Redpill me on Ryzen, is it good for gayming

Redpill me on Ryzen, is it good for gayming

>shills need not apply

Other urls found in this thread:

agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=49#121
puri.sm/learn/intel-me/
youtube.com/watch?v=TId-OrXWuOE
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

No

Yes

yes, very much so. however in some cases the i7 would be a better purchase, and they are pretty damn expensive for the gaming performance they put out, to the point where budget builds are better served by an i5.

...

Fabulous

Tbh you wouldn't notice the game running 30 fps slower because human eye can't see more than 60fps anyway

ebic meme m8

Fuck off.

More importantly, is Ryzen good for non-gaming?

you can tell the difference well into the hundreds, but returns are diminishing

the only thing Ryzen is not good at is AVX2

...

Yes, but they be even better as lab and office machines

>single-core performance on par w/ 7700K
>double the cores, double the threads
It's a killer.

They're good as in "good enough", however if you plan to only play video games there are better purchases.

>red pill
>\pol/

Outside of a few outliers (Fallout 4), it'll get around 4-8% worse performance than Kaby on current games. Its close enough that in virtually any game where Kaby gets 60+ FPS, Ryzen will get 60+ FPS. If you're going for 144 FPS Kaby might by worth it.

For future proofing it's gonna be king. Performance will only get better as more games take advantage of more threads, CIV VI is a good example. Zen 2 and 3 are confirmed to be on the same socket, so there'll be a future upgrade path. Zen 3 is supposedly 7nm.

Be very careful on motherboard selection, Asus looks like they made a batch of lemons this time. Make sure you also get two sticks of fast DDR4, it looks to be highly RAM speed sensitive like Bulldozer was. 3.6 ghz w/ 2666mhz beats 4 ghz with 2133mhz. Buy something like 3200mhz.

>single-core performance on par w/ 7700K
You wish pajeet

Dust hasn't really settled imo. Early adopters always get a raw deal
RAM speeds need to come up. Motherboards that promise speeds of 3200 or above need to see the light of day
And then there's some general bug fixing like the not-enough-power-at-stock issue

No alarming, apparently unfixable issues though. So the architecture seems promising

Well he's right in the sense that at similar clocks they are. The higher obtainable clock speed of the i7 gives it better performance though

It seems that at the relaticely low RAM speeds people are currently testing at, the Infinity Fabric isn't doing a very good job.

So very cache intense operations do not happen fast enough for these Ryzen chips.

>Performance will only get better as more games take advantage of more threads, CIV VI is a good example

Even in heavily multithreaded games like CIV VI the 7700k wins (and it is heavily multithreaded or else the 6850k wouldn't beat the 7700k).

ryzen a shit

and here is the proof

>1080p
Into the trash it goes

Except even at similar clocks it isn't, it's simmilar to broadwell-e but not to kabylake in IPC

Don't pretend to be me

I imagined you would say that

Oh boy 3%

That's actually a fact retard. The only reason you notice a difference at higher frame rates is because the computer isn't synced to your eye so even though it outputs at the same rate as your eye, it may not out put at the same time causing you to believe it's not quite right. When it outputs at higher frame rates, it presents a clearer image for your eye to generate information from which gives the appearance of a smoother image.

If you could notice higher than 60 FPS, you'd constantly see your lamp blinking instead of giving a consistent light. Which btw, is what you notice when you see lights far off in the distance.

>7700k at 4.2 ghz
>7700k runs at 4.5 ghz out of the box
>not even showing ram speeds on the 7700k
Into le trash

>replying to the guy pretending to be me

Gonna take a stab in the dark and say that the review you're posting used an Asus board. This one is on a Gigabyte board.

>That's actually a fact retard
It actualy isn't now fuck off

7700K has a base clock of 4.2ghz, clocks to 4.4ghz on all core turbo. 4.5ghz is single core turbo.
7700K used 3000mhz 15-16-16-35

>future proofing
Why won't this meme die?

why the ryzen is consired bad at 1080p but not in higher resolutions?

Nope, these were run on a Gigabyte board aswell

I-I wasn't trying to senpai
Pls forgive me

>Facts and reasoning to support my argument
>Counter argument: NUH UH. THAT'S NOT WHAT MY MOMMY SAID

Ok kid. Back to Sup Forums.

>hurrdurr you're a retard my opinion is fact
Back to kindergarten boyo

intredasting
What were the RAM speeds, as you can tell from the pictures it's very RAM dependant. 2133 15-16-16-35 and 2666 16-16-16-35 were used on the TPU review. The GPU was a stock speed GTX 1080.

Lets post some more benchmarks that show the gaming power of Ryzen.

And then MAD amdrones can respond!

>'b-b-but that benchmark doesn't count, that game is s-shit!'

2933 mhz

Well first of all it's not bad at 1080p, it's just not as good as intel. Second, at higher resolutions you will be bottlenecked by your GPU before your CPU except in edge cases like Arma 3.

That game is literally unoptimized

You know what's the point of showing the game video, I mean I could get it if it were four way split screen but it's just one render.

You'll notice that the variable factor in that picture is not 'the game', it is the cpu.

If the game was to blame for being badly optimized the Intel cpu's should suffer just as much

Because it shows the numbers at the exact moment in the game, so you can see which scenes hit the cpu the hardest

Not necessarily
agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=49#121

TPU put out their benches out on the 17th while PH did it on the 2nd.

Might be patch differences.

Wait for Ryzen 5, 7 isn't worth it.
If you are talking about video games, intel is the superior botnet/bag for buck.

I love mine for working in video editing, I don't do much gayming but from what I've played it's pretty good

Good, yes, the best, no.

because at higher resolution your cpu is just idling waiting to be fed by the GPU for a lot of games.

It's pretty good for gaming.

>The AMD Ryzen™ processor does not offer memory dividers for DDR4-3000 or DDR4-3400. Users shooting for higher memory clocks should aim for 3200 or 3500 MT/s.
>We have internally observed good results from 2933, 3200, and 3500 MT/s rates with 16GB kits based on Samsung “B-die” memory chips.

I want to see waht that cache latency connected to the Infinity Fabric comes down to at DDR4-3500

The one thing that's for certain is the 6c/12t R5 is going to put a beatdown on similarly priced i5s. That has pretty much already been demonstrated by reviewers that disabled a core within each R7 CCX and barely saw a drop in performance going from 8c/16t to 6c/12t.

Ryzen 7 is a tougher sell for 1080p/144 Hz gayming when the 7700k exists and when 6c/12t variants and the even cheaper 4c/8t Ryzen variants that offer ~90% i5 performance for less money while being better at productivity tasks are right around the corner.

>Still 1080p
REEEE WHEN WILL REVIEW SITES MOVE ON TO AT LEAST 1440p FOR REAL BENCHMARKING

Because they are going to be bottlenecked by the GPU, not the CPU.

These fucking fuckers need to fucking finally deliver my fucking board. I've been waiting since preorders on it fucking hell.

Even the Titan XP is having trouble with quite a handful of games in 2160p, can't maintain 60fps at max settings.

SLI GTX 1080 and above can, but the fucking microstuttering and the bad optimization. Fuck SLI.

1080p is still a thing you moronic piece of shit, and 1440p isn't that much of a step-up.
2160p is NOT mainstream yet.

And also,

they do. but considering most GPU's today can't handle 1440 on presets they usually dont bother.

it will get the job done, but it shouldn't be your top choice unless you livestream and don't want godawful quality from GPU encoding or low-config software.

Ryzen is a whole family of chips, the R7 is not primarily a gaming chip. R5 and R3 might be.

It fails behind an i5. And sometimes an i3. Nothing else to say. Check gamernexus, digital foundry. It is plagued with issues as well.
>just wait
Go Intel.
Or get a free premium RedTeam+ membership by buying one of our totally functional and superior Ryzen processors!

shill

How are gamernexus and digital foundry or me shilling Intel? Zen is inferior to Intel when it comes to gaming, period. If you seek something more from it or
>just wait
>futureproof
Then go Ryzen.

You'd have to be fully cucked to go intel right now. I'm not saying Ryzen is flawless, clearly it needs work, but if you can literally wait like a month or two then you'll be better off with a Ryzen CPU unless all you care about is emulation or playing ancient games at 144 Hz.

>no clear indication of fixes coming that will address current issues if at all
>no clear indication if most titles will be even optimized for more cores/threads AND CCX structure
>but AMD said so
>just wait
>muh obsolescence
For what? There's no magical fix that will come out of nowhere and make Ryzen worth out of the box for gaymen. And with more than 90% market share from Intel quad cores are here to stay unless uber jew decides otherwise.

It has Haswell tier performance in games, comes with better multi-tasking out of the box, and new BIOS and RAM compatibility updates are coming out almost daily. Also
>cheaper cost per thread
>less power draw at idle
If you're a competitive gaymer then I can see going intel but Ryzen is a true chip for the masses.

Plain and simply, if gaming is your only concern, Intel is better. This is inarguable.

If you want to do other things than gaming (or in addition to gaming), or (later on with R3) need low-budget gaming options, then Ryzen might be for you.

My point still stands, proven, for gaming Intel is and still will be better.

>gaymin
>any cpu with more than 4 cores
>any cpu that cost >250$
i5s are the sweat spot i7s are for autistic fuckbois pentium/i3 are for autistic poorfags

>still will be better
Better by a few percentage points for as long as quad cores aren't obsolete, sure. You're paying the shintel tax for a few extra FPS though and your CPU will be worse in non-gaming tasks.

But most people gaymen and do avarage stuff like browse the web etc. You can multi-task on an i5 without problems on those sort of things, quad cores won't be obsolete for another 3-4 years atleast, unless Intel decides otherwise.

I'm ending this whole fucking Intel/AMD shit right now.
puri.sm/learn/intel-me/
Enjoy your fucking embedded botnet fuckers.

>botnet
must I care?

Only if you live in a cave and have regular Intercourse with wild animals.

i have a 1800x with a gigabyte gaming 5. i love it. upgraded from a 4760k. couldn't be happier. its gaming performance is excellent and multi-threadness is beyond amazing.

all you have to make sure of is that whatever ram kit you pick up, make sure it uses samsung chips. ryzen likes samsung chips for anything over 2666mhz. gskill has a lot of kits that use samsung. pretty much any 3000 - 3200mhz cas 14-14-14-14-34 kits use samsung. also 16gb modules (2x16) and 4x8gb configurations ryzen only natively supports up to 2666mhz ratio for. in may amd plans on releasing a new microcode update that will increase frequencies and support hynix and micron more for speeds above 2666mhz.

I don't. I still don't care.

I still see no reason to care.

Educate me, rebel vigilante of antispyware justice.

>19% for internet use
>internet use
>that's right goi throw out your 6700k and buy the new $350 7700k for 19% more performance in internet!
man i sure love marketing.

If you only care about games, fuck no.
If you want games + work, then yes.
Also wait for 11.04. for R5 to arrive, might be a good option for only games.

Oh and don't forget, Ryzen is no true/normal 6/8 core configuration, it's a two part CCX so you also have to cling on your nutsack that your game/application is optimized for that. Which most of the time won't be.

It's about on par with a 7700K at 1080P gaming, it's just some reviewers had old motherboard bioses, and didn't put windows into high performance mode. There's a few bugs to work out.

Pic related is benchmarks with an updated bios.

Bullshit.
youtube.com/watch?v=TId-OrXWuOE

>digital foundry
If I wanted to eat dogshit I'd go direct to the source, not get it in a fancy tin.

It's good, but for gaymen it's not going to shit on the 7700k and likely Skylake-X, sadly.

The Ryzen 7 lineup is clocked an entire 20% lower than the current Kaby Lake processors. In general, their gaming performances line up pretty well with last generation Intel i7s. There are other nuances in their design that makes it trade blows in specific applications against Intel, e.g. using on die interconnect to stitch together CCX (though each have their own L3), which results in reduced (5-10%) performances in applications which require concurrency outside of its own CCX. A few modifications to W10 (or if you use W7/8.1) like disabling coreparking, etc.

They are insane general purpose HEDT processors, however. It may be worth investing in if you do game design or want a workstation + gaymen computer. The caveat is that Ryzen's interconnect (Infinity Fabric) also is clocked 1:2 with the memory clock instead of core clock so you are actually strongly rewarded for higher clocked memory, which is a good thing because Ryzen's overclocking headroom is incredibly small, you can push it about 10% before you need to start moving voltages.

I'd say if you wouldn't buy a X99 at 50% the price for gaming, I wouldn't bother with Ryzen at the moment. The platform is still immature, some boards are still rolling out UEFI updates to support higher clocked RAM, and some compiler updates have yet to come out for GCC and MSVC as well. I am about to pull the trigger on the 1700 though, as I am sorely in the need for a HEDT upgrade

>tfw still on nehalem

Atleast it has basis unlike your photoshoped ''benchmakred'' graphs. Respected RedTeam+ memeber.

I didn't post that review.

I'm the guy who posts this review

what's wrong with DF?

Buy Ryzen

Eurogamer is a trash website

If you only care for games a cheaper R5 would be better. The current Ryzen processors has around the same performance as the best i7 processors in games anyway but unless you have a good reason maybe a 1700 would be a better choice than a 1800. I read that the first motherboards and OS support for ryzen was buggy and that updates are actually increasing th performance significantly but research that for yourself instead of trusting anyone blindly.

I didn't ask about Eurogamer though.

Who do you think runs Digital Foundry?

I still don't see why I should discard DF altogether.

If it wasn't for that cheap CCX+Infinity Fabric design I would've gotten a 1600 :/

Better than kaby lake for future multi threaded games, worse than kaby lake for current games and single threaded games.

>all you have to make sure of is that whatever ram kit you pick up, make sure it uses samsung chips. ryzen likes samsung chips for anything over 2666mhz. gskill has a lot of kits that use samsung. pretty much any 3000 - 3200mhz cas 14-14-14-14-34 kits use samsung. also 16gb modules (2x16) and 4x8gb configurations ryzen only natively supports up to 2666mhz ratio for. in may amd plans on releasing a new microcode update that will increase frequencies and support hynix and micron more for speeds above 2666mhz.

>Just wait™