35 minutes ago, gizmosellsbunnys said:

Play truck sims too and strong single threads matter for AI cars and mods.  Doubt will see octo-core games that are common in next five years. Still, use fsx after many years and Intel cpu does the job and Ryzen is still behind in core efficiency and eight core is impractical for me as not using for video editing at all. Still, Ryzen is leaps ahead of bulldozer series. 

Some folks are nitpickers. A few sites ran different games side by side, they saw no difference, much like AMD tanks demo. Synthetic benchmarks optimized for Intel do not tell the whole story. I don't care about numbers when what I see with my own eyes SHOWS me differently!

" The Ryzen is behind in core efficiency? Are you serious?

Do a little research!

Best

BaldyB

1 hour ago, BaldyB said:

Some folks are nitpickers. A few sites ran different games side by side, they saw no difference, much like AMD tanks demo. Synthetic benchmarks optimized for Intel do not tell the whole story. I don't care about numbers when what I see with my own eyes SHOWS me differently!

" The Ryzen is behind in core efficiency? Are you serious?

Do a little research!

Best

BaldyB

mmm. its good cpu sorry the Kaby Lake shines, 

have a ryzen and lot of FX cpus like to OC extreme with them, offtoppic won the hwboot  AMD road to pro 2015 my best FX cpu is a 8320 tested over 100 vishera chips.

for FSX P3D the FX series chips ar a complete disaster true. Ryzen is more like a Haswell not as good as KabyLake.

Iam not AMD or INTEL guy .

18 hours ago, BaldyB said:

As was pointed out in a PC World article/benchmark. You can purchase a Ryzen 1700 which you can overclock, some to 4.1 Ghz, plus a new NVidia TI and have $20.00 left for a large pizza! The R 1700 excels in 4K but lags in lower resolutions!  Even so the Frames are more than playable.

I assume that this is the article you're referring to: http://www.pcworld.com/article/3179208/gaming/4k-gaming-tested-amd-ryzen-and-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-for-less-than-intels-cheapest-8-core-chip.html. Rather than saying that the 1700 "excels" at 4k, it would be more accurate to say that some of the time it was no worse at 4k. However, last 2 games tested at 4k showed the 1700 significantly slower. There are three factors to consider here. First, whilst the 5960X is a great, 8-core CPU, it's not the best for gaming. Second, as many benchmarks have shown, at 4k the GPU becomes the limiting factor which is why most modern CPUs seem to give very similar results at that resolution. Finally, the vast majority of gamers don't play at 4k - at lower resolutions the 1700 doesn't perform as well.

Another interesting article on the PCWorld site compared the 1700 to a 5-year old i5-3570K: http://www.pcworld.com/article/3176100/computers/amd-ryzen-7-1700-vs-a-5-year-old-gaming-pc-or-why-you-should-never-preorder.html. At 1440p (more representative of what many gamers actually use), the 3570K beat the 1700 with the same GPU. I'm the first to admit that it was quite a limited test, but interesting none the less.

There's no denying that the 1700 represents fantastic bang-for-your-buck but for gaming, in the real world, it currently doesn't compete with the best 4 core Intel CPUs.

4 hours ago, vortex681 said:

1700 represents fantastic bang-for-your-buck but for gaming, in the real world, it currently doesn't compete with the best 4 core Intel CPUs.

 

Agree entirely. Unfortunately Baldy has been demonstrating quite a bit of AMD bias. 

 

The nice thing about facts though is that they remain facts whether we believe them or not. 

And you cannot argue with facts.

Ryzen the thing why pay more money for less performance.  It's really SR3 and SR5 Ryzen really worth taking look at in couple months.  The Ryzen series is not terrible if you play non cpu intense games, but gonna pay hundreds why pay for less performance.  The 4K tests don't matter much till we get midrange gpu on the market can bang out 120fps anyways.  

12 hours ago, martin-w said:

 

Agree entirely. Unfortunately Baldy has been demonstrating quite a bit of AMD bias. 

 

The nice thing about facts though is that they remain facts whether we believe them or not. 

I agree entirely with you, too...

The facts proves that Intel's 7700K will give you around 2 fps more than AMD's 1700X on P3D or FSX ;  so yes  Miss Kraby Lake is a big shiner.

7 hours ago, Greggy_D said:

And you cannot argue with facts.

NO you can't. facts are facts, but may not be the real facts the makes up the facts   

4 hours ago, joemiller said:

NO you can't. facts are facts, but may not be the real facts the makes up the facts   

 

One fact that is definitely a fact is that I'll be shortly testing my Python's new Plasma accelerators in the Elite Dangerous Universe. And that my friends is the most important fact of the day. 

6 hours ago, joemiller said:

I agree entirely with you, too...

The facts proves that Intel's 7700K will give you around 2 fps more than AMD's 1700X on P3D or FSX ;  so yes  Miss Kraby Lake is a big shiner.

Have you test, its more like this after tests...do your homework Miss Kraby Lake sure shine

Kaby vs Ryzen , IPC approx 6% asume 4ghz ryzen 25fps , Kaby ipc +6% 1.5fps (26.5) clock 5ghz 25% 33fps and last mems 4% 34fps = 9fps

AMD old FX 8350 5ghz 17fps then AMD Ryzen 4ghz 25fps and last KabyLake 7700K 5ghz +3600mhz mems 34fps

4 hours ago, westman said:

Have you test, its more like this after tests...do your homework Miss Kraby Lake sure shine

Kaby vs Ryzen , IPC approx 6% asume 4ghz ryzen 25fps , Kaby ipc +6% 1.5fps (26.5) clock 5ghz 25% 33fps and last mems 4% 34fps = 9fps

AMD old FX 8350 5ghz 17fps then AMD Ryzen 4ghz 25fps and last KabyLake 7700K 5ghz +3600mhz mems 34fps

On paper if your facts equal reality! With optimization in bios, windows, and software your facts can go in the wastebasket! 

4% equals chump change in FPS unless you are simming in the teens.

I rather drive a 8 cylinder AWD vehicle then a 4 cylinder 2WD vehicle ! I will be able climb a mountain a lot quicker ! 

AMD is already working on Ryzen 2 and 3 ! So the future is looking at more cores then less. 

And with FreeSync 2 on the horizon, those TVs are looking like sweet monitors !

 

11 minutes ago, strider1 said:

On paper if your facts equal reality! With optimization in bios, windows, and software your facts can go in the wastebasket! 

4% equals chump change in FPS unless you are simming in the teens.

I rather drive a 8 cylinder AWD vehicle then a 4 cylinder 2WD vehicle ! I will be able climb a mountain a lot quicker ! 

AMD is already working on Ryzen 2 and 3 ! So the future is looking at more cores then less. 

And with FreeSync 2 on the horizon, those TVs are looking like sweet monitors !

 

Only try to clear things out for you, have you test anything yet or is it blablabla 

Info have ASUS boards and run Ryzen , KabyLake, SkyLake, BroadWell-E, Haswell-E ( and tons of other Hardware )

Learn it the Hardway , no reason to post any more in this tread To much AMD vs Intel , I use the best Hardware AMD or Intel i dont care.

On 3/12/2017 at 1:02 PM, strider1 said:

On paper if your facts equal reality! With optimization in bios, windows, and software your facts can go in the wastebasket! 

4% equals chump change in FPS unless you are simming in the teens.

I rather drive a 8 cylinder AWD vehicle then a 4 cylinder 2WD vehicle ! I will be able climb a mountain a lot quicker ! 

AMD is already working on Ryzen 2 and 3 ! So the future is looking at more cores then less. 

And with FreeSync 2 on the horizon, those TVs are looking like sweet monitors !

 

 

i will keep the 4 cylinder and pay for less fuel and better efficiency, you keep your 8 cylinder and pay double the fuel price and terrible performance, the fact is a 4 core can still blow away an 8 core in gaming. if you want productivity buy the 500.00 1800x and use it for productivity,the ryzen blows in games, i am running both side by side and plan on selling the ryzen because i preordered the piece of ****. another fail from amd for gamers.i am not a intel ###### i had such high hopes for ryzen. i was hoping it would have blown intel away. i don't have my hopes up for the r5 now.

4 hours ago, Patriot3810 said:

i will keep the 4 cylinder and pay for less fuel and better efficiency, you keep your 8 cylinder and pay double the fuel price and terrible performance, the fact is a 4 core can still blow away an 8 core in gaming. if you want productivity buy the 500.00 1800x and use it for productivity,the ryzen blows in games, i am running both side by side and plan on selling the ryzen because i preordered the piece of ****. another fail from amd for gamers.i am not a intel ###### i had such high hopes for ryzen. i was hoping it would have blown intel away. i don't have my hopes up for the r5 now.

Do you mean it's bad in IPC ? Against which intel CPU ?

I am using Xplane / DCS and only want Ryzen for that,  I don't intend to overclock but if you have Xplane and can try the performance ?

Ipc close to haswell ,Skylake KabyLake 6-7% higher at same Frq single tread.

Then Max OC för Ryzen on air-aio  cooling 4-4.1ghz vs 5.0-5.1ghz för KabyLake it give a 30% gain ipc+OC.

Thé old 4770k and 4790k Clock higher t hen the Ryzen better för sim ev en the 5960x  Clock 300-500mhz higher.