Jump to content


Is AMD cheating on RyZen benchmarks?

RyZen Cheating Benchmarks

  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

Bavor #1 Posted Mar 01 2017 - 19:53

    Major

  • Players
  • 27326 battles
  • 2,181
  • [REL2] REL2
  • Member since:
    04-21-2013

 

http://cbgamesandhardware.blogspot.com/2017/03/is-amd-cheating-in-ryzen-benchmarks.html



Horribad_At_Tanks #2 Posted Mar 01 2017 - 19:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 2264 battles
  • 5,174
  • Member since:
    11-07-2012
Oh ouch. This will be interesting to see what the follow up is from amd. This is also why I rarely ever trust synthetic benchmarks and always wait for real world benchmarks using software people actually use.

Heldar #3 Posted Mar 01 2017 - 20:02

    Major

  • WGLNA Bronze League Player
  • 27366 battles
  • 2,865
  • [REL2] REL2
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012
photoshop is easy, just saying.  And people do get salty about their fanboyism.  time will tell the truth though.

Bavor #4 Posted Mar 02 2017 - 00:17

    Major

  • Players
  • 27326 battles
  • 2,181
  • [REL2] REL2
  • Member since:
    04-21-2013

View PostHeldar, on Mar 01 2017 - 14:02, said:

photoshop is easy, just saying.  And people do get salty about their fanboyism.  time will tell the truth though.

 

Sure anything can be photo-shopped.  However, a a hardware review website and magazine wouldn't throw away their reputation with a photo-shopped image of a UEFI/BIOS page.

 

Original tweet is here:

https://twitter.com/CPCHardware/status/836967901399744513



Heldar #5 Posted Mar 02 2017 - 01:16

    Major

  • WGLNA Bronze League Player
  • 27366 battles
  • 2,865
  • [REL2] REL2
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012

View PostBavor, on Mar 01 2017 - 17:17, said:

 

Sure anything can be photo-shopped.  However, a a hardware review website and magazine wouldn't throw away their reputation with a photo-shopped image of a UEFI/BIOS page.

 

Original tweet is here:

https://twitter.com/CPCHardware/status/836967901399744513

 

Just saying.   Theres a lot of hype behind amd right now, and it could be a fake. It also might not be.

HowitzerBlitzer #6 Posted Mar 02 2017 - 03:04

    Major

  • Players
  • 12908 battles
  • 7,089
  • Member since:
    06-16-2013
Intel has bribed once before to tarnish AMD's reputation, I wonder if they'll do it again.

Lethalhavoc #7 Posted Mar 02 2017 - 03:27

    Major

  • Players
  • 37928 battles
  • 9,264
  • Member since:
    01-18-2013

I see no good reason given the competitive value of Intel's newer chips to buy AMD chips instead.

While AMD continues to make impressive strides in power, I don't feel that most of the software has caught up enough to bring that power to the fingertips of the average user.


 

I think maybe in about another 5 years of serious multicore gaming development that AMD will become a truly attractive alternative to Intel.



120mm_he #8 Posted Mar 02 2017 - 05:49

    Major

  • Players
  • 12843 battles
  • 14,765
  • [PBS] PBS
  • Member since:
    02-17-2011
Amd is great if you need multiple cores for cheap because they are quite competitive with intel on the commercial side with programs that can fully leverage a multicore cpu. For a program that uses multithreading(games use multiple threads which is an entirely different animal) cheaper amd 8 cores easily competes with uber expensive xeons and such for number crunching workstations and video editing etc. But for games intel rules the roost until programmers figure out the syncing issues that crop up when they try to multithread a game.

Bavor #9 Posted Mar 03 2017 - 03:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 27326 battles
  • 2,181
  • [REL2] REL2
  • Member since:
    04-21-2013

After all the benchmark videos and articles I saw today, it seems that an i5 and i7 are still the best for most games.

 

The new AMD RyZen CPUs are very good deals if you are mainly into video encoding and rendering.



Montel #10 Posted Mar 08 2017 - 05:45

    Private

  • Players
  • 1570 battles
  • 2
  • Member since:
    01-07-2012

View Post120mm_he, on Mar 02 2017 - 04:49, said:

Amd is great if you need multiple cores for cheap because they are quite competitive with intel on the commercial side with programs that can fully leverage a multicore cpu. For a program that uses multithreading(games use multiple threads which is an entirely different animal) cheaper amd 8 cores easily competes with uber expensive xeons and such for number crunching workstations and video editing etc. But for games intel rules the roost until programmers figure out the syncing issues that crop up when they try to multithread a game.

 

Thing is that this first batch of Ryzen chips is competing on a fairly even footing with Skylake in instructions per clock cycle.  Its not quite there with Kabylake. However when you can get a 8 core 16 thread processor unlocked for the same price as a 4 core 8 thread I7-6700 I have a hard time arguing that I see much sense in supporting intel, as both proccessors can more than max out a GeForce 1080 let alone any lesser video card.  Yes for gaming the Intel is slightly better in absolute benchmark testing.  However most games are currently optimized for the intel hardware and not for the processor with a new instruction set released less than a week ago as of this writing, and most new games and major titles will likely be updated.   So I would not turn away from a new amd proccessor at this time. (in fact buying mine at the end of this week)   Especially if you multitask during gaming.  Add in known plans to upgrade the task schedualing for both win 8 and Win 10 to better work with the amd processors and it looks like AMD has a seriously competative chip again though not quite the hands down winner of the athlon 64 days.

Horribad_At_Tanks #11 Posted Mar 08 2017 - 06:30

    Major

  • Players
  • 2264 battles
  • 5,174
  • Member since:
    11-07-2012

View PostMontel, on Mar 07 2017 - 23:45, said:

 

Thing is that this first batch of Ryzen chips is competing on a fairly even footing with Skylake in instructions per clock cycle.  Its not quite there with Kabylake. However when you can get a 8 core 16 thread processor unlocked for the same price as a 4 core 8 thread I7-6700 I have a hard time arguing that I see much sense in supporting intel, as both proccessors can more than max out a GeForce 1080 let alone any lesser video card.  Yes for gaming the Intel is slightly better in absolute benchmark testing.  However most games are currently optimized for the intel hardware and not for the processor with a new instruction set released less than a week ago as of this writing, and most new games and major titles will likely be updated.   So I would not turn away from a new amd proccessor at this time. (in fact buying mine at the end of this week)   Especially if you multitask during gaming.  Add in known plans to upgrade the task schedualing for both win 8 and Win 10 to better work with the amd processors and it looks like AMD has a seriously competative chip again though not quite the hands down winner of the athlon 64 days.

 

Amd might be closing the gap on higher end multicores but games still run just dandy off a solid dual core unless you are a leet 360 no scope muscle memory player who might benefit from a better frame time variance in fps games but unless you are on that august level of play it won't matter.

 

The new $55 g4560 and a basic 1050 ti is more than enough to play optimized AAA games at 50~60fps+ ultra 1080p. Can't do that with a $55 amd cpu for sure.

 

 

With this chip you can build a way better than console box for way less than a console that can actually do good 1080p and crush 720p. 

 

$375 and will play games just like in the vids above and is an actual upgradeable computer and not an already out of date console.

 

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/rhMk7h

 

 

 

 



Mezurashi #12 Posted Mar 09 2017 - 00:36

    Moderator

  • Moderator
  • 1816 battles
  • 118
  • [WGA-B] WGA-B
  • Member since:
    03-31-2016

My old rig (it's around 3-4 years old now) is running on an AMD A10 with 16 GB RAM and a Nvidia 780 Ti. I can play some triple A games on high settings with decent FPS but I can finally feel it's age when newer titles just keep upping the minimum requirements these days. I've also used this system to do a lot of video encoding and rendering and it's been pretty decent so far.

 

I'm looking into getting a Ryzen system soon, but I'll probably wait a few months until there's enough real world data about its use. 

 

With a 500-600 USD budget, I'll prolly stick to AMD but if Intel has any offerings around that price range, I'll bite. Any suggestions?



Horribad_At_Tanks #13 Posted Mar 09 2017 - 00:53

    Major

  • Players
  • 2264 battles
  • 5,174
  • Member since:
    11-07-2012

View PostMezurashi, on Mar 08 2017 - 18:36, said:

My old rig (it's around 3-4 years old now) is running on an AMD A10 with 16 GB RAM and a Nvidia 780 Ti. I can play some triple A games on high settings with decent FPS but I can finally feel it's age when newer titles just keep upping the minimum requirements these days. I've also used this system to do a lot of video encoding and rendering and it's been pretty decent so far.

 

I'm looking into getting a Ryzen system soon, but I'll probably wait a few months until there's enough real world data about its use. 

 

With a 500-600 USD budget, I'll prolly stick to AMD but if Intel has any offerings around that price range, I'll bite. Any suggestions?

 

I'll assume that's a ddr3 system so find an overstock i5 4th gen k chip and mobo and transfer everything over. That 780 ti is still plenty powerful with 3gb ddr5 and with a good i5 behind it should be able to play all AAA games 60 fps ultra.

 

$179 overstock i5 4670k which is just as good for gaming as the new kaby lake i5 and will do rendering and encoding at least as well as that a10 if not much better.

 

http://www.ebay.com/...=item58e6a1bc6c

 

$50 full featured msi mobo with oc genie to push that i5 out to the 4.2+ range.

 

http://www.outletpc....l-h81-uatx.html

 

That's a quick and easy upgrade to game like a champ for a while to come and only needing a new gpu once 3gb isn't enough.



Horribad_At_Tanks #14 Posted Mar 09 2017 - 19:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 2264 battles
  • 5,174
  • Member since:
    11-07-2012

Heh the cheapest ryzen 1700 cpu($329) is still only on par with an older 3rd gen i5 3570k for gaming and not much better than the $55 g4560. That $179 i5 4670k will smoke it with a mild oc and against a kaby lake k chip using heavily oc memory it won't even be a contest.

 



Lethalhavoc #15 Posted Mar 10 2017 - 00:26

    Major

  • Players
  • 37928 battles
  • 9,264
  • Member since:
    01-18-2013

For video encoding & rendering, I doubt he'll do better than a Ryzen.

 



Horribad_At_Tanks #16 Posted Mar 10 2017 - 04:06

    Major

  • Players
  • 2264 battles
  • 5,174
  • Member since:
    11-07-2012
For professional level encoding or workstations it's looking like the ryzen is going to give intel a run for their money. For everyday consumer level encoding and such the jack of all trades intel chips are still going to be better due to the unmatched gaming performance and more than adequate performance on everything else. I doubt many youtubers are going to be seeing much benefit switching from an i5 or i7 over to a ryzen chip.

Bavor #17 Posted Mar 11 2017 - 04:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 27326 battles
  • 2,181
  • [REL2] REL2
  • Member since:
    04-21-2013

View PostMezurashi, on Mar 08 2017 - 18:36, said:

My old rig (it's around 3-4 years old now) is running on an AMD A10 with 16 GB RAM and a Nvidia 780 Ti. I can play some triple A games on high settings with decent FPS but I can finally feel it's age when newer titles just keep upping the minimum requirements these days. I've also used this system to do a lot of video encoding and rendering and it's been pretty decent so far.

 

I'm looking into getting a Ryzen system soon, but I'll probably wait a few months until there's enough real world data about its use. 

 

With a 500-600 USD budget, I'll prolly stick to AMD but if Intel has any offerings around that price range, I'll bite. Any suggestions?

 

With the lowest priced Ryzen currently being over $300 it would be hard to build a new PC for $600 with a Ryzen CPU until they release lower priced models.

Lethalhavoc #18 Posted Mar 11 2017 - 05:09

    Major

  • Players
  • 37928 battles
  • 9,264
  • Member since:
    01-18-2013

View PostBavor, on Mar 10 2017 - 23:58, said:

 

With the lowest priced Ryzen currently being over $300 it would be hard to build a new PC for $600 with a Ryzen CPU until they release lower priced models.

 

He wouldn't have to build an entirely new system, just the CPU, MB and ram, all of the rest of his old system should be recycled into the new build.

Bavor #19 Posted Mar 11 2017 - 08:08

    Major

  • Players
  • 27326 battles
  • 2,181
  • [REL2] REL2
  • Member since:
    04-21-2013

View PostLethalhavoc, on Mar 10 2017 - 23:09, said:

 

He wouldn't have to build an entirely new system, just the CPU, MB and ram, all of the rest of his old system should be recycled into the new build.

 

Even at that price, it woudl be close to the $600 mark just for the motherboard, CPU, and 16 GB of memory for the lowest priced Ryzen CPU.

Uryangkhai #20 Posted Mar 11 2017 - 19:09

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 65798 battles
  • 128
  • Member since:
    09-15-2012

View PostMezurashi, on Mar 08 2017 - 23:36, said:

My old rig (it's around 3-4 years old now) is running on an AMD A10 with 16 GB RAM and a Nvidia 780 Ti. I can play some triple A games on high settings with decent FPS but I can finally feel it's age when newer titles just keep upping the minimum requirements these days. I've also used this system to do a lot of video encoding and rendering and it's been pretty decent so far.

 

I'm looking into getting a Ryzen system soon, but I'll probably wait a few months until there's enough real world data about its use. 

 

With a 500-600 USD budget, I'll prolly stick to AMD but if Intel has any offerings around that price range, I'll bite. Any suggestions?

 

Ryzen seems the best match right now.

 

If you're waiting then additional options are forthcoming.  e.g. Ryzen with four or six cores will likely be  faster (i.e. better for gaming).  And APU combo of Ryzen processors and Polaris/Vega graphics.

 

If you have the time this video seems a fairly balanced overview of the processor.

 

 

 

Lastly the original post seems to lazily lifted from an untranslated-photoshop-joke by a French magazine.   Never mind the troll-like thread title.







Also tagged with RyZen, Cheating, Benchmarks

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users