Ryzen 1600X

>>59846763
In that they're absolutely the only mid-tier CPU worth considering? Pretty much, matey.

I bought a 2500k back in 2011 and now I bought a 1600X.

>>59846881
2500k is eternal fag
>>59846950
>Not buying 1700
>No stutters open mutliple games and movies playing.

The 1600X doesn't clock as high, but at least you have more threads and a platform that will last more than a year. Also the AMD fine wine.

File: 1487032629210.png (278KB, 706x412px) Image search: [Google]

278KB, 706x412px

>>59847023
How long can we expect AM4 to last? I'm new to AMD, but I know they're pretty good in that regard. I'm sick of Intel jewing us with a new socket every year

>>59847094
They promised a 3-year lifespan at least, so AM4 is good until 2020, which is when DDR5 is expected to reach end-users.

>>59847094
AMD said 3-4 years, just in time for DDR5

>>59846763

No I don't think so.
This generation of Zen is like Intels Nehalem. I think that AMD will get all the low hanging fruit and release a Zen2 or whatever next year, and the mid tier CPUs from that generation will be 2500ks.

Tell me /g/ 1600 or 1600x?

>>59847094
4 years.

2017
2018
2019
2020

AM4's going to last a while. Good on AMD.

>>59847289
Overclocking? 1600
Not overclocking? 1600X

>>59847302
Speaking of, how good are the stock Ryzen coolers? I'm not sure if this H60 I've had for a couple years will be better or worse than it.

>>59847405
The stock coolers on 1600 and 1700 are very good, rated at 125W, people have been getting 3.8/3.9GHz stable overclocks on the 1700 with them, so for a 6 core doing the same should be nothing unless you really get the shittiest of shit bins that need like 1.35V to reach 3.7GHz
Which is probably rarer than getting Ryzen to 4.3GHz

>>59847405
They are worth 30€ of performances

I'm still on 2500k and I don't have any reasons to upgrade but I'm going to consider ryzen in a few years.

>>59846763
>>59847264

This.

I've got a 3570k @ 4.7 and I've decided to wait for Zen 2. There's nothing I use nor game that I play that stutters or lags on it yet, and when Zen 2 launches it should be able to clock higher and all the platform issues will be already sorted.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZ0SxpGzbw0

File: download1.png (366KB, 1556x722px) Image search: [Google]

366KB, 1556x722px

>>59847687

Get in the official Ryzen thread:
>>59848177
>>59848177
>>59848177
>>59848177

>>59846763
>this (or the 1600) the new i5 2500k
R5 1600 should be more value with OC than 1600X (assuming you don't spend arm+leg on cooler and stick to some sane B350 board), so R5 1600 IMO

>>59849183
what ram speed is in the middle?

>>59847094
Probably until DDR5 hits

There's gonna be X390 for their actual HEDT and Naples light, though.

>>59846763
if it would clock to 5ghz it would be, but sadly it doesn't

>>59852370
You should understand that muh gigahurts are not everything that matters

>>59852475
i know that, but it was muh niggahurtz that made the 2500k better than most locked i7's of the time

>>59852370
If Ryzen could clock to 4.5GHz, Intel would LITERALLY get bankrupt. Ryzen's main weakness is the low clockspeeds, however it has a fucking great multithread capability and very decent IPC, also it's really affordable.

if Zen is so good, why isn't Intel dropping prices?

File: kekmoboshit.png (207KB, 725x677px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 725x677px

>>59853185
>they aren't

>>59846763
No the 1500/1500x is.

>4cores
>8threads
>16mb of cache for only 4 cores

It pushes well over 60 fps at 1080p/1440p and can even drive 4K more or less with a strong enough GPU at 170-190$$ this is the new budget chip to go with an 80$ B350 motherboard.

Get that and then get a RX 580/570 and you are rock solid. Also thanks to AdoredTV we now know that AMD Ryzen combine with Polaris/vega in Crossfire runs flawlessly in DX12 games so you have a solid upgrade path if you buy an 6-8core chip and the SLI motherboard.

>>59846763
To me that what it looks like. I'm still on a 2500k and I'm seriously considering a 1600k

I can't see it having the same longevity for a few reasons.
Intel has a lot of money.
the 4GHz ceiling is pretty low and probably a fab limitation.
14nm is pretty old now so a node shrink next year is not unlikely. By 2019 it's inevitable.
Still it's a good upgrade FOR 2500k guys unless they're interested in thunderbolt or some other intel only shit.

>>59846763
Does it need 3600mhz+ ram?

If no then yes

File: warhammered.png (138KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1920x1080px

>quad core meme

>>59853259
the kikes are scurrying in response to a flood

What's the best price/performance GPU to go with it for the purposes of playing modern games at 1080p?

>>59853947
RX 480
https://youtu.be/ZxsIOV2AjMc?t=45s

>>59853947
RX480 if you want some extra juice, RX470 if you really only need 1080p.

Maybe a 1050ti if you're into Nvidia.

>>59853947
RX 470

File: 1296983255975.jpg (14KB, 253x245px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 253x245px

>>59853915
If only they built an new Ark.
Like AMD did with Zeppelin.

>>59853984
>>59853972
RX470 hits 60, and definitely above if you don't run ultra, but 480 would ensure 60 in games like witcher 3 on ultra, and games for the next couple of years that will require more power
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzyUVQHzDwk

>>59853963
>>59853972
>>59853984
>>59854014
Thank you. I'll consider getting a 1600x/480 combo very soon.

>intel have made incremental improvements for years because no competition
>AMD finally challenges them
>people honestly believe Intel wasn't performing R&D for all that time
>people honestly expect Intel to just keep their recent pace and let Ryzen ejaculate all over them
R5 and R7 builds are going to quickly become a joke and we'll all pretend we never believed in AMD.
It shouldnt be this way, but it is.

>>59854099
>people honestly believe Intel wasn't performing R&D for all that time
>what is 7740k

All that R&D goes to the 10nmeme. Just. Wait.

>>59854098
Make sure to get the 8GB version instead of 4GB.

File: 1700X 7700K 1080p crysis 3.jpg (423KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

423KB, 1920x1080px

>>59854099
Sometimes you need to consider the field before making assumptions. IPC can't magically increase, by a large margin, already thermally limited 14nm chips. Intel isn't going to make quad cores with higher clocks, they're going to optimise hex cores and octa cores, following AMDs footsteps after they've already blazed a trail and increased stock confidence by a fuck tonne, able to reinvest that back into a technologically superior/newer chip that's proven to run better than intel with proper optisation acheived in only a month

>>59853893
even if you like amd you are stupid to call intel shit. i like them both and want one of each build. don't be such an asshat.

>>59854176
Not him, but you can't read for shit.

>>59854193
Use your superior reading comprehension and take a look at his filename.

>>59854204
Shilltel is not the same as shittel.

File: 1491922566701.png (1MB, 1917x1026px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1917x1026px

>>59846763

I missed the launch. Any non-jewish influenced reviews of 1500 and 1600?

NEW THREAD
>>59854410
>>59854410
>>59854410
>>59854410
>>59854554
see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HO20mmQjY40&t=20s

>>59847453
>Ryzen to 4.3GHz
Do you remember the reviewer that got the 1700 to 4.3? Or were you just speaking generally? I can't find who it was anymore

>>59847023
yeah those fx series sure aged like wine LOL

>>59853185

Why would they? They have the market in their grasp, especially the normie one. Better competition doesn't automatically mean lost market share.
Their brand recognition is so strong, that even if Ryzen offered triple the performance for a third of the price, and also gave you blowjobs on a regular basis, there are people that would still buy Intel regardless.

>>59852727
I'd say it's main weakness is it's terrible ram compatability, and it's heavy reliance on ram speeds.

memory controller is on the cpu. does that mean that am4 motherboards could possibly support ddr5?

why would anyone bother with the 1600x when the 1700 is $100 more and has double the performance and can sit on 3.9ghz all day?

>>59855617
>and has double the performance
Cite.
That.
Shit.
Nigger.

>Can sit on 3.9 all day
>(At 1.395v)
When the silicone improves, when the fabs get shit nailed down, maybe we'll see better OC results in Ryzen. But right now, that's a bold call.

>>59854999
They did. This year or last the FX-8350 finally started beating out it's Sandy Bridge competition in current games and the gap closed every year before that as games finally started to take advantage of the higher core count. It's a recurring problem with AMD, the product finally outshines it's launch day competition after it no longer makes sense to buy one new and a great many people have already upgraded.

>>59854130
not actually that critical as 4gb still offers much better price/perf

>>59855663
FX8350 would still be a terrible buy, as it draws twice the power, some even got it up to 300W draw.

Even if you bought it cheaper, after a couple of years use, it's suddenly way more expensive.

>>59846763

no thanks I stay with intel.

>>59855641
>(At 1.395v)
More like 1.295v. These chips however start nomnoming volts like crazy once they are pushed past that 3.9ghz

>>59855706
>some even got it up to 300W draw.
What the fuck were they doing? I had an FX-9590 at 4.7/5.0 GHz and it was only (haha) 220W.

>>59855706
(Also no it doesn't. 95W on the i7 2600K vs. 125W on the FX-8350. Worse but not anywhere near twice the power).

>>59854098
Better be getting high frequency memory or you'll have shit performance.

>>59855745
You don't run them at stock.

Difference is probably around 80w, which ends up quite a lot of money if you use your computer a lot.

>>59855733
I guess the 300W was actually just spikes, and not consistent draw.

Something you'd have to take into account when buying a PSU I guess.

File: macfag_beats.jpg (6KB, 232x250px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 232x250px

>>59846763

They would've had a jewtel killer if they hadn't limited the CCX to the same speed as the memory controller. That's just fucking retarded design.

File: 1491879472401-pol.png (117KB, 372x351px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 372x351px

>>59846763
I crushes the 7700k senpai for $245

>>59855797
would be fine if ram actually worked with ryzen.

>>59847497
Actually that seems to be the most reasonable approach to upgrading.

>>59847497
Which sucks, because I'm tired of my 2500K.

>>59855167
>Their brand recognition is so strong, that even if Ryzen offered triple the performance for a third of the price, and also gave you blowjobs on a regular basis, there are people that would still buy Intel regardless.
Mean while back in reality ryzen performs worse then fucking 4 core intel.
>w-why aren't people buying AMD we are shilling as hard as we can and yet people still don't want to buy it!

File: delid.png (234KB, 882x758px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 882x758px

>>59853887
>>59853893
>>59854304

>>59856409
It doesn't perform worse than 4 core intel.

>>59847094
>How long can we expect AM4 to last?
Why does it matter? Cheap mobos die after two years anyway.

>>59856457
If you buy Asus or MSI, yeah.

>>59856435
>It doesn't perform worse than 4 core intel.
>but it does in gaming
>THAT DOESN'T COUNT REEE BACK TO /v/ IT"s only 20 fps, human eye cant see above 60 fps anyway etc

>>59846763
no it's piece of shit due memory on board aka latency is fucked so your performance suffers a lot, it's even worse than 1500x or 1700, even i3 will beat that trash cpu, i7 7700k is new i5 2500k

>>59856506
what should you buy then? gigabyte boards have no features and shit bios, and i don't know enough about asrock.

>>59856654
Buy Biostar

>>59856592
I wouldn't say it's worse than a 1500x though. The memory latency issues will be fixed in May, but it does not significantly hinder the performance of the 1600x. Also, don't even try to compare an i5 and i7. Were talking about mid-range here.

>>59856592
>Still 4 cores
>new anything

No.

>>59846763
I fear that 1600 is Nehalem of AMD, and that zen+ will be sandy.

>>59856693
except it can't be fixed

>>59856743
for one it's just 219
for two you don't need to replace half pc to get zen+, only cpu

>>59856771
it's already 15ns less than two weeks ago
they promise more cuts in may

>>59856783
It's true, didn't really think about that.

>>59856545

>IT IS WORSE!!! it's only worse in this specific scenario, but IT IS WORSE!!!!! WOOOOOOOOORSE!!!!!!!

>>59846763
Pretty much. It's basically the best mid-range CPU in the market right now and is massively future-proof.

>>59856654
Gigabyte or ASRock.

What fucking features are you looking for?

>>59855780
Jesus how much does electricity cost where you live?

File: 1491291500430.jpg (158KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 1200x800px

>>59856999
check'd and this.
for 1080p gamers (majority of market) this cpu is all you really need on high settings for full fps that your monitor can handle. Ultra is a meme benchmark of which the fidelity could only be properly appreciated on 1440p and 4k at cost of your framerates being slashed hard.

for a 1080p 144hz gaming monitor that i have, this cpu on high preset gaming is absolutely the best performer whilst multitasking.

>>59856999
trips of truth

>>59853901
why dont these charts ever show the i5 7600k overclocked?

>>59853893
4threads in 2017 pretty much. Muh i5. Muh jewtel.

>>59846763

No, the 2500k was a fast CPU.

>>59857377
>100w a day
>5 hours a day
>= 2 kw hours per two days, or 3.5 kw per week
>182.5kw/h per year
>365 kw/h for two years
>Around $50 a for those two years
Then you add that extra cost to the buy price.

If you keep it longer, it'll cost you even more.
If you play to keep it for 4 years, you're up in $100 extra.

>>59858051
Same reason they don't show anything overclocked, it's not an overclocking review.

>>59846763
>So, is this (or the 1600) the new i5 2500k?
The Ryzen 2600 will be.

1 too much fuckery with RAM speed and weird shit
2 New tech process will up the clocks a little bit
And THAT will fucking rock forever more.

>>59857756
Sure pal amd shit can't even hold 100+ fps on most games
While me 7700k 1080 SLI all around 120+ fps 1440p. Ryzen is for poor poleople that can only buy a CPU each 5 years

File: 1491687321542.jpg (236KB, 1216x968px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 1216x968px

>>59859453
>100+ fps
>Holding onto your shitty 1080p TN monitor with awful color and play CS:GO because you cant afford a videogame let alone an IPS 4k Monitor pretending that 140hz is actually important
>call anybody else poor.

You are literally a video game equivalent of an audiophile
>MUH 300 FPS IN 800*600
>No i really wouldnt buy 4k IPS even if I could afford it

File: laugh-at-you.jpg (17KB, 250x172px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 250x172px

>>59859453
>MFW Intel shills have been reduced to pure shitposting without benchmarks because they can't rely on day one R7 benches anymore

>>59853280
There's no 1500 bro.

>>59859453
>Ryzen is for poor poleople that can only buy a CPU each 5 years
So even admist your nonsense you admit that the vast majority of the PC market should buy Ryzen? The vast majority of the market only replaces hardware around every 4-7 years.

>>59859614
>So even admist your nonsense you admit that the vast majority of the PC market should buy Ryzen?

Shills can't even shitpost properly these days.

File: 1311014138647.jpg (14KB, 188x212px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 188x212px

>>59859245
Well, I'd be okay with that. As other anons said earlier, since AMD aren't jewing us like Intel when it comes to sockets, I'd only have to change the CPU by then, not half the computer

File: 1399121198584.gif (3MB, 287x191px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 287x191px

>>59846763
nah, its the new FX6300

>>59855507

How is this a weakness? CPUs finally utilising high RAM speeds

File: 5e01c5a56493897a2804ec9f87218b7a[1].jpg (128KB, 577x719px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 577x719px

T-This kinda kills Ryzen for me...

Can I hope for some kind of optimizations from Dolphin/Cemu?

>>59860478
if these get a marketshare, the dolphin team would be stupid not to

>>59860478
>i3 better than a 6950X

Lol

>>59860439
Because the RAM costs as much as the CPU itself.

>>59860632
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFPxNAQeI8Y
just mess with timings and you can use far cheaper RAM

File: ryzen.jpg (76KB, 500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 500x1000px

>>59846763
what i expected vs what i got

such is life in a third world shithole. prices are dollars and minimuim wage is less than 400 a month.

>>59860632
Or you can just use cheapo dual rank RAM that gives you the same benefit as moving up from 2600>3200

>>59860723
which is very counter intuitive and should be common knowledge specially for R5

>>59860537
>emulation
>i3 better than a 6950X
What the fuck

>>59853259
>Microcenter sales ever mattering.

>>59860723
>>59860957
>advice used to be stick to single rank RAM in order to get better speeds
>now people are saying dual rank
fug

>>59860723
You seem to be confusing dual rank with dual channel, brainlet. There's no performance benefit to dual rank RAM - it just means there are ICs on both sides of the board under the heatspreader. Ryzen struggles with these sticks and they generally can't be run above 2933MHz (often lower).

Single rank kits only have ICs on one side of the PCB, and these work much better with Ryzen. You can run two sticks of this at 3200MHz on any board, including B350s. Higher than that even with BCLK tweaking. Some have gotten 3600MHz working fine, so the CPU IMC is perfectly capable of those speeds. It'll be easier if/when AMD allow higher speeds through multiplier tweaking.

>>59861056
Ryzen is weird like that. It's up to 10% more performance than SR.

>>59861115
>>59861138
WHO DO I BELIEVE

>>59861115
you don't get it

SR 3200 RAM gets same performance as 2600 DR ram

probably due to how ryzen controller is tuned for servers where they use high density low speed RAM

File: aida64-single-read.jpg (220KB, 1760x904px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 1760x904px

>>59861145
You believe me, he's a retard.

>>59861163
No it doesn't. You're either dumb or trolling, but either way you can fuck off.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZS2XHcQdqA

>>59861115
Dual rank has always been faster than Single Rank, however the claim that 2600 DR is the same as 3200 SR is ridiculous.

>>59861196
>Dual rank has always been faster than Single Rank

No, it hasn't. There is no inherent performance difference between single and dual rank sticks. Presumably you're another brainlet confusing ranks with channels.

>>59861214
Dual rank has better latency performance due to interleaving and parallelization in the memory controller, you retard.

>>59861239
Then you'll have no problems posting some benchmarks showing this performance difference then, right? Go ahead. Do it.

>>59861189
Those look identical at the same speeds to me.

>>59861262
Now that you've been exposed for not knowing what you're talking about my job here is done. I'll let you play out your fit of autistic rage.

File: dual vs single-rank-latency.jpg (176KB, 1754x905px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 1754x905px

>>59861268
No shit. Ignore these fucking retards.

>>59861299
Yeah, I thought not, brainlet. I'll just blow you the fuck out one more time with some actual numbers on your way out.

>muh latency
>muh dual rank

Off you fuck, lad.

>>59861262
https://www.golem.de/news/ram-overclocking-getestet-ryzen-profitiert-von-ddr4-3200-und-dual-rank-1704-127262.html

look at chart lower

>>59861262
http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php/763132-What-memory-is-better-for-Skylake-Z170

File: 1468504682773.jpg (155KB, 1259x875px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 1259x875px

>>59861320

>>59861317
http://frankdenneman.nl/2015/02/20/memory-deep-dive/

Educate yourself, retard.

>>59861320
>>59861351
>some random German site and a fucking forum
>neither backs up your point

Nice try.

>>59861368
Still trying, little buddy? Do you actually have any facts to post yet? I'm still the only one to have posted literally any hard numbers for Ryzen, and they back up what I've said entirely. Nobody gives a shit about your random articles from sites that nobody has ever heard of.

Post figures, or fuck off. It's that simple.

>>59861464
>golem.de
>random site

okay.

>>59861464
>thinks his AIDA64 benchmarks with inconsistent results everywhere proves anything
My sides

>falcon still has the i5 listed on logical increments as the recommended part in that price range

what are you DOING.

>>59861115
>>59861196
According to this it is >>>59851777

>>59861008
Dolphin devs don't know how to split across threads effectively without sync issues.

>>59861873
It's only been a day. Give them time.

>>59861873
He updates it every few weeks, with threads here for discussion.
Maybe if you weren't such a newfag, you'd maybe know that m8.

>>59862179
>>59862271
the R7 was updated pretty quickly, but I'm mostly taking the piss with him.

They actually already have a blogpost with an ideal r5 1600 build.

NO EXCUSES THOUGH

>>59848269
>Official

>>59847497
how did you get it that high? mine starts crashing at just 4.0

>>59860478
>>59860530
Emulators are notoriously hard to program to use 4+ cores. You can't really split CPU emulation between 3 cores and GPU emulation between another 3.

>>59860675
jesus, even in eastern europe 1600x costs less than yours 1400.

>>59853893

Wowzers....at half the price (practically).
Welcome back into my life, AMD.

>>59853893
Ahhh... It's considerably cheaper, kicks ass, and still has room to improve. i3s and i5s have been wiped off the face of the Earth by Ryzen.

The i7 7700k is barely scraping by with its single core performance. Its sweet death throes are music to my ears. No one fucks with the G4560 though; its price to performance is PRETTY GODLY still.

no

2500k stayed great because nothing happened for the desktop cpu after it.
I doubt that will be the case for the processors released today, there might be competition now.

>>59863231
Some truth right here

2500K owes a lot of its legacy to the fact the CPU market was stagnant for so long, from both companies

>>59860478
>T-This kinda kills 2+ cores for me..


fixed

>>59860478
Dolphin isn't even that taxing. This emulator benchmark is really just dickwaving. Even my shit-tier 2013 laptop with an A8-4500M and dual graphics can run Wii games. Granted, they don't look any better than they did on the original hardware, but it works.

>>59854999
Only numales resort to sarcasm when they disagree with someone.

Imagine if AMD just decided fuck it, we're gonna sell an actual desktop chip and not mislabeled server parts. They proceed to fix up their voltage/frequency curves and we get a zen at 4.5ghz

Irresponsible amounts of power

>>59863218
>G4560
Raven Ridge is gonna kick it off a cliff.

>>59864039

The clock speed is mostly dependent on the GlobalFoundries 14LPP process, not how AMD designs the chip. And there is no difference that you can design out of a processor that makes it inherently more gaming or server focused. Consumer chips are all less powerful server chips that don't have formal verification and enterprise support of features like SAS and ECC RAM.

>>59847497
I have an fx6300. It's slow as shit for transcoding but it does everything else great with a gtx970. I really want to upgrade but I'm such a tight ass it's hard to justify when everything works fine.

>>59856592
Phht. Get a load of this guy

>>59861464
You're one pathetic mother fucker

>>59859528
>Holding onto your shitty 1080p TN monitor with awful color and play CS:GO because you cant afford a videogame let alone an IPS 4k Monitor pretending that 140hz is actually important
This level of damage control all because you are a goy that bought into the 4k meme.

>>59847094
>>59847171
>>59847210
>>59847298
How'd you all miss that AM4+ will almost certainly be backwards compatible?

As in, you'll probably be able to put a 4th-6th generation Ryzen CPU into an AM4 board and it'll work, but just without DDR5 support since only the AM4+ motherboards support that.

AM3 was supported for 8 years, with an asterisk on it.

>>59860478
>>59862854
Dolphin will never use over 1 core.

But what they can do is compile it targeted to AMD.

>>59866965
they are never going to compile for AMD, they are huge intel fanboys that spent years jacking off to intel opcode

File: let me guess 30 fps is nothing and memes matter more.png (610KB, 640x1080px) Image search: [Google]

610KB, 640x1080px

>>59846763
Just gona leave this here.

>>59867737
You're a really sad shill.