AMD's Ryzen CPUs (Ryzen/TR/Epyc) & Vega/Polaris/Navi GPUs

As posted in another thread, the scheduler is an issue and TBH M$ is happy to fix it. Why, well this will give W10 a distinct advantage over prior Windows versions on a new generation CPU.

Now no one is saying the scheduler is the only issue, just an issue with an easy fix.

 

Oh yeah, I remember seeing that, not sure how that fits in with the conclusions on CCX communication latency that was flagged up in that article that hmscott linked. Praps a separate issue, but that latency between CCX's is still gonna remain. Any improvements welcome though, I wanna see AMD have a success on their hands, they already do, but if it can be better then great.

Yep, I mentioned it a number of pages back now - I'd buy a Ryzen CPU for a 60 or 75Hz gaming rig in a heartbeat, but for 144Hz rig I'd go 7700K or hold out a bit longer to see if AMD/Microsoft/etc can make some further fine tunings to Ryzen to bump up high fps gaming performance.

 

I did a few pages back. It's a frame-pacing issue. Something that I've experienced with GTA IV and ridiculously high-clocked X9100. It was no secret that quad core was obligatory for this game and goes to say that no amount of clock would save you when you just need more cores. This is the reason I did my best to research the hell out on how to make a quad running in my 5920G (because I liked it and also just because I like to modify (the money spent + eventual tear-down sale of the machine in question (the X9100 E0 alone was commanding quite the premium, also the 2x4GB DDR2), could've easily get me a quad machine)). This is also the reason why I see AM4 machine in my future. The quad was fun while it lasted, but it would be stupid to expect that it is future-proof.

As a side addition - this is the reason why I'm hesitant of CF/SLi machines. I don't give a damn about frame rate (given it is high enough of course), I give a damn about how smooth/fluid it looks.

Not if they keep core-swapping within the same CCX.

 

That would only work if a game only uses 4 cores or less, or I might be mistaken?

 

So, the problem is the scheduler. What PCPer showed is that the scheduler is functioning properly for what it currently is supposed to do, they did not show that it was optimized, and, therefore, working properly for what people mean in the regular sense. They showed NUMA nodes would not correct the first cache issue of core complex communication (while also showing the extraordinary low latency of cores on a single complex). They also did not discuss the further issue of windows seeing each core having it's own 16MB L3 cache, nor the influence of that on performance. Even mentioning without testing would have been nice.

But, they mentioned to resolve the issue, M$ would need to design a new scheduler that allows for an awareness of latency and compensates for that through scheduling. Proving a scheduler works properly, generally and for its design, is not the same thing as disproving the scheduler, as currently implemented, is not the problem. This showed the weakness of the current scheduler. The awareness aspect suggested would act as a benefit to all CPUs as it would allow for the core interactions to be optimized for low latency in all situations. So, the conclusion they drew is both correct and incorrect depending upon what standard or meaning is given to the statement that "the scheduler is the problem."

 

The App / OS would need to be aware of the distinction between CCX's or CPU's as if in a multi-CPU system, and then could use all of the cores without limits of tripping over the CCX or multi-CPU boundaries.

 

The difference in FPS for games already 200+ FPS for either CPU won't keep you from 144hz gaming.

 

https://community.amd.com/community/gaming/blog/2017/03/13/amd-ryzen-community-update?sf62109582=1

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Here's the text as is right now - within days of Ryzen 7 release - for posterity

Spoiler

AMD Ryzen™ Community Update
Posted by rhallock in Gaming on Mar 13, 2017 3:39:32 PM

It’s been about two weeks since we launched the new AMD Ryzen™ processor, and I’m just thrilled to see all the excitement and chatter surrounding our new chip. Seems like not a day goes by when I’m not being tweeted by someone doing a new build, often for the first time in many years. Reports from media and users have also been good:

• “This CPU gives you something that we needed for a long time, which is a CPU that gives you a well-rounded experience.” –JayzTwoCents
• Competitive performance at 1080p, with Tech Spot saying the “affordable Ryzen 7 1700” is an “awesome option” and a “safer bet long term.”
• ExtremeTech showed strong performance for high-end GPUs like the GeForce GTX 1080 Ti, especially for gamers that understand how much value AMD Ryzen™ brings to the table
• Many users are noting that the 8-core design of AMD Ryzen™ 7 processors enables “noticeably SMOOTHER” performance compared to their old platforms.

While these findings have been great to read, we are just getting started! The AMD Ryzen™ processor and AM4 Platform both have room to grow, and we wanted to take a few minutes to address some of the questions and comments being discussed across the web.

Thread Scheduling
We have investigated reports alleging incorrect thread scheduling on the AMD Ryzen™ processor. Based on our findings, AMD believes that the Windows® 10 thread scheduler is operating properly for “Zen,” and we do not presently believe there is an issue with the scheduler adversely utilizing the logical and physical configurations of the architecture.

As an extension of this investigation, we have also reviewed topology logs generated by the Sysinternals Coreinfo utility. We have determined that an outdated version of the application was responsible for originating the incorrect topology data that has been widely reported in the media. Coreinfo v3.31 (or later) will produce the correct results.

Finally, we have reviewed the limited available evidence concerning performance deltas between Windows® 7 and Windows® 10 on the AMD Ryzen™ CPU. We do not believe there is an issue with scheduling differences between the two versions of Windows. Any differences in performance can be more likely attributed to software architecture differences between these OSes.

Going forward, our analysis highlights that there are many applications that already make good use of the cores and threads in Ryzen, and there are other applications that can better utilize the topology and capabilities of our new CPU with some targeted optimizations. These opportunities are already being actively worked via the AMD Ryzen™ dev kit program that has sampled 300+ systems worldwide.

Above all, we would like to thank the community for their efforts to understand the Ryzen processor and reporting their findings. The software/hardware relationship is a complex one, with additional layers of nuance when preexisting software is exposed to an all-new architecture. We are already finding many small changes that can improve the Ryzen performance in certain applications, and we are optimistic that these will result in beneficial optimizations for current and future applications.

Temperature Reporting
The primary temperature reporting sensor of the AMD Ryzen™ processor is a sensor called “T Control,” or tCTL for short. The tCTL sensor is derived from the junction (Tj) temperature—the interface point between the die and heatspreader—but it may be offset on certain CPU models so that all models on the AM4 Platform have the same maximum tCTL value. This approach ensures that all AMD Ryzen™ processors have a consistent fan policy.

Specifically, the AMD Ryzen™ 7 1700X and 1800X carry a +20°C offset between the tCTL° (reported) temperature and the actual Tj° temperature. In the short term, users of the AMD Ryzen™ 1700X and 1800X can simply subtract 20°C to determine the true junction temperature of their processor. No arithmetic is required for the Ryzen 7 1700. Long term, we expect temperature monitoring software to better understand our tCTL offsets to report the junction temperature automatically.

The table below serves as an example of how the tCTL sensor can be interpreted in a hypothetical scenario where a Ryzen processor is operating at 38°C.

Product Name True Junction Temp (Example) tCTL Offset for Fan Policy
Temp Reported by tCTL
AMD Ryzen™ 7 1800X 38°C 20°C 58°C
AMD Ryzen™ 7 1700X 38°C 20°C 58°C
AMD Ryzen™ 7 1700 38°C 0°C 38°C

Power Plans
Users may have heard that AMD recommends the High Performance power plan within Windows® 10 for the best performance on Ryzen, and indeed we do. We recommend this plan for two key reasons:

1. Core Parking OFF: Idle CPU cores are instantaneously available for thread scheduling. In contrast, the Balanced plan aggressively places idle CPU cores into low power states. This can cause additional latency when un-parking cores to accommodate varying loads.
2. Fast frequency change: The AMD Ryzen™ processor can alter its voltage and frequency states in the 1ms intervals natively supported by the “Zen” architecture. In contrast, the Balanced plan may take longer for voltage and frequency (V/f) changes due to software participation in power state changes.

In the near term, we recommend that games and other high-performance applications are complemented by the High Performance plan. By the first week of April, AMD intends to provide an update for AMD Ryzen™ processors that optimizes the power policy parameters of the Balanced plan to favor performance more consistent with the typical usage models of a desktop PC.

Simultaneous Multi-threading (SMT)
Finally, we have investigated reports of instances where SMT is producing reduced performance in a handful of games. Based on our characterization of game workloads, it is our expectation that gaming applications should generally see a neutral/positive benefit from SMT. We see this neutral/positive behavior in a wide range of titles, including: Arma® 3, Battlefield™ 1, Mafia™ III, Watch Dogs™ 2, Sid Meier’s Civilization® VI, For Honor™, Hitman™, Mirror’s Edge™ Catalyst and The Division™. Independent 3rd-party analyses have corroborated these findings.

For the remaining outliers, AMD again sees multiple opportunities within the codebases of specific applications to improve how this software addresses the “Zen” architecture. We have already identified some simple changes that can improve a game’s understanding of the "Zen" core/cache topology, and we intend to provide a status update to the community when they are ready.

Wrap-up
Overall, we are thrilled with the outpouring of support we’ve seen from AMD fans new and old. We love seeing your new builds, your benchmarks, your excitement, and your deep dives into the nuts and bolts of Ryzen. You are helping us make Ryzen™ even better by the day. You should expect to hear from us regularly through this blog to answer new questions and give you updates on new improvements in the Ryzen ecosystem.

4572 Views

 

Within days of Ryzen 7 release Linus measures his Amazon affiliate sales product selections, and gives some interesting %'s for AMD vs Intel (7% vs 93%) CPU and AMD vs Nvidia ( % vs. %) GPU's, it will be interesting to see how this plays out in the next review, how much will the AMD Ryzen CPU's and still to come AMD Vega GPU's increase AMD's marketshare?

Spoiler: Linus's click through *current* AMD marketshare - CPU and GPU

Spoiler: Shut up and Take My Money! - Viewer's Choice PC (March 2017)

Shut up and Take My Money! - Viewer's Choice PC [March 2017]

 

You may want to mention in the description that the impact of Ryzen's release is not yet included in the information given.

 

Done

 

In case you are thinking of water cooling, "Thermal Mike" has good comments on water cooling:

Common Liquid Cooling Mistakes & Misconceptions


The Tech Lounge #018 - Ryzen Scheduler vs Design? Vega Incoming, 1080ti Aftermarket Cards incoming
Some good Ryzen chat at the beginning...

 

There was another good Ryzen post in the AMD Community Board yesterday:

Tips for Building a Better AMD Ryzen™ System
https://community.amd.com/community...4/tips-for-building-a-better-amd-ryzen-system

Spoiler: Content preserved in case it goes away...

Tips for Building a Better AMD Ryzen™ System
Posted by rhallock in Gaming on Mar 13, 2017 11:41:13 PM

The AMD Ryzen™ processor is a completely new and different platform from what gamers may be accustomed to, and established practices for configuring a system may prove incorrect or unreliable. We’ve assembled the following configuration steps to ensure users are extracting the best possible performance and reliability from their new PC.

Update Your Firmware
Ensure that you are using the latest UEFI ROM for your motherboard.

1. The latest ROMs will support the Windows 10 tickless kernel for best application performance.
2. Newer ROMs can improve the functionality/stability of your motherboard and its UEFI menu options.

Memory Matters
AMD Ryzen™ processors have an appetite for faster system RAM, but it’s important to ensure that you have a solid setup before proceeding.

1. The AMD Ryzen™ processor does not offer memory dividers for DDR4-3000 or DDR4-3400. Users shooting for higher memory clocks should aim for 3200 or 3500 MT/s.
2. Memory vendors have also begun to validate 32GB (4x8GB) kits at 3200 MT/s rates for select motherboards.
3. Ensure that you are programming your BIOS with the recommended timings (CAS/tRCD/tRP/tRAS/tRC/CMD) and voltages specified on the DRAM packaging.
4. To ensure reliable POST, the AMD Ryzen™ processor may fall back to a DIMM’s JEDEC SPD “safe” timings in the event an overclock proves unreliable. Most DIMMs are programmed to boot at DDR4-2133 unless otherwise instructed by the BIOS, so be sure your desired overclock is in place before performance testing. Use CPU-Z in Windows to confirm.
5. For speed grades greater than DDR4-2667, please refer to a motherboard vendor’s memory QVL list. Each motherboard vendor tests specific speeds, modules, and capacities for their motherboards, and can help you find a memory pairing that works well. It is important you stick to this list for the best and most reliable results.1
6. We have internally observed good results from 2933, 3200, and 3500 MT/s rates with 16GB kits based on Samsung “B-die” memory chips. Potential kits include:
   • Geil EVO X - GEX416GB3200C16DC [16-16-16-36 @ 1.35v]
   • G.Skill Trident Z - F4-3200C16D-16GTZR [16-18-18-36 @ 1.35v]
   • Corsair CMK16GX4M2B3200C16 VERSION 5.39 [16-18-18-36 @ 1.35v]
7. Finally, as part of AMDs ongoing development of the new AM4 platform, AMD will increase support for overclocked memory configurations with higher memory multipliers. We intend to issue updates to motherboard partners in May that will enable them, on whatever products they choose, to support speeds higher than the current DDR4-3200 limit without refclk adjustments. AMD Ryzen™ processors already deliver great performance in prosumer, workstation, and gaming workloads, and this update will permit even more value and performance for enthusiasts who chose to run overclocked memory.
8. AMD’s officially-supported DRAM configurations are below for your reference:
   
   DDR4 Speed (MT/s)
   Memory Ranks DIMM Quantities
   2667 Single 2
   2400 Dual 2
   2133 Single 4
   1866 Dual 4

Mind Your Power Plan
Make sure the Windows® 10 High Performance power plan is being used (picture). The High Performance plan offers two key benefits:

1. Core Parking OFF: Idle CPU cores are instantaneously available for thread scheduling. In contrast, the Balanced plan aggressively places idle CPU cores into low power states. This can cause additional latency when un-parking cores to accommodate varying loads.
2. Fast frequency change: The AMD Ryzen™ processor can alter its voltage and frequency states in the 1ms intervals natively supported by the “Zen” architecture. In contrast, the Balanced plan may take longer for voltage and frequency changes due to software participation in power state changes.

In the near term, we recommend that games and other high-performance applications are complemented by the High Performance plan. By the first week of April, AMD intends to provide an update for AMD Ryzen™ processors that optimizes the power policy parameters of the Balanced plan to favor performance more consistent with the typical usage models of a desktop PC.

The Observer Effect
Ensure there are no background CPU temperature or frequency monitoring tools when performance is essential. Real-time performance measurement tools can have an observer effect that impacts performance, especially if the monitoring resolution (>1 sample/sec) is increased.

Overclocking!
Overclocking is a time-tested and beloved way to squeeze even more “free” performance out of a system. That’s why every AMD Ryzen™ processor is unlocked for overclocking.2

Consider the example of the AMD Ryzen™ 7 1700 processor. It has a base clock of 3.0GHz, a two-core boost clock of 3.7GHz, an all-cores boost clock of 3.1GHz, and a 2-core XFR clock of 3.75GHz. Many have reported all-core overclocks of around 3.9GHz, which is a full 25% higher than the default behavior of the CPU.

PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER
To test the performance impact of all of these various changes, we threw together a brand new Windows 10-based system with the following specifications:

• AMD Ryzen™ 7 1800X (8C16T/3.6-4.0GHz)
• 16GB G.Skill (2x8) DDR4-3200
  • Clocked to 2133MT/s: 15-15-15-35-1t
  • Clocked to 2933MT/s: 14-14-14-30-1t
• ASUS Crosshair VI Hero (5704 BIOS)
• 1x AMD Radeon™ RX 480 GPU (Radeon Software 17.2.1)
• Windows 10 Anniversary Update (Build 14393.10)

Throughout this process we also discovered that F1™ 2016 generates a CPU topology map (hardware_settings_config.xml) when the game is installed. This file tells the game how many cores and threads the system’s processor supports. This settings file is stored in the Steam™ Cloud and appears to get resynced on any PC that installs F1™ 2016 from the same Steam account. Therefore: if a user had a 4-core processor without SMT, then reused that same game install on a new AMD Ryzen™ PC, the game would re-sync with the cloud and believe the new system is also the same old quad core CPU.

Only a fresh install of the game allowed for a new topology map that better interpreted the architecture of our AMD Ryzen™ processor. Score one for clean computing! But it wasn’t a complete victory. We also discovered that the new and better topology map still viewed Ryzen™ as a 16-core processor, rather than an 8-core processor with 16 threads. Even so, performance was noticeably improved with the updated topology map, and performance went up from there as we threw additional changes into the system.

As an ultimate maneuver, we asked the question: “Can we edit this file?” The answer is yes! As a final step, we configured F1™ 2016 to use 8 physical CPU cores, rather than the 16 it was detecting by default. Performance went up again! After all was said and done, we gained a whopping 35.53% from our baseline configuration showing how a series of little changes can add up to something big.

The picture tells the story clear as day: configuration matters.



Robert Hallock is a technical marketing guy for AMD's CPU division. His/her postings are his own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such linked sites and no endorsement is implied.



Footnotes:

1. Overclocking memory will void any applicable AMD product warranty, even if such overclocking is enabled via AMD hardware and/or software. This may also void warranties offered by the system manufacturer or retailer or motherboard vendor. Users assume all risks and liabilities that may arise out of overclocking memory, including, without limitation, failure of or damage to RAM/hardware, reduced system performance and/or data loss, corruption or vulnerability. GD-112
2. AMD processors, including chipsets, CPUs, APUs and GPUs (collectively and individually "AMD processor"), are intended to be operated only within their associated specifications and factory settings. Operating your AMD processor outside of official AMD specifications or outside of factory settings, including but not limited to the conducting of overclocking using the Ryzen Master overclocking software, may damage your processor, affect the operation of your processor or the security features therein and/or lead to other problems, including but not limited to damage to your system components (including your motherboard and components thereon (e.g., memory)), system instabilities (e.g., data loss and corrupted images), reduction in system performance, shortened processor, system component and/or system life, and in extreme cases, total system failure. It is recommended that you save any important data before using the tool. AMD does not provide support or service for issues or damages related to use of an AMD processor outside of official AMD specifications or outside of factory settings. You may also not receive support or service from your board or system manufacturer. Please make sure you have saved all important data before using this overclocking software.

1553 Views

RECENT POSTS

• Tips for Building a Better AMD Ryzen™ System
• AMD Ryzen™ Community Update
• AMD Ryzen™ 7 Desktop Processors Global Review Round-Up: "Nothing Short of Amazing"
• Building a Smarter Core with AMD SenseMI Technology
• Great Gaming on the New AMD Ryzen™ Processor
• AMD Ryzen™: An Elite CPU For Streamers
• Radeon Software Crimson ReLive Edition: Seize the Moment and ReLive it
• VR is More Accessible than Ever with AMD FX® Processors
• DirectX 12 Unleashes AMD FX Processors in Battlefield 1
• Radeon Software enables an incredible gaming experience with DirectX® 12 multi-GPU Frame Pacing

 

Review: Ryzen 7 1700 processor - Guru3.com

 

AMD Ryzen 7 Review! 1700 Vs. 1700X Vs. 1800X Overclocked Air Cooled
Interesting, shows 1700 4ghz 65w on air-cooling performed better than 1700x 3.95ghz / 1800x 4.1ghz 95w due to thermal throttling - water cooling for top performance needed.

 

I wonder if the thermal throttling is because the 1700X/1800X CPUs are believing they're 20C hotter than they really are ......

 

It's only supposed to be the tCTL temperture +20C offset for fan control, it shouldn't be used for internal CPU throttling control...

In his review the 1700x was unable to stay stable at 4.0ghz under some sustained tests, and needed to be detuned to 3.95ghz to complete the tests. That can't be the +20C offset in tCTL.

The 1800x OC'd to 4.1ghz stable, but the process under load would throttle, and not just in a few tests, the 1800x results showed constantly underperforming the 1700 @ 4.0ghz.

Although the read temps might show high, the actual CPU's were throttling performance, and being unstable.

Edit: adding AMD chart and explanation:

 

But, who wouldn't use an AIO or water cooling on this beast?

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Count me in.

Unless someone can assure me it won't leak or fail after 1-2 years of absolutely no monitoring and maintenance, I'm not gonna put one in my tower.

 

Fair enough. I'd build it myself, meaning any leaks are my fault. At this point, AIOs are fairly tested and proven for years without too much issue. So, that is why my comment. Also, AIOs allow for doing push/pull, meaning often much better results can be had over an air cooler. There is some risk, but not enough to scare me off...

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

I'm sure the reviews I saw on Guru3d had Ryzen performance at 1080p resolution showing fps restrictions well below 144fps, therefore it would still come into play. I'll double check now to make sure I'm not talking rubbish!

EDIT: yep, here:
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-processor-review,17.html
& here:
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-processor-review,18.html
& here:
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-processor-review,18.html

There's probably other examples in other games in other reviews, but those are the ones I found in a couple of minutes. Ryzen no good for 144Hz gaming at the moment, no two ways about it - you don't need to defend Ryzen in this regard, it's just a fact at the moment, it's still perfectly good for 60Hz & 75Hz gaming. Like I said, I'd buy Ryzen for a rig with 60 or 75Hz, but not for 144Hz. Hopefully AMD/Microsoft/game developers can make updates to make Ryzen more suitable for high fps gaming in the near future.

 

I'm not sure why no one made a fuss about Intel's $1000 8 core when it gets beaten in games by a 7700k?
Pretty much similar gaming results across the board.

 

I see your point, we need to wait for the Ryzen 4 core CPUs to be tested too. As it currently stands Ryzen does look weak for 144Hz gaming, especially as Intel 8 core CPUs are outperforming Ryzen 8 core CPU in games by quite a margin too (as seen at the same links I listed in my previous post) - but we do need to wait for some AMD/Microsoft updates to see what improvements can be made.

 

Yeap.
But then again, most of the benchmarks I have seen have the 6900k running at 4.4Ghz or something.
Can't address that the 6900k does outperform in certain games by almost 40-50%, but looking at the price I wouldn't complain .

 

Well, looking on the bright side of Ryzen - even with me using my PC mainly for gaming (as the most computationally demanding task), then I would actually buy a Ryzen 8 core (the 1700 version) if I was creating a 60Hz/75Hz gaming system - I think it would be more future proof as a gaming system too as games eventually use 8+ threads, plus providing fantastic CPU power for everything else non-gaming that can be done on a PC. Just I couldn't justify it for high fps gaming at say 144Hz, is all!

 

Very true.
I personally don't play anything other than CSGO DOTA2 and OW. Other than CSGO, which runs great on my 6860k @ 4.6Ghz, the other 2 mainly use the GPU. and I am always at 200+fps in DOTA2, OW is usually around 160.
And this will go further up once the 1080ti comes in.

End of the day, I feel that Ryzen is currently a no brainer for people with heavy 3D and encoding loads (pro summers at home).
At least until the firmwares and optimizations are taken care of.

 

You forgot to mention that *all the CPU's* in those game results you linked were under 144 FPS

Ryzen wasn't in a different boat, all CPU's results were under what's needed for reliable 144hz gaming.

That's why I said for games already running 200+ FPS on Intel (7700 @ 5ghz) you can expect Ryzen 7 to support 144hz, actually it's more like 160-180 FPS on Intel (7700 @ 5ghz) then Ryzen 7 @ 4.0ghz will do 144hz G-sync ok.

 

dupe please delete

 

I've decided to build an 1800X/1080 TI rig as soon as the Asrock X370 Taichi is back in stock. I'm still undecided on a case though. I'll keep you guys updated.

 

Are you hoping for an 1800x 4.1ghz sample? Otherwise all the 1700's I've seen so far have hit 4.0ghz just as well or better % as the 1700x / 1800x, and you save $$$

Isn't the current rumor that Vega / Polaris is coming April / May, with recent leaks for Vega showing 35% greater than 1080 performance, which is in 1080ti territory?
https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd/amd-rx-vega-sisoft-benchmarks
https://www.computerbase.de/2017-03/amd-vega-4.096-shader/
https://ocaholic.ch/modules/news/article.php?storyid=16260

Maybe use a parts drawer GPU as a placeholder for the build and match your AMD Ryzen CPU with an AMD Vega GPU?

 

I'll be doing similar, but maybe going Asus. I'm waiting to see whether or not new motherboards are planned. But I won't buy until May when they do the microcode update for the ram fix/unlock (effects ALL motherboards as it is locked by AMD). Since waiting for that, I'll also wait to verify Vega. If you must have something now and Vega doesn't interest you, I'd grab the 1080 Ti as soon as the preferred aftermarket card of your choice is available, then get the platform later. But, it is your prerogative.

 

Good tips!

I love the 'Observer Effect' term too. (I'm always conscious of that in my testing...).

 

I didn't forget to say anything - more fps is more fps (which is better, even if you are under 144 fps), and besides there is a good chance that those games are GPU limited in places at those higher framerates. Doesn't negate anything I've said. ;-) I'm not sure why you're going on about Ryzen being good for 144Hz gaming - it's not the most optimal solution at the moment, I'm not gonna rehash what I said in my recent posts. I hope AMD can improve the Ryzen high fps gaming performance with collaboration with Microsoft, & others.

EDIT: had some additional thoughts on the point you made. Yes, Ryzen can do 144Hz gaming in some titles, not all. It's still not the most optimum solution for a 144Hz gaming rig, 7700K is best option for that application. Now if you want to build a 144Hz rig which main focus is not JUST 144Hz gaming and you use your CPU for other demanding tasks like content creation or some kind of other proffessional activities, then Ryzen 8 core would be an outstanding choice. But for pure 144Hz gaming it's not the best choice. EDIT#2: well actually overclocked Intel 8 core CPU would be best solution if you wanted to do 144Hz gaming & also that content creation/proffesional application, but they're obscenely expensive, so Ryzen 8 core comes to the rescue for the more budget restricted.

 

Holy moly, just read this on Toms Hardware just now: apparently AMD have said that the somewhat disapointing 1080p gaming performance is not due to Windows Scheduler issues.
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/amd-ryzen-vs-intel-kaby-lake-gaming,review-33823.html

Quoted from article above:
"According to AMD, this problem doesn't relate to the Windows scheduler. Normally we'd say that's a good thing, since it doesn't depend on Microsoft to fix. But if the issue was tied to the operating system, a single update could optimize for AMD's processors, similar to what we saw with Bulldozer in the Windows 8 days. Instead, we have to look out for improvements one application at a time."

Hmm, that's not particularly good news, I was hoping for an 'easy' fix through a Windows patch. Haven't read the rest of that article above yet, just literally posting this after I read the first page!

And after finishing reading the article I agree with their conclusion which I quote now:
"While we're happy to have Ryzen doing serious battle with Broadwell-E for the hearts and minds of content creators, coders, and other professionals, our assessment of the gaming space suggests Ryzen 7 isn't currently the processor family to beat. Intel's Kaby Lake-based CPUs are definitely less expensive, and typically faster. Perhaps a rash of patches will change the way existing games treat Ryzen. Maybe developers are already rolling optimizations into their upcoming titles. And we definitely have high expectations for the Ryzen 5 and 3 line-ups, which should level AMD's strengths against Intel's mainstream processors using more evenly matched prices."


EDIT: and here's the direct blog from AMD where they mention that Windows 10 scheduler is not cause for issue or concern:
https://community.amd.com/community/gaming/blog/2017/03/13/amd-ryzen-community-update?sf62107357=1

 

I'm not doing anything except responding to your claims, I'm not claiming any special abilities at all. I'm saying don't claim something about Ryzen when all the other CPU's are in the same boat. All those results for all the CPU's tested were under 144 FPS, not only the Ryzen CPU's - NONE did 144 FPS.

So saying Ryzen didn't do 144 FPS on those particular games tested wasn't anything important to mention.

 

Pfff.... (nothing of value here)

 

That's what I was trying to say about your listing 3 games where Ryzen didn't hit 144 FPS, I checked your links and pointed out that NONE of the CPU's hit 144 FPS.

Your complaint about Ryzen and those 3 games not hitting 144 FPS is a noop complaint

 

Well I'm not going to argue semantics with you...I'm just gonna refer to my previous couple of posts where I've stated the evidence & my conclusions on the topic of Ryzen & 144Hz gaming...so there's nothing more for me to say.

 

Maybe next time when making your point use links to proof that helps your argument instead of nullifying it

 

That's wrong...last post from me to you on this subject. Links & evidence plenty clear, really can't write anymore about this, at least to you for now!

 

AMD Ryzen 5 CPUs to Launch April 11, Offering Ultimate Price to Performance
http://www.game-debate.com/news/224...ril-11-offering-ultimate-price-to-performance

Spoiler: Details...

AMD has confirmed Ryzen 5 will launch on April 11th. AMD’s high-end Ryzen 7 processors have been on the market for a weeks, but now it’s time for something a little more affordable. Ryzen 5 is basically AMD’s equivalent of Intel’s Core i5, hitting that sweet spot betwixt price and performance. As we saw in our Ryzen CPU survey, they’re also the most hotly anticipated of all Ryzen processors.

There’s going to be a whole bunch of Ryzen 5 CPUs available in various 4 and 6-core variants, ranging in price from just $169 all the way up to $249 for the highest-end model. At that sort of price point they’re a much more realistic purchase for your average gaming PC build, with performance that isn’t likely to hold any graphics card back.

The full lineup of AMD Ryzen 5 processors comprises Ryzen 5 1600X, Ryzen 5 PRO 1600, Ryzen 5 1500, Ryzen 5 PRO 1500, Ryzen 5 1400X, Ryzen 5 PRO 1400, Ryzen 5 1300 and the Ryzen 5 PRO 1300. We’re still at a bit of a loss for what the Pro variants even are, so don’t expect them to launch until later in the year. Instead, this is what we’re looking at on April 11th:

Ryzen 5 April 11 Launch CPUs
CPU Core/Thread L3 Cache TDP Base Clock Boost Clock Price
Ryzen 5 1600X 6/12 16MB 95W 3.3GHz 3.7GHz $249
Ryzen 5 1500 6/12 16MB 65W 3.2GHz 3.5GHz $219
Ryzen 5 1400X 4/8 8MB 65W 3.5GHz 3.9GHz $189
Ryzen 5 1300 4/8 8MB 65W 3.2GHz 3.5GHz $169

As with all Ryzen chips these all have unlocked multipliers meaning you can overclock to your heart’s content. The ‘X’ variants however feature XFR (eXtended Frequency Range). This is basically automatic overclocking capabilities, and it’s why you see the R5 1600X guzzle down a 95W TDP overhead.

The pick of the bunch is undoubtedly the Ryzen 5 1600X. With six cores, 12 threads, 3.6 GHz base clock and a $249 price tag ($10 cheaper than expected), this looks as if it could be unbelievable purchase.

https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/5zibkm/_/

 

I posted about this and the exact AMD link you shared days ago. This statement came after the article that was published showing the scheduler works as programmed and designed. It did not show an optimization for Ryzen, though. This is because the scheduler does not have an awareness of latency costs in scheduling, so unless the software itself is optimized to prevent the hit to performance due to switching between the CCXs on the processor, there will be a penalty that occurs. Microsoft accepted blame and said they were working on a solution before this statement. I take both parties admitting fault to mean that M$ knows they can further improve the scheduler to improve Ryzen performance while AMD acknowledges and takes the heat off of M$ because the scheduler works as designed. So, yes, scheduler optimization to employ awareness of latency in communications between cores is the answer, that latency between CCXs is the problem, but, the scheduler functions properly according to it's design. Does that make sense to you?

 

Sooner than I've expected. I guess there wont be any improvements, just disabled cores and lower prices. Which is not bad at all, just hoped that the 6c, or at the very least the 4c, would get slight performance bump. We'll see soon enough.

 

Look at the timing. They originally planned the release with the RX 500 series GPUs. Now, those come one week later. I wonder why?

 

Same. Slight last minute tweaks to completely destroy the Ti? One can dream, no April would be entertaining, that's for sure.

 

AMD Ryzen™ 5 Desktop Processor Sneak Peek

Spoiler: More New Ryzen 5 video's

RYZEN 5 Pricing and Specs - 4 NEW SKUS!!!


Ryzen 5: AMD Talks 4-Core & 6-Core Ryzen CPUs!


AMD RYZEN 5 - Explained! (1600X, 1600, 1500X & 1400!)


PC Perspective Podcast #441 - LIVE @ 10pm ET / 7pm PT
Ryzen 5 starts at 52:20 - Live stream still up, no playback video posted.
Check the left side agenda, find the index posted eventually in the comments or details.

 

Gets interesting as the benchmarks arrive, CCX single / dual comparison in games, higher performance memory in games, SMT on / off, lots of new observations.

The (Belated) Ryzen Review - R7 1800X and R7 1700 - AMD back in business.


Newegg Insider: AMD Ryzen 7 Auto Overclocking to 4.0GHz with Walkthrough & Benchmarks
Tuning starts at 2:20

 

Yeah, makes some kind of sense. Although after seeing AMD's statement on the matter it does make me think that the Windows 10 scheduler update may not happen and/or might not be that influential in some of the disappointing performance which has been seen. We'll have to see what occurs with time though.

 

Testing with 4 active cores (2+2 vs 4+0) already prove scheduler behavior leads to a noticeable difference. It's definitely not the whole story though.