Do you play at 800x? Probably not. I prefer "real life" resolutions (and settings) in gaming benchmarks.
I wonder if it's also part due to the lack of memory performance, well specifically latency. Some games are affected quite a bit by ram performance. Very odd to see near 90ns for 3600mhz. Here i have 46ns~ with 3200 ram, that's about a 100% decrease in latency. That's with quad channel, dual channel 7700k gets even better latencies. Maybe an issue with their IMC or perhaps future bios will alleviate the issue somewhat. What kind of options are there to tweak regarding secondary/Tertiary timings? Tweaked memory should bring performance up because per core performance certainly isn't an issue.
Image show, that at equal ram speed and timings, bandwidth is nearly identical for a 7700k and the Ryzen... Both on dual channel... But the latency is the problem... IPC is good for an AMD, but bad vs. Intel... And as said, we can hope that's caused by a lack of optimization, that new game code can change this... Otherwise you'll have to wait for the next gen Ryzen
It makes sense to test at 4k because gaming is slowly starting to become mainstream at that resolution.
I think waiting a few weeks for some BIOS and microcode updates would be worth having a CPU better than a 7600K... Just yesterday you were saying you'd rather get the 1700 over a Ryzen 5 simply because you don't want to wait and you'd rather have the better performance, but you WILL get worse performance in a 7600K whether you wait or not (in the long run). Unless you're playing 1080p games with a 144Hz monitor, the slightly worse performance in gaming benchmarks are irrelevant, with or without BIOS fixes. You've waited this long, don't let impatience make you regret your choices. Doesn't make sense.
What an awesome launch for AMD! I have to say they took a long time, but they came in strong and they pushed hard enough to be back in the game. Now I can only see how this CPU mature as BIOS updates come out and little tweaks are made. Price wise I don't think Intel can come close unless they drop their top CPU to the $599 price and let the rest follow.
and why exactly would G3D do a lower graphics settings test during it's gameplay benchmarks? It's a high end CPU no one who is buying the CPU for gaming cares about how well it performs at the lowest graphics settings we care about how well it performs when we want the eye candy turned to max. IF that results in the benchmark results being bottlenecked by GPU then that's what we want to know because we are more likely to encounter that in the real world than we are playing the latest games at their lowest graphical settings. The other tests, non gameplay tests, are the ones that let us see what the CPU can do when it comes to pure number crunching power.
Awesome review, Hilbert! It's really good to be able to have on launch day. I think Ryzen is a really nice CPU. This model in particular is rather geared towards workstations, and I can already see myself recommending it for the people whose need that kind of a computer. Meanwhile, gaming performance is not exactly what I expected, but hey: first gen of a new arch, new tech (SMT, XFR) with probably bug-ridden BIOSes / UEFIs... Things will get better in a month or two. Besides, we really need to take price and power consumption into account, let alone the fact that AMD is a much smaller company than Intel. Anyway, I hope we'll see quad core CPUs at higher frequencies. Good job AMD and good job (again) Gurur3d! //// OFF TOPIC //// By the way, a nice cure for the flu, you can boil some cinnamon (powder, sticks, anything you got) in a water filled pot. Let it rest for about 5 minutes. Meanwhile, extract the juice of a lemon (or, better yet, of a bitter orange) in a glass and add some honey. Pour the hot water in your glass. Enjoy this tasty medicine! There are other things that help as well, but most people look at me like I'm an alien when I suggest ginger and garlic (which you can add to the above). Not to mention turmeric... I always make herbal tea like that when I'm ill, besides using regular medicine from the drugstore, and it's always been effective. But anyhow, get well soon! /////////////////////
Yes yes, we all game at 1080p or higher... Fine! BUT BUUUUUUT DAMMIT... Why do all of you STILL fail to realize that at these resolutions you're bottlenecking the gfx... aka actually just testing the GPU?
4k will not be mainstream for a long time. Although testing at 800x600 isn't very important, 900/1080P are good realistic resolutions to test gaming performance. The fact that they said test at 4k is clear that even AMD knows gaming performance can be poor across various titles.
So Intel still king, specialy when OCed. It's just not gonna happen is it?... a real battle of the titans.
I'm sorry, but I don't see your point about my perspective. My assertion is that the 1800X chip is faster in Handbrake than the 6950X. True, the gaming benchmarks shows a different picture but still it's an amazing feat. It's simply absurd to only say it's great value when the processor beats Intel flagship for a third of a price.
Great review, cheers HH. My impression (as a gamer) is that I have the performance the 1800X offers already. However, I fully expected this scenario. The reality is very few of us will fully utilise such a cpu and definately not most gamers (until we see Xbox Scorpio ports perhaps?). The situation might change in a year or so, but, we still have to see Intel's full response and future competing products against where Ryzen is heading. Looking forward to the 1700 review to compare, which I think will be more favourable cost-wise.
In a way no, in a way yes... Ryzen is good... In some cases really great! The battle right now is to force Intel to give us what should've been a long time ago by doing this: It will force Intel to push core count up on mainstream CPU's... or... Lower prices on their expensive 6/8 core CPU's... It's a win-win, AMD fanboys can rejoice, Intel users can keep the systems for now... Later, we all get better CPU's! PARTY ON!
