AMD Ryzen 7 1800X (14nm Zen)

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

This was answered on Reddit.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comment...other/def4wcj/

Its not some - some here are having massively AMD tinted glasses on this and are having their heads in the sand.

Look at my previous posts - 12 games at least show regressions.









No amount of silly deflecting changes the fact that loads of games are affected and AMD is basically saying it will be fixed when its fixed.

Anybody trying to deny the scale of the issue or the tepid response by AMD is basically trying to hide a major issue of the CPU with gaming on purpose to deceive people.

If its not a general scheduling issue under Windows - how many games is AMD going to make sure will be fixed??

Every major game in the last few years?? Every one going forward??

Its almost like they didn't even bother trying to engage with some devs before launch.

Edit!!

What if AMD cheats and makes sure there are fixes only for some popular benchmarking titles used in reviews??

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Anyway,since Ryzen is not only about gaming this review by The Stilt on the none-gaming abilities of Ryzen is probably one of the most in-depth released so far and covers ground many other reviews have not:

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads...nical.2500572/

[kalniel]

There is a terrible statement from Lisa Su in there: "Ryzen is doing well... when applications are more GPU bound" ?!? That's basically like saying 'so long as you don't need to use the CPU, our CPU is great!'

[scaryjim]

CAT - there's a much deeper issue here than just "AMD's SMT is borked in gaming". The charts you've shown are self-contradictory in at least one game - hardware.fr show virtually no change in Civ 6 with SMT enabled, while PCGamer have an 8% drop off.

Plus aside from Hardware.fr no-one's tested whether Intel also have SMT performance reductions in-game. Everyone's just gone "Oh look, AMD has this problem" without asking if it's an AMD problem or a game engine problem. Hardware.fr's results indicate that it's a bit of both depending on the game. Normally you'd be jumping on the fact that no-one's pointed out that Intel still have issues with HT in some games despite having had more than 8 years to optimise....

And pretty much every test up there is using a GTX 1080 at 1080p to return 100fps+. I remember the days when you used to complain bitterly about that kind of testing because it didn't reflect the experience most gamers would get! Has anyone tested with a GTX 1060 or RX 480 at 1080p? Does the CPU make a difference there?

You don't buy an 1800X and a GTX 1080 to game at 1080p. If they still have issues with the R5 1400X and a GTX 1060/RX 480, then I'll get worried. For now, it's an interesting but ultimately meaningless anomaly.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

CAT - there's a much deeper issue here than just "AMD's SMT is borked in gaming". The charts you've shown are self-contradictory in at least one game - hardware.fr show virtually no change in Civ 6 with SMT enabled, while PCGamer have an 8% drop off.

Plus aside from Hardware.fr no-one's tested whether Intel also have SMT performance reductions in-game. Everyone's just gone "Oh look, AMD has this problem" without asking if it's an AMD problem or a game engine problem. Hardware.fr's results indicate that it's a bit of both depending on the game. Normally you'd be jumping on the fact that no-one's pointed out that Intel still have issues with HT in some games despite having had more than 8 years to optimise....

And pretty much every test up there is using a GTX 1080 at 1080p to return 100fps+. I remember the days when you used to complain bitterly about that kind of testing because it didn't reflect the experience most gamers would get! Has anyone tested with a GTX 1060 or RX 480 at 1080p? Does the CPU make a difference there?

You don't buy an 1800X and a GTX 1080 to game at 1080p. If they still have issues with the R5 1400X and a GTX 1060/RX 480, then I'll get worried. For now, it's an interesting but ultimately meaningless anomaly.

Because you talk about Intel having regression in what one game?? The other was within a margin of error and trying to point Civ6 is not helping your case. Some games don't show any regressions,but if Civ6 is showing that it depends on the load,it means those games might also show it too,depending on what area is tested.

You can't hide the fact that 12 games at least have major SMT issues and you and some here are being entirely disingenuous on the issue and trying to bury it. You are trying to deceive people and if I am saying its a big issue despite trying to fight the side of AMD for so long it is.

I also am on Xeon E3 1230 V2/Core i7 3770 - for me why should give a flying crap about a work in progress SMT implementation when Intel does not have the issue.

What happens if the SMT issue persists in the 4C/8T models?? What are you going to tell people to buy one over a Core i5 7500 when the latter will most likely be faster.

Even with a GTX1060 or RX480 whats the point of the 4C/8T models if the SMT is not working in games?? Its Ryzen 4C vs KL 4C.

What about the 6C/12T model if Intel drops the price of the Core i7 7700K??

Plus you are on purpose trying to bury the comments from AMD saying it needs to be optimised on a game by game basis??

That means it pretty much means for gaming SMT on Ryzen is dead in the water until it works properly just like HT in the first P4 models.

Its another AMD "work in progress".

A lot of prospective purchasers won't care about whether AMD has not had SMT before,its not their concern.

You and I might give AMD some leeway,but plenty won't and they will just continue to get Intel CPUs and get Nvidia graphics cards.

That is my experience outside forums - most people are locked into Intel/Nvidia since they consider them more reliable.

Trying to argue with me won't change that and won't change the sales figures we see for Intel and Nvidia who are making a mint out of gamers.

AMD needs to up its game.

Just launching good hardware is not enough - software support needs to be there from day one.

A gamer is not interested in "maybe" support since "maybe" is not important for them.

Look at Apple - how much money they make from iPhones?? Apples make more money from their iPhones than the entirety of the Android market IIRC.

Android has the view of being buggier but cheaper,etc and I have no problem using Android and have zero interest in an iPhone.

I am sorry SJ,but I cannot agree with you on this.

This one buggy launch after another for AMD,and sadly amongst the public they just don't have the mindshare for people to forget these issues.

This launch still makes AMD a cheaper alternative to Intel with MOAR cores.

But this time MOAR cores(the average gamer will think SMT is MOAR cores too) might actually negatively affect performance.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Another thing - I am not going to blindly recommend AMD just because it is AMD. Some of you have short memories - when it came to actual build threads,I rarely recommended the first Phenom or first Bulldozer CPUs,even if their were arguments that they were fine - maybe as an alternative in some cases,but for the most part I steered clear unless it was a need which suited their design.

The same goes with the ATI HD2000 series,which again,very rarely would I recommend. Even with the FX8350 I tended to push the Core i5s instead.

Even recently I avoided recommending AM3+ due to the age of the platform.

This is no different - SMT has problems and the CPU will need to stand on its own merits with SMT disabled against Intel CPUs with SMT enabled for gaming.

ATM,price for price the Core i7 7700K is still a better gaming chip,the R7 1770X and the R7 1800X costs more. The R7 1700 might be viable overclocked as it is lower leakage but the motherboards which actually can handle a proper overclock actually are more expensive than the Intel equivalents it seems,and when overclocked power draw is more than a Core i7 7700K(which is not shocking) meaning you need a better board which adds cost.

The 6C/12T models will need to be judged with SMT off against the Core i5 7600K for gaming. If Intel drops the Core i7 7700K pricing then its 6C vs 4C/8T.

I am sorry you can't just ignore SMT is having a major problem with games and even AMD is not really sure how long it will take to fix.

As a result its a non-feature for a gamer in its current state.

Anybody saying otherwise needs to look at it objectively and take off their rose tinted glasses.

You want AMD to do well - don't make excuses for their rubbish SCREW UPs.

Otherwise they will NEVER learn as a company.

Edit!!

This is also what gets my goat(or more likely my moose) - its all the excuse making by some when AMD themselves have said they do not know when it will be fixed.

So instead of calling out AMD on this,people want to bury it.

We are all for supporting the underdog(me especially) but this is taking it to a whole new level.

[scaryjim]

Because you talk about Intel having regression in what one game??

Four - they have worse regression than AMD in Civ 6, but also minor regression (2.5%) in GTA V, and significant regression (> 5%) in Watch Dogs 2 and F1 2016. That's half of the tested games.

... You can't hide the fact that 12 games at least have major SMT issues and you and some here are being entirely disingenuous on the issue and trying to bury it. ...

Not trying to bury anything. I've accepted that have an issue, I'm just pointing out that it's likely to be a lot less relevant in real world scenarios than in benchmarking ones.

... You are trying to deceive people ...

OK, that I outright take exception to. I'm offering a different interpretation of the data you provided that highlights factors you're not taking into account. I'm no more trying to deceive people that you are.

... Its another AMD "work in progress". ...

All technology is a work in progress. You repeatedly say yourself how AMD

A lot of prospective purchasers won't care about whether AMD has not had SMT before,its not their concern
's products are never the best at launch but last longer and get better support. Why the sudden change in tune?

... I am sorry SJ,but I cannot agree with you on this. ...

No need to apologise, I have no issue with people disagreeing with me

Besides, I'm not convinced we really disagree that much - i think we both agree that Ryzen 7 looks like a poor buy for gamers, particularly for those targeting 1080p. I'm just a lot more optimistic about a) AMD getting fixes out for the worst of the problems, and b) Ryzen 5 Quads cores being much less affected by the issues.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

snip

The point is 12 MAJOR TITLEs maybe more are affected,and we cannot say how many more are affected - that is the issue.



That response is worrying - we don't know how long it will take.

That is just PR talking - 12 MAJOR titles is not small and that is only the ones reviewers use.

I honestly hope what you said about the 4C models is true and that AMD PR have gotten slightly confused about whether MS scheduler updates will not help.

If not it could take a long time for SMT to work in games.

As a result we need to be conservative and judge Ryzen in games without SMT until we know it works more consistently.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Anyway,since Ryzen is not only about gaming this review by The Stilt on the none-gaming abilities of Ryzen is probably one of the most in-depth released so far and covers ground many other reviews have not:

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads...nical.2500572/

Anyway I will quote this again - people should read this. For non-gaming purposes Ryzen is going to be quite strong indeed and its performance at 3GHZ and performance/watt are impressive. It shows AMD has something which will do well for not only workstations but even for server usage.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

On a side-note SJ,was having a discussion about this elsewhere and one or two people think AMD PR might have mis-communicated things a tad. They seem to hint its a game by game optimisation which is needed when only specific games in the past have shown this to be required in the past,and that general scheduler patches under Windows might suffice for most of them.

But I should know better than believing AMD PR fully - overclockers dream anyone??; ) They do have a habit of sometimes digging holes for themselves.

[Platinum]

Looking forward to seeing how hte Opterons perform, could be a good source if income that, a 1u 128 thread beast could appeal to some

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Looking forward to seeing how hte Opterons perform, could be a good source if income that, a 1u 128 thread beast could appeal to some

They are making a separate model for that it seems - apparently the desktop chips can run all cores at lower clockspeeds with ridiculous efficiency.

Downclocked 8C/16T samples can score 850 points in CB R15 at only 30W,ie,around the same score as a Core i7 4790K.

It seems optimal performance/watt is upto 3GHZ and from there efficiency is somewhat less.

[Platinum]

They are making a separate model for that it seems - apparently the desktop chips can run all cores at lower clockspeeds with ridiculous efficiency.

Downclocked 8C/16T samples can score 850 points in CB R15 at only 30W,ie,around the same score as a Core i7 4790K.

It seems optimal performance/watt is upto 3GHZ and from there efficiency is somewhat less.

Laptop monster APU incoming?

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Laptop monster APU incoming?

Its pretty mental having 8C cores at 30W!! Imagine a 4C/8T Ryzen APU with one CCX replaced by an IGP??

AMD might be able to have 4C/8T APUs in 15W to 30W TDPs!!

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Just saw this mentioned on AT forums:

In regards to gaming ASUS in particular, and MSI to some extent. It explains why reviewers such as Joker, Crit, UFDiciple, and TechDeals had far better gaming performance.

Golem.de in Germany had this to say in regards to their MSI motherboard.


https://translate.google.co.uk/trans...ml&prev=search

The MSI board was delivered with BIOS version 113, until last Friday a new one appeared.

Version 117, which is still up-to-date, improved speed and stability. If we were still able to count on sporadic Bluescreens with the older UEFI, the board is currently stable. Much more important, however, is the drastically higher performance in games and the real pack with 7-Zip. The release notes include, among other things, a fixed problem with the memory act and its timing as well as the voltage.

Compared to the original bios, the new UEFI increases the image rate in our game course between plus 4 and plus 26 percent, on the average even plus 17 percent!

Why AMD,why u do this at EVERY launch,rush??

So to summarise:
1.)Launch CPU one month before win patches drop
2.)SMT reduces performance but don't say anything to save face and most reviews have sub-par gaming performance. Reviewers who tested with SMT off get better performance. AMD should have just been honest and told reviewers their SMT implementation was not fully supported in games
3.)Windows power plans affect performance(probably due to lack of windows support) but I assume AMD missed that
4.)Motherboards are buggy
5.)Hardly any motherboard stock
6.)On Reddit AMA one PR person give vague answers which basically said devs need to patch performance,but it might just windows updates are needed in many cases
7.)They could have waited one month and negated many of these issues

[kompukare]

They could have waited one month and negated many of these issues

I also think that they had to launch some time. Possibly they should only have launched well binned 1800X Pro versions and said these are workstation-only parts and the rest of the desktop parts will come in a month's time.

That way the mobo's and microsoft would have a chance to get things sorted, and only a few people would be trying to bench games.

As I said, gamers very fussy and are easily convinced that they need 300+ FPS at 720P on a clean-install machine, whereas at realistic settings with background applications octocore Ryzen might actually have better performance especially for those who stream. The other irony is that Ryzen might age better than Kabylake but like with Hawaii vs 780Ti nobody cares.