KitGuru KitGuru.net – Tech News | Hardware News | Hardware Reviews | IOS | Mobile | Gaming | Graphics Cards
With the Ryzen launch now imminent, we are starting to see more and more leaks. We have had quite a bit of early information over the last few weeks, from pricing information to retail packaging and new stock coolers. However, today, something a bit more juicy appeared on the web- the first leaked benchmark for the Ryzen 7 1700x.
The Ryzen 7 1700x is set to be the mid-tier offering in AMD's new 8 Core CPUs, featuring a 95W TDP but lower clock speeds compared to the R7 1800x. The benchmarks were run by XFASTEST, showing Cinebench R15 results and CPU Mark results.
Click images to enlarge.
In CPU Mark the Ryzen 7 1700x managed a score of 583, running at 3.5GHz. By comparison an Intel 5960x scores around 561 in this test. In Cinebench R15, the R7 1700x managed to score 1537 on the CPU score and according to Videocardz, their Intel Core i7 6800k sample scored 1259 in this test, meanwhile the Core i7 5960x managed 1318 points.
Judging from these leaks, the R7 1700x is going to put up a good fight against Intel's higher end i7 processors in some benchmarks. With that in mind, it will be interesting to see how much of a jump we get when testing the R7 1800x.
KitGuru Says: It is great to finally start seeing some performance numbers for AMD's upcoming CPUs. From the looks of it, AMD is going to provide some good competition, though we've only seen a limited number of test results so far. What do you guys think of these leaked R7 1700x results?
Synthetic benchmarks mean nothing, i want to know how does ryzen perform in real life scenario like rendering videos in vegas or what is gaming performance like ?
This is starting to feel to good to be true.
I’m waiting to see the direct competition AMD brings to the consumer level Intel CPUs and what the price delta between those is.
well the interesting part is that if the prices are right, AMD will make available enthusiast grade CPUs in consumer level prices.
So based on that we all gonna have a nice time, no matter what brand we prefer.
Cheaper, better, faster.
Ryzen looks amazing, but when you consider the fact that AMD is a much smaller competitor with an annual R&D budget that’s probably about as much as Intel’s quarterly snack bar budget, and the rumors that suggest AMD’s R&D spending from 2012 onwards was very restrained on account of them needing to be extremely careful how they spend their cash, then Ryzen being this competitive on all fronts (performance, efficiency, die size, product pricing) just blows you away.
I feel as though single-threaded performance and IPC will be very good, but not equal to Intel. That is why Ryzen offerings from AMD have way more cores and threads than their Intel rivals, because AMD needed to make up for the lesser IPC. So, the i7 7700K may still be the best overall CPU for gaming. I hope I’m wrong, but I feel as though an outcome such as that would not be unlikely.
Agreed that IPC will be very probably better @ Intel… But it is important putting things into consideration. A higher IPC will provide what? A couple of more FPS?
I have a FX8350 + R9 Fury.
My Bro has a i5 6500 + R9 390
I play better than he does. The takeover is 1USD is marginally better being invested in a GPU rather than a CPU.
So for instance, the i7 7700K costs 400EUR.
You’ll (very likely) be better buying for example a 1600X @ 330EUR and investing those extra 70EUR in a better graphic card, or a better mobo, or more Ram (faster or quantity), or a faster SSD.
Now, obviously, let’s be honest; If you already have your killer Mobo and 1070 or 1080, and all the hard drive you need with very high speed and bla bla. You’ll be better with the 7700K.
But, for me, needing to change my ageing 8350, I’ll (certainly) be getting a Ryzen, and invest the equivalently spent money on a better component (pci SSD for example). And I’m pretty certain I’ll be marginally faster than getting only the i7 7700k
Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj179d:
On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
!mj179d:
➽➽
➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash179HomeMailGetPay$97Hour… ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!mj179d:….,……..
According to recent benchmarks it would seem that Ryzen actually beats Intel even in single core performance.
It doesn’t really matter how a core achieves its performance. Whether it’s from higher IPC or higher clock speeds, as long as performance is competitive, efficiency is competitive, and the product is priced to sell, then it’s a winner. The 1800X and 1700X both have higher clocks to compensate for the presumably lower IPC but they also do so at lower TDP levels. In the end, you have similar or higher single thread and multi thread performance at lower TDP and much lower price. That’s amazing. And the kicker? They’re priced to make Intel fume like crazy.
The only thing that worries me is how AMD seems to have equipped those Intel 8-core (and 6-core?) systems with dual channel memory configurations. While this makes for an apples-to-apples comparison it also puts a huge asterisk on their performance claims. Then again Ryzen chips are selling for a lot less and AM4 boards will be far cheaper than LGA2011 boards as well. So a bit of lost performance (and AMD’s tongue in cheek dishonesty) will be a bit disappointing but I think most folks will still buy because you will pay a lot more for those extra channels I’d you really want them.
I imagine getting a 6-core Ryzen (that’s cheaper than a 7700K) and clocking it at 4.0GHz or higher is very enticing. This is of course assuming Ryzen OCs very well and doesn’t exhibit a sharp rise in power consumption as the clocks ramp up.
I see what you and @disqus_CLqBdLEFDf:disqus are saying, and I now tend to agree with both of you. Those 2 or 3 frames lost in purely IPC will probably be made up for with clock speed (although 7700K can hit 5GHz with decent cooling), and regardless the place where AMD will do fantastically well is in pricing. I think that’s what it comes down to – if I want a processor in the near future, there will be little financial incentive to go with Intel when I can have equivalent performance for a lot less or a lot more performance for the same price as Intel.
We’ll see, really. AMD is Professional Hype and disillusion creator…
This time however it can be different. It’s their last chance and they know it. Screwing the launch would probably mean the death of the Company, and again, they know it.
The second element is that it is well known that Lisa Su is a CPU centered CEO.
We’ll see, we’ll see.
No one really knows right now how comparable those are to Intel chips. People get so excited when 500$ AMD chip beats 1100$ Intel chip in Cinebench in test run by AMD. I heard 6900x was running with dual channel memory even when it supports 4 channel memory so that is not very fair comparison.
I personally care only about gaming bench and for that you should compare 6600k or 7600k to the 1700x (if 1700x comes even near with the price). I’m currently running 6600k @ 4,8Ghz and can push it to 5Ghz if I’m willing to. I’m HOPING AMD will beat my 6600k when OC:d to maxium but I’m afraid that’s not going to happen.
I saw OC comparison between 6700k @ 4,4Ghz vs 6900x @ 4,4Ghz = 6700k at the same clock speed. 6700k killed 6900x in almost every game. 6700k has much better OC capability than 6900x has so the reality would be even more in favor of the 4 core chip. 6600k is almost identical in gaming performance and costs only around 230$. Ofcourse they were comparing multicore performance in this Cinebench test but gamers should but some ice in the pants as Ryzen will most likely NOT beat Intel when it comes to fully overclocked gaming comparison. I’m hoping it does thought because Intel has dominated far too long. I would like to jump to 8 core bandwagon if they made games to utilize it better. Right now full OC:d 4 core beats 6-8core when it comes to gaming.
No the 7700k will be not better overall for gaming.The r7 chips will be the kings for everything if are good overclockers
Soon you will see that 7700k will belong in the past
The 7700K can hit 5GHz with the right cooling. To be matched by Ryzen, the Ryzen processors would need to be clocked in excess of a whole GIGAHERTZ higher than what they come out of the box. I would love to be proven absolutely wrong, but I doubt Ryzen will overclock as well as that. I’m not saying that I will put a 7700K in my next build, but that it will probably still be gaming king.
Hopefully I’m completely wrong, but we’ll see.