4790k has a mere 17% faster single thread yet 83% slower multi thread.IMO that is a major come back for AMD.
Look at the budget under which AMD is operating, yet they were still able to develop a monster cpu.
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-4790K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-1700X/2384vs3915

 

Yeah, but the problem is, alot of programs are still only single thread optimized, and even alot of multi-threaded apps rely heavily on the first thread for overall performance. this may change in the future. now, i haven't actually tested the ryzen, but like has been said, the ryzen chips suck for gaming, and im talking even multi core performance for gaming. it may have an 83% increase for 4K Sony Vegas rendering or something tho. but still disappointing. i do more gaming these days than actual composing because i am quite simply out of ideas. so that is important to me.

 

One thing to keep in mind. If Ryzen doesn't have video, then rendering won't be anything to measure since the GPU in the video card would be handling that processing. Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Not so up to date on current configurations as I haven't done a build in quite some time.

 

Of course. Its a beast of a processor. But Intel still beats it with a 3 years old processor ( Talking about single thread because most of DAW's use 1 core anyway) But speaking of multi thread, amd is the bomb!

 

That is true.We shall see how it performs in real stress tests, daw benchmarks, etc.

 

A little less optimistic after seeing this video.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Mar 2, 2017

Here we have "realtime" audio test:
http://techreport.com/review/31366/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-ryzen-7-1700x-and-ryzen-7-1700-cpus-reviewed/12

This whole review show, that for pure gaming, intel is still better chip, ryzen is between Broadwell and Haswell single core performance. Now for productivity(transcoding, compression, audio) ryzen kick back and is better option. If i was read right, the limiting factor of ryzen chip is internal memory throughput, which preventing ryzen to do better job in some tasks. Maybe next time.

 

Last edited: Mar 2, 2017

Its not as bad as I thought it was at first. But its not breathtaking either. I will wait for some more daw benchmarks. But I still think in music production world, intel will rule for another year.

 

The difference is probably under a heavy load, where pentium can handle the asio drivers to the max, while amd would start crackling faster.
This was the major diffence for me after switching from phenom to pentium.
Still i think its a monster cpu, great job amd.

 

http://www.pcworld.com/article/3176...-or-why-you-should-never-preorder.html?page=2

 

Well the other relevant information to flesh out the chart above is just how much CPU load was being used when the audio started to break up in playback.

AMD 1700X 3.8 @ GHz

64 = 520 count @ 70% load
128 = 860 count @ 72% load
192 = 1290 count @ 85% load

Intel 6800k 3.8 @ GHz

64 = 540 count @ 85% load
128 = 930 count @ 99% load
192 = 1590 count @ 99% load

Intel 6900k 3.6 @ GHz

64 = 990 count @ 85% load
128 = 1550 count @ 90 % load
192 = exceeds test

Intel 7700k @ 4.5GHz

64 = 560 @ 90% load
128 = 950 @ 98% load
196 = 1270 @ 99% load

So the big problem here appears to be inefficiency at lower buffer rates. The ASIO buffer is throwing data at the CPU in quicker bursts the lower you go with the setting, so with the audio crackling and breaking up it seems that the CPU just isn’t clearing the buffer quickly enough once it gets to around 70% CPU load at those lower 64 & 128 buffer settings

Intel at this buffer setting looks to be hitting 85% or higher, so whilst the AMD chip may have more RAW performance to hand, the responsiveness of the rest of the architecture appears to be letting it down. It’s no big secret looking over the early reviews that whilst AMD has made some amazing gains with the IPC rates this generation they still appear to be lagging slightly behind Intel in this performance metric.

So the results start to outline this as one of the key weaknesses in the Ryzen configuration, with it becoming quite apparent that the are bottle necks elsewhere in the architecture that are coming into play beyond the new CPU’s. At the lower buffer settings the test tends to benefit single core performance, with the Intel chips taking a solid lead. As you slacken off the buffer itself, more cores become the better option as the system is able to spread the load but even then it isn’t until we hit a 192 buffer setting on the ASIO drivers that the performance catches up to the intel 4 Core CPU.

This appears to be one section where the AMD performance still seems to be lacking compared with the Intel family be that due to hardware bottle necks or still not quite having caught up in the overall IPC handling at the chipset level.

What we also see is the performance start to catch up with intel again as the buffer is relaxed, so it’s clear that a certain amount of performance is still there to be had but the system just can’t access it quickly enough when put under heavy complex loads.

 

my next build will be an 8 core intel something over 4.0ghz per core, i will have to wait a few years for that kind of a clock speed for 8 cores. I definately won't be taking a chance on another AMD let-me-down experiment.

 

Ryzen seems to be weaker (clock for clock) on integer performance and stronger on FPU.

How much does FPU performance matter for software synthesizers?

Also, there are claims there are problems with the "simultaneous multithreading" feature in games and disabling it leads to higher performance - perhaps this might be part of the issue in the above test where they were not able to get above 90% CPU usage?

 

I agree with you Von they did the same thing to XP an its the most stable operating system i have man lol im serious too>>> i use XP cause i have gear that only have drivers for it ... But my main system is windows 7 cause everything as of now is compatible with it... They all washing each others nuts an gona push windows 10 on everyone just like they did with XP just give it time \m/ i have windows 10 on my Edit machine but i would chose windows 7 over 10 anyday >>> BUT>>> they gona weed it out in time>>>Fuckers lol

 

For us serious producers OS is just an extension of hardware.Newer doesnt mean better and it certainly doesnt mean more practical.

 

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+7+1800X&id=2966

sucky bench

 

let me write reasons why no deal:

1) AMD decided to go efficiency path, so unless a software can make use of multiple cores, even the 1800X gets beaten by higher-clocked Core i3 (and once you realize Intel Core i3-7320 with 2 cores and 4 threads costs about 1/3 of 1800X and runs at smooth 4.1GHz, even the promoted automatic overclocking doesn't help a bit
2) no Thunderbolt, and this is a no go, because (any) Thunderbolt is Intel exclusive technology, and Intel decides who they provide Thunderbolt to (which btw is also a reason why RME flagship MADIface XT features USB 3.0 and external PCIexpress, not Thunderbolt at all)
3) no OSX hackintosh support, and thanks to no Thunderbolt it also means no chance for Apple Mac Pro going Ryzen
4) no Windows 7 support, and this is a no go again, because it cannot be effectively emulated, and since Windows 10 is piece of fckin unfinished tacky sh!t, it makes no sense to buy a cpu which cannot be handled by any decent OS
5) no serious workstation roadmap - no quad-channel memory support, only 4 ram slots, only the top-end chipset support 2 graphics cards only, usb and sata headers aren't that plenty either

ps: I'm not an Intel fanboy or Windows hater, but seriously if anyone wants a good audio workstation, only way to go is 2011-V3, X99, 6-core 12-thread higher clocked Intel cpu, and OSX as a hackintosh

 

Hi all.

Don't believe the hype. AMD's announcement that Ryzen will run only on Win10, sounds as fake as was that the recent i7 7700k would only support WIn10. Is it not a x86 architecture cpu just like all before it and the intel cpus as well? So what's the fuss about it man. AFAIK 99% of the drivers that work on Win10 work on Win7 and i have built at least 20 pcs the past 15 months ... The only major difference of Win10 is Direct X 12. AMD has been away for so long, they need all the help they can have to get back as major players in the cpu market. And if this means kissing Ms's butt with stupid declarations like that they would do it with np imho.
On another topic, that performance chart posted in the thread start is quite biased in favor of AMD. Respectable third party tests like Linustech etc show that 7700k still kicks X1800's butt by 20-25% when it comes to gaming. Which in turn shows that clock by clock the Intels are still faster. Still, on multi-threaded loads the AMD Ryzen is a kickass cpu and a tremendous value both for what it costs and how much power it consumes vs the Intel 8 core beast. Can't wait to get my hands on one of these x1800 babies. Anyway this is a major rls and its only going to benefit us the end users by throwing some much needed healthy competition to the table.

You should upgrade your Sonar then my friend. Check this out:
https://www.cakewalk.com/Documentation?product=SONAR&language=3&help=NewFeatures.017.html

I don't see why no Thunderbolt on board is a deal breaker for Hackintosh. Apple is in bed with Intel anyway so far and i don't see how a good cpu from AMD could change this. Hackintosh comps with AMD FX cpus were built all these years and the really top ones were still faster than most iMacs and Apple never bothered. From my view, if at least the premium Ryzen mobos have USB-C they will probably have some way of doing Thunderbolt as well, and there will be an adapter from usb-c to thunderbolt too if i am not mistaken. It's still too early to talk for sure anyway, but the problem in cases like this, lies always with the Apple side of the drivers support and not the other way around. Sometimes justified-most times not, there is enough good hardware out there that Apple chooses to ignore or not support if you like. But we ' ll see. Patience my friend
Cheers all

 

Last edited: Mar 4, 2017

there is no optimization for ryzen !yet!
and if they have legacy pci support this could be superb for hobbyist

 

I have an i7 2600K now on win7. i am thinking to give a middle finger to intel and break their monopoly on my part.
the thing is, can i just change my Mobo, RAM and Ryzen 1800x and plug it with my current SSD?
will it work? or i have to do it all from the beginning?