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
In theory it is not. But lets take for example Overwatch. You need at least to have GTX 1070 to have more than 144 FPS minimum.
And that is Ultra setting 1080p. Epic is more demanding.
Where is the 7700k in those charts? I know they are comparing processors with similar core counts, but that's not how I shop. I compare performance and shop for parts based on tasks I do. Does the 1800x still go toe to toe with the 7700 in gaming tasks?
As CPU rendering starts to really die all over, I'm starting to look at more real time solutions for rendering animation: UE4 and Unity.
GDC was eye opening. Both of those companies are offering insane tools for outputting video work on their free engines. I've talked with creators who used both engines for everything from short films to commercials to interactive VR cartoons (not to mention games!). I am totally hooked.
Hell, if UE4's real time output can live up to ILM VFX supervisor's John Knoll's tough standards, I feel like the animation rendering world is shifting faster than I can keep up.
And if I do need fast offline rendering, having a couple of 1080ti cards in my rig will get the job done significantly faster in Octane or Redshift, so I'm not sure how important Ryzen is for my future needs.
I'd be a bit more excited if I had seen more Ryzen mobos with multiple m.2 slots. I can get z270 boards with multiple m.2's and upcoming optane support. That's awesome for having a wicked fast system writing to a wicked fast storage/scratch drive.
But Ryzen I think has more PCI lanes available, so if I need offline GPU bound rendering perhaps Ryzen holds the edge there, too. It certainly holds in edge in any CPU bound offline rendering.
Man, what an exciting time to be in the market for a PC. Too many things to think about!
As CPU rendering starts to really die all over, I'm starting to look at more real time solutions for rendering animation: UE4 and Unity.
GDC was eye opening. Both of those companies are offering insane tools for outputting video work on their free engines. I've talked with creators who used both engines for everything from short films to commercials to interactive VR cartoons (not to mention games!). I am totally hooked.
Hell, if UE4's real time output can live up to ILM VFX supervisor's John Knoll's tough standards, I feel like the animation rendering world is shifting faster than I can keep up.
And if I do need fast offline rendering, having a couple of 1080ti cards in my rig will get the job done significantly faster in Octane or Redshift, so I'm not sure how important Ryzen is for my future needs.
I'd be a bit more excited if I had seen more Ryzen mobos with multiple m.2 slots. I can get z270 boards with multiple m.2's and upcoming optane support. That's awesome for having a wicked fast system writing to a wicked fast storage/scratch drive.
But Ryzen I think has more PCI lanes available, so if I need offline GPU bound rendering perhaps Ryzen holds the edge there, too. It certainly holds in edge in any CPU bound offline rendering.
Man, what an exciting time to be in the market for a PC. Too many things to think about!
If you are thinking about using multiple GPUs and multiple PCIe drives, you shouldn't be looking at Intel's and AMD's mainstream platforms.
Skylake-EP or Naples are what you need.
I was hoping to avoid that expense, as many of my colleagues have tested that PCI speed doesn't affect offline GPU bound rendering all that much so dropping to 4x is OK.
Also, some z270 boards come with multiple M.2 drives and can accommodate the 2x GPUs I would expand into. I'm going to start with 1 1080ti, and go to 2 if needed in a year or two.
I guess I hope that Zen brings down the price of X99 if I end up needing that expensive platform.
It's not about the 100%. If you look at some of those numbers, it indeed seems not optimized, unless you're looking at some AVX2 effect.
The more I look at AMD, the more things are coming apparent.
They can have tremendous Engineers, they can have really good technology, overall, but they lack few things.
Money - so they can not dedicate everything they have to launch properly.
They have absolutely terrible marketing, so they do not know how to create "healthy" hype for their products, and it affects their brand appeal. Im pretty sure that Marketing is affected by money starvation. Or by just plain stupidity of their marketing teams, who knows?
And thirdly - Software. A lot of Open Source initiatives, but without dedication of the market they cannot go anywhere.
Sad, but true.
They can have tremendous Engineers, they can have really good technology, overall, but they lack few things.
Money - so they can not dedicate everything they have to launch properly.
They have absolutely terrible marketing, so they do not know how to create "healthy" hype for their products, and it affects their brand appeal. Im pretty sure that Marketing is affected by money starvation. Or by just plain stupidity of their marketing teams, who knows?
And thirdly - Software. A lot of Open Source initiatives, but without dedication of the market they cannot go anywhere.
Sad, but true.
https://twitter.com/BitsAndChipsEng/status/838445134782025729
Total system power consumption. 114W under load. The TDP in this case scenario supposedly should be around 45-50W of power.
Last edited:
AMD Ryzen 1700 - 1800X chips would be awesome for iMac Pro, and it could be Apple's' start with AMD CPUs. Mac mini and regular iMac's will use APU/NPU's and they're not yet ready. Same with Naples for Mac Pro, when it's ready.
Apple's AMD laptops will come last. That's why Apple released Intel MBP now... to have something new for the market.
And why to jump to AMD wagon? Two things; HSA and custom APU/NPU's. HSA will give Apple a software edge for VR & other demanding markets, and custom chip will deliver the profit. Axx for custom ARM chips, Xxx for custom x86-64 chips?
Apple's AMD laptops will come last. That's why Apple released Intel MBP now... to have something new for the market.
And why to jump to AMD wagon? Two things; HSA and custom APU/NPU's. HSA will give Apple a software edge for VR & other demanding markets, and custom chip will deliver the profit. Axx for custom ARM chips, Xxx for custom x86-64 chips?
Last edited:
APUs with HBM2 will be simply extremely important for HPC. The question is, will HPC jump HSA and ROCm bandwagon?
@cube https://twitter.com/BitsAndChipsEng/status/838488192751894529 something for ya'.
@cube https://twitter.com/BitsAndChipsEng/status/838488192751894529 something for ya'.
Have any Ryzen Hackintoshes been spotted in the wild?
This forum is about Apple systems, after all.
[doublepost=1488749355][/doublepost]
https://www.ibm.com/blogs/systems/ibm-power8-cpu-and-nvidia-pascal-gpu-speed-ahead-with-nvlink/
This forum is about Apple systems, after all.
[doublepost=1488749355][/doublepost]
The killer system for HPC is Power8 (OpenPower) with NVlink.
https://www.ibm.com/blogs/systems/ibm-power8-cpu-and-nvidia-pascal-gpu-speed-ahead-with-nvlink/
Based on the reviews I've seen and read... 1800X does not beat an i7-7700K in single-threaded gaming tasks.
Instead... it excels in multi-threaded tasks like encoding and rendering. But you shouldn't be disappointed if you had a 1800X in your gaming rig.
In theory... gamers who live-stream are a good candidate for an 1800X since you've got more cores to devote to streaming as well as the game. And if you edit video of your game streams later... the 1800X will excel at that too.
All that said... I looked at some real life examples of how these processors perform in Premiere Pro.
HardwareCanucks showed the $500 1800X performing pretty close to the $1000 Intel i7-6900K. And it was ahead of the i7-7700K.
Great, right?
However... it was only about 10% faster than the i7-7700K in their export test in Premiere Pro.
That's not exactly the blowout I was expecting from the Ryzen hype.
Linus Tech Tips saw as much as a 20% increase in Adobe Media Encoder over the i7-7700K.
On the one hand... you're getting $1,000 performance for only $500.
On the other hand... you're paying 32% more than the i7-7700K but only getting a 10-20% increase in video encoding.
So I don't know what to think.
Another problem... the motherboard makers are furiously putting out BIOS updates trying to get everything to work. These are the pains of a brand new platform.
I was excited for Ryzen. The early multi-threaded benchmarks looked amazing. Similar to the top-end $1,000 Intel benchmarks for only $500.
But for what I would use it for... video editing... it doesn't seem like the slam dunk I was expecting.
And for gamers... the 1800X doesn't make any sense.
I can't tell if you were replying to my question about Apple OSX benchmarks - but those three are Windows 10.