Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AMD Discussion
- Thread starter koyoot
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-cpu,4951-10.html
Those benchmarks are most important from my point of view, at least for this forum.
I do not want to say big words, but... IMO competition is back in x86 space. Let them solve the problems of new architecture platform, and we have a product that everybody will want to have.
And this feature is most interesting.
Ryzen 7 1800X
i7-6700K
uOp cache + neural Net in action.
Even with the RAM support in progress, CCX communication limitation and Windows 10 thread allocation seemingly suboptimal ("Game Mode" incoming), it looks great when applications are properly programmed or can take advantage of all cores.
I don't think that AMD has "overhyped" Ryzen, they've delivered what they've announced: Stellar multithread performance per dollar (and per watt)!
(... and even a soldered IHS!)
Many gaming benchmarks are looking a little unfair though. Yes, it's neccessary to remove any GPU bottleneck if you want to see differences in (mostly singlethread) CPU performance, but seriously, who's gaming @ 720 in 2017?
Performance is virtually the same in resolutions above 1440 (and that's the least I'd expect anyone with a GTX 980Ti to use), so it doesn't matter anyway.
(... and even a soldered IHS!)
Many gaming benchmarks are looking a little unfair though. Yes, it's neccessary to remove any GPU bottleneck if you want to see differences in (mostly singlethread) CPU performance, but seriously, who's gaming @ 720 in 2017?
Performance is virtually the same in resolutions above 1440 (and that's the least I'd expect anyone with a GTX 980Ti to use), so it doesn't matter anyway.
More information about gaming from AMA with Robert Hallock, and Lisa Su:
And last bit about ECC:
There is however one apparent thing in gaming. Ryzen offers very good minimum framerates compared to Intel offerings, but lacks in ability to push the maximum framerates out of the boudaries, because of the scheduling. It appears that the ST performance is good even for gaming, resulting in no stuttering, but so far affecting the maximum FPS, which also results in reduced average framerates.
Ryzen 7 1700 appears to be best CPU even for gaming right now, if the minimums are everything to go for.
And last bit about ECC:
There is however one apparent thing in gaming. Ryzen offers very good minimum framerates compared to Intel offerings, but lacks in ability to push the maximum framerates out of the boudaries, because of the scheduling. It appears that the ST performance is good even for gaming, resulting in no stuttering, but so far affecting the maximum FPS, which also results in reduced average framerates.
Ryzen 7 1700 appears to be best CPU even for gaming right now, if the minimums are everything to go for.
Last edited:
From what I've seen from the benchmarks at tomshardware and anandstech, the new AMD Ryzen processors offer excellent price-performance ratio for scientific and semi-scientific computations with a few caveats like the lack of AVX instructions and the somewhat "green" eco-system, the latter can be fairly easily polished with a few compiler and microcode updates.
I expect it to be a huge success in the HPC and workstation markets. You're getting a boatload of highly efficient cores for half the price of an equivalent Intel product. The lack of AVX instructions is a concern but I think they will quickly fix this in the next iteration, you can't do everything at once.
I expect it to be a huge success in the HPC and workstation markets. You're getting a boatload of highly efficient cores for half the price of an equivalent Intel product. The lack of AVX instructions is a concern but I think they will quickly fix this in the next iteration, you can't do everything at once.
It does not lack AVX2 instructions. It has them, but it only has 128-bit execution units, not 256-bit.
Some Xeons have AVX-512.
You're right. I just checked the specs, and it indeed supports AVX and AVX2 instructions, but it has 2x128-bit FMA units in contrast to Skylake's 2x256-bit units. It's not bad, but it's something that should be improved in the future.
Geekbench results: https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/search?page=1&q=Ryzen&utf8=✓
For comparizon Intel CPU's: https://browser.primatelabs.com/processor-benchmarks
For comparizon Intel CPU's: https://browser.primatelabs.com/processor-benchmarks
Now, with ECC and good WS performance, will we be seeing Ryzen in the nMP to come?
I hope not. Not for the foreseeable future I guess.
I hope not. Not for the foreseeable future I guess.
I guess the argument is that the Mac Pro should have the highest end workstation class CPU's, which is why it's traditionally had Xeons. These Ryzen chips are desktop class, and probably not suitable for the Pro (yet)?
Nothing prevents Apple from making proper Ryzen desktops as well as workstations.