Actually check out the Linus benchmarks -- 

 

 

He was playing around with their Ryzen computers unsupervised

Got a nasty feeling the FSX/P3D performance is going to still be underwhelming

Anyone else remember the hype preceding Bulldozer?

 

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice...

 

'nuf said.

 

Regards

 

You don't have to order one today, but there are plenty of benchmarks available which show AMD isn't pulling the wool over our eyes.  Ryzen is NOT another Bulldozer.  

Got a nasty feeling the FSX/P3D performance is going to still be underwhelming

 

Define underwhelming.  

 

If it's the same FPS as Intel will you be disappointed?  

 

How about 10% less performance for half the price?  

How about 10% less performance for half the price?  

 

A Silicon Lottery Kaby Lake 7700k that is binned to hit 5.1GHz is $420, still cheaper than the 1800X. Clock speed is all FSX (and P3D mostly) cares about, and with the binned 7700k you know you can hit 5GHz.

 

Quote from Eurogamer:

 

Ryzen has single-thread performance on par with Intel's older Broadwell architecture and the stated clocks are lower than the new i7 7700K.

 

this is good for our community. quite frankly Intel has been mugging us all off and not giving us much the past 4 or 5 years in terms of improvement.  sorry but going from an ivy to kaby isnt enough to justify the 350 dollar price tag to get 2 or 3 more frames after you overclock to 5 GHZ , if you are lucky. long live AMD to put pressure on intel!!

 

Ammmm, No. I am an Intel fan and I will stick with Intel even if it's $500.00 more at the same performance. Go Intel! Please bring out another chip with 2% performance increase at over $1,000- I I will always be loyal to you.  

 

nuff said.  (lololol)  (I'm really bad at sarcasm) 

A Silicon Lottery Kaby Lake 7700k that is binned to hit 5.1GHz is $420, still cheaper than the 1800X. Clock speed is all FSX (and P3D mostly) cares about, and with the binned 7700k you know you can hit 5GHz.

 

Quote from Eurogamer:

 

The article says 28% of the 7700K they tested hit 5.1Ghz. Hummm.  ???? 

A Silicon Lottery Kaby Lake 7700k that is binned to hit 5.1GHz is $420, still cheaper than the 1800X. Clock speed is all FSX (and P3D mostly) cares about, and with the binned 7700k you know you can hit 5GHz.

 

Quote from Eurogamer:

 

As someone who owns a 5.2GHz 7700k, I know very well what Flight Sim needs.  It's the reason I went with this chip, delidded it, and OC'd higher than the vast majority of these chips will ever reach.  

Performance needs depend on workload.  FSX may only care about single thread IPC x clock speed (it's not just clock speed, architectural improvements from generation to generation matter just as much otherwise we would all be running LN2 cooled Pentium 4s) but other sims like P3D and XPlane seem to be able to utilize multiple cores better than FSX ever will.  Who knows, maybe P3D v4 will run better on an 8-core Ryzen than a highly clocked 7700k.  

 

“I’ve had a lot of meetings with Microsoft, AMD, and a little bit of NVIDIA and Intel – they really need to hit home the fact that DirectX 12, Vulkan, and Mantle, allow all of the cores of your CPU to talk to the video card simultaneously. But everyone’s really iffy about that, because that means acknowledging that for the past several years, only one of your cores was talking to the GPU, and no one wants to go ‘You know by the way, you know that multi-core CPU? It was useless for your games.’” – Brad Wardell

 

Well hopefully Xplane takes more advantage of multi-core when it moves to Vulkan !

The benches are out, hope your not feeling "butthurt!"

 

BaldyB

 

Why should I? :-D I am not a ###### so why the hell should I?

I never got into that hype and I don't care who is faster, AMD or Intel. 

 

I think it's good to have AMD on the same level as Intel (or better) to get better prices and better competition and higher jumps in performance in the next years.

 

And if I am really butthurt - then I go out and buy a Ryzen system - pretty simple ;-)

The article says 28% of the 7700K they tested hit 5.1Ghz. Hummm.  ???? 

 

Silicon Lottery tests stability at very high voltages needed for extreme overclocking. In terms of thermals you'll need to delid (which they can do professionally for $50) and use a watercooling setup. As a user of the old Sandy Bridge limited to 4.6GHz not by heat, but by extreme (almost dangerous) VCore voltages, Silicon Lottery's binned CPUs allow me to know that their chips are tested to withstand such high voltages.

 

With FSX, heat is not an issue because it's only single threaded, therefore only one core gets maxed out. But the instability (e.g. Frequent BSODs) from the high overclocking voltages is a critical problem.

 

The best thing from Ryzen for simmers is the prospect of a price war, with Intel lowering their prices. I don't see Ryzen capable of such high overclocks but if you use your PC to do more than simming alone (e.g. Video editing, general gaming) then you'll probably benefit more from Ryzen.

Let's see, competition is always good for us. However a CPU is a CPU , dont think we are going to see huge performance increase within the Sims, maybe on 64 bit maybe. Lets see how the motherboard vga working together with this cpu. But only for flightsimming and if you are already using some new cpus i dont see reason to upgrade. Did somebody see major difference in terms of performance using a 2600K 6700K 6800K still playing with 30FPS 

 

 

Who knows, maybe P3D v4 will run better on an 8-core Ryzen than a highly clocked 7700k.

 

Exactly what I'm going to have to take base my new CPU decision on without probably knowing the answer before I do! 

 

 

 

if you use your PC to do more than simming alone (e.g. Video editing, general gaming) then you'll probably benefit more from Ryzen.

 

A good point too. 

 

I'm going to be really interested in how far the reviewers are able to push the new Ryzen chips next week. I think this will end up being the decider for me between Intel and AMD. The pricing is competitive though I have to say if you are looking at more cores.

Here in the UK, the 1700 is coming in at £320.  You can get a 7700K for that if you look around.  You've said yourself, the 7700k is the chip of choice for simmers.  Yes, these chips do have good performance in various usages, but to anyone that has a dedicated sim rig, it makes pretty much no sense to go with Ryzen

 

I am really disappointed, as I say, I ran AMD stuff for years back from the k6-2 days.  The first Athlon was ground breaking, I had an Athlon 700 clocked to 950, which was streets ahead of anything in its time.

 

Hopefully it may push Intel to bring something new out

 

Define underwhelming.  

 

If it's the same FPS as Intel will you be disappointed?  

 

How about 10% less performance for half the price?  

The prices for us Indians seems to be expensive 329 USD is like 23,000 INR wow. Guess i wait for lower quad cores

Why should I? :-D I am not a ###### so why the hell should I?

I never got into that hype and I don't care who is faster, AMD or Intel. 

 

I think it's good to have AMD on the same level as Intel (or better) to get better prices and better competition and higher jumps in performance in the next years.

 

And if I am really butthurt - then I go out and buy a Ryzen system - pretty simple ;-)

 

I would jump in that BMW ASAP and go to your nearest computer store, see why below!

 

By Richard Leadbetter Published 22/02/2017

UPDATE 22/2/17 2:50pm: AMD has officially revealed Ryzen 7 - three eight-core/16-thread processors - effectively confirming the leaks discussed below, though prices have shifted slightly. The top-tier Ryzen 7 1800X costs $499, Ryzen 7 1700X is $399, while Ryzen 7 1700 costs just $329. As expected though, AMD is significantly under-cutting Intel's Core i7 6900K with similar performance, while putting serious pressure on the i7 7700K and i7 6800K.

AMD has also revealed that further optimisations have resulted in a chip that outperforms its predecessor to an even greater degree. Previously, an IPC (instructions per clock) boost of 40 per cent was mooted - an increase of 52 per cent is delivered in the final product. AMD has also released more of its own internal benchmarks, showing the top-tier Ryzen 7 1800X matching the single-core performance of Intel's $1000 Core i7 6900K, with multi-core performance pulling ahead by nine per cent. Meanwhile, the cheaper Ryzen 7 1700X beats the Core i7 6800K by 39 per cent in the Cinebench multi-core benchmark, pulling ahead of the 6900K by four per cent.

Ryzen 7 1800X and 1700X feature a 95W TDP, while the lower clocked Ryzen 7 1700 is remarkably frugal for an eight-core chip at just 65W (again verifying previously leaks). Pre-orders start today, and the processor will be available to buy from March 2nd. Reviews for Ryzen 7 will be published on the same day. In amongst the press materials, AMD also provided a die-shot of the full, eight-core processor, which we've reproduced below - click on the thumbnail for a higher resolution image. Expect to hear more about Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 3 soon.

 

The benchmarks were backed up by other independent reviewers.

Beats Intels best in in IPC!!!

 

No hard feelings here.

Best

 

BaldyB

I would jump in that BMW ASAP and go to your nearest computer store, see why below!

 

By Richard Leadbetter Published 22/02/2017

UPDATE 22/2/17 2:50pm: AMD has officially revealed Ryzen 7 - three eight-core/16-thread processors - effectively confirming the leaks discussed below, though prices have shifted slightly. The top-tier Ryzen 7 1800X costs $499, Ryzen 7 1700X is $399, while Ryzen 7 1700 costs just $329. As expected though, AMD is significantly under-cutting Intel's Core i7 6900K with similar performance, while putting serious pressure on the i7 7700K and i7 6800K.

AMD has also revealed that further optimisations have resulted in a chip that outperforms its predecessor to an even greater degree. Previously, an IPC (instructions per clock) boost of 40 per cent was mooted - an increase of 52 per cent is delivered in the final product. AMD has also released more of its own internal benchmarks, showing the top-tier Ryzen 7 1800X matching the single-core performance of Intel's $1000 Core i7 6900K, with multi-core performance pulling ahead by nine per cent. Meanwhile, the cheaper Ryzen 7 1700X beats the Core i7 6800K by 39 per cent in the Cinebench multi-core benchmark, pulling ahead of the 6900K by four per cent.

Ryzen 7 1800X and 1700X feature a 95W TDP, while the lower clocked Ryzen 7 1700 is remarkably frugal for an eight-core chip at just 65W (again verifying previously leaks). Pre-orders start today, and the processor will be available to buy from March 2nd. Reviews for Ryzen 7 will be published on the same day. In amongst the press materials, AMD also provided a die-shot of the full, eight-core processor, which we've reproduced below - click on the thumbnail for a higher resolution image. Expect to hear more about Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 3 soon.

 

The benchmarks were backed up by other independent reviewers.

Beats Intels best in in IPC!!!

 

No hard feelings here.

Best

 

BaldyB

 

Just to be clear - the only benchmarks which have been "backed up by independent reviewers" are the same 4 benchmarks AMD showed on stage, when they allowed said reviewers backstage to run the same benchmarks for themselves.  That does not qualify as a proper review.  March 2nd will give us a more complete picture of Ryzen.