AMD Zen FX - information, benchmarks, experience of users

[muzz]

Opp used to get the newest/ best Kingston ram and ramp it up on Abit boards, another guy always used Asus boards...I used Corsair BH-5.
Maybe AMD IS BACK!:-P

[tbone8ty]

I just wanna bench again, we used to have so much fun on here competing with different boards..I didn't see the point anymore, so I stopped. I remember barrels of fresh snow coming in the house with my 2600/Epox 8rda...hahaha

true

i got about 2 min 30 seconds with my fx-8370 at 4.8ghz on blender with the amd ryzen pic file.

[muzz]

tbone- It looks good, gonna be like old times hopefully.
Serious fun.

[vario]

true

i got about 2 min 30 seconds with my fx-8370 at 4.8ghz on blender with the amd ryzen pic file.

Its pretty quiet and i dont know why AMD isnt fixing this, but the blender file on AMD website IS NOT THE ONE USED IN THE LIVE STREAM, its not comparable.People with 6900K are getting WAY worse results with the settings this file provides, so it cant be used to compare to zen :-/ .To get the score from the show 6950x (10 core broadwell-e) must be clocked at 4ghz!
I find it absolutely hilarious at this point. Amd s up pretty much the most important show in 2016... And its still on AMDs website and they welcome people to compare ...

[Lightman]

I'm pretty sure the file provides correct render resolution of 800x800 pixels but it looks like for the sake of quicker comparision time they dumbed down on number of samples to a lower value.
At default settings my i7 4790K @4.4GHz needs 1m 19s to render RyZEN.

[vario]

I'm pretty sure the file provides correct render resolution of 800x800 pixels but it looks like for the sake of quicker comparision time they dumbed down on number of samples to a lower value.
At default settings my i7 4790K @4.4GHz needs 1m 19s to render RyZEN.

Yea, people are trying different values, but nothing really sticks. Fact is, amd, on their own site, after such important event, shared a test file and wanted people to compare.But the file has wrong settings and is not comparable, when someone does the test like it is, its showing WAY worse results than it should.It could be interpreted as a manipulation :/ .And after 2 days , no statement or fix.Its still there

[AbortRetryFail?]

I'm pretty sure the file provides correct render resolution of 800x800 pixels but it looks like for the sake of quicker comparision time they dumbed down on number of samples to a lower value.
At default settings my i7 4790K @4.4GHz needs 1m 19s to render RyZEN.

At least for me, I easily trade 20% in render time for what my eye perceives as a 10% increase in image quality, and whether by IPC or SMP, it's nice to see AMD put up a good number -- even in a small slice of 'Blender render'. Without a comparison of engines and 'quality' it's always subjective.

I think the 'BIOS on Chip' could have a great upside, especially if you can manage in combination P-States and voltages -- even in AOD. And most AMD BIOSs these days can save 8 different profiles in a 'dual-BIOS' set-up.

The Monster AMD Tweaker will RyZEN especially with a quality ITX mobo and Vega kicker

[charged3800z24]

On the Ryzen file from AMDs site during the live stream, I got 2:34 on my FX 9370, all stock settings. I heard there was a updated file?

[Davey]

Phenom II X6 1055T @ 3.8Ghz --> 1:47:10 (150 samples)

[FlanK3r]

there is thread with updated file from AMD (second link with 150 samples)

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...-benchmark****

[vario]

This looks promising

[FlanK3r]

More of this old review: https://imgur.com/a/qo9pH and https://imgur.com/a/KOXPd


PS:be sure, this is not the final sample (clocks, maybe revision also-its possible final silicon is A1)

[AbortRetryFail?]

More of this old review: https://imgur.com/a/qo9pH and https://imgur.com/a/KOXPd


PS:be sure, this is not the final sample (clocks, maybe revision also-its possible final silicon is A1)

My head will explode

I've tried to temper my enthusiasm for Zen/AM4 with the understanding that AMD has historically struggled with "shrinks" requiring re-spins -- typically gaining higher clocks at lower volts, while putting out a few big fires that held back performance.

If true, Son of Zen might be a real slobber-knocker

[FlanK3r]

Do you dont know about the final silicon has now 3.4 GHz base clock (without turbo)? Its maybe 3 weeks confirmed. And its really possible, this final retails could be A1 and not A0 as the one from review. 3.15 GHz chips was aviable in summer...

[tbone8ty]

3.6 ghz with 3.9 ghz turbo

wanna get one of these so we can have OC fun soon

[charged3800z24]

When is retail availability? That's my question.

[ReKcOlNu]

Sorry if old news, I haven't followed this stuff very close.

Zen to live on,

When asked how long Zen would last, compared to Intel’s two-year tick-tock cadence, Papermaster confirmed the four-year lifespan and tapped the table in front of him: “We’re not going tick-tock,” he said. “Zen is going to be tock, tock, tock.”

AMD says its Zen CPU architecture is expected to last four years
PCWorld | JAN 6, 2017 11:09 AM PT

[drmrlordx]

That's pretty new actually.

From the board previews at CES, it looks like most X370 boards will support DDR4-2666 "officially" with OC of up to at least DDR4-3000.

[ReKcOlNu]

If RyZen is really competitive then aren't they going to be really expensive? I see some saying only $450 for 8C/16T, that seems way too cheap, remember these?...

AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+
Introduction date May 31, 2005
Price at introduction $1001

AMD Athlon 64 FX FX-60
Introduction date Jan 10, 2006
Price at introduction $1031


Any clue on RyZen prices?

[tbone8ty]

no clue for prices but i wouldn't expect AMD to price these to high this generation it would be suicide.
maybe something like this?
4c/8t to be <$299
8c/16t <$499

i bet zen+ will be higher priced once its been proven.

also Ryzen will be released on my birthday Feb 28th ok thanks Amd

[drmrlordx]

k7 was really cheap given its performance. The 1.4 GHz Tbird was the fastest x86 CPU you could get for a long time (since the Pentium4 1.4, 1.6, and 1.8 chips were such failures), yet it was stupid-cheap. I think I got mine for under $200, more like $140? It was fairly long in the tooth by the time I got it and most of the boards comparatively sucked compared to what you could get on the Intel side, but still . . . AMD made it cheap to grab market share and establish rep.

On the flip side, Su has been pretty clear that they don't want to be the budget brand anymore.

I can see Summit Ridge/Ryzen costing more than Intel quads but less - far less - than Intel's HEDT lineup. $500 sounds about right for the Ryzen flagship chip.

[robbicfc]

So about a grand all in for CPU, quality MB and RAM? or to put it another way the same price for the whole platform as the competition is charging for a CPU

Asus is keeping its cards very close to it chest ref the AM4 platform. So far we have only had news on the B350 board, a bit infuriating.

[tbone8ty]

ryzen for my birthday!

GDC release time

[drmrlordx]

Asus is keeping its cards very close to it chest ref the AM4 platform. So far we have only had news on the B350 board, a bit infuriating.

I agree. I want to see some of their X370 offerings, and maybe a QVL list too. I want to get my stuff ready in advance!

[BenchZowner]

Release date's 28 Feb