MMM
    X

    Subscribe to New Ads!

    Receive weekly ads in your inbox!



Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28

Thread: First AMD Ryzen 1700X Full Review

  1. #1
    Memory Addict
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Esfahan - Iran
    Posts
    186

    Cool First AMD Ryzen 1700X Full Review

    Hi Fellas,

    Here you are the full AMD Ryzen 1700X full review with complete benchmarks and comparison with rival CPUs:

    http://www.shahrsakhtafzar.com/fa/re...7-1700x-review

    What's your idea? Do you go with AMD again?

    Enjoy

  2. #2
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Argentina
    Posts
    412
    Excellent CPU. Finally :')
    Main: Windows 10 Core i7 5820K @ 4500Mhz, Corsair H100i, 32GB DDR4-2800, eVGA GTX980 Ti, Kingston SSDNow 240GB, Crucial C300 64GB Cache + WD 1.5TB Green, Asus X99-A/USB3.1
    ESXi Server 6.5 Xeon E5 2670, 64GB DDR3-1600, 1TB, Intel DX79SR, 4xIntel 1Gbps
    ESXi Server 6.0 Xeon E5 2650L v3, 64GB DDR4-2400, 1TB, Asrock X99 Xtreme4, 4xIntel 1Gbps
    FreeNAS 9.10 x64 Xeon X3430 , 32GB DDR3-1600, 3x(3x1TB) WD Blue, Intel S3420GPRX, 4xIntel 1Gbps

  3. #3
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    889
    I thought the NDA lifted tomorrow
    Intel 8700k
    16GB
    Asus z370 Prime
    1080 Ti
    x2 Samsung 850Evo 500GB
    x 1 500 Samsung 860Evo NVME


    Swiftech Apogee XL2
    Swiftech MCP35X x2
    Full Cover GPU blocks
    360 x1, 280 x1, 240 x1, 120 x1 Radiators

  4. #4
    I am Xtreme Ket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    6,810
    "Database connection error"

    "Prowler"
    Asrock Z77 Extreme6 | i5 3570k @ 4.5GHz 1.18v | 2x4GB PC12800 Ripjaws @ 1866MHz 10-10-10-15 1T 1.55v | Gigabyte GTX980, custom cooler @ 1.5GHz / 7.6GHz | Xonar DX 7.1 | 2TB Barracuda | 2x Sony Optiarc | Corsair 850w HX

    Cooling:

    3x Coolermaster Sickleflow 120mm 70CFM fans | Modified CoolIT ECO sealed loop CPU cooler | Custom made "The Judge" VGA VRM heatsink

    Asrock Z77 thread! | Asrock Z77 Extreme6 Review | Asrock P67 Extreme4 Review | Asrock P67 Extreme4/6 Pro3 thread | Asrock Z68 Extreme4 thread | Asrock Z68 Extreme4 Review | Asrock Z68 Gen3 Thread | 8GB G-Skill review | TK 2.ZERO homepage | P5Q series mBIOS thread

    (\_/) This is Bunny.
    (+.+) Bunny is dead.
    (^ ^) Copy and paste Bunny into your sig to create an army of BUNNY ZOMBIE MINIONS!!!

  5. #5
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Argentina
    Posts
    412
    F5 until it loads.

    If this benchmarks are true, it's an excellent CPU. Power consumption at stock speed is really low! Clock per clock is competitive with Intel, sometimes better, sometimes worse.

    We now have competition! And we can finally see Bulldozer die! Finally, worst abortion of a CPU ever made (yes, even worse than Netburst) is dead!

    Only problem is clock... it looks like 4.0-4.1Ghz will be max on average
    Main: Windows 10 Core i7 5820K @ 4500Mhz, Corsair H100i, 32GB DDR4-2800, eVGA GTX980 Ti, Kingston SSDNow 240GB, Crucial C300 64GB Cache + WD 1.5TB Green, Asus X99-A/USB3.1
    ESXi Server 6.5 Xeon E5 2670, 64GB DDR3-1600, 1TB, Intel DX79SR, 4xIntel 1Gbps
    ESXi Server 6.0 Xeon E5 2650L v3, 64GB DDR4-2400, 1TB, Asrock X99 Xtreme4, 4xIntel 1Gbps
    FreeNAS 9.10 x64 Xeon X3430 , 32GB DDR3-1600, 3x(3x1TB) WD Blue, Intel S3420GPRX, 4xIntel 1Gbps

  6. #6
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    889
    I can't open due to work filters. I'm not worried about max overclock but I'm curious how AMD's 4.0 - 4.1Ghz overclock compares to Intel's 4.5+ Overclock (performance wise).
    Intel 8700k
    16GB
    Asus z370 Prime
    1080 Ti
    x2 Samsung 850Evo 500GB
    x 1 500 Samsung 860Evo NVME


    Swiftech Apogee XL2
    Swiftech MCP35X x2
    Full Cover GPU blocks
    360 x1, 280 x1, 240 x1, 120 x1 Radiators

  7. #7
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Ace Deuce, Michigan
    Posts
    3,956
    I got a peak at them on my phone.

    Results seem to vary across the board, where Ryzen smashes some benchmarks and falls behind the pack in others. The gaming test surprised me though; didn't think Bioshock was all that CPU intensive.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hans de Vries View Post

    JF-AMD posting: IPC increases!!!!!!! How many times did I tell you!!!

    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    .....}
    until (interrupt by Movieman)


    Regards, Hans

  8. #8
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Argentina
    Posts
    412
    Quote Originally Posted by StAndrew View Post
    I can't open due to work filters. I'm not worried about max overclock but I'm curious how AMD's 4.0 - 4.1Ghz overclock compares to Intel's 4.5+ Overclock (performance wise).
    I guess it will compare just like Intels 4.0Ghz vs Intels 4.5Ghz :P

    Also, R7 1800X is 4.0Ghz stock, if this review is real, it looks like it's heavy binned. It took 1.45V and 100W more to get the R7 1700X to 4.0Ghz
    Main: Windows 10 Core i7 5820K @ 4500Mhz, Corsair H100i, 32GB DDR4-2800, eVGA GTX980 Ti, Kingston SSDNow 240GB, Crucial C300 64GB Cache + WD 1.5TB Green, Asus X99-A/USB3.1
    ESXi Server 6.5 Xeon E5 2670, 64GB DDR3-1600, 1TB, Intel DX79SR, 4xIntel 1Gbps
    ESXi Server 6.0 Xeon E5 2650L v3, 64GB DDR4-2400, 1TB, Asrock X99 Xtreme4, 4xIntel 1Gbps
    FreeNAS 9.10 x64 Xeon X3430 , 32GB DDR3-1600, 3x(3x1TB) WD Blue, Intel S3420GPRX, 4xIntel 1Gbps

  9. #9
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    889
    Quote Originally Posted by Andi64 View Post
    I guess it will compare just like Intels 4.0Ghz vs Intels 4.5Ghz :P

    Also, R7 1800X is 4.0Ghz stock, if this review is real, it looks like it's heavy binned. It took 1.45V and 100W more to get the R7 1700X to 4.0Ghz
    Sure but I have a feeling it won't be that simple. I'm just curious, price, power and stock performance out the window, who has the absolute performance crown at max overclock. If Intel keeps the overclock performance crown, we may not see them drop prices as aggressively as we would like.
    Intel 8700k
    16GB
    Asus z370 Prime
    1080 Ti
    x2 Samsung 850Evo 500GB
    x 1 500 Samsung 860Evo NVME


    Swiftech Apogee XL2
    Swiftech MCP35X x2
    Full Cover GPU blocks
    360 x1, 280 x1, 240 x1, 120 x1 Radiators

  10. #10
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    679
    Quote Originally Posted by Andi64 View Post
    I guess it will compare just like Intels 4.0Ghz vs Intels 4.5Ghz :P

    Also, R7 1800X is 4.0Ghz stock, if this review is real, it looks like it's heavy binned. It took 1.45V and 100W more to get the R7 1700X to 4.0Ghz
    Common misconception, it is NOT 4ghz stock, its 3,6ghz stock with a Turbo (not all cores) of 4ghz(4.1ghz xfr).
    BTW, these results are based on ZD processor , so not retail we dont know about turbo and it was gimped with ram running at 2133 CAS 15, 7700K was running 3200.
    Intel 5960X@4.2Ghz[Prime stable]@4.5 [XTU stable] 1.24v NB@3.6ghz Asrock X99 Extreme 3 4x8GB Corsair Vengeance@3200 16-17-17
    Sapphire nitro+ VEGA 56 Samsung SSD 850 256GB Crucial MX100 512GB HDD:WD10TB WD:8TB Seagate8TB

  11. #11
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    4,332
    Sure hope this isn't a good indication of what kind of OC'ing 1700X is capable of, was hoping to go AMD this round but was waiting for the final bits, overclocking, to be revealed. Hoping it would at least do ~4.5GHz, might still go Kaby Lake and shoot for a 5GHz overclock since it would save me a pretty penny too. Even the same branded motherboard in AMD flavor costs a little more than Intels as well. ASRock Z270 Taichi vs X370 Taichi, 230€ vs 270€ which also has to be added into the comparison in my case.
    Last edited by RPGWiZaRD; 03-01-2017 at 08:56 AM.
    Intel? Core i5-4670K @ 4.3 GHz | ASRock Extreme6 Z87 | G.Skill Sniper 2x8GB @ DDR4-1866 CL9 | Gigabyte GTX 970 OC Windforce 3x | Super Flower Titanium 1000W | ViewSonic VX2268wm 120Hz LCD | Phanteks PH-TC14PE | Logitech MX-518 | Win 7 x64 Professional | Samsung 850 EVO & 840 Pro SSDs

    If all people would share opinions in an objective manner, the world would be a friendlier place

  12. #12
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    HD0
    Posts
    2,646
    Quote Originally Posted by vario View Post
    Common misconception, it is NOT 4ghz stock, its 3,6ghz stock with a Turbo (not all cores) of 4ghz(4.1ghz xfr).
    BTW, these results are based on ZD processor , so not retail we dont know about turbo and it was gimped with ram running at 2133 CAS 15, 7700K was running 3200.
    Does memory performance even matter? Worst case scenario you just run tighter timings, right?

  13. #13
    I am Xtreme Ket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    6,810
    Quote Originally Posted by Andi64 View Post
    F5 until it loads.

    If this benchmarks are true, it's an excellent CPU. Power consumption at stock speed is really low! Clock per clock is competitive with Intel, sometimes better, sometimes worse.

    We now have competition! And we can finally see Bulldozer die! Finally, worst abortion of a CPU ever made (yes, even worse than Netburst) is dead!

    Only problem is clock... it looks like 4.0-4.1Ghz will be max on average
    Thats harsh man, BD at least had alright multi-threading. Nothing will ever be worse than "nutburst".

    "Prowler"
    Asrock Z77 Extreme6 | i5 3570k @ 4.5GHz 1.18v | 2x4GB PC12800 Ripjaws @ 1866MHz 10-10-10-15 1T 1.55v | Gigabyte GTX980, custom cooler @ 1.5GHz / 7.6GHz | Xonar DX 7.1 | 2TB Barracuda | 2x Sony Optiarc | Corsair 850w HX

    Cooling:

    3x Coolermaster Sickleflow 120mm 70CFM fans | Modified CoolIT ECO sealed loop CPU cooler | Custom made "The Judge" VGA VRM heatsink

    Asrock Z77 thread! | Asrock Z77 Extreme6 Review | Asrock P67 Extreme4 Review | Asrock P67 Extreme4/6 Pro3 thread | Asrock Z68 Extreme4 thread | Asrock Z68 Extreme4 Review | Asrock Z68 Gen3 Thread | 8GB G-Skill review | TK 2.ZERO homepage | P5Q series mBIOS thread

    (\_/) This is Bunny.
    (+.+) Bunny is dead.
    (^ ^) Copy and paste Bunny into your sig to create an army of BUNNY ZOMBIE MINIONS!!!

  14. #14
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    679
    Quote Originally Posted by xlink View Post
    Does memory performance even matter? Worst case scenario you just run tighter timings, right?
    Well, if youre doing slow as hell 2133Mhz with Cas-15-15-15 vs 3200 Cas 15-15-15 it does matter, albeit not much in pure computational tasks like cinebench, but in gaming it can do some damage.

    @RPG wizard

    You were dreaming for some time now ;-).
    Remember, BDE does 4.1-4.3 on air.Also, kaby lake isnt guaranteed for 5ghz if you dont delidd.
    Intel 5960X@4.2Ghz[Prime stable]@4.5 [XTU stable] 1.24v NB@3.6ghz Asrock X99 Extreme 3 4x8GB Corsair Vengeance@3200 16-17-17
    Sapphire nitro+ VEGA 56 Samsung SSD 850 256GB Crucial MX100 512GB HDD:WD10TB WD:8TB Seagate8TB

  15. #15
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Argentina
    Posts
    412
    Quote Originally Posted by Ket View Post
    Thats harsh man, BD at least had alright multi-threading. Nothing will ever be worse than "nutburst".
    This is for another debate, but IMO Netburst was an inefficient subpar architecture compared with... anything that shared it's timeline. BUT...

    It had it's ups and dows. Power efficiency was really weak, on an era where nobody really cared... IPC was also weak compared even with Tualatin. But overall performance was from OK to "best in class".

    It had the performance crown for some time, and when it lost it wasn't by much. You could put a P4C 3.0Ghz against an AXP 3000+ and they would trade blows.

    BD, on the other hand, was the biggest failure I've seen! It was (finally, was.. :') ) an IPC nightmare, compared to Llano (or even Thuban), it was a clear step down for X6 users on many aplications. It was a disaster in power consumption, and an awfull overclocker (yeah, I know.. you could achieve 5Ghz on air... on a CPU that required 6Ghz to compete with Intel's 3Ghz). Overall performance it NEVER won on anything. It's an 8 core CPU (or 4C/8T if you want to make it sound less of a failure) that couldn't compete with Intel's i3...

    I'm glad it's dead!
    Main: Windows 10 Core i7 5820K @ 4500Mhz, Corsair H100i, 32GB DDR4-2800, eVGA GTX980 Ti, Kingston SSDNow 240GB, Crucial C300 64GB Cache + WD 1.5TB Green, Asus X99-A/USB3.1
    ESXi Server 6.5 Xeon E5 2670, 64GB DDR3-1600, 1TB, Intel DX79SR, 4xIntel 1Gbps
    ESXi Server 6.0 Xeon E5 2650L v3, 64GB DDR4-2400, 1TB, Asrock X99 Xtreme4, 4xIntel 1Gbps
    FreeNAS 9.10 x64 Xeon X3430 , 32GB DDR3-1600, 3x(3x1TB) WD Blue, Intel S3420GPRX, 4xIntel 1Gbps

  16. #16
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Ace Deuce, Michigan
    Posts
    3,956
    For those at work, wccftech reposted the images:
    http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700...ck-benchmarks/

    As expected, did well in most multi-thread tests - though surprisingly poorly in a few, and was fairly competitive in single threaded tests.

    I'm still unsure what to make of the gaming tests. I don't have a good reason yet why some (especially Bioshock) show fairly substantial differences. Perhaps memory bandwidth?
    Quote Originally Posted by Hans de Vries View Post

    JF-AMD posting: IPC increases!!!!!!! How many times did I tell you!!!

    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    .....}
    until (interrupt by Movieman)


    Regards, Hans

  17. #17
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    4,332
    Quote Originally Posted by vario View Post
    Remember, BDE does 4.1-4.3 on air.Also, kaby lake isnt guaranteed for 5ghz if you dont delidd.
    Kaby Lake has a very decent chance of reaching 5GHz what I've seen, here's a few stable overclocks on air or water copied from a swedish forum I follow:
    5.0GHz 1.31v
    4,95GHz 1.285v
    5.0GHz 1.344v
    5.0GHz 1.31v
    5.0GHz 1.36v
    4.8GHz 1.295v
    4.8GHz 1.314v
    5.0GHz 1.27v
    5.0GHz 1.306v
    5.0GHz 1.31v
    5.0GHz 1.325v
    5.0GHz 1.30v
    5.0GHz 1.290v (5.1GHz 1.37v)
    5.0GHz 1.34v
    5.0GHz 1.30v
    5.0GHz 1.36v (5.1GHz 1.385v, 5.2GHz 1.40v)
    5.0GHz 1.285v
    5.0GHz 1.34v

    As long as you are ready to give it around 1.35~1.36v your chances should be pretty high, well 4.9GHz would still be decent too and so far I've not seen one who doesn't do 4.9GHz at least at 1.35~1.36v. 5.0GHz vs 4.1GHz for example is a 22% difference which is huge when you look at poorly threaded scenarios and if I can get the Intel significantly cheaper it makes my decision easier as I still need good one threaded performance too. But I hope this test is not 100% accurate as I would love to have more cores in the few scenarios I'll have a good use of it.

    But assuming 1700X won't do much more than say 4.2~4.3GHz stable then looking at OC capability and price of the CPU + motherboard (7700k + z270 = 589€ vs 1700X + X370 = 709€), the Ryzen hype is starting to fade a bit for me and I'd see both roughly as equally good options and it'll come down to what kind of applications you are using if it's worth spending more on Ryzen over Kaby Lake (X99 platform was never interesting for me as I'm a bang for buck guy). Would explain a bit why they weren't so keen to show its overclocking capabilities just yet.
    Last edited by RPGWiZaRD; 03-01-2017 at 10:49 AM.
    Intel? Core i5-4670K @ 4.3 GHz | ASRock Extreme6 Z87 | G.Skill Sniper 2x8GB @ DDR4-1866 CL9 | Gigabyte GTX 970 OC Windforce 3x | Super Flower Titanium 1000W | ViewSonic VX2268wm 120Hz LCD | Phanteks PH-TC14PE | Logitech MX-518 | Win 7 x64 Professional | Samsung 850 EVO & 840 Pro SSDs

    If all people would share opinions in an objective manner, the world would be a friendlier place

  18. #18
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    679
    Quote Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD View Post
    Kaby Lake has a very decent chance of reaching 5GHz what I've seen, here's a few stable overclocks on air or water copied from a swedish forum I follow:
    5.0GHz 1.31v
    4,95GHz 1.285v
    5.0GHz 1.344v
    5.0GHz 1.31v
    5.0GHz 1.36v
    4.8GHz 1.295v
    4.8GHz 1.314v
    5.0GHz 1.27v
    5.0GHz 1.306v
    5.0GHz 1.31v
    5.0GHz 1.325v
    5.0GHz 1.30v
    5.0GHz 1.290v (5.1GHz 1.37v)
    5.0GHz 1.34v
    5.0GHz 1.30v
    5.0GHz 1.36v (5.1GHz 1.385v, 5.2GHz 1.40v)
    5.0GHz 1.285v
    5.0GHz 1.34v

    As long as you are ready to give it around 1.35~1.36v your chances should be pretty high, well 4.9GHz would still be decent too and so far I've not seen one who doesn't do 4.9GHz at least at 1.35~1.36v. 5.0GHz vs 4.1GHz for example is a 22% difference which is huge when you look at poorly threaded scenarios and if I can get the Intel significantly cheaper it makes my decision easier as I still need good one threaded performance too. But I hope this test is not 100% accurate as I would love to have more cores in the few scenarios I'll have a good use of it.

    But assuming 1700X won't do much more than say 4.2~4.3GHz stable then looking at OC capability and price of the CPU + motherboard (7700k + z270 = 589? vs 1700X + X370 = 709?), the Ryzen hype is starting to fade a bit for me and I'd see both roughly as equally good options and it'll come down to what kind of applications you are using if it's worth spending more on Ryzen over Kaby Lake (X99 platform was never interesting for me as I'm a bang for buck guy). Would explain a bit why they weren't so keen to show its overclocking capabilities just yet.
    Thing is, it was never assumed that Ryzen would do 4,5-5ghz.
    Other 8 cores out there arent doing it also (well maybe some 5960x on water will do 4.5 stable).
    "you also agree that not all kaby lakes are doing 5.0 , moreover i am abit skeptical about what people post as "stable" , people have a tendency to be more optimistic than the reality is.
    Anyhow, it was widely known that ryzen wont clock as high as kaby lake, and also about price you can show 1700 and a midrange B350 board and the price will be smaller than kaby .But yes, you probably dont reach 4.5, and most probably reach 4.1 or 4.2.
    Its a simple question of what do you want, more cores or more ST speed.You cant have both.
    I see it as a simple Single core or dual core problem, later on whats better E8400 or Q6600 , also how long will the platform survive.
    And all this points me more towards ryzen than 7700K.
    Last edited by vario; 03-01-2017 at 11:09 AM.
    Intel 5960X@4.2Ghz[Prime stable]@4.5 [XTU stable] 1.24v NB@3.6ghz Asrock X99 Extreme 3 4x8GB Corsair Vengeance@3200 16-17-17
    Sapphire nitro+ VEGA 56 Samsung SSD 850 256GB Crucial MX100 512GB HDD:WD10TB WD:8TB Seagate8TB

  19. #19
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    419
    well the memory bandwidth is good but the latency is atrocious
    2133c15
    ryzen 102ns
    6700k 56ns

    it could explain why its performance is so far behind in a single threaded game like bioshock vs cinbench that really doesnt care so much about memory speed
    hopefully this is some something amd can or has fixed

    look forward to more reviews
    Last edited by dasa; 03-01-2017 at 12:07 PM.
    TJ08-EW 6700k@4.7 1.375v - Z170-GENE - 2x8g 3866 16-16-16 - 1070@ 2088\9500MHz -Samsung 830 64G, Sandisk Ultra II 960G, WD Green 3tb - Seasonic XP1050 - Dell U2713 - Pioneer Todoroki 5.1 Apogee Drive II - EK VGA-HF Supreme - Phobia 200mm Rad - Silverstone AP181 Project Darkling
    3770k vs 6700k RAM Scaling, HT vs RAM, Arma III CPU vs RAM, Thief CPU vs RAM

  20. #20
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Ace Deuce, Michigan
    Posts
    3,956
    Quote Originally Posted by dasa View Post
    well the memory bandwidth is good but the latency is atrocious
    2133c15
    ryzen 102ns
    6700k 56ns

    it could explain why its performance is so far behind in a single threaded game like bioshock vs cinbench that really doesnt care so much about memory speed
    hopefully this is some something amd can or has fixed

    look forward to more reviews
    Yeah could be, curious to see what other's have to show as well
    Quote Originally Posted by Hans de Vries View Post

    JF-AMD posting: IPC increases!!!!!!! How many times did I tell you!!!

    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
    .....}
    until (interrupt by Movieman)


    Regards, Hans

  21. #21
    Xtreme Monster
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    2,182
    Quote Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD View Post
    ................
    I agree with you here although is too early to have a conclusion, official non-eng cpus reviews coming soon.

  22. #22
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    419
    looks like all those game tests are still a little gpu limited even at low res with his gtx980
    just gave bioshock a run with 6700k 2x8g@spd2133c15 gtx1070 all stock 209fps and despite gpu usage not going over 95% gtx1070 overclocked 226fps at 1366x768
    edit
    at 3200c14
    gpu stock 220fps
    gpu oc 240fps
    Last edited by dasa; 03-01-2017 at 01:04 PM.
    TJ08-EW 6700k@4.7 1.375v - Z170-GENE - 2x8g 3866 16-16-16 - 1070@ 2088\9500MHz -Samsung 830 64G, Sandisk Ultra II 960G, WD Green 3tb - Seasonic XP1050 - Dell U2713 - Pioneer Todoroki 5.1 Apogee Drive II - EK VGA-HF Supreme - Phobia 200mm Rad - Silverstone AP181 Project Darkling
    3770k vs 6700k RAM Scaling, HT vs RAM, Arma III CPU vs RAM, Thief CPU vs RAM

  23. #23
    I am Xtreme FlanK3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Czech republic
    Posts
    6,796
    but you will never play at 1366x768 with highend PC....Thats the point
    ROG Power PCs - Intel and AMD
    CPUs:i9-7900X, i9-9900K, i7-6950X, i7-5960X, i7-8086K, i7-8700K, 4x i7-7700K, i3-7350K, 2x i7-6700K, i5-6600K, R7-2700X, 4x R5 2600X, R5 2400G, R3 1200, R7-1800X, R7-1700X, 3x AMD FX-9590, 1x AMD FX-9370, 4x AMD FX-8350,1x AMD FX-8320,1x AMD FX-8300, 2x AMD FX-6300,2x AMD FX-4300, 3x AMD FX-8150, 2x AMD FX-8120 125 and 95W, AMD X2 555 BE, AMD x4 965 BE C2 and C3, AMD X4 970 BE, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD X6 1100T BE, A10-7870K, Athlon 845, Athlon 860K,AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-6800K, A8-6600K, 2x AMD A10-5800K, AMD A10-5600K, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, 2x AMD A64 3000+, AMD 64+ X2 4600+ EE, Intel i7-980X, Intel i7-2600K, Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930KAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread Intel Cinebench R15 thread

  24. #24
    Brilliant Idiot
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Hell on Earth
    Posts
    11,020
    I just want to point out a key factor here.

    Note memory multi is tied to northbridge frequency in his screen shots.

    2133/2133.

    3000/3000

    Dont be surprised if you see other reviews with ram clocked i dunno say equally on both platforms that results change.
    Last edited by chew*; 03-01-2017 at 01:44 PM.
    heatware chew*
    I've got no strings to hold me down.
    To make me fret, or make me frown.
    I had strings but now I'm free.
    There are no strings on me

  25. #25
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    419
    Quote Originally Posted by FlanK3r View Post
    but you will never play at 1366x768 with highend PC....Thats the point
    no nor do we need 200fps but its a good way to reduce the gpu limitation so that we dont have $50 pentiums performing the same as $500+ cpu http://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/1321 in gpu bottlnecked time demos which while easier to get consistent results they often dont accurately represent more demanding parts of the game
    which in some cases can be gpu limited to 150fps in some places and cpu limited to 30fps in other parts of the same game
    the other option is to chose games like arma (~3 threads)\total war (multithreaded) that are actually cpu limited around 60fps but the review above didnt do this although its hard to be sure without having a slower cpu in the tests like i5 7400\pentium G4560 & amd fx
    Last edited by dasa; 03-01-2017 at 02:11 PM.
    TJ08-EW 6700k@4.7 1.375v - Z170-GENE - 2x8g 3866 16-16-16 - 1070@ 2088\9500MHz -Samsung 830 64G, Sandisk Ultra II 960G, WD Green 3tb - Seasonic XP1050 - Dell U2713 - Pioneer Todoroki 5.1 Apogee Drive II - EK VGA-HF Supreme - Phobia 200mm Rad - Silverstone AP181 Project Darkling
    3770k vs 6700k RAM Scaling, HT vs RAM, Arma III CPU vs RAM, Thief CPU vs RAM

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •