Intel hasn't had to drop prices on the 7600K/7700K because they are already cheaper than the 1700/1800 and can compete on the gaming front... But when a 6c/12t CPU that clocks to 4Ghz, does close the gap in games and outperforms Intel equivalents considerably in threaded applications gets launched for ~£250? That's when they are going to have to react. I can probably get 2/3's of the price of a 1600X if I sell my 6700 now, that could drop to half if Intel take £50 off the RRP for the 6700K/7700K. That difference isn't a deal-breaker, but it certainly makes the deal sweeter!
If the flagship 1800X can't compete with a 7600K in gaming, then I'm not sure that AMD are going to release a lower-end part that's faster and cheaper. Stranger things have happened, though.
You mean like the 7700K being faster and cheaper than the 6900K in gaming scenarios? The 1600/1600X will be the best bang-for-buck chip in the Ryzen line up, and the best for a general use+gaming rig. It'll also be cheaper than a Z170/7700K machine, so it'll be interesting to see how Intel counter it.
If the 7 series are anything to go by do not buy the X series. Total waste of cash. The 1800x is like 100-200mhz better than the 1700 and costs a load more.
It'd be interesting to see if you could downclock/undervolt and R7 to allow it to be passively cooled while being used as a plex media server handling transcoding to multiple people and other things. And if it is possible, how small such a machine could go. Actually, lets remove the R7 and just say a machine in general. Downclocking/undervolting mandatory though - how low can you go kind of challenge
The 7700k also clocks a LOT higher. the R7 chips all seem to top out at 4GHz for stable performance regardless of thermals or voltage. There is no reason to expect R5 to perform differently in this regard. It really depends on what price the R5 series release for, and how much you need to spend on a motherboard and RAM given how sensitive Ryzen seems to be for RAM choice (needing to push DDR rates up to push up the 'infinity fabric' link speed between CCXs) and motherboard power delivery.
AMD need to spend time now binning and refining. But yes, Ed, I agree, these early chips all seem to crap out around 4ghz. Clearly Ryzen was designed to run far slower, but AMD have had to do what they have been doing for a few years now (Fury X, etc) and clock them to nigh on their limits to make them competitive. Been reading about Ryzen today (seen a few early reviews of the quad core) and again, 4ghz seems to be about the absolute limit. That will improve in time. Even Intel have released a few stinkers of their own. The early 5820ks could barely scrape 4ghz without mimicking the surface of the sun. It was only later that Intel refined them and they could clock much higher.
It should be interesting to know if the microcode update AMD is due to release does anything to address that, would their claimed reduction in DRAM latency by six nanoseconds be related to the 'infinity fabric'?
You see, given the TDP levels (low for the core count) I don't actually think they were designed to run slower. Slower running chips would end up with TDP levels below 50W - which is insane.
They are server chips, which is where the money is, here they require good IPC, threads and low, clock speed is not too important, AMD has just put out as Ryzen to get retail coin also.
Yup. Ryzen is basically some sort of hand-me-down server chip. Their main plan with Ryzen IMO was to hit back in the server market, where they will be releasing 32 core chips. That's probably why the rumour mill is in full swing about there being a HEDT 12-16 core CPU. I'd take a wild guess and say that the server CPUs won't be clocked anywhere near as high as these desktop ones. They seem to be very very tame up to a point and then the volts, temps and heat just go into overdrive. I'm sure with time though they will get better and better. The FX 83 series was a 15% leap over the BD CPUs before them. And having a look around right now it is starting to look like they will actually release those better chips as a new CPU. The RX 580 and 570 are basically identical to their "4" counterparts yet clock a good chunk higher.
Nothing really fun as a consumer though with that idea. I do not expect the 6 cores to clock as high as the 8 core ones. If you lock at the base core clocks seems to go down.
While not strictly a benchmark i found this PCPer article on the results of AMD's changes to Windows power plans an interesting read.
Been running my crosshair and 1700 for about a month now and so far so good, no problems and overclock to 4GHZ easy enough but I've had a play about with ryzen master and quite like it, I have it at stock for Windows and a 3.8ghz profile for gaming, I only have 2400 ram at the mo but looking to get some faster stuff after vega drops
Anyone had a look at this? AMD Offers Custom Power Plan for Ryzen EDIT: Derp... i see it's already been posted
MSI at it again announcing even more AM4 boards... http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/msi-unveils-new-a320-gaming-pro-series-line-up.html
