AMD Ryzen

If I didn't have so many damn PCIe cards in my box, I would seriously consider Ryzen. Instead, I'm stuck with x299 for my upgrade this year. Well, maybe this will give AMD the money they needs to invest in R&D to continue to bring their platform closer to intel in terms of features.

 

I think you'd be looking more at their upcoming Naples/Zeppelin rather than Ryzen for them PCIe lanes. Maybe they'll do a Intel and bring a slightly cut down version to the VHEDT, although I doubt that.

 

Maybe in a few years, when they have the money to look into rolling out a whold product line.

 

Techpowerup review

About the architecture - https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_7_1800X/3.html

 

the 1080p gaming performance is not as I would have hoped and I see there chips are not really that good at overclocking either but I feel like this is an awesome start.Also I feel they have a great product to improve on compared to this tick tick tock crap from intel XD

 

The performance issues at 1080p seem largely related to poorly optimized game engines. Did you see the PCPer followup where they found that disabling half the cores raised performance at 1080p? I think Ryzen is a great value - i'm about to build one to play with at work to evaluate.

 

Probably needs more optimized schedulers from the OS, so performance will be interesting to examine about 3 months post launch.

 

Bought a 1700 because of the low power consumption. Pleased with the performance but I don't do any gaming. All compute and encode.

 

This article should catch you up:
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/201...s-ryzen-at-games-but-how-much-does-it-matter/

 

Fast storage and in some cases, a well-supported GPU helps a lot with video editing, too. Most of the triple-A NLE software does a shitload of GPU acceleration for everything from colour correction to rendering transitions. Being generous with memory gives well-written software the ability to speculatively render to RAM behind the scenes more, too.

Depending on the software used, the specific brand of video card matters somewhat too, e.g. the Adobe stuff seems happier with CUDA than OpenCL.

Of course, if you're just top and tailing 1080p in Shotcut, it's less of an issue.

 

@Marvey I think whether you go intel or AMD, you should wait for Ryzen to come out, simply because it may cause intel chip prices to drop. Unless there's a time constraint (Birthday gift, school semester timed, etc), probably worth the wait.

 

I'm definitely more of an AMD fan. My first system I built was on a Phenom II 550 processor. It's just been that they've been unfortunately too far behind to really make it worthwhile making an AMD system, if system longevity is something that you really desire. It has been pretty hard to make a good AMD system when everybody is using intel's bleeding edge stuff more and more, and AMD has been playing catch-up.

It got to the point where you built a new AMD system any time in the last 3-5 years, it was pretty much outdated by the time you threw it together. Bulldozer/Piledriver were barely competitive with Sandy Bridge, and then Haswell and Skylake basically buried them and Excavator in the cradle.

And now intel has sort of gotten fat and lazy (and kind of greedy). They're still leading R&D for sure, but I don't think they really feel any steep competition. I truly want Ryzen to be a bit of a game shaker, if for nothing else that it might light a bit of a fire under their ass and improve innovation across the entire sector.

 

I think it's less being lazy and more of reaching the end of what silicon based systems can do.

They are literally going to have to invent a new design. Last I checked quantum computing was making some headway, but still years before we actually see real progress and more years before it reaches a consumer level.

 

Intel have had quite a few interesting technologies even back in 200X times but I suppose they couldn't find a way to make them at scale cheaply.

Main issue with computers now that most of them are "fast enough" that normal users don't feel the need to upgrade. I'm still on a Intel Ivy Bridge and for normal use it certainly is quick enough, but for friends in the architectural fields etc they're looking pretty hard at Ryzen (although I keep asking them why not GPU rendering, but well...)

 

Hell, I'm still running an antediluvian Core i7 980 (Gulftown) and it's fast enough for most of what I do. Six cores and relatively well-behaved, it has been incredible value. I bought the CPU when it was cheap to replace a lower-end socket 1366 part.

Since the motherboard is getting more cranky (and the ancient case has seen better days), I will probably do a complete new build at some point. This ancient mobo doesn't have SATA 600 (I boot from a PCI-E controller instead), doesn't have USB 3, and obviously no m.2. It's that rather than the CPU thoughput holding me back which could prompt an upgrade

I'm sure I'll enjoy the general across the board performance increase, when I do upgrade, but it won't be as heady as it used to be, when you were starving for cycles and crossing your fingers that a new processor would save you.

 

I've extensively tested Ryzen before returning it... Sadly. I am a high fps gamer...
I ran a 1700 @ 3.9Ghz 2966Mhz ram. At both 1080p and 1440p I drop settings in games (if needed) to maintain 130+FPS. Maxed out with GPU limitations the Ryzen had less of an issue, however when I'd drop settings to play competitively on certain games the Ryzen couldn't raise the bar where my Intel rigs just take off... Ryzen is an awesome chip, however the Numa design and limited clocking/high freq memory support are a deal breaker, for now. It's a strong offering, just not for the likes of high-end gamers yet.

 

Ryzen 5 has been released if anyone's interested: http://www.anandtech.com/show/11244/the-amd-ryzen-5-1600x-vs-core-i5-review-twelve-threads-vs-four