Anyone have any experience with Ryzen processors?

Anyone have any experience with Ryzen processors?

Price wise it seems a no brainer compared to Intel but I've been burnt by AMD in the past. I'm wondering if anyone has any real world use case feedback.

im not a super user or anything but i got 1600 a month ago.
i like it.
super quiet
runs at like 28C
mobos are cheap, or were during black friday
stays around 25-27C
runs games well above my monitor max

Stop being a faggot, if all you do is game on a 1080ti at 1080p buy Intel, if your workload doesn't scale with more threads buy Intel, anything else AMD is a really good option.

Good but id wait to see whether current mobo’s can really handle next gen stuff.
Get a xeon and install Gentoo
but
pstate is basically redundant
hit or miss with cpu & ram oc kinda
fast ram is expensiver, mainly used for gaming

My R7 1700X is great but I can't recommend them right now since AMD says upgraded Zen chips in Feb.

the worst thing about my 1600 was having to reinstall windows cause it threw a shitfit when i changed over from my 4670k. was cooler and faster. only weird thing i noticed is if i oc'd to over 3.78ghz, it wouldnt downclock when idle (on the ax370 gaming 5)

running the tr1950x now and no problems whatsoever

it werks

badass CPUs
I can mine monero coin at 600H/s while browsing internet, watching movies, listening to music, programming and even playing gaymes if I wanted.

R7 1700

so you recommend a cpu because you can mine a jewish currency that will be banned in the future?

I got the 1600x because of paper launch bullshit and I'm very happy with it. I'm just going to upgrade in a year or two anyway

I get 630 at 3.95 ghz.

>don't be stupid
>game at a resolution with an overpowered card for it where the CPU would hardly make a difference
Fucking retard.

It's literally an anti jew currency
and no. Because you can do extremely high end tasks all simultaneously.
nice Mine's at stock because my room gets too hot lol

Should I buy Ryzen now or wait for Ryzen 2 in Feb?

wait until February, you stupid Nazi frog poster

While I no longer benchmark my computer and measure all the relevant stuff (who cares about the numbers), I have a very good experience with my R7 1700 bought in June, replacing my 2500k. Testing 8K streaming on youtube and the CPU was actually limiting. 4K streaming and the 2500k was already at 97-100% usage, creating 2-3 second lags for 8K streaming. The R7 sits at 30% usage for 8K streaming. Similar thing for gaming (only casual now, too old for hardcore gaming): Running GTA V on 4K with nearly max details and graphics mods, my R7 sits at 25-30% usage. Everything works great, nothing on the market that seems to get the CPU to it's limit (I don't do video editing) and lots of reserves left. I expect to upgrade the GPU in 2-3 years (only have a RX480) but the processor will most likely last 7-8 years. If I won't have the time for casual gaming anymore due to family stuff, then I will keep it till it dies.

Just my 2 cents from a guy who was all into this synthetic benchmarking cock size comparison with overclocking, home build water cooling systems (got a free heat exchanger from an old Mercedes truck at the junk yard) etc 10 years ago and now has other things to do in life.

I had an fx 8320 @ 3.7ghz for years and in alot of recent games I was noticing stuttering at 1080p. I only have an AMD 290x but when I got my r7 1700 @3.9ghz I can play Destiny 2 in 4k with only a couple settings on high instead of ultra. It made a huge difference in other games too. I gained like 20-30 fps..more in 1080p.

It has plenty of power for whatever. I just need to upgrade this damn GPU. I'd recommend Ryzen if you had a processor older than two years

1080ti at 1080p
Christ

I went full AMD, the processor is good but I regret that RX, especially now that I need CUDA.

You always 'wait', but there will ALWAYS be something better around the corner.
Get whatever the fuck you want at this moment if desire IT and with Ryzen that's a good thing since you have various paths.

We know AM4 will be supported till 2020 (Zen+ and Zen 2), so you can get a very good X370 MOBO like an Asrock Taichi, get a Ryzen 1600 for cheapo, and 'upgrade' to a Ryzen 2 for the final CPU buy (since it's 7nm and will probably be better in gaming).

You can still go and wait till Zen+ (this february) and the plan I proposed above would've worked if it was like September or something, you can still do it if you FIND a super deal on any of the Ryzen CPU's atm (like in the U.S a 1600+B350 for $169 in Fry's).
tl;dr : You can wait for like 2 months for Zen+ but if you want a new CPU right now to get stuff done then it's no problem getting a cheap 1600 for a possible future upgrade to Zen 2 later on.

I switched from a r7 1800x to a 8700k. The 8700k easily goes toe to toe matching ryzen 8 core parts in heavy multithreaded workloads. It’s generally faster in medium and light multithreaded workloads and crushes ryzen in single threaded performance. Ryzen may match it in heavy multithreaded scenarios, but it will never match the 8700k in anything else. It will always be behind. Regardless how hard you try and how heavy you try to overclock, it will never match or surpass the 8700k in single threaded performance. So worst case scenario is the 8700k matching ryzen 8 core parts in heavy multithreaded scenarios but destroying it in everything else. And that’s what makes the 8700k the superior processor. It has best of both worlds while ryzen only has one.

People lol at coffee lake power consumption but rarely compare it to a overclocked ryzen. The reality is both consume similar amount of power and do so very respectively for what they are. Ryzen with slower clocked 8 cores and coffee lake with faster clocked 6 cores.

My early ryzen have the performance marginality problem. Compiling stuff is quick, but have to restart large compiles often due to that problem. Currently sent it in for an RMA, but I'm sure the service center wont approve it since none of them have ever heard about gcc. I assume current CPUs are fine, but you might get unlucky and get one that's been sitting on a shelf for half a year.

Threadripper is fine. It's a 180W TDP CPU, but the current tower coolers still keep them fairly cool, while the fans are somewhat quiet (600-800 RPM).

Memory compatibility can be fiddly, but should't be a problem if you buy an "AMD kit".

Stay away from the latest AGESA for ryzen (threadripper is fine).

Zen 2 just needs to come close to Intel and beat them om price, Intel have faster single core speeds but that is not the only factor for buyers, most people are looking for the most bang for the buck, and remember EVERYBODY wins then AMD competes.

The real question is, does anyone actually care when it is a desktop

And yet barring niche titles, that's the only real situation you'll actually be CPU bound.

If you're just gaming, go Intel.

Idiots on Sup Forums will try to sell you Ryzen CPUs for gaming, but they don't actually play games themselves. Lower IPC and frequency means they're inferior for 99% of games.

If your priority is productivity and/or you don't plan on playing a lot of Civilization 6, get a Ryzen.

Intel for games, ryzen for not games. Its pretty simple. Anyone who says ryzen for games ia a shill, anyone who says intel for not games is a shill

If you only play games get an i7-8700, if not R7-1700 is better.
R5-1600 with B350 board if poor.
I like my 1700X, but it struggles to get past 4.0 GHz. Can only get to 4.05 with reasonable voltage, which really hurts FPS for 144 Hz gaming.

Ryzen vs Intel for graphics? I mean like physical based rendering (non-realtime, non GPU) and that sort fo thing.

What games require to-end processors these days? This isn't 1990, just offload it to the GPU.

Probably Ryzen.

Would be nice if they could include the i7-7800x. It's in the same price range, and low end LGA2066 motherboards aren't much more expensive than high end LGA1151 and AM4 motherboards. Would give you much more options for upgrades too. More RAM and higher end CPU's further down the road.

Ryzen is only worse for games if you have a 1070ti/1080/1080ti and a 144hz monitor. For the vast majority of people with 1060s or slower and who only have 60hz display it makes zero difference.

Intel comes with security holes built into the CPU

X370 has much upgradability potential than X299.

and in that instance, you'd still be better off with a cheaper Intel quad core, still boasting higher IPC and frequency.

Also, we're not even getting to emulation here, where Ryzen is terrible.

>the worst thing about my 1600 was having to reinstall windows cause it threw a shitfit when i changed over from my 4670k
no fucking shit you brain dead mongoloid, changing new cpu+mobo almost always warrants a reinstallation of the os

Shill

Super happy with my 1700. If you're going to be mostly gaming, the 1600 is what you want, and if you have productivity the upgrade to the 1700 is worth it as long as your workload can use the threads.

An Intel i5 8400 will do better in gaming, but you've gotta buy a hella overpriced Z series board that you can't even make use of.

I can't comment on the gaming performance really, since I'm at 4k and am GPU bottlenecked.

only people i've met that actually "care" are either those who really want low heat producers or people in extremely high cost electricity areas like a lot of europeans. other than that majority of time its just fanboys using it as an excuse to shit on X.

Not always, there are tools that unregister all the drivers and if you do that before the switch, it should be possible to boot and then it reinstalls everything as needed.

Trouble may arise if you don't use the same boot mode (legacy/UEFI/secure boot) I guess.

Didn't have to for my 8.1 install but i guess its so "modded" and fucked with it just didn't give a shit when i replaced 2500k with 1600x

>1080ti at 1080p
don't you mean 2k or 4k? don't even bother with a 1080 if you're just gonna game on 1080p, just get a 1050ti.

>changing new cpu+mobo almost always warrants a reinstallation of the os
and yet ive migrated the same windows install from my old hp dv6000 to my current 4670k media center build with minor problems.

this had to do with some intel -> amd bullshit

If you want more modern motherboard features and an upgradeability path B350+1600 is better (and cheaper) than buying Kaby Lake or Skylake

skylake-x as a whole is just really disappointing. its mesh technology that replaced the ring bus to allow communications across all the cores negatively reduced its single threaded performance. skylake-x clock for clock is tends to be slower than skylake mainstream in quite a few benchmarks. its gaming performance because of that actually causes it to on many occasions to either match or lose to ryzen core for core. even with its slightly higher stock clocks. pretty much if you go skylake-x, you go for it for its 10 cores and higher and for primary for all core usage scenarios. honestly i would go threadripper over skylake-x.

Not much reason to get them unless you are going TR(which is better than SKL-X) or don't want to drop more money on more expensive mobos with higher end chipsets/want to upgrade your CPU.
Also depends on the region. For example in my region a 1700 is more expensive than a 8700 non K. However AMD mobos of similar tier are cheaper, ie C6H is the same price as Z370F/E Strix but the M10H cost a whole hundred dollars more.

>photoshopping clock speed

1700x here runs everything smooth for me. And my temp never gets above 30

but dont you need a 1080 to play at 1080p?

it is common for people to post their OC + voltage in speccy shots since it only shows stock things
newfag

They are a great deal right now. The only thing thats stopped me from buying one is that you only get 24 PCIe lanes. It I wish it was closer to 32 so that you could run more than one M2 disk on them.

I people like me there's always threadripper.

Why is Ryzen terrible for emulation?

r5 1600 reporting in.
Ryzen is the best choice if you need it for work, or work + gaming.
If you're ONLY gaming, it depends on the price. If it's cheaper than the Intel equivalent then I'd say it's worth it.

That being said, keep in mind that these CPUs have lower per core performance than intel's. This means that some single threaded programs, like cemu, will run much much better on Intel than AMD processors.

>running the tr1950x now
muh nibba

my first amd cpu in over ten years (since the last time they were good, kek)

Ryzen has a higher IPC than anything x86 ever made dumb Sup Forumsedditor

Ryzen unless you're retarded and comparing a 1700 with some i9, or your renderer is from the 90's and not multithreaded

Mainstream platform: Intel 8700/K
HEDT: AMD TR

MUh nigglets running kike ripper .. 1950x no core skimping. It's good to be w/ fellow anons who aren't corelets. Praise be to the enlightened 1950x peeplets. I fanciful workload is coming soon for you

R5 1600 is the thinking man's choice

I want to get a Ryzen CPU in the upcoming year.
I'm aiming for 1800x but i'm pretty unsure if it isn't a waste of money and i shuld go for a lower model or wair for Ryzen2.

I am constantly compiling Android and mainly play World of Warcraft. Currently i'm on a A10-7850k coupled with a 970 meme card.
Optinions?

Whats your budget and build? Do you play a lot of Vulkan games?

Wut ?

That program is probably reading incorrectly.
A 1700 would need close to 1.6V to got 4.5ghz.

Windows task manager, must be useless I guess.
it has been performing much better after Asus ROG C6H Bios 3008 though however.

Wouldn't get an 1800X unless it's on sale like they did for black friday.

A 1600 or 1700 would be a big upgrade from older AMD chips and gets you on the platform so you can easily upgrade to a faster cpu later.

I'm eyeing that myself for an itx build once my dan case arrives in a couple months time.

kikeripper has been worth it for the reduction in build times alone

They're great.
However, getting ram for them is a pain in the fucking ass.

I'm sure it performs great, but it's not getting to 4.5GHz. The process that Ryzen is on doesn't go over 4.1GHz at the extreme.

I have a 1700 overclocked to 3.9 gigs.

It kicks ass at production and gaming. I play destiny 2 at 120fps to 140fps on a 1440p 144hz monitor at max settings. Ryzen chips are the real deal. Been very happy with it.

1700 is the same chip as the 1800x but binned marginally lower, not worth the ~$110 difference. Plus you get a free air cooler that's perfectly fine unless you overclock it to over 4GHz. If you already have a compatible cooler or plan on getting a Crosshair VI which has an AM3 compatible mount then the $10 extra for a 1700X might be worth it to almost guarantee a 4.0 GHz+ OC

>1080ti at 1080p
Do not be so surprised they exist.

ryzen is fantastic imo
and how has amd burned you?

My current Intel machine is still good for one or two years, but all those cores are very tempting.

>holy fucking cherry picking batman

I'll sell you a Tomahawk 350, 16gb RAM, and a R7 1700x for $450, m8.

>coming year
Zen+ releases like end of Feb

bought an r5 1600, msi b350 board and 8gb of RAM for like $500 when ryzen first came out. processor overclocks to 4ghz at 1.4v. pretty happy with it.

>he doesn't know

I have a ryzen 7 1700, it has way more power than I will ever need, it is pretty efficient and only 300 euro's , I am happy

Allright, that's good to know, thanks.
I just tinkered and got my A10-7850k to got to 4,2GHz at least with 0.06xx (something) voltage increase.
Seems to be the limit as 4,3Ghz will start getting stuck shortly after boot if i don't let it auto volt to 1,5V (nope.jpg). Also as the idle temperatures where so fucking high i jus reapplied paste and de-dusted the cooler 20°C is enormous..
Also Cooler is a Scythe something, it'S actually good (when properly dust free)
Yeah i'll probably wait if the price drops. I'm not after every year's AAA title anymore.

Is there a chan for Ryzen?

its MORE THREADS all over again to FX's MOAR CORES

they still perform slower than intel

play wildlands at max shadows on a 1050ti and get back to me

1600x hasn't failed me

>Gayming sub-GTX 1080
Whatever will work.
>Gaymining with better gfx
Intlel 7700k or 8700k
>Productivity
AyyMD is better bang4buck

That's why you go ryzen and Nvidia, at least the money you save can go to a better graphics card

Emulation relies heavily on single threaded performance (most emulators use only 1 or 2 cores), and Ryzen is not good on this aspect.

Why is this? Ps4 and xbone both have 8 core x86 cpus, and the switch has 8 ARM cores.

Huh? We don't have emulators for any current gen console if that's what you mean. The only emulator that really benefits from moar cores is RPCSX3, a PS3 emulator, due to the clusterfuck that is Cell (PS3 CPU), but anyway, it runs a little bit better on Intel 6 cores CPUs than it runs on AMD 8+ due better single core performance.

>real world experience
Unless you perform a lot of paralled tasks, or you are streaming+encoding while playing games, you will not notice a difference unless you are the kind of person who is so aware of frame rates that you can actually tell the difference between 65 and 70 fps. If you are such a person, you already own a hardware setup that meets your incredibly specific needs.

If i were going very high-end(for gaming) or very low-end and didn't need a dedicated gpu i'd buy an intel processor but other than that ryzen seems the more compelling option.

Mining XMR slows the responsiveness on my machine way the fuck down, 1700x here. Are you using XMR-stak?

If I can fix this I'll be in heaven. Other than that OP, I'd still recommend it for sure. I got my 1700x open-box at Microcenter for $200, couldn't pass up that deal. Also ASRock X370 Killer motherboard for $100 after rebates on a deal at newegg. Feelsgoodman

...

It doesn't slow mine down to the point of being unusable. The UI continues to be fluid, but web pages render noticeable slower, etc. What's your config?

Well yeah me too, it's definitely usable, especially if I set priority to low, but it's still to the point of being annoying.

Config's just the default setup that xmr-stak gives you upon first run - mining on alternating even-number threads, 0 2 4 ... 14 I think

Set up scripts using hotkeys to enable or disable your miner, or use a different config. I need to get to doing that but it doesn't bother me that much so I haven't bothered yet. Leaving 2 threads open and only using 6 for mining makes most things as fast as not mining at all for me.

>mfw bought a 1080 Ti
>mfw it was the EVGA Hybrid SC2 version
>mfw paired it with a Ryzen 1700X
>mfw 8 GB RAM
>mfw 1080p max resolution
>mfw [spoiler]60Hz display[/spoiler]

You CANNOT stop me.

10hz more than me gg

>50Hz
stop