J o m s, 23 Feb 2017It may be 5-10% slower clock per clock vs Kabylake in single core IPC but it will demolish Kab... moreHow do you know that? Because it's the same question when it comes to: Why chips used in Android perform poorly in multi core performance test, while do only better in Single core. taking into consideration that the difference in multi core tests is huge in favor of iphone, while although they are higher than apple in single core tests the difference is minimal!
S., 23 Feb 2017The Ryzen 7 series are competing directly against Intel's 1050$ processor, they are to show th... moreAMD hardcore fans reply ? do you really think that consumer will going for those benchmark meaning flagship either i7-6900K or i7-6950X but not i7 - 7700K , i7-6700K or even more demanding & reasonable price without sacrifying a lot performance i5-7600K , i5-6600K which only cost US280 below ?
the fact is USD250 or lower ( i5 ) is the most consumer base .
i was talk about marketing lousy ,its shouldn't be 1700x vs i7 ,use egg try to beat rock , its not impressive ,they just waste another big oppotunity to counter Intel with they really on par side by side Intel CPU. but if spend those money buy the rookie (AMD 1700X) ? i would spend for Intel with more stable long run CPU . even i was long time ago AMD fans. as i was mention in early statement. its a big improvement for AMD itself , not a big deal to Intel . Intel all along has been have this type performance , and they are wait for AMD counter attack until slow down their upgrade CPU performance cycle.
Anonymous, 24 Feb 2017AMD is like Mediatek of computer world. Whatever they made are always cheap and affordable.Thankfully they are not!
Anonymous, 24 Feb 2017AMD is like Mediatek of computer world. Whatever they made are always cheap and affordable.That is a horrible comparison though. Since always AMD has been engineering first while Intel was finance first, but they are both cutting edge tech companies and one was never consistently better than the other. AMD has the superior Zen core now, Intel had the core architecture before and earlier on AMD had the Athlon 64 etc. They are the worlds fastest processor architectures around and Intel and AMD are taking turns at tech superiority, except Intel is also the bad business guy while at it, thus insane profit margins and prices.
Mediatek merely takes ARM designs and makes average quality chips out of predesigned puzzles.
pdude, 23 Feb 2017These are 64bit processors.thanks captain obvious
AMD is like Mediatek of computer world. Whatever they made are always cheap and affordable.
Finally getting a gaming PC/Laptop half the price of Intel based boards.
Quoting cinebench website support CPU list:
"Supported Processors: Intel Pentium 4, Intel Pentium 4 D, Intel XEON, Intel Core 2, Intel Core i7, Intel Core i5, Intel Core i3, Intel Celeron, Intel Celeron D, AMD Sempron, AMD Athlon 64, AMD Opteron, AMD Phenom, AMD FX, AMD Ontario, AMD Zacate, AMD Kabini, AMD Temash, AMD Beema, AMD Mullins, AMD Llano, AMD Trinity, AMD Richland, AMD Kaveri"
Variables, end to end compatibility, surrounding system influence...
I made twice this mistake and went with AMD, I really got disappointed. Their study won't be great value to me. Need some accredited tester and need real practical results on different platforms. Here we go again with the benchmarks and how to benchmark... reminds me every time something new is coming that beats the top mark after is just a average chipset or part of a average device pushed above and beyond for the testing only - what about product reliability?
z4ck, 23 Feb 2017LOL. We often omit the "-64" when it's not important. In this article, the author wanted to... morehaha yeah I dont remember the last time I had such good laugh from the online comments. Especially considering that x86-64 is an AMD standard, AMD made the first 64 bit desktop processors based on it and Intel's Core processors license the 64 bit tech from AMD to be able to use it.
RWGD, 23 Feb 2017I think nobody has read the full article. It is clearly mentioned that the announced CPUs are ... moreLOL.
We often omit the "-64" when it's not important.
In this article, the author wanted to emphasize that it has full compatibility with other intel processors(x86).
That's why he didn't write x86-64 or x64.
We all(excluding you) can understand that it's 64bit even it's not specified.
I think nobody has read the full article. It is clearly mentioned that the announced CPUs are x86(32 bit). I was an AMD fan till 2008.Then came Intel's i series of processors and my AMD fans became intel loyalists. Come on AMD you are now 10 steps behind Intel. In this day and age when even mobile phone processors are basd on x64 architecture, what are you doing? How those RAM hungry demanding Media production applications or even games with high end graphics will be handled by your crappy CPUs without the help of large system memory(RAM)?
Actually Ryzen 1700 looks wonderful & meats a cost requirement for enthusiast build, litle work station & good enough for gaming at 3.0Ghz base. Actually with only 14~15% lower performance compared to the 1800X it looks fantastic while costing a one third less.
Linas, 23 Feb 2017The problem that "enthusiasts" are not the same as "professionals". Enthusiasts means "gamers"... moreWe want CPUs with more cores,higher clock speeds and grater IPC,bigger L1,L2 & L3 cache without drawing a lot of power and overheating!
If I ever get a CPU like this,it will really help me with my work!
My current PC has a 2C/4T CPU with 4GB RAM,a slow old 500GB hard drive and Windows 10 32-Bit version even though my PC fully supports 64-Bit but the OEM decided to put the 32-Bit version.I planned to upgrade my PC by adding an SSD,more RAM and the 64-version of windows 10 but I changed my mind and now I plan to build my own PC with a workstation/server AMD CPU if it's cheap.
Anyway with all of those limitations it takes me a lot of time to finish my work,I hope they are cheap!
i saw some AMD fan like me used to be. i was long time ago AMD fan. but once i finally give up AMD , i realiase that Intel actually much more good in term marketing , ratio price , user experience .
i not said Ryzen not good . but for the "non-excited performance" what Intel already have all day long . & this rookie CPU asking same price like Intel highend .just like your company rookie asking to be a manager.
why as a end user like us , need to pay USD 300+ for the big improvement for AMD , i know AMD cpu was improve more than 40-60% compare to previous high end CPU. but it doesn't mean we should pay for it .
AMD still dont really know what end user need. they just like HTC , always put his "non-excited performance" item to compete with highend . Intel not Nokia. they can sense the trend.
now , who willing pay USD 329 for the "lower end"instead of Intel highend . who will not buy brand name but looking in to paper performance ?
if make it i5 low end price with i7 performance , i only can see AMD really think to compete in CPU market war.
finally something to look foward to not the tired old intel ripoffs, i always hated intel now i can go back to my generic brand. a complete pure amd powered gaming rigg. no nvidia gt whatever ti gpu and finaly intel outside and amd at the helm from now on. hope intel dont drown on what ever "lake" they name thier cpus on. hum skylake, canonlake bla bla sandy bridge now amd is kicking sand in thier face and i like it, serves em right.
Linas, 23 Feb 2017The problem that "enthusiasts" are not the same as "professionals". Enthusiasts means "gamers"... moreI agree "enthusiasts" are not professionals but they do drop pretty big bucks to have the latest and greatest, just so that they can play on 1440p or 4k Ultra settings or for heavy multitasking . And when 4k or 1440p ultra gaming comes into scenario, then CPU becomes less relevant including its frequency and GPU is the one which needs more attention.
So at 1440p or higher Kaby Lake 4C/8T @4.2Ghz won't give any significant performance gain compared to Ryzen @3.6Ghz. So why the hell not get the 8C/16T for the same price or a little more and get the added benefit of faster encoding/decoding and rar/un-rar, which I am sure everyone does occasionally if not frequently. Also every Ryzen CPU can be overclocked (correct me If I am wrong), if the stock performance is not up to the mark.
But most importantly, if I were to build a gaming rig now and plan to keep it for 3 years at least I will go with 6 and 8 core if price is close to quad cores, just because we will be seeing more games tapping into the power of DX12 which can use more cores than DX11 can efficiently.
P.S : I have assumed that Ryzen has same IPC as Intel's.