• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AMD Ryzen (Summit Ridge) Benchmarks Thread (use new thread)

Page 258 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Can someone try forward dating their system and running 3Dmark and see if 3Dmark reads system date. They may be forward dating to bypass some software licences or to avoid detection from something, it would be funny if 3DMark can't pick that up.
 
IEC said:
Mmm... 12C/24T.

I will content myself with 8C/16T for the time being. Come on RyZen, deliver on the hype train!
Click to expand...

Only if that thing is compatible with x370 on the present day.

Actually, I am seriously hoping that the x370 would still support the 4th gen of Zen.
 
OrangeKhrush said:
Can someone try forward dating their system and running 3Dmark and see if 3Dmark reads system date. They may be forward dating to bypass some software licences or to avoid detection from something, it would be funny if 3DMark can't pick that up.
Click to expand...

Nope, it just uses your system setting date/time.

Or did I achieve time travel?

3dmark%20future_zps5kwfutve.png



Addendum: These are at ~4.3GHz all core turbo for the CPU and stock settings/undervolted for the GPU.
 
OrangeKhrush said:
Can someone try forward dating their system and running 3Dmark and see if 3Dmark reads system date. They may be forward dating to bypass some software licences or to avoid detection from something, it would be funny if 3DMark can't pick that up.
Click to expand...

A good old times were back dating a system could trick out stupid license expiration dates.
 
Chinese review site accident post review early. It has since been taken down.

https://news.xfastest.com/amd/31741/amd-ryzen-7-1700x-benchmark/



Translate via Google Translator



AMD RYZEN 7 1700X performance exposure, INTEL to be careful



AMD Ryzen news everywhere, it seems from the market is not far away, we are looking forward to it with Intel a higher, so players in the procurement of CPU can have a more diverse choice. According to the current news AMD new generation Ryzen product line is quite complete, to meet more different consumers. I now have a new AMD Ryzen CPU, model Ryzen 7 1700X.



Left for the FX CPU, right for the latest AMD Ryzen 7 1700X CPU



AMD-Ryzen-7-1700X-CPU.jpg




Back of the CPU



AMD-Ryzen-7-1700X-back.jpg




Want to know the performance of the players look down !! Measured down with the opponent i7-5960X is a match!

CPU-Z seems to be 8-core 16 implementation, from the definition of Windows 10 computer administrator seems to be the core number 8, logical core 16, the core clock 3.4GHz, Turbo 3.8GHz, it is understood that the temperature is based on the frequency, L3 cache 16MB , Using DDR4 memory.



CPU Mark99 583(i7-5960X 561)



AMD-Ryzen-7-1700X-CPUZ.png




CINBENCH R15 1537(i7-5960X CPU 1318 ；i7-5960X CPU Single 138 )



P.S: unit cb, the greater the better the number of performance



AMD-Ryzen-7-1700X-Cinebench.jpg




3DMARK2013 FIRE STRIKE Physics score 17916 (i7-5960X 3DMARK2013 FIRE STRIKE Physics score 16126)



P.S: The bigger the number, the better the performance



AMD-Ryzen-7-1700X-Fire-Strike-Physics.png
 
Mockingbird, that is already posted.

Perhaps you know why the date is wrong, just after midnight on 2/25/17, for Fire Strike?
 
Looks like Ryzen will replace my 775 Xeon (modified) unless legit review says otherwise or Intel drop prices.. 3DXpoint is kinda leaning me towards Intel with dropped price. Either way, good for us consumers. Got to love competition!
 
Mockingbird said:
I haven't seen translation of the original article posted.
Click to expand...
We don't need translation, we know the specs of 1700X and we have the numbers now. Easy to extrapolate relative performance/clock and positioning Vs intel parts. We had done exactly that on previous pages.

LTC8K6 said:
Mockingbird, that is already posted.

Perhaps you know why the date is wrong, just after midnight on 2/25/17, for Fire Strike?
Click to expand...
Check IEC's post above. He time-traveled too by simply changing the system date and time.
 
Mockingbird said:
I haven't seen translation of the original article posted.
Click to expand...
Well, we all went to Google Translate immediately...so we've already seen that, and it's kind of iffy anyway.

Do you think the NDA is up at midnight on 2/25? Is that the significance of the future date on Fire Strike?
 
inf64 said:
We don't need translation, we know the specs of 1700X and we have the numbers now. Easy to extrapolate relative performance/clock and positioning Vs intel parts. We had done exactly that on previous pages.


Check IEC's post above. He time-traveled too by simply changing the system date and time.
Click to expand...
We know it can be done, but why? And why that date just after midnight?

Why obscure the family info on CPU-Z? When it already says what chip it is?
 
LTC8K6 said:
Prices seem to be low for the leaked performance. It looks like AMD could easily go considerably higher on prices.
Click to expand...
They would get bashed for lower single threaded performance than Intel X/Y, even if having 1/2 or 2/3 better MT. This factor is probably what is keeping the pricing down.
Also if they limited it to HEDT area of X99, the adressable market would be too low for them to make decent money.

In the JPR GPU reports, they state that 99% of Intel consumer CPUs (sold into PCs, notebooks, as opposed into servers) have integrated GPU. Which means that X99 CPUs are only 1% of Intel sales and thus roughly 1% or less of PC market.
 
Jan Olšan said:
They would get bashed for lower single threaded performance than Intel X/Y, even if having 1/2 or 2/3 better MT. This factor is probably what is keeping the pricing down.
Also if they limited it to HEDT area of X99, the adressable market would be too low for them to make decent money.

In the JPR GPU reports, they state that 99% of Intel consumer CPUs (sold into PCs, notebooks, as opposed into servers) have integrated GPU. Which means that X99 CPUs are only 1% of Intel sales and thus roughly 1% or less of PC market.
Click to expand...
ST performance, at least in Cinebench R15, seems to be right with Intel though?
 
LTC8K6 said:
We know it can be done, but why? And why that date just after midnight?

Why obscure the family info on CPU-Z? When it already says what chip it is?
Click to expand...

Obscuring info has at least two possible interpretations:
1) Trying to hide the identity or origin of the chip, to obscure the leak source
2) Faked benchmarks using a different CPU

Time/date possible interpretations:
1) User error
2) Future dating to make it look like benchmarks are "hot off the press" for whenever the review was supposed to go live
3) Trolling
 
inf64 said:
Do you really think this benchmark was fake?
Click to expand...
Where did you get that idea?
Why would I be smug about not buying Broadwell, Skylake, and Kabylake, if I thought the post was fake and Zen was weak?
You should really read the whole thread before jumping in.
 
inf64 said:
Do you really think this benchmark was fake?
Click to expand...

Playing devil's advocate here. This benchmark seems legit, though is not 100% comparable to BDW-E since the XFR is in play here. The screenshot shows 3.9 Ghz, but I highly suspect that wasn't the highest it went during the benchmark. God knows what is the real clock when the benchmark was running.
 
LTC8K6 said:
ST performance, at least in Cinebench R15, seems to be right with Intel though?
Click to expand...
Not on par with the higher-clocked Kaby Lakes, though? (most importantly 7700K and its 4,5 GHz turbo).

In the reviews, people might also rag on Ryzen due to stuff like less PCI Express lines, only few PCIE 2.0 lines from chipset, lower memory bandwidth... I bet people will quote USB and SATA controller performance as downsides even, if it ends up worse than with Intel 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top