AMD Ryzen™ Processors, AMD Is Back!?

[harhar]

---

oh. another excuse

should we wait for windows 11?

IF ONLY IT WERE PRICED LOWER THAN INTEL, IT'S A WINNER.

but it's not.

Mao2 ragud nas gpu need e configure and drivers, mo dagan banag tarong ang gpu kung inamaw ang drivers diba dili? Dili nana ma abot ug windows 11, ang games/apps rana e configure.

"When Intel released the first Pentium 4 processors with Hyper-Threading for the consumer market, previous Windows operating systems like Windows 2000 and Windows XP pre-SP1 didn’t assign workloads properly because they didn’t understand that HT offered a second logical processor, not a second physical core."

Note that this is first generation architecture of Ryzen.

[butitoy]

Mao2 ragud nas gpu need e configure and drivers, mo dagan banag tarong ang gpu kung inamaw ang drivers diba dili? Dili nana ma abot ug windows 11, ang games/apps rana e configure.

"When Intel released the first Pentium 4 processors with Hyper-Threading for the consumer market, previous Windows operating systems like Windows 2000 and Windows XP pre-SP1 didn’t assign workloads properly because they didn’t understand that HT offered a second logical processor, not a second physical core."

Note that this is first generation architecture of Ryzen.

was it not the same excuse with the first amd quads and octacores?

when they had said it was windows 7 that does not respond so well with the K10 of the Phenom | Phenom II , then with Bulldozer series. was it corrected with the release of windows10?

i believe it is the direct x 12 that gave it some optimization.

history of computing has it. hopefully not this time around, it would the 3rd time.

i am hoping too that Ryzen would really mature..a good competition is indeed healthy.
but it is not acceptable when consumers are feed with lies so that the hype would not die..

[tabs14]

dili akoy nagsuwat ani, nabasahan ra ni

people are complaining about the gaming performance of the CPU. and if you look at the how people play games, it usually is with a gpu bottleneck. And gaming performance at low settings is not a real indication of the power of a CPU. It only shows the performance of higher clock speeds since that is what games mostly rely on. If you really want to test the actual horsepower of a CPU, its better to use CPU intensive task rather than games. Games only use a small number of instruction of the CPU. If you really want to test the CPUs performance, uses stuff like media encoding and render work. That uses a lot more cpu power than games at low settings. The other thing is, people are talking about ryzen bottle necking at low settings and thats why it performs so poorly at those settings. But if you look at benchmarks with the cpu utilization overlays (which a lot of reviewers do not include in their videos), you will see that ryzen usually is not even near 80% utilized, where the intel cpus are all basically maxed out or in the high 90%. And thats where my point comes in about optimization. Most games are heavily optimized for intel cpus and not for ryzen's new architecture. If you look at dx12 or vulkan benchmarks (which do better with unoptimized drivers since they are low level APIs), you can see that ryzen performs way better compared to dx11. My whole point about my previous post was just to state my opinion about the low settings/res benchmarks. I dont think its a good indication of gaming performance, firstly since no one that can afford a cpu like this will play at those settings, and secondly all the reviewers dont take into consideration that the games arent optimized for it and write it off as a cpu bottle neck while the cpu is never fully utilized.

[tabs14]

oh. another excuse

should we wait for windows 11?

IF ONLY IT WERE PRICED LOWER THAN INTEL, IT'S A WINNER.

but it's not.

https://www.futuremark.com/hardware/cpu

[harhar]

was it not the same excuse with the first amd quads and octacores?

when they had said it was windows 7 that does not respond so well with the K10 of the Phenom | Phenom II , then with Bulldozer series. was it corrected with the release of windows10?

i believe it is the direct x 12 that gave it some optimization.

history of computing has it. hopefully not this time around, it would the 3rd time.

i am hoping too that Ryzen would really mature..a good competition is indeed healthy.
but it is not acceptable when consumers are feed with lies so that the hype would not die..

Na optimized man ang Dota 2 nga DirectX 9.

[unkn0wnym0us]

this is the same boring story about amd few years ago. yes, their cpu's are specd higher compared to the commercial intels. thing is with them, they lack support.

[harhar]

this is the same boring story about amd few years ago. yes, their cpu's are specd higher compared to the commercial intels. thing is with them, they lack support.

Hmmn murag outdated ka bro...

[butitoy]

dili akoy nagsuwat ani, nabasahan ra ni

people are complaining about the gaming performance of the CPU. and if you look at the how people play games, it usually is with a gpu bottleneck. And gaming performance at low settings is not a real indication of the power of a CPU. It only shows the performance of higher clock speeds since that is what games mostly rely on. If you really want to test the actual horsepower of a CPU, its better to use CPU intensive task rather than games. Games only use a small number of instruction of the CPU. If you really want to test the CPUs performance, uses stuff like media encoding and render work. That uses a lot more cpu power than games at low settings. The other thing is, people are talking about ryzen bottle necking at low settings and thats why it performs so poorly at those settings. But if you look at benchmarks with the cpu utilization overlays (which a lot of reviewers do not include in their videos), you will see that ryzen usually is not even near 80% utilized, where the intel cpus are all basically maxed out or in the high 90%. And thats where my point comes in about optimization. Most games are heavily optimized for intel cpus and not for ryzen's new architecture. If you look at dx12 or vulkan benchmarks (which do better with unoptimized drivers since they are low level APIs), you can see that ryzen performs way better compared to dx11. My whole point about my previous post was just to state my opinion about the low settings/res benchmarks. I dont think its a good indication of gaming performance, firstly since no one that can afford a cpu like this will play at those settings, and secondly all the reviewers dont take into consideration that the games arent optimized for it and write it off as a cpu bottle neck while the cpu is never fully utilized.

recently we assembled < locally available parts > a new Creative All around Editing Rig in the office for Adobe Lightroom , Bridge, Photoshop, illustrator , InDesign, Premiere Pro, After effects | Sony Vegas.

just in time for the available Ryzen which are more expensive than intel. so saddening after reading all the hypes and the actual benchmarks, IT IS NOT ANY FASTER than intel @1080p jobs.

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/ar...rformance-907/
-If we normalize all our results to the AMD Ryzen 7 1700X, you get a great idea of how these new AMD CPUs compare to Intel's offerings. To make it short: Ryzen isn't all that great for Photoshop.

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/ar...rformance-909/
- Overall, our take on Ryzen for Premiere Pro is that while it presents some interesting opportunities and can be competitive with Intel for many tasks, it doesn't quite earn a place on our Premiere Pro recommended systems. This isn't to say that a Ryzen workstation might not be the right fit for you, but there are a couple of reasons that (right now) it just barely misses the mark for us:

If you are on a tight budget, the Intel Core i7 7700K is likely a better choice for most users. While the 7700K is a little slower than Ryzen for some tasks in Premiere Pro, but it is much faster for other tasks (like warp stabilize) and in applications like Photoshop.

REALITY BITES.

The i7 7700K is a bit cheaper as well which frees up some of your budget for more RAM, larger storage, etc.

EXACTLY!

[tabs14]

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

[harhar]

recently we assembled < locally available parts > a new Creative All around Editing Rig in the office for Adobe Lightroom , Bridge, Photoshop, illustrator , InDesign, Premiere Pro, After effects | Sony Vegas.

just in time for the available Ryzen which are more expensive than intel. so saddening after reading all the hypes and the actual benchmarks, IT IS NOT ANY FASTER than intel @1080p jobs.

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/ar...rformance-907/
-If we normalize all our results to the AMD Ryzen 7 1700X, you get a great idea of how these new AMD CPUs compare to Intel's offerings. To make it short: Ryzen isn't all that great for Photoshop.

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/ar...rformance-909/
- Overall, our take on Ryzen for Premiere Pro is that while it presents some interesting opportunities and can be competitive with Intel for many tasks, it doesn't quite earn a place on our Premiere Pro recommended systems. This isn't to say that a Ryzen workstation might not be the right fit for you, but there are a couple of reasons that (right now) it just barely misses the mark for us:

If you are on a tight budget, the Intel Core i7 7700K is likely a better choice for most users. While the 7700K is a little slower than Ryzen for some tasks in Premiere Pro, but it is much faster for other tasks (like warp stabilize) and in applications like Photoshop.

REALITY BITES.

The i7 7700K is a bit cheaper as well which frees up some of your budget for more RAM, larger storage, etc.

EXACTLY!

1 month ago naman ni nga article, bag-o pa gi anak ang ryzen...

Kini ang updated sa Photoshop thing...