Official AMD "Ryzen" CPU Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Intel has no interest in making their PC chips more affordable. They just launched a new program including video games with their mid to high end chips.

More to the point they said they expect with the launch of their new memory chips that consumers will be more then happy to continue paying a premium price.

So basically Optane memory modules will only be available for Intel equipped PC's from the sound of it. Top it off don't expect cheaper prices for Intel CPU's because Intel has a lock on Optane memory chips right now. Even though they have a co-inventor of the tech.

stoneybeach_onmotherboard_logo_rgb_lr-100714846-large.jpg


"One limitation of Optane Memory could be a deal-breaker for many users: Intel says Optane Memory will be tied to Kaby Lake CPUs, and not just the associated 200-series chipsets. That means, for example, if you have a Z270 motherboard with a Skylake Core i7-6700K in it, it won’t work. Intel said it wanted to limit the validation work it had to do. We’d also guess that by limiting Optane to Kaby Lake, Intel gets to eliminate supporting Windows 7 and Windows 8.1."

http://www.pcworld.com/article/3184...ission-make-hard-drives-faster-than-ssds.html
 
Is anyone else over-clocking their ryzen CPUs and if so what are you using to do it? And what results with what hardware are you achieving?

I'm using the ASUS performance and power utility software with my Asus prime b350 motherboard and easily getting to 3.8ghz air cooled in a hot house without going above 53c.
 
Is anyone else over-clocking their ryzen CPUs and if so what are you using to do it? And what results with what hardware are you achieving?

I'm using the ASUS performance and power utility software with my Asus prime b350 motherboard and easily getting to 3.8ghz air cooled in a hot house without going above 53c.
Have you benched yourself on UserBenchmark, yet? If you do, please tell me your Single Core score with that 3.8GHz clock.

*Edit*
BTW, the Overclocking section is all yours. I assumed Jefferz would want to take that to cohere with his liquid overclocking thread, but as he wrote above, he would prefer someone else handle it.
 
Last edited:
Have you benched yourself on UserBenchmark, yet? If you do, please tell me your Single Core score with that 3.8GHz clock.

*Edit*
BTW, the Overclocking section is all yours. I assumed Jefferz would want to take that to cohere with his liquid overclocking thread, but as he wrote above, he would prefer someone else handle it.
I cinebenched it a few times before I got to playing with the OC mode of all my components. I will jump on user benchmark(for the first time ever) tonight and see if I end up with something useful.



And that's a sub $1000 build
UserBenchmarks: Game 74%, Desk 82%, Work 88%
CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 1700 - 95.5%
GPU: AMD RX 480 - 74.4%
SSD: OCZ Trion 150 480GB - 70.8%
HDD: Hitachi Deskstar 7K1000.C 1TB - 64%
RAM: G.SKILL F4-2400C DDR4 2x8GB - 79%
MBD: Asus PRIME B350-PLUS

Cant get my CPU numbers to post so I'll type them. (OMG I'm retarded, it's all in the links)
95.5% score
single thread sc int110/float 117/ mixed 113: 90% total
quad core qc int 435 / float 466 / mixed: 450: 102% total
MC int 1242 / float 1266 / mixed 1222: 186% total
 
Last edited:
I pushed it to failure. I was stable at 3.8ghz so I tired 3.85, and 3.9, and 4.0ghz, then I got ballzy and tried 4.2ghz and it was stable so I went to 4.212ghz...

Stable!

4.225 black death...

My temp never went above 54c so it wasn't an overheat, I think my motherboard being a cheaper one is what stopped me from going higher.

The thing that sucks most is all my RGB reset to default and now I must re-glow my rig :)
 
I pushed it to failure. I was stable at 3.8ghz so I tired 3.85, and 3.9, and 4.0ghz, then I got ballzy and tried 4.2ghz and it was stable so I went to 4.212ghz...

Stable!

4.225 black death...

My temp never went above 54c so it wasn't an overheat, I think my motherboard being a cheaper one is what stopped me from going higher.



The thing that sucks most is all my RGB reset to default and now I must re-glow my rig :)

What voltage and memory speeds are you using?
 
What voltage and memory speeds are you using?
I just left the house but I'll post it when I get back.

Edit, I didn't save the profile so I will have to play with it again.
 
Last edited:
@TSO have you had any BIOS updates recently?
 
I cinebenched it a few times before I got to playing with the OC mode of all my components. I will jump on user benchmark(for the first time ever) tonight and see if I end up with something useful.



And that's a sub $1000 build
UserBenchmarks: Game 74%, Desk 82%, Work 88%
CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 1700 - 95.5%
GPU: AMD RX 480 - 74.4%
SSD: OCZ Trion 150 480GB - 70.8%
HDD: Hitachi Deskstar 7K1000.C 1TB - 64%
RAM: G.SKILL F4-2400C DDR4 2x8GB - 79%
MBD: Asus PRIME B350-PLUS

Cant get my CPU numbers to post so I'll type them. (OMG I'm retarded, it's all in the links)
95.5% score
single thread sc int110/float 117/ mixed 113: 90% total
quad core qc int 435 / float 466 / mixed: 450: 102% total
MC int 1242 / float 1266 / mixed 1222: 186% total
Beautiful. Yeah, that should mean for the single core the 3.9GHz will your specs should reap around 115pts & 4.0Ghz should get you ~116pts-117pts assuming your sample held as an average. Makes sense.

118 pts is the still the highest anyone has gotten (119pts for the 1700x; 121pts for the 1800x), so you're confirming that a relatively cheap air overclock is the way to go. No point in wasting money. Pretty incredible scores for a build under $1K, dude. Props.

Oh yeah, btw, for comparison, the averages at stock frequency are as follows for Intel CPUs:

Single Core
  • 111 pts = i5-7500
  • 113 pts = i7-6800K
  • 114 pts = i3-7100
  • 121 pts = i5-7600
  • 121 pts = i7-7700
  • 132 pts = i5-7600K
  • 139 pts = i7-7700K
Quad Core
  • 309 pts = i3-7100
  • 415 pts = i5-7500
  • 430 pts = i5-7700
  • 450 pts = i7-6800K
  • 455 pts = i5-7600
  • 489 pts = i7-7700K
  • 499 pts = i5-7600K

So nobody can say you're aren't balling.
 
Last edited:
@TSO have you had any BIOS updates recently?
I downloaded a BIOS update and the ASUS power and performance utilityThe Utility is what I'm using to OC since it works while windows is on and it doesn't crash like AMD Ryzen master does.
 
Beautiful. Yeah, that should mean for the single core the 3.9GHz will your specs should reap around 115pts & 4.0Ghz should get you ~116pts-117pts assuming your sample held as an average. Makes sense.

118 pts is the still the highest anyone has gotten (119pts for the 1700x; 121pts for the 1800x), so you're confirming that a relatively cheap air overclock is the way to go. No point in wasting money. Pretty incredible scores for a build under $1K, dude. Props.

Oh yeah, btw, for comparison, the averages at stock frequency are as follows for Intel CPUs:

Single Core
  • 111 pts = i5-7500
  • 113 pts = i7-6800K
  • 114 pts = i3-7100
  • 121 pts = i5-7600
  • 121 pts = i7-7700
  • 132 pts = i5-7600K
  • 139 pts = i7-7700K
Quad Core
  • 309 pts = i3-7100
  • 415 pts = i5-7500
  • 430 pts = i5-7700
  • 450 pts = i7-6800K
  • 455 pts = i5-7600
  • 489 pts = i7-7700K
  • 499 pts = i5-7600K

So nobody can say you're aren't balling.

I plan on running it at 4.0 ghz once my cooler comes in.
 
Last edited:
So that i5 is cranked up to 5ghz? If so the r5 did really well. If not, it looks like the i5 has more than a leg up in a few respects.
Yeah, and neither of the guys who benched the R5-1600 are overclockers, and I suspect their rest of their systems aren't great because at stock it is underperforming relative to the lower-clocked R7-1700 in the single core score (R5-1600 = 3.2GHz ; R7-1700 = 3.0Ghz). I was just excited to see real-world benchmarks actually roll in.

You don't really start to get a great idea of how the processors stack up until a few hundred benchmarks are in.
 
Yeah, and neither of the guys who benched the R5-1600 are overclockers, and I suspect their rest of their systems aren't great because at stock it is underperforming relative to the lower-clocked R7-1700 in the single core score (R5-1600 = 3.2GHz ; R7-1700 = 3.0Ghz). I was just excited to see real-world benchmarks actually roll in.

You don't really start to get a great idea of how the processors stack up until a few hundred benchmarks are in.


I doubt the legitimacy of these benchmarks seeing that there are no 1600 out to the public yet. If they are testing them they are using engineering samples hardly legit testing.
 
I doubt the legitimacy of these benchmarks seeing that there are no 1600 out to the public yet. If they are testing them they are using engineering samples hardly legit testing.
One would assume that they aren't yet officially released would go without saying, but I suppose it doesn't hurt to point it out, explicitly.
 
Yeah, and neither of the guys who benched the R5-1600 are overclockers, and I suspect their rest of their systems aren't great because at stock it is underperforming relative to the lower-clocked R7-1700 in the single core score (R5-1600 = 3.2GHz ; R7-1700 = 3.0Ghz). I was just excited to see real-world benchmarks actually roll in.

You don't really start to get a great idea of how the processors stack up until a few hundred benchmarks are in.
I was also exited to see the numbers roll in. Apparently I'm building an r5 1600 for everyone in my family because now I'm the computer guy.
 
I doubt the legitimacy of these benchmarks seeing that there are no 1600 out to the public yet. If they are testing them they are using engineering samples hardly legit testing.
The testers have all the r5's so one might have posted a benchmark.
 
Ryzen is definitely living up to the hype. It's giving me the itch to system build as I doubt AMD makes the mistake of releasing virtually the same CPU's just underclocked for 75% the price.

If Vega works out, those who bought AMD shares last January will be moonwalking. It's already gone from $2 to $15. Still kicking myself for missing that boat...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top