• Hardware

  • AMD has Ryzen - Ryzen 7 announced - 1700 / 1700x / 1800x

So, it's been like 24 hours since the announcement and yet no one made a topic about it, apparently this is the next big thing, first I'll post the video that I found the most useful which LinusTechTip

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rUndzpdo1I

Personally I'm very excited of this new launch, AMD is back in the game and they not only has a better performer (on the multi-threaded part and also neck to neck on single threaded performance) they have also a better price and a better package (better stock cooler with some units has RGB fans on it!), Ryzen7 was the top performer family and now we are waiting for the Ryzen3 and Ryzen5 which will be the main focus for a budget gaming system builders.
Will they work with Nvidia GPU's ?
in SLI ?
In the video linked in my first post you can clearly see multiple systems with different Ryzen models working with Nvidia GTX 1080, Titan XP and RX 480, so the answer is yeah, even SLI was supported on AMD motherboards since 2011
yea i've watched the whole unveiling, and got very excited for ryzen 7 1800x, as i will propable be investing in a rendering workstation in few months and this looks very promising.
DOES IT HAVE RGB ?!

God I love Linus !

Well it's about time we saw something like this!
Gear-up.me has pre-order set in the Middle east, ships to Lebanon aswell, they're certified supplier for AMD.
I'm going for 1700x.
Have to wait for mini itx motherboard though, got dan a4 here ;)
I wouldn't pre order for obvious reasons,
First from the site, its not known whether it can be trusted or not, warranty /shipping and everything.
Second it's an expensive computer component that you're ordering and paying for, not a pizza, all this hype and all their results can go down the drain in any minute, remember the gtx 970 problem.

What I advise everyone is to wait release, few weeks after, lurk around the net and YouTube watch for reviews and benchmarks, and then Think about getting it.
Or if you wanna go further more, wait for Intels next generation and then make your decision.
well the 6900k is still for 999$ so yea i still would go for the ryzen.

i would like to see here some recommended builds using ryzen 1800x, maybe one for gaming and another for rendering workstation, i'm more interested in the latter and mainly autodesk products.
Just wait for few hours, I read that NDA will end tomorrow and we will start to see benchmarks, for what I've seen till now the Ryzen7 1700 is very promising 330$ workstation cpu that does not require a huge power supply or beefy watercooler, 65watt for 8cores, beats the 140watt 6800k, pair that with something like GTX1070 and u can run it on a 400watt PSU :) and cool it with AMD stock cooler without any issues
So NDA was lifted and mainly 1800x benchmarks were shown, AND the hype train was over-exaggerated by AMD, don't get me wrong, for 500$ the 1800x kills the 6900k that costs 1000$, even kills the 6850K 590$ 6 cores for workstation and gaming load, but if you are aiming only for gaming the Ryzen 7 is not for you (till now), for Gaming and because 6 years of Intel domination drove the game developers to focus on 4 cores + high clock speeds, it means the OCed 7700k is still the gaming champion, yes the Ryzen7 will not bottleneck any modern GPU but it can't keep up when very high frames is needed for 144hz Gaming at lower resolution.
I was very interested to see compiling benchmarks, cause it might be good pick for developer station.
nuclearcat wroteI was very interested to see compiling benchmarks, cause it might be good pick for developer station.
1800x is not that compelling for a developer station because of it's 500$ price, in the next few days the 1700 (330$) and the 1700x (400$) will arrive, I guess the 1700 is most the compelling CPU because from price point it will cost almost the same as a 7700k, so 8cores/16threads will be beneficial for developing / VMs / Emulators etc
anayman_k7 wrote
nuclearcat wroteI was very interested to see compiling benchmarks, cause it might be good pick for developer station.
1800x is not that compelling for a developer station because of it's 500$ price, in the next few days the 1700 (330$) and the 1700x (400$) will arrive, I guess the 1700 is most the compelling CPU because from price point it will cost almost the same as a 7700k, so 8cores/16threads will be beneficial for developing / VMs / Emulators etc
Actually i am looking for 2xE5-2690v4, but seems NUMA topology will make gaming hard for me.
I want to build a new rig; was interested in switching to AMD (never had an AMD based PC). But after seeing the 1800X benchies, I'm having second thoughts. I mean I do convert videos and run VMs, but not all day long. I guess most software still perform better with less cores and more clock speeds. The Intel 7700K can compete with the 1800X is some operations though it costs less. Don't get me wrong. Ryzen is absolutely great for other purposes and dominates in operations such as rendering. I hope the board manufacturers release a workstation grade board that supports dual processors; that would be absolutely awesome as you can build a 16 core machine for the fraction of the cost compared to Intel.

I just wish the base clock speed was 4.0Ghz and supports better OC. If that was the case, then definitely many would move to AMD in a heartbeat. Right now many are still in doubt that Ryzen would be suitable for them (including me). Ryzen surely competes with Skylake, but is not enough to topple it.

I wish AMD the best with their new platform.
It is still too early to judge, a new architecture needs some time to be tuned from AMD itself, example: when hyperthreading is disabled u get more fps now! Also Ryzen is not all out yet, Ryzen7 is not aimed to compete against the 7700k, yeah its i7 vs Ryzen 7 but look at core count vs frequency, 7700k getting 5Ghz OC because its 4cores meanwhile 6800k 6 cores boosts to 3.6Ghz maybe can be oced to 3.8~3.9Ghz so it is worst for gaming than the 7700k, personally I have a good system for now but I'm happy that AMD is not a second choice anymore and Intel can't take its customers for granted and inflate prices or apply low quality TIM for premium CPUs like 7700k (25C less when cpu was delidded and TIM replaced)
nuclearcat wrote
anayman_k7 wrote
nuclearcat wroteI was very interested to see compiling benchmarks, cause it might be good pick for developer station.
1800x is not that compelling for a developer station because of it's 500$ price, in the next few days the 1700 (330$) and the 1700x (400$) will arrive, I guess the 1700 is most the compelling CPU because from price point it will cost almost the same as a 7700k, so 8cores/16threads will be beneficial for developing / VMs / Emulators etc
Actually i am looking for 2xE5-2690v4, but seems NUMA topology will make gaming hard for me.
Check this out, and also, 2000$ CPU and 2 of those also! CMON! What are you compiling? GOOGLE?

See AMD is missing the point. They are just trying to get back into the game. They want to just reach the same performance level as Intel, but not exceed it. If AMD wants to gain back part of the market share (basically stealing customers from Intel), they should give us a reason. It's is not easy to do so with their current lineup. Should have they released a processor with faster clocks than a 7700K and more/equal cores to let's say a 6950X for cheaper cost, people would switch instantly. But now you'll see people are not that interested, they are happy with what they have and don't have the incentive to switch.
MrClass wroteSee AMD is missing the point. They are just trying to get back into the game. They want to just reach the same performance level as Intel, but not exceed it. If AMD wants to gain back part of the market share (basically stealing customers from Intel), they should give us a reason. It's is not easy to do so with their current lineup. Should have they released a processor with faster clocks than a 7700K and more/equal cores to let's say a 6950X for cheaper cost, people would switch instantly. But now you'll see people are not that interested, they are happy with what they have and don't have the incentive to switch.
I think it is a bit early to say that they did not exceed Intel yet, which is by the way is not an easy task to achieve, we will not have any miracles in the CPU industry, all the changes done are cores/threads/cache etc, so there is no revolution in this sector unless new material is discovered and proven to be useful (light based cpu maybe)

I agree that there is no need to switch if someone is currently running minimum a second gen CPU but that is not the only scenario up there, they chose to go with the top version of the Ryzen 7 for workstation I guess for a good reason, with a lot of early bugs in the BIOS for the different board manufacturers also the developers of the games doesnt have a CPU with this new architecture to work on, this would damage the launch of a gaming focused new CPU.

Future is bright, competition is back, we all win