Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

AMD Ryzen

AMD Zen Ryzen

  • Please log in to reply
138 replies to this topic

#121
Zoraptor

Zoraptor

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 2294 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

I wonder what the TDP would be on a 18 Core Skylake-E, you could probably heat a swimming pool with one.

 

I suspect that Intel's reliance on a ringbus system rather than clusters will start to catch up to them with those sort of core numbers as well. AMD's ccx system does have some drawbacks with low cluster numbers, but their advantages get more and their disadvantages less as cores increase, while it's the reverse for Intel. That's why graphics cards all shifted to clusters rather than ringbus.
 

I'm a bit torn as to wether I should pick up an Ryzen 7 1700 or an 1800X while I'm at it, and wether I should/could go for an Fractal Design Celsius S36 or S24 cooler. I'll pick up a new graphics card when AMD releases their new ones. My HD7970 is still quite capable.
https://www.inet.se/.../bild/10428302/
 
The X370 motherboard is by necessity since the store doesn't have any 350 motherboards that are worth it.

 
To me, 1800x is far too much premium cash wise for too little benefit unless there's no plan to overclock or for workstation situations where the competition is Broadwell-E. The overclock ceiling on it vs the 1700 is only 200Mhz difference, and you pay nearly 1USD/ hz for that.
 
That's also why I personally wouldn't consider watercooling either, unless sound is an issue. You might eke an extra 100Mhz or two on top of Wraith Spire but again that's at a hefty cost relative to benefit.
 
I am very much concerned with getting the best longevity/ cost/ performance balance though, so I tend to see everything through that lens.


Edited by Zoraptor, 29 May 2017 - 12:39 PM.


#122
Azdeus

Azdeus

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 589 posts
  • Location:Sweden. The ass-end of nowhere, on the right hand side.

I'm a bit torn as to wether I should pick up an Ryzen 7 1700 or an 1800X while I'm at it, and wether I should/could go for an Fractal Design Celsius S36 or S24 cooler. I'll pick up a new graphics card when AMD releases their new ones. My HD7970 is still quite capable.
https://www.inet.se/.../bild/10428302/
 
The X370 motherboard is by necessity since the store doesn't have any 350 motherboards that are worth it.

 
To me, 1800x is far too much premium cash wise for too little benefit unless there's no plan to overclock or for workstation situations where the competition is Broadwell-E. The overclock ceiling on it vs the 1700 is only 200Mhz difference, and you pay nearly 1USD/ hz for that.
 
That's also why I personally wouldn't consider watercooling either, unless sound is an issue. You might eke an extra 100Mhz or two on top of Wraith Spire but again that's at a hefty cost relative to benefit.
 
I am very much concerned with getting the best longevity/ cost/ performance balance though, so I tend to see everything through that lens.

 

Yeah, the price hike is pretty damn big, but it would save me the headache of silicone lottery. I've got both a processor and GPU that won't accept even the smallest of overclocks. I've always had bad luck. :)

 

The water cooling is 99% because I don't want any extra weight hanging on the motherboard. I live in an old house and the floor sways when you do something like close a door, so if I can get something that doesn't have an high offset that leverages the weight I'll go for it. I'm considering getting a waterblock for the gpu aswell but I don't think that I would save as much weight on that and that I have ALOT of lego. :p

 

I usually try to balance a build aswell, I just wish inet could get a decent b350 motherboard in stock with 3200 support.



#123
Sarex

Sarex

    (12) Mage

  • Members
  • 1823 posts

http://www.guru3d.co...-skylake-x.html

 

2k for the 18 core variant from intel... Here's to hoping AMD rips them a new one and prices their 16core variant closer to 1k.


  • samm and Valsuelm like this

#124
Zoraptor

Zoraptor

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 2294 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

Got my computer assembled and all working well. Had to set the RAM up manually as XMP caused a boot loop but otherwise no problems. Have to say that for a purely cosmetic feature I did rather like the LEDs when I had the side off as well.



#125
teknoman2

teknoman2

    (9) Sorcerer

  • Members
  • 1359 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

http://www.guru3d.co...-skylake-x.html

 

2k for the 18 core variant from intel... Here's to hoping AMD rips them a new one and prices their 16core variant closer to 1k.

the trick to the 16 core threadripper is the infinity fabric that offers near 100% scalability in performance based on how many smaller chips you put together. what they made from the start are 4c/8t chips. stick 2 of them together through the infinity fabric and you get the 8c/16t 1800X. join 2 with a faulty core each together and you get the 6c/12t 1600. put 4 on the same piece of IF and you get the 16c/32t threadripper. and by adding more 4c pieces to the IF you can just go up to as many cores as it is physically possible to put in a CPU and still be able to fit it into the socket of the board.

saves time, saves money and by using a network of smaller chips they get to keep the yield of each wafer up, meaning that they can have more pieces available in the stores and at a lower price


  • samm likes this

#126
samm

samm

    (8) Warlock

  • Members
  • 1166 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer

Waiting for Threadripper and its motherboards to decide whether to invest in an Intel X299 or an AMD X399 platform. As things stand today, AMD could offer the more convincing platform regarding I/O and surprisingly even heat output :)



#127
mkreku

mkreku

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 8462 posts
  • Location:Uppsala, Sweden

Just beware if you decide to go for the X299. Only a few of the Intel CPU's available for that platform are actually made for it, ie. some of them are just rebranded i7's.


  • Azdeus likes this

#128
Gfted1

Gfted1

    Forum Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 5311 posts
  • Location:Chicago, IL
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

AMD Threadripper—16 cores and 32 threads for $999–arrives in August.



#129
Keyrock

Keyrock

    Obsidian Order Rodent Tamer

  • Members
  • 6742 posts
  • Location:The Queen City
  • Steam:Keyrock
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
Damn, AMD is undercutting Intel pretty hard here. Good, hopefully Threadripper slaughters the i9s and Intel is forced to tone down the outrageously inflated prices they sell their high-end chips for.
  • Azdeus likes this

#130
Zoraptor

Zoraptor

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 2294 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

OTOH having seen the R3's info I'm not sure what their point is at all- AMD's APU based options ought to be a far better budget option when they arrive, and their direct Intel equivalents budget wise are the most pointless Intel offerings as well. Much like the i3 they don't bring much to the party, you'd still be better off either getting a lower cost G4560 or spending a bit more for an R5 (or i5 if an Intel loyalist).

 

Seems likely that they're not built from the core Ryzen chip as well due to being 4c/4t and their manufacturing yields being so high, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they actually were APUs minus the integrated graphics component.



#131
Gfted1

Gfted1

    Forum Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 5311 posts
  • Location:Chicago, IL
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Ryzen Threadripper Review.



#132
teknoman2

teknoman2

    (9) Sorcerer

  • Members
  • 1359 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

OTOH having seen the R3's info I'm not sure what their point is at all- AMD's APU based options ought to be a far better budget option when they arrive, and their direct Intel equivalents budget wise are the most pointless Intel offerings as well. Much like the i3 they don't bring much to the party, you'd still be better off either getting a lower cost G4560 or spending a bit more for an R5 (or i5 if an Intel loyalist).

 

Seems likely that they're not built from the core Ryzen chip as well due to being 4c/4t and their manufacturing yields being so high, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they actually were APUs minus the integrated graphics component.

half of the CPUs in the ryzen lineup serve no real purpose. they are there to make it look like it has lots of options and make a quick buck off of the less tech savvy people.

there is no reason to pay more for a 1600x when you can take a 1600 and have pretty much the same performance

there is no reason to get a 1500X when the 1400 is the exact same CPU. 

same with 1700 vs 1700X and 1800X

the X is there to make ignorant people think they pay more to get something better when they are just paying more for the same thing. AMD is a corporation after all and it's main focus is to make money... and just like every other corporation, they will use every trick in the book to make you let them stick their hand ever deeper in your pocket.



#133
Bartimaeus

Bartimaeus

    (10) Necromancer

  • Members
  • 1485 posts
  • Steam:Ask!

 

I would have liked to see more single-threaded performance benchmarks: there were only two. Of course 32 threads is likely to beat 20 threads in tasks that actually take advantage of a huge amount of threads...but the reality is that most things that aren't synthetic benchmarks aren't really equipped to handle even close to that many threads...



#134
teknoman2

teknoman2

    (9) Sorcerer

  • Members
  • 1359 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

there is only so much performance that can be squeezed out of a single thread and it usually is directly proportional to the clock speeds if the architecture is not designed badly (like in the FX series).


Edited by teknoman2, 10 August 2017 - 09:59 PM.


#135
Zoraptor

Zoraptor

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 2294 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

 

 

I would have liked to see more single-threaded performance benchmarks: there were only two. Of course 32 threads is likely to beat 20 threads in tasks that actually take advantage of a huge amount of threads...but the reality is that most things that aren't synthetic benchmarks aren't really equipped to handle even close to that many threads...

 

 

As the article says, you aren't going to be getting a 10 or 16 core $1000 processor and $400 mobo for single thread performance when you could get a premier i/r7 equivalent for less than half that. Plus you can always do multiple poorly multithreaded tasks simultaneously with more cores and save time that way. i9 and TR are also theoretically* the same as standard ryzen and skylake/ kabylake just with more cores, so we already know what their performance is clock for clock.

 

*Having said that, Broadwell-E actually beats the new i9s in a bunch of tests. That I find hard to rationalise since the i9 should have better clock speeds and IPC.

 

half of the CPUs in the ryzen lineup serve no real purpose. they are there to make it look like it has lots of options and make a quick buck off of the less tech savvy people.

there is no reason to pay more for a 1600x when you can take a 1600 and have pretty much the same performance

there is no reason to get a 1500X when the 1400 is the exact same CPU. 

same with 1700 vs 1700X and 1800X

the X is there to make ignorant people think they pay more to get something better when they are just paying more for the same thing. AMD is a corporation after all and it's main focus is to make money... and just like every other corporation, they will use every trick in the book to make you let them stick their hand ever deeper in your pocket.

 

 

1400 and 1500x are intrinsically different, as the 1500 has more (2x) cache. I don't really have a problem with AMD's binning of Ryzen, if you don't plan on overclocking and for market segments where you don't expect overclockers to buy (eg preassembled for retail or corporate) they make sense, or if you already have a cooler and want a 'better' chip for not much more money. Certainly on a pure value for money basis x chips aren't the best there is for the enthusiast market.


  • Azdeus and Jozape like this

#136
injurai

injurai

    (8) Warlock

  • Members
  • 1089 posts
  • Location:Not the oceans
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

there is only so much performance that can be squeezed out of a single thread and it usually is directly proportional to the clock speeds if the architecture is not designed badly (like in the FX series).

 

It's directly proportional to clock-speeds if architecture and code is the same. The problem is code optimization, architecture optimization, die-fab optimization, and clock-speeds are all hitting their upper limit.



#137
teknoman2

teknoman2

    (9) Sorcerer

  • Members
  • 1359 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

 

there is only so much performance that can be squeezed out of a single thread and it usually is directly proportional to the clock speeds if the architecture is not designed badly (like in the FX series).

 

It's directly proportional to clock-speeds if architecture and code is the same. The problem is code optimization, architecture optimization, die-fab optimization, and clock-speeds are all hitting their upper limit.

 

we're saying pretty much the same thing: if other factors do not hamper it, clock speed is what makes or breaks single thread performance



#138
mkreku

mkreku

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 8462 posts
  • Location:Uppsala, Sweden

AMD Threadripper 1950X review: Better than Intel in almost every way

 

https://arstechnica....ew-1950x-1920x/



#139
Jozape

Jozape

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 154 posts
  • Location:USA
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

OTOH having seen the R3's info I'm not sure what their point is at all- AMD's APU based options ought to be a far better budget option when they arrive, and their direct Intel equivalents budget wise are the most pointless Intel offerings as well. Much like the i3 they don't bring much to the party, you'd still be better off either getting a lower cost G4560 or spending a bit more for an R5 (or i5 if an Intel loyalist).

 

Seems likely that they're not built from the core Ryzen chip as well due to being 4c/4t and their manufacturing yields being so high, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they actually were APUs minus the integrated graphics component.

 

The R3 Summit Ridges serve as a substitute until the R3 and R5 Raven Ridges release which seems to be some months away. Also its a way to get into the platform on a budget. I almost bought an R3 because I intended to buy an 8-or-more-core CPU based on Zen 2 next year or the year after. I settled on the R5 1600 though as its twice as fast in most non-gaming applications and I didn't want to gamble on AMD or ASUS maintaining compatibility. AMD said they would maintain compatibility but both AMD and Intel have lied before.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: AMD, Zen, Ryzen

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users