• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD Ryzen 7 1800X 3.6 GHz

Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
355 (0.18/day)
Likes
205
#51
An excellent review and a great fanboyism free conclusion. Thank you, @W1zzard

Several missing pieces though:
  • You haven't mentioned whether Ryzen is worth the upgrade money (and it's a lot since you have to buy a new motherboard and RAM) for the owners of Intel Core it 2500/3770 CPUs who game at 1080p using average GPUs (GTX 970/1060/RX 470/480)
  • Do you think memory support will improve or not in this generation?
  • You've complimented AMD for creating this beast of a CPU architecture however from what I see IPC (even though it's 52% higher than Bulldozer's) is not really there - do you think AMD can actually overturn Intel with IPC performance in Zen 2.0 which was already announced?
A lingering issue is a relatively slow communication between CCX complexes which kills the performance of the applications whose threads need to talk to one another - this issue doesn't affect rendering/encoding but it affects certain games and workflows. So, at least for me Zen 1.0 is a nice try and I truly appreciate what AMD has managed to achieve, but I'll be waiting for Coffee Lake (the first hexacore consumer CPU from Intel)/Zen 2.0.
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
3,061 (0.77/day)
Likes
1,029
Location
Police/Nanny State of America
System Name More hardware than I use :|
Processor 4.7 8350 - 4.2 4560K - 4.4 4690K
Motherboard Sabertooth R2.0 - Gigabyte Z87X-UD4H-CF - AsRock Z97M KIller
Cooling Mugen 2 rev B push/pull - Hyper 212+ push/pull - Hyper 212+
Memory 16GB Gskill - 8GB Gskill - 16GB Ballistix 1.35v
Video Card(s) Xfire OCed 7950s - Powercolor 290x - Oced Zotac 980Ti AMP! (also have two 7870s)
Storage Crucial 250GB SSD, Kingston 3K 120GB, Sammy 1TB, various WDs, 13TB (actual capactity) NAS with WDs
Display(s) X-star 27" 1440 - Auria 27" 1440 - BenQ 24" 1080 - Acer 23" 1080
Case Lian Li open bench - Fractal Design ARC - Thermaltake Cube (still have HAF 932 and more ARCs)
Audio Device(s) Titanium HD - Onkyo HT-RC360 Receiver - BIC America custom 5.1 set up (and extra Klipsch sub)
Power Supply Corsair 850W V2 - EVGA 1000 G2 - Seasonic 500 and 600W units (dead 750W needs RMA lol)
Mouse Logitech G5 - Sentey Revolution Pro - Sentey Lumenata Pro - multiple wireless logitechs
Keyboard Logitech G11s - Thermaltake Challenger
Software I wish I could kill myself instead of using windows (OSX can suck it too).
#52
Wowzers, only a couple of those tests actually use the cores.
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
98 (0.03/day)
Likes
36
#53
Great review W1zz!

What is really interesting about this cpu is that if you disable one CCX and do a lil OC, it will perform better in most of these buggy games (everyone is considering it as a legit performance measure ... sadly).
In plus, it will still beat the i7 7700k in some of the other tests.
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
1,901 (0.59/day)
Likes
633
Location
Republic of Texas
Processor i7 6800k 4.2ghz @1.28v
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix X99 Gaming
Cooling NZXT Kraken X62 with CableMod
Memory 32gb Corsair Vengeance LPX @3200MHz
Video Card(s) Asus GTX 1080 Ti Strix OC
Storage Samsung 960 EVO Series - 500GB NVMe | Crucial MX300 750GB
Display(s) Acer Predator X34 Curved IPS 3440x1440 G-Sync | Acer XB270H Abprz 27" G-Sync | Oculus Rift
Case Phanteks Enthoo Evolv TG
Audio Device(s) Objective2 Amp/DAC | AKG K612PRO and Beyerdynamic DT880 (600-ohm) | Blue Yeti Mic
Power Supply Seasonic Prime 750W with CableMod
Mouse Razer DeathAdder Elite
Keyboard Corsair K70 RGB "Cherry MX Brown"
Software Win 10
#54
Would Zen be a good upgrade path from 2600k, i dont see a whole much comparison.
 
Joined
Jul 18, 2016
Messages
79 (0.11/day)
Likes
33
System Name Gaming PC / I7 XEON
Processor I7 4790K @stock / XEON W3680 @ stock
Motherboard Asus Z97 MAXIMUS VII FORMULA / GIGABYTE X58 UD7
Cooling X61 Kraken / X61 Kraken
Memory 32gb Vengeance 2133 Mhz / 18gb Corsair XMS3 1600 Mhz
Video Card(s) Gainward GLH 1080 / MSI Gaming X Radeon RX480 8 GB
Storage Samsung EVO 850 500gb ,3 tb seagate, 2 samsung 1tb in raid 0 / Kingdian 240 gb, megaraid SAS 9341-8
Display(s) 2 SAMSUNG LCD 24" / Dell UP2716D LCD Monitor 27 "
Case Corsair Graphite Series 780T / Corsair Obsidian 750 D
Audio Device(s) ON BOARD / ON BOARD
Power Supply Sapphire Pure 950w / Corsair RMI 750w
Mouse Steelseries Sesnsei / Steelseries Sensei raw
Keyboard Razer BlackWidow Chroma / Cooler master trigger z
Software Windows 1064bit PRO / Windows 1064bit PRO
#56
why not compare 1800x and at least 6850k?
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2011
Messages
116 (0.04/day)
Likes
55
Location
Israel
System Name Negra5
Processor i5 6500
Motherboard ASUS Z170M-Plus
Cooling Cooler Master Hyper TX3
Memory Kingston HyperX 16GB DDR4
Video Card(s) PNY GTX-1070, ASUS GTX970, XFX RX480
Storage Kingston SSDNow V300 120GB, WD 1TB HDD, WD 1TB HDD.
Display(s) SPELER 21" FullHD
Case GAMING EAGLE WARRIOR CG-06R1
Audio Device(s) Onboard RealTek HD Audio
Power Supply Corsair GS800W 80 Plus Bronze
Mouse Cooler Master Devastator MS2k
Keyboard Cooler Master Devastator MB24
Software Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit
Benchmark Scores Pfft
#57
This is what annoys the crap out of me(Intel is guilty too). Why change the mounting hole layout so we have to buy(or the heatsink manufacturers have to give away at a loss) new retention brackets? Did Intel really need to make the holes on the 115X platform ever so slightly larger than the 775? Did AMD really need to do the same between AM3+/FM2+ and AM4? And it makes even less sense that AMD wouldn't take the opportunity to make their mounting holes square, and they should have actually just matched the already in use Intel spacing. Make it easier for all of us!



It is the classic fanboy problem. If you speak ill of a product by the fanboy's chosen brand, you are instantly bias. The reality is the reviewer just feels the product isn't as good as the competition that scores higher. Right now AMD is still behind both Intel and nVidia in terms of overall product quality, so their scores in reviews reflect that. They are a lot closer than they were last year, that is for sure, but not quite to the point of being equal or better. Of course, I'm sure I'll get "well Ryzen is better than Intel in XYZ area, or Ryzen is cheaper than one single Intel processor so Ryzen should have better scores" or "AMD GPUs are better than nVidia if you look at a few specific games". Well, yes, if you look at a few specific areas, AMD is better, but if you look overall they are not.

People saying W1zzard is Bias need to review their history. This site started largely as an ATI resource. W1zzard has gone so far as to hide an easter egg in an nVidia review that said "epic fail" because the card was so bad. And I believe an nVidia card still holds the crown for the lowest score ever received in a review here.

Just going to name a few stuff i seen from several years ago:


* Thumbs Down to AMD GPU's for not supporting PhysX back in the day. nVidia GPU's never got a Thumbs Down for not supporting MANTLE or FreeSync

* Thumbs Down to AMD GPU's for Supporting DX11 claiming it will not be relevant for a while, yet when nVidia released Fermi they get a Thumbs up for "Substantial performance improvements in DirectX11". (Fermi at least got lower scores than HD5000 series in the end)

* Not benchmarking MANTLE which did brought final Performance in several games, claiming nVidia did not supported the API and that only a few games used it. But heck, if you're a review site you should review every single feature of a card, if not adding to the final score, at least leave it there for reference.

* Very very late Benchmarks for DX12/Vulkan claiming DX12 was unstable and not reliable. This was back when AMD was stomping nVidia to the floor with early DX12 games.

* When finally started benchmarking DX12/Vulkan the RX480 got left out of the list, putting the RX470 against both GTX1060 (3GB and 6GB).

* Wizz making fun of Ryzen at release in Facebook, going back and forth changing the title.


Those are just a few of the things i noticed in the past. I only owned 1 Radeon GPU which was the HD5770 and sold it like a year later, not because it was bad and actually worked fine with no issues at all. Sold it because i was offered a GTX470 which was almost twice as powerful. Then bought a GTX780TI. Prior to my HD5770 i owned a 8800GT, 7600GT and 5200FX which was my very first one. Hardware side i preffer nVidia, but i preffer AMD ethics since nVidia sometimes really act like a D*ck.

Lately i noticed that TPU has not been reviewing some AMD hardware, as they claim they did not provide or got their review hardware late. But if i were AMD i would totally not send them any more hardware Lol.

I really like AMD and i want them to succeed to keep both Intel and nVidia prices in check, lately it has not been the case but i don't want to see them go. I plan to support them with VEGA IF it offers GTX1080 performance for less cash.

Anyway TPU it is what is and i check every review they do from any brand, but when it's AMD i always expect a 8 - 8.5 from TPU.

I hope i don't get banned for this.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 2, 2008
Messages
6,646 (1.81/day)
Likes
9,101
Location
Hillsboro, OR
System Name Main/DC
Processor i7-3770K/i7-2600K
Motherboard MSI Z77A-GD55/GA-P67A-UD4-B3
Cooling Phanteks PH-TC14CS/H80
Memory Crucial Ballistix Sport 16GB (2 x 8GB) LP /4GB Kingston DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) Asus GTX 660 Ti/MSI HD7770
Storage Crucial MX100 256GB/120GB Samsung 830 & Seagate 2TB(died)
Display(s) Asus 24' LED/Samsung SyncMaster B1940
Case P100/Antec P280 It's huge!
Audio Device(s) on board
Power Supply SeaSonic SS-660XP2/Seasonic SS-760XP2
Software Win 7 Home Premiun 64 Bit
#58
There will be more CPU reviews from me though :) Just bought i5 7400, i3 7100, Pentium G4560.
Would you please add the i3-7350K to that list?.
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,325 (0.88/day)
Likes
2,334
System Name Virtual Reality / Bioinformatics
Processor Undead CPU
Motherboard Undead TUF X99
Cooling Noctua NH-D15
Memory GSkill 128GB DDR4-3000
Video Card(s) Sapphire R9 Fury X
Storage Samsung 960 Pro 1TB, Crucial MX200 500GB
Display(s) Acer K272HUL, HTC Vive
Case Fractal Design R5
Power Supply Seasonic 850watt
Mouse Logitech Master MX
Keyboard Corsair K70 Cherry MX Blue
Software Windows 10 Professional/Linux Mint
#59
Just going to name a few stuff i seen from several years ago:


* Thumbs Down to AMD GPU's for not supporting PhysX back in the day. nVidia GPU's never got a Thumbs Down for not supporting MANTLE or FreeSync

* Thumbs Down to AMD GPU's for Supporting DX11 claiming it will not be relevant for a while, yet when nVidia released Fermi they get a Thumbs up for "Substantial performance improvements in DirectX11". (Fermi at least got lower scores than HD5000 series in the end)

* Not benchmarking MANTLE which did brought final Performance in several games, claiming nVidia did not supported the API and that only a few games used it. But heck, if you're a review site you should review every single feature of a card, if not adding to the final score, at least leave it there for reference.

* Very very late Benchmarks for DX12/Vulkan claiming DX12 was unstable and not reliable. This was back when AMD was stomping nVidia to the floor with early DX12 games.

* When finally started benchmarking DX12/Vulkan the RX480 got left out of the list, putting the RX470 against both GTX1060 (3GB and 6GB).

* Wizz making fun of Ryzen at release in Facebook, going back and forth changing the title.


Those are just a few of the things i noticed in the past. I only owned 1 Radeon GPU which was the HD5770 and sold it like a year later, not because it was bad and actually worked fine with no issues at all. Sold it because i was offered a GTX470 which was almost twice as powerful. Then bought a GTX780TI. Prior to my HD5770 i owned a 8800GT, 7600GT and 5200FX which was my very first one. Hardware side i preffer nVidia, but i preffer AMD ethics since nVidia sometimes really act like a D*ck.

Lately i noticed that TPU has not been reviewing some AMD hardware, as they claim AMD did not provide or sometimes they got their review hardware late. But if i were AMD i would totally not send them any more hardware Lol.

I really like AMD and i want them to succeed to keep both Intel and nVidia prices in check, lately it has not been the case but i don't want to see them go. I plan to support them with VEGA IF it offers GTX1080 performance for less cash.

Anyway TPU it is what is and i check every review they do from any brand, but when it's AMD i always expect a 8 - 8.5 from TPU.

I hope i don't get banned for this.

Pretty sharp observation. Just went back to read some of the old reviews done by W1zzard, what you said are all true.

Welp as critical thinkers it should not be that hard for people to connect dots and figuring out trends now.
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2017
Messages
565 (1.01/day)
Likes
243
System Name Cave Dweller
Processor Intel i7-6900K (4500MHz @1,395 vcore, 3600MHz cache @1,255 vring)
Motherboard Gigabyte GA X99 Designare EX
Cooling Corsair H115i (both fans replaced with Noctuas NF-A14 PPC-3000)
Memory 4x8gigs G.Skill F4-3400C16Q-32GTZSW (3400MHz, 16-18-18-38, T1 @1,43 volts)
Video Card(s) Gigabyte GTX1080 Waterforce 8GB (fan replaced with Noctua NF-F12 PPC-3000)
Storage Samsung 960 Pro 1TB
Display(s) LG 24GM77-B
Case modified Fractal Arc XL black
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster ZxR
Power Supply EVGA Supernova T2 80 Titanium 1000
Mouse Corsair M95
Keyboard Corsair K95
Software Windows 10 Enterprise 64bit (build 1607) ((and staying there))
#60
I pressed 'thanks' before reading it.

When you get an 8c/16t for a review, you should compare it to another 8c/16t if they are available; and they have been for some time now. And you must do so by i) over/underclocking until both have same freqs, run the exact same RAM, at the exact same freqs and timings, ii) pinpointing the performance difference if all was left at a default stock. Then and only then do you bother with 'unfair' comparisons between different lines [8c vs 4c and so on]. And should you go down that route, one would expect the wording to specify how problematic (hint!!!) such comparisons are.
While i have no doubt Wizzard's technical knowledge far surpasses even my wildest dreams, his way of thinking and mentality is highly problematic; for a reviewer mind.

Man, was that not a let down. Page after page about where it's all heading, what with an entire damn market comparing apples to oranges and calling the outcome of such comparisons an 'educated' opinion !!! And yet, here we are, lol

Removed my thanks, expressed my disappointment and politely moving on.
What-Ever. Like seriously.
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
25,097 (5.43/day)
Likes
11,384
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 8700K@4.8GHz(Quick and dirty)
Motherboard AsRock Z370 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H110i GTX w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB Corsair DDR4-3000
Video Card(s) ASUS Strix GTX 1080Ti
Storage 500GB Crucial MX500 + 2TB Seagate Solid State Hybrid Drive with 480GB MX200 SSD Cache
Display(s) QNIX QX2710 1440p@120Hz
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply Corsair HX850
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#61
Thumbs Down to AMD GPU's for not supporting PhysX back in the day. nVidia GPU's never got a Thumbs Down for not supporting MANTLE or FreeSync
PhysX added elements to the game that AMD had no alternative to. Mantle was just an alternate rendering path with the only real benefit being to improve performance on AMD GPUs, while nVidia GPUs were already outperforming AMD so mantle wasn't necessary for them.

And since nVidia offers a competing solution to FreeSync, again it isn't a con. You just have to pick which of the two technologies you want. If it had no alternative to FreeSync, then it would be a con. I don't believe "No Gsync support" was ever a con(except for maybe for a brief time after nVidia came out with Gsync before AMD scrambled to rebrand someone else's technology as their own so they would have an alternative).

Thumbs Down to AMD GPU's for Supporting DX11 claiming it will not be relevant for a while, yet when nVidia released Fermi they get a Thumbs up for "Substantial performance improvements in DirectX11". (Fermi at least got lower scores than HD5000 series in the end)
You know, in the GTX480 review, "DirectX 11 won't be relevant for quite a while" is listed as a con, right? Same thing in the GTX470 and the GTX460 So it seems kind of idiotic to say they are biased because they put that in AMD reviews when it is in nVidia reviews too. But yes, it is a pro that the nVidia GPUs were significantly more capable at DX11 too. That isn't bias, that is just the facts.

Not benchmarking MANTLE which did brought final Performance in several games, claiming nVidia did not supported the API and that only a few games used it. But heck, if you're a review site you should review every single feature of a card, if not adding to the final score, at least leave it there for reference.
Yeah, and how relevant did Mantle end up becoming? The total number of games that used it ended up being like 12... Seems the decision to not waste time with it was a good one. And really, it shouldn't have been a concern for people buying the card either, because it ended up to not matter. And if someone did buy the card becuase they hoped Mantle would be the next big thing, they ended up pretty disappointed.

Very very late Benchmarks for DX12/Vulkan claiming DX12 was unstable and not reliable. This was back when AMD was stomping nVidia to the floor with early DX12 games.
By "games" you mean single game right. Because Ashes of Singularity was about the only game using DX12 at that time...

When finally started benchmarking DX12/Vulkan the RX480 got left out of the list, putting the RX470 against both GTX1060 (3GB and 6GB).
And which review are you talking about. Because I just went through every single GTX1060 review, and every single one had the RX 480 in it.

Wizz making fun of Ryzen at release in Facebook, going back and forth changing the title.
He's made fun of nVidia plenty in the past. I even mentioned it already.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 3, 2013
Messages
54 (0.03/day)
Likes
26
#63
* Thumbs Down to AMD GPU's for not supporting PhysX back in the day. nVidia GPU's never got a Thumbs Down for not supporting MANTLE or FreeSync
* Mantle is explicit for AMD GPUs where the software API matches the HW interface exposed by the AMD GPU. Wanting NVIDIA to support that is non-sense. Similar to Glide back in the day from 3DFX.
* PhysX was not started by NVIDIA and it also had a CPU fall-back code-path.
* FreeSync in my book is a rip off of G-Sync. NVIDIA invested in the RnD, proved the concept, obviously they want the feature to be a premium. And it is.

In general, AMD fanboys keep on bashing NVIDIA for not seeing gains from DX12. As if that matters - DX12 doesn't make your games prettier, it's a power move by M$/AMD. NVIDIA invests in game works, physx, gsync to make gaming and graphics better, gets accused for being evil. WTF?
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2011
Messages
116 (0.04/day)
Likes
55
Location
Israel
System Name Negra5
Processor i5 6500
Motherboard ASUS Z170M-Plus
Cooling Cooler Master Hyper TX3
Memory Kingston HyperX 16GB DDR4
Video Card(s) PNY GTX-1070, ASUS GTX970, XFX RX480
Storage Kingston SSDNow V300 120GB, WD 1TB HDD, WD 1TB HDD.
Display(s) SPELER 21" FullHD
Case GAMING EAGLE WARRIOR CG-06R1
Audio Device(s) Onboard RealTek HD Audio
Power Supply Corsair GS800W 80 Plus Bronze
Mouse Cooler Master Devastator MS2k
Keyboard Cooler Master Devastator MB24
Software Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit
Benchmark Scores Pfft
#65
PhysX added elements to the game that AMD had no alternative to. Mantle was just an alternate rendering path with the only real benefit being to improve performance on AMD GPUs, while nVidia GPUs were already outperforming AMD so mantle wasn't necessary for them.

And since nVidia offers a competing solution to FreeSync, again it isn't a con. You just have to pick which of the two technologies you want. If it had no alternative to FreeSync, then it would be a con. I don't believe "No Gsync support" was ever a con(except for maybe for a brief time after nVidia came out with Gsync before AMD scrambled to rebrand someone else's technology as their own so they would have an alternative).



You know, in the GTX480 review, "DirectX 11 won't be relevant for quite a while" is listed as a con, right? Same thing in the GTX470 and the GTX460 So it seems kind of idiotic to say they are biased because they put that in AMD reviews when it is in nVidia reviews too. But yes, it is a pro that the nVidia GPUs were significantly more capable at DX11 too. That isn't bias, that is just the facts.
No, just no.

The HD5870 was cooler with less TDP than the GTX480. The only reason why the 480 won was because it's frequency speed was pushed way too high to beat the 5870 which had been out for more than 6 moths. It is idiotic to say that the 480 had superior DX11 performance. You also missed the point of the MANTLE/PhysX. Yes one of them is an API and the other is a middleware, but you can't really blame nVidia for not supporting MANTLE, but it seems it is ok to blame AMD for not supporting PhysX. What sort of mentality is this?
 
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
60 (0.08/day)
Likes
36
#66
I pressed 'thanks' before reading it.

When you get an 8c/16t for a review, you should compare it to another 8c/16t if they are available; and they have been for some time now. And you must do so by i) over/underclocking until both have same freqs, run the exact same RAM, at the exact same freqs and timings, ii) pinpointing the performance difference if all was left at a default stock. Then and only then do you bother with 'unfair' comparisons between different lines [8c vs 4c and so on]. And should you go down that route, one would expect the wording to specify how problematic (hint!!!) such comparisons are.
While i have no doubt Wizzard's technical knowledge far surpasses even my wildest dreams, his way of thinking and mentality is highly problematic; for a reviewer mind.

Man, was that not a let down. Page after page about where it's all heading, what with an entire damn market comparing apples to oranges and calling the outcome of such comparisons an 'educated' opinion !!! And yet, here we are, lol

Removed my thanks, expressed my disappointment and politely moving on.
What-Ever. Like seriously.
This is what I said, but no justification from W1zzard on why he only compared to a 7700K. That's completely not the CPU this should be compared with - it's on a hiding to nothing as well with all these tests in this review that prefer frequency over cores (which is strange again).

Sure, throw a 7700K in there, but at least alongside a 6900K as well for comparison.

Just going to name a few stuff i seen from several years ago:


* Thumbs Down to AMD GPU's for not supporting PhysX back in the day. nVidia GPU's never got a Thumbs Down for not supporting MANTLE or FreeSync

* Thumbs Down to AMD GPU's for Supporting DX11 claiming it will not be relevant for a while, yet when nVidia released Fermi they get a Thumbs up for "Substantial performance improvements in DirectX11". (Fermi at least got lower scores than HD5000 series in the end)

* Not benchmarking MANTLE which did brought final Performance in several games, claiming nVidia did not supported the API and that only a few games used it. But heck, if you're a review site you should review every single feature of a card, if not adding to the final score, at least leave it there for reference.

* Very very late Benchmarks for DX12/Vulkan claiming DX12 was unstable and not reliable. This was back when AMD was stomping nVidia to the floor with early DX12 games.

* When finally started benchmarking DX12/Vulkan the RX480 got left out of the list, putting the RX470 against both GTX1060 (3GB and 6GB).

* Wizz making fun of Ryzen at release in Facebook, going back and forth changing the title.

.
The most recent one was perhaps the most telling -

At the 480/1060 launches, the cards were benched with a really, really old suite of games featuring stuff like BF3 AND BF4 and no DX12/Vulkan titles. Then the conclusion was formed from the performance summary that the 1060 was quite significantly faster than the 480 because it was quite a lot faster in these old DX11 titles W1zzard benched with. Bizarrely, just after both cards had been reviewed (and opinions formed from the reviews by TPU readers) he updated his bench suite with lots of newer games and DOOM Vulkan/DX12 games. (and lo and behold, the 480 is neck-and-neck with the 1060 for the most part). But it was too late then. Surely with a huge twin videocard release, you would have updated your test suite before release, not a couple weeks afterwards.
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2011
Messages
116 (0.04/day)
Likes
55
Location
Israel
System Name Negra5
Processor i5 6500
Motherboard ASUS Z170M-Plus
Cooling Cooler Master Hyper TX3
Memory Kingston HyperX 16GB DDR4
Video Card(s) PNY GTX-1070, ASUS GTX970, XFX RX480
Storage Kingston SSDNow V300 120GB, WD 1TB HDD, WD 1TB HDD.
Display(s) SPELER 21" FullHD
Case GAMING EAGLE WARRIOR CG-06R1
Audio Device(s) Onboard RealTek HD Audio
Power Supply Corsair GS800W 80 Plus Bronze
Mouse Cooler Master Devastator MS2k
Keyboard Cooler Master Devastator MB24
Software Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit
Benchmark Scores Pfft
#67
* Mantle is explicit for AMD GPUs where the software API matches the HW interface exposed by the AMD GPU. Wanting NVIDIA to support that is non-sense. Similar to Glide back in the day from 3DFX.
* PhysX was not started by NVIDIA and it also had a CPU fall-back code-path.
* FreeSync in my book is a rip off of G-Sync. NVIDIA invested in the RnD, proved the concept, obviously they want the feature to be a premium. And it is.

In general, AMD fanboys keep on bashing NVIDIA for not seeing gains from DX12. As if that matters - DX12 doesn't make your games prettier, it's a power move by M$/AMD. NVIDIA invests in game works, physx, gsync to make gaming and graphics better, gets accused for being evil. WTF?
* AMD offered MANTLE to nVidia, they said no.

* nVidia never offered PhysX to AMD

* Who cares.

I'm neither Red or Green Team. I use whatever fits my needs at the time, which had happen more often nVidia for me.

This is what I said, but no justification from W1zzard on why he only compared to a 7700K. That's completely not the CPU this should be compared with - it's on a hiding to nothing as well with all these tests that prefer frequency.

Sure, throw a 7700K in there, but at least alongside a 6900K as well for comparison.



The most recent one was perhaps the most telling -

At the 480/1060 launches, the cards were benched with a really, really old suite of games featuring stuff like BF3 AND BF4 and no DX12/Vulkan titles. Then the conclusion was formed from the performance summary that the 1060 was quite significantly faster than the 480 because it was quite a lot faster in these old DX11 titles W1zzard benched with. Bizarrely, just after both cards had been reviewed (and opinions formed from the reviews by TPU readers) he updated his bench suite with lots of newer games and DOOM Vulkan/DX12 games. (and lo and behold, the 480 is neck-and-neck with the 1060 for the most part). But it was too late then. Surely with a huge twin videocard release, you would have updated your test suite before release, not a couple weeks afterwards.

Tell this to the fanboys above. How dare AMD not support PhysX Software, but why should nVidia support AMD API Software crap.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,325 (0.88/day)
Likes
2,334
System Name Virtual Reality / Bioinformatics
Processor Undead CPU
Motherboard Undead TUF X99
Cooling Noctua NH-D15
Memory GSkill 128GB DDR4-3000
Video Card(s) Sapphire R9 Fury X
Storage Samsung 960 Pro 1TB, Crucial MX200 500GB
Display(s) Acer K272HUL, HTC Vive
Case Fractal Design R5
Power Supply Seasonic 850watt
Mouse Logitech Master MX
Keyboard Corsair K70 Cherry MX Blue
Software Windows 10 Professional/Linux Mint
#68
No, just no.

The HD5870 was cooler with less TDP than the GTX480. The only reason why the 480 won was because it's frequency speed was pushed way too high to beat the 5870 which had been out for more than 6 moths. It is idiotic to say that the 480 had superior DX11 performance. You also missed the point of the MANTLE/PhysX. Yes one of them is an API and the other is a middleware, but you can't really blame nVidia for not supporting MANTLE, but it seems it is ok to blame AMD for not supporting PhysX. What sort of mentality is this?
Bias, ain't it clear? I thought you have already named it!
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2011
Messages
116 (0.04/day)
Likes
55
Location
Israel
System Name Negra5
Processor i5 6500
Motherboard ASUS Z170M-Plus
Cooling Cooler Master Hyper TX3
Memory Kingston HyperX 16GB DDR4
Video Card(s) PNY GTX-1070, ASUS GTX970, XFX RX480
Storage Kingston SSDNow V300 120GB, WD 1TB HDD, WD 1TB HDD.
Display(s) SPELER 21" FullHD
Case GAMING EAGLE WARRIOR CG-06R1
Audio Device(s) Onboard RealTek HD Audio
Power Supply Corsair GS800W 80 Plus Bronze
Mouse Cooler Master Devastator MS2k
Keyboard Cooler Master Devastator MB24
Software Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit
Benchmark Scores Pfft
#69
Bias, ain't it clear? I thought you have already named it!
I'm just here for the Lulz. I already know what to expect from TPU. Intel, nVidia, AMD... whatever, I love them all equally. But sometimes nVidia d*ckness is what gets on my nerves. Intel has behave quite good for the last decade though.
 
Joined
Dec 6, 2016
Messages
528 (0.89/day)
Likes
585
#70
Right on the money, this is my first CPU review. Which means selecting and figuring out benchmarks, then building test systems with the hardware that's available, then bench (not exactly few results), then think, fix bench suite, rebench everything (two times for this review), then come up with structure, layout, texts, conclusion.

There will be more CPU reviews from me though :) Just bought i5 7400, i3 7100, Pentium G4560.
Could you please also test stock CPU cooler performance (temp) and noise? (if provided)
Also, would it be possible to measure power consumption of the CPU like you do with the GPUs?
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
25,097 (5.43/day)
Likes
11,384
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 8700K@4.8GHz(Quick and dirty)
Motherboard AsRock Z370 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H110i GTX w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB Corsair DDR4-3000
Video Card(s) ASUS Strix GTX 1080Ti
Storage 500GB Crucial MX500 + 2TB Seagate Solid State Hybrid Drive with 480GB MX200 SSD Cache
Display(s) QNIX QX2710 1440p@120Hz
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply Corsair HX850
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#71
The HD5870 was cooler with less TDP than the GTX480. The only reason why the 480 won was because it's frequency speed was pushed way too high to beat the 5870 which had been out for more than 6 moths. It is idiotic to say that the 480 had superior DX11 performance.
The GTX480 was on a different performance level to the 5870 in DX11. In DX11 the GTX480 had a good 30% lead over the 5870. So, no, it is not idiotic to say the GTX480 had superior DX11 performance. It is the fact to say it had superior DX11 performance. It had massively superior DX11 performance. In the first GTX480 review, in Metro 2033, one of the few DX11 games tested, the HD5870 scored 0.6FPS in the highest resolution test while the GTX480 scored 18.1FPS! In the next lowest resolution the 5870 scored 18.9FPS while the GTX480 was getting a solid 31.3FPS.

You listed a bunch of other reasons that the GTX480 ended up getting a bad score, but none of them are reasons why the better DX11 performance shouldn't be a positive bullet point for the GTX480. Remember, the HD5870 scored a 9.5, the GTX480 only got 8.2.

You also missed the point of the MANTLE/PhysX. Yes one of them is an API and the other is a middleware, but you can't really blame nVidia for not supporting MANTLE, but it seems it is ok to blame AMD for not supporting PhysX. What sort of mentality is this?
Actually, no I didn't, I addressed it. AMD has no alternative to PhysX. However, nVidia had an alternative to Mantle, its called DX11 and DX10, and DX9, and their cards performed just fine using those alternative APIs.

AMD offered MANTLE to nVidia, they said no.
NVidia didn't need it. Their cards were already beating AMD cards with the APIs already on the market. Mantle was a performance improving API that really only improved performance for AMD cards. Supporting Mantle would have only made it go main stream, and that would have only resulted in AMD closing the performance gap. Why would nVidia bother doing this?

nVidia never offered PhysX to AMD
https://www.extremetech.com/computing/82264-why-wont-ati-support-cuda-and-physx

The real fact is that nVidia was happy to let AMD/ATI use and support PhysX and CUDA. AMD/ATI just didn't want to write their drivers to do it.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
150 (0.07/day)
Likes
92
System Name Poke
Processor i7-7700K OC 4.8 Ghz
Motherboard Asus Z270 ROG Maximus IX Hero
Cooling Cooler Master MasterLiquid Pro 280
Memory G.skill TridentZ DDR4 16GB 2X8GB kit 3600 Mhz XMP
Video Card(s) Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080TI FE
Storage Samsung 850 Evo 1 TB SSD / Western Digital Scorpio Blue 500 GB HDD
Display(s) Asus VG248QE 144 Hz
Case NZXT H440 Black
Audio Device(s) Onboard Realtek
Power Supply Corsair RM750i
Mouse Logitech G403 Prodigy
Keyboard Logitech G910 Orion Spark
Software Win 10 Home x64
#73
So then why is this being compared against a 7700K and nothing else? Last I checked TPU wasn't a 'gaming' website but a 'hardware' website. AMD didn't compare it to a 7700K for a reason. It is a HEDT competitor - so at least put the 6900K, 6950K or a 6800K in there.


But you said this:



So with a review over 2 weeks after launch, I take it AMD is pretty low down in your estimations?

Yet the Nvidia 1080 Ti gets reviewed a day before it launches.
One of the reasons was the troubled platform in order to make it work, memory issues etc, Wiz said that, reviewers have had a very hard time reviewing this CPU, the issues with it makes some people leave the review unfinished.
 

Melmac

New Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
1 (0.00/day)
Likes
1
#75
* FreeSync in my book is a rip off of G-Sync. NVIDIA invested in the RnD, proved the concept, obviously they want the feature to be a premium. And it is.

In general, AMD fanboys keep on bashing NVIDIA for not seeing gains from DX12. As if that matters - DX12 doesn't make your games prettier, it's a power move by M$/AMD. NVIDIA invests in game works, physx, gsync to make gaming and graphics better, gets accused for being evil. WTF?
sorry, long time lurker, but had to sign up to reply to this. Nvidia were first to bring sync to the market, because they wanted their own solution that tied people into their cards. But, AMD were first to come up with the idea. They went the open source route and had to apply to VESA to get the specs of Display port changed to allow adaptive sync to work.

And what's this BS about Dx12 been a power move by M$ and AMD? Do you not remember that presentation by Nvidia and Microsoft and they said that they had been working for 4 years together on Dx12. Where they claimed that they had much better support for Dx12 than AMD.

I am not sure about Nvidia been evil but they are just out for themselves. They invested in Gsync knowing that AMD were pushing for adaptive sync which is an open source solution that anybody can use. 3D, PhysX, Gsync have all been things that have tied people to their brand.
 
Top