better gpu, if you care so much about MUH GAYMEZ.

Can't be done on a 7700k either, your point?

>muh gams use many physics

Aren't APUs only AMD's version for laptops? I didn't know they get on overlock motherboards as well. If that's the case why don't you use those?
If they are low cache or something though they can't apply.

>Phones have quadcores
>Game consoles have octacores
>Intel shills still arguing you only need 4 cores in a high end desktop PC

the 7700K's single thread advantage will be extremely limited, even in vidya

try to think of as many games as you can that meet the following criteria
>uses 4 cores or less
>isn't limited by GPUs available on the market now
>doesn't get hundreds of frames per second on mid end hardware

shit like DayZ and ultra-modded Skyrim come to mind but overall Ryzen wins, hard. and it can stream/multitask/etc better too.

the average user doesn't require shit
you argument?

This!!! I went and bought two 7700Ks today and they will go in the high powered gaming computer for me and my wife's son.

Go ahead and post it, I have never even seen that such a benchmark exists.

AMD is scared to benchmark Ryzen against a 7700k because they know it loses

>Aren't APUs only AMD's version for laptops?
Have you been living under a rock since 2011?

Watch Dogs 2 scales well beyond eight threads. A lower-clocked Haswell-based 5960X beats a Skylake i7, so Ryzen will smoke the 7700K in that game as well.

Why bother spending 300+ bucks then if you could get ryzen r3 for cheap as dirt????

You realize the 7700k is almost exactly the same price as a 1700?

You aren't saving any money.

Also that benchmark is hilarious, they are comparing it to a 6800k

Funny how AMD never wants to benchmark it against a 7700k, really makes you think

>lowest ryzen
>only 65W
>only 3 FPS less than overclocked intel
lmao

>inb4, muh max/min
You better come back with standard deviation or more detailed distribution data or you can fuck off.

I had to buy a new CPU when the haswells were reigning so I didn't pay attention. But aren't they low-end in general?
I never see anyone talking about them for an overclockable PC.

Shit, my bad, it was against a 6900k. But isn't that stronger than a 7700 anyway?

...

>the 7700K's single thread advantage will be extremely limited, even in vidya

Really? Doesn't look very limited here

Post a game benchmark ryzen wins

>the hardcore fanboying in this thread, for either side

Competition is healthy for the industry, fuccbois. It's the only reason AMD has been able to produce something like Ryzen, and Ryzen's existence will force Intel to try with their development.

The only thing I regret is having my motherboard fry out last September and not being able to find an 1155 board so I "upgraded" to an 1151.

Ryzen Series 7 is not geared towards those who only game, nor are Intel's 6-8 cores.

Why not get a i5 if 4 cores is all you need? You're basically arguing for 4 extra logical threads instead of 8 cores.
If your shit game is using those logical threads on a 7700k it's gonna use those 8 cores on ryzen as well, so pray tell me why aren't you getting a i5 without HT and you're shilling a 7700k?

>he doesn't know that ryzen 1700 has only 65w tdp
kys and compare 1600x instead

>Avg of stock ryzen within margin of error of overclocked 7700k

>Competition is healthy for the industry
Agreed which I believe AMD fucks up by not giving the people something like 7700K. It's simply still a sweet spot for most regular power users. Games and other interactive application simply can't be parallelized that easily, whatever the whishful thinking.
It's not a matter of time, it's just inherently a mathematical puzzle.

>le I have haswell and are arguing for Ryzen face

Lol show me the real draw at the plug on similiar amd/intel systems and I gauruntee you won't see these magical power nums

>Couldn't even wait for the price drops

>7700k is about 350
>1700X is about 400
>somehow 1700X saves you money

This.

I want AMD to make a processor that isn't just good at video encoding.

>>"Limited"

>>tries to disprove with a sample size of one.

I like how you skip people showing you proof of games using more cores.
Is this the best Tel Aviv can do?

>4-Core
>8-Core
It's not that hard of a concept.

IT LITERALLY GETS LIKE 5 FPS LESS THAN A 7700K

Its fucking nothing. And its better in everything else

compare 1600x and its cheaper than 7700k

My theory was that they can't, that their cores are extremely slow. But these 8cores don't look that bad. So they do seem competitive if they were 4core + 4ht with higher clocks.
Then again they still don't have their own foundries like Intel so there is a chance they are forced to pull tricks like this.

>double the cores
>can only win in (some) benchmarks
>gets btfo in gaymen

Because American basement autists don't have a clue about the world outside.