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

Will be interesting to hear how you get on with that RX 580, I've seen very little about such laptops, so will be good to hear about it from you.

 

Argghh, that freaks me out how much voltage that thing would want to pump through that 8700K to reach 5.4Ghz! I've never been a fan of auto/1 button overclocking, the voltages used are insanely high! With manual overclocking through trial & error & testing by the user you can end up at a lot lower voltage normally.

 

Wait an 8 core AMD chip marginally beats out the 6 core Intel chip in a single benchmark? Mind blown. AMD really has something there. Never mind it loses is basically all other tasks and is substantially slower in all games. Ryzen certainly is an amazing chip. Just imagine how bad the Ryzen chip would look compared to an Intel chip of same IPC/speed with 8 cores/16 threads. Yikes.

 

The Ryzen CPU's are clocked 1ghz slower than Intel's, and still beating or matching performance, so if the mhz race narrows in future releases, Intel is going to have problems keeping up. AMD is going to catch up faster in mhz than Intel is going to be releasing 8 cores.

The benefits of remaining on the same AM4/TR4 will continue to pay off for AMD system builders. The difference in performance now is far less than the difference in immediate cost and long term cost.

AMD's market share will continue to increase, while Intel's market share will continue to decrease.

It's best to invest in AMD now than the declining Intel market share and performance gap.

 

It doesn't match performance at all my friend. Take this example of the i5 8400 at a max 3.8Ghz when all cores are loaded up, vs the Ryzen R5 1600 with an all 6 core speed of 3.2Ghz? (not sure). Regardless that isn't 1Ghz difference in clockspeeds.. Not only that the Intel chip is negative 6 threads that the 1600 has. The Intel chip wins some, loses some, and comes close in others. When it comes to gaming it pretty much hands Ryzen a smack down.



While I'll agree with you that long term it looks like you should be able to upgrade your CPU on the AMD platform with AMDs pledged support, that doesn't mean it won't be missing new features, possibly performance improvements. Companies lie. Looking at you MSI. I suppose if you're on a super budget and want long term CPU upgrades Ryzen has it's appeal, but I think people need to be more realistic about the gaps in gaming performance. Claiming budget friendly, but also saying you need to bench at 1440p or 4K is just silly. Either you're on a budget or you're buying expensive monitors, pick one.

 

Narrow clock speed is one thing. The question is can it same time Overclock on same level as Intel? Or will the Oc headroom be eaten up due raised stock clocks?

 

OC is a fantasy construct. Clocks are clocks, whether it's all accounted for in the stock operating range, or extended with OC.

The Intel advantage is all due to clock advantage, if AMD can extend the clock speed in the next couple of CPU releases it's already got the core advantage and the consistent socket / motherboard continuity.

Intel still needs to go through another motherboard change with z390 to get 8 core, and it's not known if that CPU will be the same architecture or if Intel will try a process jump as well as an architecture, it's risky either way for Intel.

AMD owners can keep upgrading CPU's moving forward as speed, architecture, and process improve, while Intel fans will need to buy new motherboards - basically a whole new build each time.

 

When I said 1ghz apart, I meant at maximum speeds for both platforms. AMD 4.2ghz, Intel 5.2ghz, or AMD 4.0ghz vs Intel 5.0ghz, whatever the gaming set up is and the differences in scores.

It's a range of speeds, where the Intel is clocked much higher than AMD right now, yet the results are compared as if equal.

When the AMD clocks are able to be the same as Intel's, then the scores will reflect a more equal comparison

 

The RX 580 as tested thus far showed no signs of throttling while gaming in reviews and its performance is pretty good. It trails the 1060 mobile in DX11 by about 5%, while being faster in DX12.

It was only when an artificial benchmark was run that stressed the whole system to the extreme (both CPU and GPU) that there might have been some concerns about throttling on the GPU or temperatures on it - which begs the question, why hadn't Asus optimized the GPU for each system individually in that case or added more efficient cooling for it - they did that for the CPU, but not the GPU.

But, that kind of scenario is unlikely to be representative of ANY real-world use.
I have yet to see even rendering software that's stressing the GPU and CPU simultaneously to the levels those artificial benches do.

Though, undervolting the GPU should (at least theoretically) be possible.


hmscott

To answer your question on where I ordered it from... it was LaptopsDirect.
Price: £1566... but I joined Which for £1 for just 1 month and that took off £15 off the laptop - which I used for 'next day delivery' for £10 (I probably just should have selected the free delivery as it would have gotten here sometime next week).

Either way, even with the extra £10, I spent in total £1561 - so, LESS than what I would have paid on Overclockers UK website - though OCUK seems like a more reliable website.
Oh well, LaptopsDirect is reputable as well (I remember using it to recommend new laptops to people within their budget years ago).

 

The 8400 is in a weird spot right now. It's the budget part, non-OC'able, but doesn't have a matching low cost motherboard right now.

The B360 Intel motherboard chipset isn't out till 2018, Feb?

So for right now you'd need to spend more to get a z370, but not be able to use the OC features.

The good news is you can use faster memory on z370 vs B360, so for now you get that performance advantage. But, any test results on z370 may of course be slightly higher than what you would get with a B360 motherboard.

The Asrock z370 motherboards have implemented the BCLK OC for the 8400 and until Intel blocks that with microcode updates you could OC perhaps as much as 25% with the 8400 to 5.0ghz, anxiously waiting for reviews with that configuration.

As far as the rest for that video, the performance in gaming differences aren't enough to worry about, with G-sync / Free-sync the top end will be dropped off, negating the value of the differences.

1440p / 2160p FPS differences are even smaller, and as far as expensive monitors the 1440p / 2160p monitor prices are coming down, and the budget monitors with 1080p again will be limited by refresh.

The expensive high refresh 1080p monitors are the only place you can really use the higher FPS, and reducing eye candy will get you there too, without being a slave to Intel and paying for the privilege

In non-gaming work, the 8400 is well behind in performance. With 4ghz OC applied to the unlocked 4c/8t Ryzen 1500x it should match the locked 8400 6c/6t in CB results.

There's no good reason to give Intel money for their bad behavior to us and to competitors over the years.

 

Nvidia might BAN OVERCLOCKING on new 1070Ti
Rumors point to a frequency lock on Nvidia's next graphics card.
http://www.pcgamer.com/you-might-not-be-able-to-overclock-nvidias-geforce-gtx-1070-ti/

"We are fairly confident that Nvidia is readying a GeForce GTX 1070 Ti graphics card that slip into its product lineup between the non-Ti variant and the higher-end GeForce GTX 1080. However, if you are hoping to squeeze out GTX 1080-like performance through overclocking, you might be in for a rude awakening—the latest rumors suggest Nvidia is locking the frequency on the GTX 1070 Ti."

Nvidia might BAN OVERCLOCKING on new 1070Ti - WAN Show October 13, 2017
01:01:52 - Rumored 1070 Ti rumored to not be overclockable

Spoiler: Full Show Index

00:09:26 - OnePlus OxygenOS built-in analytics
00:19:34 - Apple not intentionally slowing down iPhones
00:27:00 - Sponsor: Squarespace
00:28:41 - Sponsor: Mack Weldon
00:31:20 - Sponsor: Savage Jerky
00:34:34 - Airbnb building in Florida
00:39:38 - iOS and Samsung market share tied in US
00:41:24 - Windows 10 Fall Creator's Update
00:47:42 - Floatplane
00:51:24 - FLIR cameras have unremovable backdoors
00:54:40 - Floatplane (cont)
01:00:28 - AU Optronics roadmap
01:01:52 - Rumored 1070 Ti rumored to not be overclockable
01:04:11 - Razer teased first smartphone
01:06:22 - Two new Oculus headsets coming
01:09:44 - Coffee Lake in short supply

It sounds like Nvidia is having 2nd thoughts about releasing a GPU cheaper than the GTX1080 that could conceivably OC to the same or higher performance than the GTX1080.

The AMD Vega RX56 has nothing to fear from either the GTX1080 nor the GTX1070ti

 

It's been effectively demonstrated that the only reason Intel is faster than AMD right now is because it's able to clock it's cores higher and enjoys industry support from developers using their compilers that take advantage of Intel uArch features.

That's working on a highly refined 14nm++ process, whereas AMD is using a regular 14nm process suitable for lower clocks and mobile parts (so it's pretty impressive it's getting the speeds and overclocks, not to mention power consumption it does).

The Ryzen refresh though will be on 12nm LP (leading process - thank you guys for posting the articles here) and it will by default increase base clocks by 10% and chip density by 15%.
So, let's say that a Ryzen with 3.2 GhZ base, gets boosted to 3.5 GhZ... and boost clock by another 10% above that (or close to 4 GhZ).
In the case of Ryzen 1600X... it's refresh would push base clock to 4 GhZ (across all cores) and boost to about 4.4 GhZ (on single core). So, leaving potential overclocking headroom by another 10%, we could see Ryzen refreshes running oveclocks to about 4.4 GhZ - at which point you could compare 1600X+ (refresh) to i7-8700 at stock clock of 4.3 GhZ across all cores.

But this is just a personal estimate that could easily be wrong.
The manuf,. process is no longer 'low power'... but 'leading process', same designation as used on upcoming 7nm IBM's process that GloFo will be using for achieving high performance and Ryzen 2 will be made on (5 GhZ stock anyone?).

So, I would imagine that the 12nm LP process might (I repeat 'might') allow AMD to approach Intel tightly in terms of clocks and overclocks... depending on how high AMD can push Ryzen on that process without requiring much higher voltages.
I don't think we can expect to see them being pushed to 5.2 GhZ like 8700K... though it would be nice too see that if possible... not sure if Ryzen might limit this somehow due to it's architecture, but I still maintain that the architecture isn't the issue, but rather the manuf. process for Ryzen's inability to clock past certain point (say 4.1 GhZ0.

Btw, one of the guys on youtube apparently called me a 'moron' for saying that software devs optimize programs for CPU's and GPU's architectures.
He says no program is optimized for any CPU or GPU... which is pure nonsense.
I provided him with links from accredited sources and even game devs who acknowledged that after releasing patches for Ryzen for example, performance in some games jumped by up to 30% and how GTA V for instance is an Nvidia optimized game.

Btw, the guy never provided a shred of data to back up his claims, and of course told me to 'get a proper education'.

I would think that gaming and hardware devs know more about this situation that this youtube poster does and we've seen instances of both GPU's and CPU's being coded for by games and software in general.
Most of the industry is using Intel compilers for crying out loud... open source and closed source.

 

Yeah, Clocks are clocks. And Apples vs. Apples. And not Apples vs. Oranges(8 cores vs. 6 cores). And the performance gap will increase further as you probably know with a decent overclock. I see people think Intel will let AMD come closer than ever. Oh'well

Spoiler: Cinebench R15

And you think Intel haven't learned anything of the release of AMD Ryzen? I'm quite sure Intel knows whats will come from Amd next time. Aka they will be more prepared than with the release of Ryzen.

 

Of course Intel and AMD watch each other, but they are on different paths with different development architecture, so there will be differences moving forward.

As we've already seen Intel can't change their product schedules like the Coffee Lake morphing into Kabylake + 2 cores, and expect it to succeed without problems, as there are certainly problems delivering product.

Given AMD's path with AM4 / TR4, and process + architecture changes it's very likely AMD will continue to gain ground on Intel while Intel spins it's wheels trying to stay relevant until they can catch up on core count.

 

According to those results, Intel has about 10% IPC advantage over Ryzen (when you adjust for 100 MhZ higher clocks on 8700k).
Still, with Ryzen+, I think AMD will catch up to Intel closely in core frequencies... and Ryzen 2 will likely close the gap on IPC.
Assuming of course that Cinebench is helping Intel gain an extra advantage by using it's uArch features and not those of Ryzen.

 

Many of you expect Intel will give up the performance race aka sit down and let AMD come on the side or in front. Oh'well. We will see. Too early make conclutions. Next time, won't AMD have same surprise factor. Thats for sure.

 

Intel appears direction-less at this point, and needs new management. Intel couldn't be bungling this more if they were trying to screw up.

 

We all know that the 8400 is NOT going to perform that way it is now unless you buy a Z370 mobo. No one buying an i5 8400 and picking up an expensive Z370 mobo. If they are, they really need to rethink their computing needs. With that said, the 8700K is the king for gaming and productivity multitasking. Unfortunately for Intel, a paper launch doesn't cut it. That means AMD wins this round. Whenever Intel does have full stock of the 8700K in Q1 2018, AMD will have their Ryzen revision on its way.

 

Faster ram + increased BCLK can make a difference for i5-8400 (as in the pict... 869cb vs. 1012cb)Aka +15% performance increase. Could be the Z370 MB is worth it.
http://hwbot.org/submission/3674224_ev0lv3_cinebench___r15_core_i5_8400_1012_cb

Could point towards an earlier than expected release time-frame for B360 boards.

 

Well, as long as you are spending more for the motherboard and memory, you might as well pop for the 8700k then, all together faster and more capable.

The 8400 BCLK OC will be ground under by Intel microcode updates through Windows updates, and if Intel starts shipping microcode updated CPU's, you'll be totally out of luck.

The 8400 locked to OC fits the B360 realm, budget builds.

 

Probably some who build the rig and is broke. Use all money on the rig and hope they can gather up more cash later for 8700K.

 

Nah, noone is gonna waste $200 on a CPU to throw in the drawer, or wait another pay check or two, nope they'll get the Ryzen 1700 instead.

 

Maybe throw the money instead of 8700K into...
NVIDIA’s Upcoming Geforce GTX 1070 Ti Graphics Card Gets First Benchmarks Leaked Through AotS Database

"The GTX 1070 Ti gets an overall score of 6200, which is an acceptable score from the GTX 1070 successor. We have seen some highly overclocked 1070s reach this range but we have also seen lower clocked 1080s reach this range as well. All in all it looks like NVIDIA will finally be plugging the hole that the Vega 56 is sure to carve in its lineup. The most impressive thing however, is that the average frame rate in the normal batch is at an all time high. This is actually faster than all of the GTX 1070s and many of the GTX 1080s and goes on to show the potential this card could have once performance tuning is completed."

 

Without DDR5x this GPU will be the darling of Mining. It'll sell well enough for mining to make it scarce for gaming.

And, when it kills the GTX1080 sales, the RX 56 will out perform whatever Nvidia has left on the shelf.

AMD and partners need to figure out how to deliver more RX 56 product to take advantage of this Nvidia bungle.

 

See:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=3001&cmp[]=3097

I will always buy (more) physical cores over 'hyper' cores.

At the same price and higher performance (~8% and ~12% higher in the graph you show) of the Intel chip (at stock, as shown), I wouldn't support AMD for their bad behavior right now (an inferior chip).

While the pm 'score' shows them trading places between single/multithreaded workloads - there is still much optimizing to do yet for the newly introduced platform...

Yeah; I'm ignoring O/C'ing. But so will 99.1% of the people looking at these systems too.

With O/C'ing the AMD chip; even matching it; it doesn't, really. Not where long term stability/dependability and availability is concerned.

By the same token that you want to build an AMD kingdom; I applaud Intel for making AMD wake up (finally) - yeah; they were their muse. And for the benefits AMD made Intel give us back too.

We can't just see things from a single viewpoint. What's good for the goose and all...

Know what I mean?

 

The reality speaks otherwise. (Even) With all these screw-ups; they're still ahead.

 

Really? I don't see it like that, their CPUs are more than competitive against AMD, there are some arguments for value wins for AMD when you take CPU & mobo into account, but they're not screwing up on the performance front. I think Intel's architecture isn't as scalable for increasingly more cores than AMD, but at this point with consumer 16 thread CPUs already out there I don't think there will be a PC demand for more cores than that for a while - software/games need to catch up with that first before more cores = more speed - that's my view point.

 

Got the laptop... basic setup done.
But I'm having issues updating the GPU drivers since the AMD utility cannot recognize the GPU.
After running the latest drivers utility from AMD, I keep getting an Error 173 saying: AMD installer cannot continue since AMD graphics hardware was not found.

The GPU however IS installed and I can see it in device manager as RX 580.

I might be able to manually update the driver by extracting the files from the installer and using the device manager

 

Which notebook? What are the spec's?

 

Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC

 

I just checked Asus website on their UK and US websites... US website has the laptop but no drivers etc. as of yet.

 

Update... I downloaded the chipset drivers from AMD's website... when I ran it, it offered an update.

 

It worked.
You have to download and run the AMD AM 4 B350 chipset software from AMD's website... otherwise, the GPU driver alone won't work

 

Yeah; I always update the chipset drivers (first). Everything else follows.

 

Gees, they're making this complicated for you! I'm surprised it didn't come shipped ready to rock & roll. Looking forward to hearing the performance & temperatures once you've tweaked it.

 

See:
http://support.amd.com/en-us/download/chipset?os=Windows+10+-+64

Oct 1, 2017 seems to be the latest release - kind of hard for them to be included.

 

Something unpleasant that I discovered with installing the latest drivers.
I lost FreeSync.
The laptop comes with FreeSync but by installing latest drivers, it's gone.

I hope that this isn't one of those stupid OEM features that only work if you only use their drivers (Which don't exist on the laptop's website as of yet of course).
I'll send an email about this to AMD and Asus.

Also, I can't use Wattman. It's not showing up in the Global settings of Gaming portion.
The GPU seems to be working on a low voltage as is, but it ramps up to 1V on 1077 MhZ (which seems to be the turbo frequency - but I don't think it needs it).
I also limited the target FPS to 60 in the drivers as the refresh rate of the screen is 60Hz and there's no point going over that on this laptop's screen.
Radeon Chill is operational it would seem.

I downloaded and installed Ryzen Master utility (for Threadripper) as the one for other Ryzen CPU's refused to be opened (something about a missing driver).
I got into it and managed to find voltage control, but I don't think that changing the Voltage actually did anything.
I ran Cynebench btw, and got a score of 1392
OpenGL score: 88-91 FPS

For now, I'm still trying to transfer all of my files and programs from the old laptop to this new one, so I'm nowhere near done.

CPU-Z results were interesting... a few % above reference results.

As for the GPU voltages... I was able to obtain WattTool, and once I opened it, I only saw 3 P states that can be altered.
The voltages are already pretty low, but GPU-Z does record the voltage going up to 1V under load - which is puzzling.

As for Ryzen Master utility... It's very peculiar.
I tried changing the voltages in Creator Mode, but it doesn't seem to be applying them.
And If I want to change voltages in Game Mode it asks me to restart Windows (which I hadn't done yet - and it looks like they are controlling the overall voltage for now, so I'll need to do that).

RyzenMaster utility is a bit odd. Never used it before so I'm still wrapping my head around it and trying to figure it out.

But, it's a very new laptop, so tools like these might need time to get adapted for them (except of course Ryzen Master utility).

 

AMD Ryzen 5 2500U ‘Raven Ridge’ APU With Radeon Vega M Graphics Spotted In HP Envy x360 Listing, Clock Speeds Confirmed
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-5-2500u-raven-ridge-apu-with-radeon-vega-m-gpu-spotted/


HP Envy x360 spotted with Ryzen 5 2500U and Vega graphics
It is here guys, at least according to HP datasheet.
https://videocardz.com/newz/hp-envy-x360-spotted-with-ryzen-5-2500u-and-vega-graphics

" AMD Ryzen 5 2500U with Vega Mobile

The Envy x360 15-bq101na is officially the first notebook with Zen APU. According to the datasheet, the device will feature Ryzen 5 APU called 2500U with 2 GHz base frequency and 3.6 GHz Turbo frequency.

Envy x360 is equipped with one stick of 8GB DDR4-2400 RAM, 256 GB of NVMe SSD and full HD touch-enabled display.

The graphics chip is integrated into the APU. HP confirms that Ryzen 5 2500U features Vega Mobile, possibly Vega 8 or 10.

The power consumption of the full system should not exceed 45W"

HP is readying an Envy x360 laptop with integrated AMD Vega mobile graphics
This could be an option for casual gaming.
http://www.pcgamer.com/hp-is-readying-an-envy-x360-laptop-with-integrated-amd-vega-mobile-graphics/

"For a brief period, HP posted a datasheet of an upcoming 2-in-1 laptop that could be the first to implement AMD's 14-nanometer Raven Ridge APU. According to the datasheet, which HP has now pulled from its website, its Envy x360 15-bq101na will feature a Ryzen 5 2500U that combines a quad-core Zen CPU with an integrated graphics core powered by AMD's Vega architecture.

To be clear, this is not a discrete graphics solution, so we don't expect performance to rival a desktop Radeon RX Vega. However, AMD previously said its Zen-based APUs will deliver 40 percent more graphics performance than its current Bristol Ridge APUs, and 50 percent more CPU performance. If those claims are true, the Envy x360 and other similarly configured laptops could offer up respectable gaming performance in less demanding games.

The datasheet indicates the Ryzen 5 2500U will run at 2GHz to 3.6GHz and have 6MB of cache. It lists the graphics core as "AMD Radeon Vega M," but provides no further details.

Other specs include a 15.6-inch IPS display with a 1920x1080 resolution, 8GB of single-channel DDR4-2400 memory (can be upgraded to 16GB), 256GB M.2 NMVe storage, and a 45Wh battery with claimed battery life at a little over 10 hours."

 

Nothing like combining the learning curve of a new CPU + GPU in a new form factor, in a new laptop

You've got a lot to keep track of, and a lot to try - porting tuning from desktop AMD CPU / GPU into Asus's laptop implementation of desktop AMD CPU / GPU.

Please take lots of notes like you have been to come up with a list of what does and doesn't work.

It would probably be fun to strike up a conversation with an engineer on the Asus laptop team. You can try to do this via the Asus Support ticketing system, asking questions that only those engineers can answer, and escalating through the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd tier support realms, you may get lucky and get a supportive manager that will get you to an engineer directly.

When you are ready please start a thread for this laptop for new owners, with a 1st post that gives them all they need to take it from out of the box through to fully updated and tuned.

Good luck, and please keep posting your detailed discoveries

 

I already created the owner lounge thread for this laptop over in the Asus portion of these forums.
I'll take some photos of my laptop today and upload them into the first post I made.


As for note taking... of course I will.
Wish there were more people with these machines though as bouncing back ideas would be good.

I think I might have to open it up though and apply my own thermal paste to the CPU and GPU... not too thrilled with the temps under benchmarking, but granted, I hadn't tried actual gaming or 3d studio Max just yet.
Will need time to do all of those.

 

Excellent, found it: Asus ROG GL702ZC owners lounge

 

I'd love to use the Asus Support ticketing system, but not sure how to do that.
I can't even register my laptop on their website (even though I opened a user account).
My Laptop's Model number simply isn't coming up, so I can't register it.
The same is happening on the software that came pre-installed with the laptop ... my laptops model number isn't coming up.

Looks like I'll need to send them an e-mail about this.
Also, Windows updates failed to install a security update for some reason (the latest KB4041676).

Heh... it seems Asus is also updating their website for maintenance. Oh well... guess these are the woes of working with new hardware.
Still, I find it odd that Asus don't even have Drivers available for download for this laptop. Manuals, etc... nothing is available on their website.
Is it common that a company releases a product with 0 software (aka drivers) on their website?

 

Maybe they prefer to rely on Windows own drivers Mind you Crematory Fall Edition is out. Asus will probably need the maintenance for their driver download page.

 

Hm... I'm not so sure about that.
The original drivers my laptop shipped with (the GPU ones) were 17.6.
I doubt that these would be based on Windows own drivers as Asus had to work with AMD to get this machine created.
Also, I don't know if installing the old drivers would work for re-enabling FreeSync - because I don't have them (among other things).
The only 2 ways I could do this is to say try download the 17.6 drivers from AMD's website and see if they bring FreeSync back... if they don't, then it's likely that Asus enabled this option in 17.6 drivers they used as a baseline from AMD... or I do a factory reset (Which would effectively bring everything back).

Laptop screens are not the same as desktop ones. You can't download a driver for a laptop LCD screen as they don't really exist - so, it is likely that things like FreeSync are handled by the drivers.
I'll have to send an email to AMD as well (already sent one to Asus) and alert them of this... along with the fact that Wattman is missing from the Global settings.

 

News on upcoming AGESA update from AMD:
https://www.bit-tech.net/news/tech/cpus/amd-agesa-1007-may-bring-bugs-warns-asus-elmor/1/

"The upcoming AGESA 1.0.0.7 release, however, could be one to watch for a while prior to installing, according to Asus employee and noted overclocker Elmor. In a post to the Overclock.net forum spotted by TechPowerUp, Elmor warns that ' AMD has also changed the entire BIOS base structure [in AGESA 1.0.0.7] so we have to do a lot of work to port everything to the new version, which may result in further bugs."

This just seems to be a cover for Asus sloppy/lazy coding abilities.
Granted, it may seem like an overly critical analysis coming from a non-coder, but seriously, they already knew AMD promised backward compatibility to users and as such would need to be adequately prepared.

Besides, isn't it easier/better to upgrade UEFI/BIOS so it supports hardware designed to work on the same platform as opposed to designing a completely NEW (but ultimately the same) platform and coding for it as well?
I mean come on.
The upcoming Raven Ridge is Ryzen based... it's the same hardware (at least CPU wise) as in the rest of the Ryzen chips (except it might not have infinity fabric due to being a 4 core 8 thread chip which is likely on a single chip and not 2 chips tied together, which in this instance would make sense, with an IGP).

And Ryzen 2 and 3 will also use same underlying technology, only improved.

 

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti Fire Strike Extreme and Time Spy Benchmarks Leaked – Clocked at 1886 MHz Boost Frequency
"We have another round of benchmarks of the upcoming NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti graphics card which has just surfaced. This time, both TimeSpy and FireStrike extreme runs were recorded. Interestingly, the frequency of the card is recorded as 1866 MHz, which is a pretty decent clock rate all things considered."

In FireStrike Extreme, "the card scores around 9449 points , which is lower than the RX Vega 56 clocking in at around 9949 points. Keep in mind however, that this is an early sample and there is usually a variation in points with different test runs. But based on these early numbers the GTX 1070 Ti is just slightly behind the RX Vega 56 . After the final clock tuning has been set in place and drivers have been updated, we are sure it will be able to go toe to toe with the AMD counterpart quite easily." Nice try, but this ain't enough, Ngreedia!! Why not skip the whole messed up idea and rather shrink the prices for Gtx1080 ?

 

I wouldn't be too hard on Asus, or any of the other vendors, they are constantly rearranging code for MS and AMD, and Intel, etc, and there are bound to be "flag days" brought about by framework or major changes somewhere along the coding chain before it hits Asus - where they have to deal with it.

Keep posting any little gotcha's like that here, it's a good head's up for everyone, not just AMD Ryzen / ThreadRipper Asus motherboard (laptop!!) owners.

My New Computer Build - Threadripper 1950x


Infosec on the Threadripper NVMe Drivers, a Level1 Diagnostic
Yipe!! - Silly AMD installs open (password protected) Apache server + tools to support their app that shouldn't be included. But, whole C drive is open, and Apache runs as System User... sigh...the interesting stuff starts at 05:00

Article: https://level1techs.com/video/infosec-threadripper-nvme-drivers-level1-diagnostic

 

Guys, you might recall I sent an email to AMD and Asus about Freesync not being supported from the newest drivers on my Asus ROG Stryx GL702ZC laptop, along with non-existence of Wattman.
Here's what AMD had to say (Asus hadn't replied as of yet) :

"Thank you for your email

The laptop manufacturer customizes the hardware to support the specific features and functions of the laptop and the display driver will be designed specifically to the laptop. Hence, I would kindly request you to get in touch with the laptop manufacturer to get the compatible driver and for the further guidelines.

The reason why I’m referring you to the contact the laptop manufacturer is because, the laptop uses the customized hardware. The laptop manufacturer could customize its hardware and it drivers to support the specific features and functions of the laptop, where the AMD driver could have the limited support for such product.

Thanks for contacting AMD."

So, those of us who have these laptops might be limited to Asus it would appear when it comes to FreeSync support on future drivers.
This might put a wrench into things as OEM's are notoriously bad for supporting their laptop hardware long term - though I don't know where Asus stands with this.
Point being here is little guarantee Asus will be releasing new drivers whenever AMD releases them.

However, there is something else to take into account. AMD has to release new drivers to support a wide range of GPU's and APU's they have (including mobile ones).
They had to have been working with Asus to make this laptop in the first place, meaning that they would eventually (hopefully) release drivers supporting the custom RX 580 inside it (especially since they have drivers for other mobile products) and possibly Freesync along with it (I mean, FreeSync was AMD's idea after all, although I know Asus assembled the laptop by customizing desktop components... but still - we would in that case either require LCD panel drivers that would accurately identify it along with it's Freesync features - something which would need to be cleared with Asus support/engineers - or knowing how Asus did it so we can replicate the feat ourselves).

I'm reasonably certain that Wattman functionality could be enabled by editing the drivers a bit to work with the custom RX 580, or we can eventually use WattTool or another program (provided that Asus doesn't include Wattman). The RX 580 is already set to relatively low voltages, but it DOES ramp up by around 120mv on load (reaching 1V in total when turbo boosting if GPU-Z is accurate). I really don't think it needs that kind of voltage on 1077 MhZ though, and besides, I always enjoy shaving off use of electricity and lowering heat emissions. Still, I don't think that the GPU would desperately need it... it's actually working quite efficiently. The CPU on the other hand... I still maintain Asus could have implemented better cooling like using 'lung' like devices or even a miniature water cooling for both the CPU and GPU, but it's not a big deal (just a bit of a disdain with how lazy/cheap OEM's are in 2017).

I have another 'problem'.
I tried a factory reset of the laptop in order to get the previous/original drivers installed.
No such luck. The F9 button upon bootup didn't work, so I downloaded a program with a workaround which brought me to the bootup utility where one could run the factory reset.
Found it, set it to only affect the OS drive, and it set out to work. It reached 40% and then it just stopped, saying it couldn't proceed.
Then it reset the system and undid the changes.
Wow... Windows on this thing is quite persistent. It's as if it's 'lodged' itself firmly onto the hardware and won't let go. First it was the KB update that didn't want to go through until I had to find a third option (aka the Windows 10 update assistant) because manual installation of the KB update failed much like the automated updates did... and of course Factory reset doesn't work.

I tried factory reset second time around and this time it couldn't find a factory reset image at all - which makes me wonder where did it find it the first time I tried it?


I guess I could do a clean install of Windows 10... that's always preferable with a new system... but I want to make sure I have the drivers for everything on standby... and with Asus not having any up and running for this laptop on their website... it's a bit iffy, as I don't want to end up with a device that's not functional.

Oh well... I'll have to go back to setting up software and run some benches.
Stay tuned.

 

Will be interesting to see what Asus say about whether you need their drivers in order to have Freesync enabled - assuming they'll eventually update their website with all the drivers for your new notebook!

 

I'm hoping that FreeSync support can be integrated into AMD's drivers... or at the very least, enabled by editing driver files if the LCD panel in a laptop supports it.
The problem here is that the system registers the LCD panel as a Generic PNP Monitor. Now, whether it was detected as something else when the original GPU drivers were installed, I have 0 clue. I remember opening device manager to see how the RX 580 registers, but I didn't check what was under 'Monitor' - that's why I wanted to do a Factory Reset.
Usually, FreeSync capability relies on monitor drivers to accurately identify it along with its features... and since laptop LCD panels aren't treated as separate monitors at all, they have no drivers to speak of.
But if the original AMD drivers Asus installed were modified, why would their removal affect the Monitor drivers?
I'm thinking it wouldn't.

But if AMD is correct in saying that Asus customized the drivers to enable FreeSync, we need to know exactly what they did so we can replicate the results with newest AtMD drivers in case Asus doesn't release newest drivers, though, here's the thing... Wattman wasn't available in Radeon Settings under Global settings in the original drivers much like it's not present in the new ones... I wonder why this is the case, since the new drivers should effectively treat the GPU as a desktop RX 580... unless it's something Asus did intentionally via software.

Ah the possibilities.

New thought: I can identify the LCD panel through HWInfo... It says: LG Philips [unknown model: LGD04E8]
Perhaps if we can get the model id number itself into the drivers for FreeSync

Got it... looks like NotebookCheck had that info: LG Philips LP173WF4-SPF5 (LGD04E8).