Monday, March 6th 2017

AMD Ryzen 7-1800X Cracks Cinebench R15 World Record at 5.36 GHz

AMD Ryzen 7-1800X scored a Cinebench R15 world record, surpassing even the fastest overclocked Core i7-6950X 10-core processor based bench, in the multi-threaded benchmark. The eight-core Ryzen 7-1800X was overclocked by Swedish overclocker Elmor, to 5.36 GHz with all its cores and threads enabled, scoring 2,454 points in Cinebench R15, surpassing the previous world record on the HWBot leaderboard held by a Core i7-5960X overclocked at 6.00 GHz, by 9 points.

This feat also proves that at high frequencies, the "Zen" architecture exhibits higher IPC than Intel architectures such as "Haswell-E" and "Broadwell-E." Elsewhere in the world, German overclocker Der8auer successfully overclocked the Ryzen 7-1800X to 5.80 GHz (5802.93 MHz), with a base-clock of 130.4 MHz, and a multiplier of 44.5x, and an insane 1.97V core voltage. The best part? None of the 8 cores or SMT needed to be disabled.

Source: DigiWorthy
Add your own comment

46 Comments on AMD Ryzen 7-1800X Cracks Cinebench R15 World Record at 5.36 GHz

#1
RejZoR
While this doesn't help casual users, it's nice to know there are no cold bugs and that CPU is capable of reaching high clocks (although at extremely low temperatures). Means CPU is done properly. Considering this will be their platform for years to come, I think it's an important factor. Building on top of already buggy platform could be problematic...
Posted on Reply
#2
Prima.Vera
I have a feeling AMD intentionally kept the freqs low in order to follow the crappy and callous strategy of Intel's on releasing "new" CPUs, with only a small amount of freqs up.
And call it a new CPU.
Posted on Reply
#3
Camm
Prima.Vera said:
I have a feeling AMD intentionally kept the freqs low in order to follow the crappy and callous strategy of Intel's on releasing "new" CPUs, with only a small amount of freqs up.
And call it a new CPU.
pitfalls of using a low power process sadly.
Posted on Reply
#4
Mats
Prima.Vera said:
I have a feeling AMD intentionally kept the freqs low...
Low? Compared to which other first gen 14 nm 8 core CPU?

It's not low, and the air OC's speaks for themselves, there isn't much headroom anyway, for now.
Posted on Reply
#5
Camm
Mats said:
Low? Compared to which other first gen 14 nm 8 core CPU?

It's not low, and the air OC's speaks for themselves, there isn't much headroom anyway, for now.
The fab process is literally called LPP. Lol.
Posted on Reply
#6
Mats
Camm said:
The fab process is literally called LPP. Lol.
Exactly, they're not kept "intentionally low"..
Posted on Reply
#7
NC37
Anyone delid a Ryzen yet and see what the TIM is on it?

I know Intel has been using crap for awhile now. Curious if AMD cheapened too.
Posted on Reply
#8
Enzarch
NC37 said:
Anyone delid a Ryzen yet and see what the TIM is on it?

I know Intel has been using crap for awhile now. Curious if AMD cheapened too.
Same guy who did this feat did, Its soldered, (Indium) and done well, he showed
Posted on Reply
#9
john_
Ryzen will not make gamers happy, but I guess some professionals out there have a smile bigger than Jokers.
Posted on Reply
#10
ShockG
This is not correct. It's not a WR, but an 8 core hardware record. Record for Cinebench R15 10 core is by XtremeAddict and its over 2,700 points at 5.3GHz odd using 6950X.
So once again this is not a WR. Score is about the same as a 4600 ~ 4700MHz 6950X.
Posted on Reply
#11
Melvis
ShockG said:
This is not correct. It's not a WR, but an 8 core hardware record. Record for Cinebench R15 10 core is by XtremeAddict and its over 2,700 points at 5.3GHz odd using 6950X.
So once again this is not a WR. Score is about the same as a 4600 ~ 4700MHz 6950X.
Its a WR for 8 core CPU's not 10cores.
Posted on Reply
#12
theGryphon
ShockG said:
This is not correct. It's not a WR, but an 8 core hardware record. Record for Cinebench R15 10 core is by XtremeAddict and its over 2,700 points at 5.3GHz odd using 6950X.
So once again this is not a WR. Score is about the same as a 4600 ~ 4700MHz 6950X.
No, the world record in Cinebench R15 is "8299 cb with 4x Intel Xeon E7 8890 v4 at 2700MHz"


Edit: All said, it's clear that as GF's fab process improves, Ryzen will be able to hit higher clocks, and if it's true that its IPC actually improves with clock speed, AMD can easily market it as a next generation (probably coupled with some improvements and bugfixes), and it would be a very successful release with potentially 25%+ performance increase chip-to-chip.
Posted on Reply
#13
haxzion
AMD brought some competition with Ryzen and that's all we ,the customers need.
So good job AMD and keep it up.
Posted on Reply
#14
Gundem
Glad to hear it, the overall value and subsequent purchase incentive just keeps getting better. I'd buy one if I was building right now.

AMD is ryzen to the occasion ;)

...Sorry, couldn't resist.
Posted on Reply
#15
camaro16
ShockG said:
This is not correct. It's not a WR, but an 8 core hardware record. Record for Cinebench R15 10 core is by XtremeAddict and its over 2,700 points at 5.3GHz odd using 6950X.
So once again this is not a WR. Score is about the same as a 4600 ~ 4700MHz 6950X.
Just check here:
http://hwbot.org/benchmark/cinebench_-_r15/
Posted on Reply
#16
R0H1T
Mats said:
Exactly, they're not kept "intentionally low"..
There's also an LPU, we'll see if there's any Zen variants or APU's made on it.
Posted on Reply
#17
chaosmassive
cut AMD some slack please, this is first time AMD using brand spankin' new uarch, furthermore in was manufactured it 14nm for the first time also
this is reason why AMD cant reach high clock like Intel was

now lets compare to Intel side, major uarch was Sandy Bridge after Nehalem and 45nm Wolfdale cores,
and the rest was optimization, refresh, node change, and so on

Intel Kaby Lake was also optimization from skylake cores (hence 100-400 Mhz bump depending on SKU)

with that said give AMD some time to optimize its uarch and hopefully it can competitive with Intel clock rate ( since AMD mostly fixed its IPC weakness)
Posted on Reply
#18
owen10578
I find it interesting that even with the clock difference between the Ryzen chip and the Haswell chip, the Ryzen chip still beats it. So it seems like the IPC gains per clock increase is huge
Posted on Reply
#19
Caring1
ShockG said:
This is not correct. It's not a WR, but an 8 core hardware record.
Quit ya bitching, it clearly says A world record, not THE world record. :slap:
Posted on Reply
#20
jaggerwild
and Still no review from "TECHPOWERUP"..............
Posted on Reply
#21
ShockG
Caring1 said:
Quit ya bitching, it clearly says A world record, not THE world record. :slap:
Er no. There's no such thing. World Record is exactly that, the world's fastest. This isn't it. In the editorial it says beating the 6950X, and it simply hasn't, even #20 on the bot with 6950X has a higher score. The Bot rules are very clear on this. It's simply a hardware record. Details matter.
http://hwbot.org/submission/3473862_elmor_cinebench___r15_ryzen_7_1800x_2454_cb This is the score, you can see for yourself that there are no WR points there. THIS - http://hwbot.org/submission/3234137_dhenzjhen_cinebench___r15_4x_xeon_e7_8890_v4_8299_cb is the record and there are three gold cups there to indicate it, one which is for WORLD RECORD

This is important to get right, it is Digiworthy that got it wrong, amongst other things
Posted on Reply
#22
EarthDog
jaggerwild said:
and Still no review from "TECHPOWERUP"..............
Meh... it's stale by now...
Posted on Reply
#23
Sir Alex Ice
Nobody gives a damn about Cinebench.
Meanwhile 7700K is killing it in games.
Posted on Reply
#24
Devon68
Again. Wow I'm impressed with ryzen.
Posted on Reply
#25
jigar2speed
Sir Alex Ice said:
Nobody gives a damn about Cinebench.
Meanwhile 7700K is killing it in games.
Finally the kids have raise their voice in this thread.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment