Ingame Performance with AMD Ryzen "Zen" CPUs

Hello there,

does anyone allready have a system running with the new AMD CPUs and can give a feedback on performance?
Maybe also GGG has some testhardware to work with, or allready has been testing it?

Would be really interested in some benchmarks.

Thanks in adv.
~Doe

Hiho,
First my specs :)http://valid.x86.fr/eyqpg8

Asus Crosshair VI Hero, G-Skill 16GB 3200-Cl14, Ryzen 7 1800x with a Macho Rev. B from Thermaltake, Asus R9 280x and a M.2 Samsung Evo

PoE runns in DX11 at over 180 FPS and if someone fools around with the physics im dropping down to 100 ^^ Frametimes are at 6ms-11ms

BUT, if you plan on upgrading soon be aware that most of the Software is kinda Beta-Stage. Windows is strange sometimes, it wont load anything and i have to restart.
The BIOS versions are okayish but not stable on most settings and alot of Ram isnt supported
So ATM im running a low-freq Cpu (3.8ghz 1.35v) to get "enough" power on low heat.
But here is my system at a higher clock http://valid.x86.fr/2bdura
I tried to get it over 4Ghz, but system was unstable and since i cant read the temperatures on windows i didnt fool around and waiting for a better BIOS. I hope i will get it to 4.15-4.2 Ghz in the long run :)

If you are aware of these problems then go ahead and try it out, the price/performance is amazing, alot of applications at the same time are no problem and imo its a future proof investment.

Benchmarks are available all over youtube, but handle with care it's a new tech and some things have to be adapted to get even more fps, so i hope the industry will give them a try and make use of the 8-16 threads :)

"

K3ll06s wrote:

Hiho,
First my specs :)http://valid.x86.fr/eyqpg8

Asus Crosshair VI Hero, G-Skill 16GB 3200-Cl14, Ryzen 7 1800x with a Macho Rev. B from Thermaltake, Asus R9 280x and a M.2 Samsung Evo

PoE runns in DX11 at over 180 FPS and if someone fools around with the physics im dropping down to 100 ^^ Frametimes are at 6ms-11ms

BUT, if you plan on upgrading soon be aware that most of the Software is kinda Beta-Stage. Windows is strange sometimes, it wont load anything and i have to restart.
The BIOS versions are okayish but not stable on most settings and alot of Ram isnt supported
So ATM im running a low-freq Cpu (3.8ghz 1.35v) to get "enough" power on low heat.
But here is my system at a higher clock http://valid.x86.fr/2bdura
I tried to get it over 4Ghz, but system was unstable and since i cant read the temperatures on windows i didnt fool around and waiting for a better BIOS. I hope i will get it to 4.15-4.2 Ghz in the long run :)

If you are aware of these problems then go ahead and try it out, the price/performance is amazing, alot of applications at the same time are no problem and imo its a future proof investment.

Benchmarks are available all over youtube, but handle with care it's a new tech and some things have to be adapted to get even more fps, so i hope the industry will give them a try and make use of the 8-16 threads :)

Thanks a lot for the reply sir, it pretty much reflects was i was reading for days now in other hardware forum threads aswell.

It seems to work out (some luck might be required), once you get the system running and a windows installed.

Iam planning on a complete new build, so i kinda can try arround with the hardware and if i doesnt work as great i can still take my current setup as a backup option.

I still think it may be better to wait for atleast a new BIOS release for the Crosshair board (which is also the one i'd pick up atm).

RAM seems to be the biggest issue right now, looks like you cant run most of the RAMs and if then with <3000Mhz even if the Board and CPU should be able to support more than that.

Thanks again sir.

"

K3ll06s wrote:

Hiho,
First my specs :)http://valid.x86.fr/eyqpg8...

Pardon my ignorance, but what do you mean by 'most of the software is in the beta stage'? I'm looking at getting a new machine from scratch in the next 6 months and wanted to keep an eye on what people were saying about this, especially in regards to PoE performance. Are you saying that the new AMD tech somehow (or with some applications) doesn't work 'out of the box'? Or is what you're saying limited to the specific tooling around you did to get things to run at slightly higher performance?

I need to see side-by-side benchmarks of ZEN vs Intel CPUs in a variety of games. Benchmarks That show real world single-thread and multi-thread performance.

People have been skeptical of AMD since "Faildozer". Sandy Bridge just completely crushed faildozer so hard, that it took them several gens of CPUs to catch up. If Zen actually means they've caught up to Intel, and at a considerably lower price point, then it's a great buy.

I'm really considering Ryzen for the machine I will build, because I plan on streaming and the encoding, all the tabs I'll have open, all the background programs etc. require a lot of processing and I believe I could benefit from a processor with more cores and threads.

"

Manocean wrote:

I'm really considering Ryzen for the machine I will build, because I plan on streaming and the encoding, all the tabs I'll have open, all the background programs etc. require a lot of processing and I believe I could benefit from a processor with more cores and threads.

That is also my plan, the thing with Ryzen atm is that u'll have a hard time to get a stable system state. Lottery about the RAM you are using and the voltage problems and no heat monitoring. Windows incl. Applications have no Zen support atm. Once all those little problems are fixed via BIOS updates and software patches Ryzen might be very strong for gaming too.

Would love to have an GGG statement if they are testing their new engine for Ryzen and optimizing arround the multithreading of Zen, but the thread here got moved from tech to offtopic so prolly will never get a statement from GGG.

Software is indeed Beta, most of the tools coming with Motherboards can't be used, multithreading doesn't work efficient (OS related), CPU parking etc. which is OS related aswell.

I'll give it another month atleast before i decide, i7 6850K vs 1800X, both in same pricerange, 3yr old socket vs brand new socket and in theory more future potential, if you are able to get the system running stable.

"

MrSmiley21 wrote:

I need to see side-by-side benchmarks of ZEN vs Intel CPUs in a variety of games. Benchmarks That show real world single-thread and multi-thread performance.

People have been skeptical of AMD since "Faildozer". Sandy Bridge just completely crushed faildozer so hard, that it took them several gens of CPUs to catch up. If Zen actually means they've caught up to Intel, and at a considerably lower price point, then it's a great buy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7s-9RmCA8E there are some side by side "benchmarks" but the thing is that Ryzen sometimes idles cores, the cpu usage overall is super low (Witcher3 for example)


Also interesting about 1800x gaming in general: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-mMBbWHrwM

How to think of benchmarks and performance reviews in general: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylvdSnEbL50


Last but not least, this vid shows and highlights of the "starter problems" you have with Ryzen atm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SE4sxXva9Eg , BIOS issues, stability etc.


Edit:
I'll be ordering a 1800X next month, and will post results and setup problems i might meet.

The impression I am getting from reviews is that if you want the best for gaming and dont care about the cost, intel is still best. But if you want a mix of streaming (or some other no gaming related thing) and gaming than AMD is a very good option. The other thing is that a lot of people find 1800x extremely bad in performance for its high price. Looks like the 1700 is much better for price/performance balance

Also dont know if this is true, but people suggest to wait for other AMD CPUs to be released, as they will be designed specifically for gaming, and will have higher single core performance and do better in games compared to 1800x

"

miljan wrote:

Also dont know if this is true, but people suggest to wait for other AMD CPUs to be released, as they will be designed specifically for gaming, and will have higher single core performance and do better in games compared to 1800x

The four and six core CPUs will probably have higher clocks so yeah, higher single core performance. But if you want to be set for the next 3+ years, the 1700 is the way to go. And it will only get better over time, Windows 10 will get a patch next month or so which will increase Ryzen performance. As far as I understand, currently Windows 10 doesn't exactly know how Ryzen works so the performance is a bit wonky.

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

miljan wrote:

Also dont know if this is true, but people suggest to wait for other AMD CPUs to be released, as they will be designed specifically for gaming, and will have higher single core performance and do better in games compared to 1800x

The four and six core CPUs will probably have higher clocks so yeah, higher single core performance. But if you want to be set for the next 3+ years, the 1700 is the way to go. And it will only get better over time, Windows 10 will get a patch next month or so which will increase Ryzen performance. As far as I understand, currently Windows 10 doesn't exactly know how Ryzen works so the performance is a bit wonky.

I think higher clock speed will stay more important than having two more cores in gaming in future (6vs8). People said similar things about older multi core amd CPUs (dont remember the name of the architecture )and we see now, that they actually didn't do that good