Jump to content

Wired Asked For It, So Here It Is. Ryzen 1700 Fps In Mwo


105 replies to this topic

#1 Bill Lumbar

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • 2,070 posts

Posted 26 September 2017 - 04:05 PM

I haven't had much time or desire to play this game anymore, but I did just do a clean install of Windows 10 64 bit on my new Samsung Evo 1tb M.2 drive, and with the new Ryzen build running smooth, no over clock on the Ryzen atm, and a mild over clock on the MSI 1070 EK version, +91 on the core, and +90 on the memory clock, here are some Fraps runs. My ram is at 3200mhz, and stable. I will post fraps runs as I play, doing 90 second burst. I have fraps runs from my Old FX 8350 at 5ghz, and my Intel I74790K at 4.8ghz rig I just dropped as my main gaming rig also.

As many of us have tried to figure out over the last few years, Just what does it take to play MWO with better than avg FPS. All my settings are on very high, no Vsync on. Game play with this new Ryzen build is very smooth, feels better than my old rigs, including the Intel system. If you haven't seen my system yet, check out the builds area, specs are posted.


2017-09-26 19:50:06 - MWOClient
Frames: 5933 - Time: 74032ms - Avg: 80.141 - Min: 48 - Max: 115 Termline Dessert, skirmish mode

#2 NARC BAIT

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 439 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 28 September 2017 - 08:56 AM

if you've got afterburner installed, you could use it to make the pretty graphs ... they make it easy to see trends etc .... I'm doing some up at the moment, but re-enabling SMT has thrown a spanner into the works ...

#3 Ed Steele

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood Bound
  • The Blood Bound
  • 3,312 posts
  • LocationSolaris 7

Posted 28 September 2017 - 11:56 AM

I was tempted to get a Ryzen R5 for my new PC, but the cost difference between and R5 and an I5 7600k is negligible. The other issue is that the Ryzen / AM4 combo requires a rediculous amount of bios / OS tweaking just to get close to the same performance as an Intel-based PC. I guess, if you already own a Ryzen PC, or you use your PC primarily for multithreaded applications, then I guess it is worth your time to tweak it to perfection, but I am going for the I5.

#4 Bill Lumbar

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • 2,070 posts

Posted 28 September 2017 - 03:33 PM

View PostNARC BAIT, on 28 September 2017 - 08:56 AM, said:

if you've got afterburner installed, you could use it to make the pretty graphs ... they make it easy to see trends etc .... I'm doing some up at the moment, but re-enabling SMT has thrown a spanner into the works ...

I have after burner installed, no clue how to use and make graphs. I will check out youtube lol.

#5 Bill Lumbar

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • 2,070 posts

Posted 28 September 2017 - 03:37 PM

View PostEd Steele, on 28 September 2017 - 11:56 AM, said:

I was tempted to get a Ryzen R5 for my new PC, but the cost difference between and R5 and an I5 7600k is negligible. The other issue is that the Ryzen / AM4 combo requires a rediculous amount of bios / OS tweaking just to get close to the same performance as an Intel-based PC. I guess, if you already own a Ryzen PC, or you use your PC primarily for multithreaded applications, then I guess it is worth your time to tweak it to perfection, but I am going for the I5.

I haven't had to really tweak to much of anything at this point.... even when I had it OC'd to 4ghz, nothing major needed to be tweaked to hit it and stay stable in bios. I think the results vary depending on your motherboard, the support for it.... I went with a ASRock pro X370, very happy with it. I will start logging more games as I play more, and try to convert them with afterburner.

#6 Ed Steele

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood Bound
  • The Blood Bound
  • 3,312 posts
  • LocationSolaris 7

Posted 28 September 2017 - 04:55 PM

View PostBill Lumbar, on 28 September 2017 - 03:37 PM, said:

I haven't had to really tweak to much of anything at this point.... even when I had it OC'd to 4ghz, nothing major needed to be tweaked to hit it and stay stable in bios. I think the results vary depending on your motherboard, the support for it.... I went with a ASRock pro X370, very happy with it. I will start logging more games as I play more, and try to convert them with afterburner.


Interesting. I have heard that Ryzen CPUs perform much better with 3200 and 3400 RAM though, but you need a higher end motherboard for that. I am a fan of MSI boards though (I have used one for the past 7 years with no issues) and MSI has a couple really good AM4 boards.

Edited by Ed Steele, 28 September 2017 - 04:57 PM.


#7 Bill Lumbar

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • 2,070 posts

Posted 28 September 2017 - 05:43 PM

View PostEd Steele, on 28 September 2017 - 04:55 PM, said:

Interesting. I have heard that Ryzen CPUs perform much better with 3200 and 3400 RAM though, but you need a higher end motherboard for that. I am a fan of MSI boards though (I have used one for the past 7 years with no issues) and MSI has a couple really good AM4 boards.

I have the G.Skill 3200mhz Amd ram, it works great! No issues. The AsRock Professional is a high end board, one of the most expensive... but not. I was considering a MSI Platinum but it was the highest cost board for the X370 line up, and if you read the reviews for it, I am glad I didn't go with it. Very little support, updates on the bios was almost next to nill. The only thing the MSI board had going for it was looks.... and had very little more to offer over the AsRock board. I have already updated my bios with my AsRock board 6 times now I think. AsRock is all over support for theirboards. I wanted to go with a step down, a very small step at that, the Tachie board, but it was sold out when I pulled the trigger on the new build. I don't regret blowing The extra $60 for the professional series board, it was worth it.

Edited by Bill Lumbar, 28 September 2017 - 05:46 PM.


#8 Ed Steele

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood Bound
  • The Blood Bound
  • 3,312 posts
  • LocationSolaris 7

Posted 28 September 2017 - 05:46 PM

Part of me wants to challenge myself to build a good system around the Ryzen 5 1600x, but whatever I build, I will be stuck with for the next 5-7 years or so. Maybe in the near future more games will be build with engines that are optimized for multithreaded operation, so it might be decent.

#9 Bill Lumbar

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • 2,070 posts

Posted 28 September 2017 - 05:51 PM

IMO, if you can swing the extra cash, go with the 1700, and not the X. Not sure on pricing, but I love the 1700. I could of gone 1800X or the 1800 but I don't think it's worth it. You might get really lucky with the chip lotto, and if you set up a custom water loop, you can push the 1700 just as hard as an 1800X even. Yeah, custom water loops cost money, I have around $400 into mine, but..... they can be used for years if you do them right, and can go from build to build. I have 2 of them now, my first one is over 7 years old and still running just fine.

It was a hard bullet to bite, but once I set mine up, I never regretted it. My 1070 EK seahawk stays 29C, never seen it hit over 35C even with gaming. Ryzen is sitting at 24C right now.... loving it.

#10 NARC BAIT

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 439 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 28 September 2017 - 07:49 PM

I've had to tweak a lot, as did many of the 'early adopters', even though I actually bought in a little late hoping to miss that wave, and I've since recommended that people buy RAM that states ryzen compatibility, to avoid the hoops I've jumped through ....

I'm not unhappy about having to learn a lot either ... news from the last few days implies that the current generation AM4 socket will get at least two generational updates, over the next few years .... with a processor first at 12nm, and then at 7nm in a few years ... that will be mental ... but the full benefit will probably not carry over into the lower end boards .... time will tell ...

I specifically picked the 1600X because it had a higher TDP ... and for me, that's been a good choice, because according to monitoring software, with a decent overclock, on 12 cores, the cpu has no problems exceeding its rated TDP of 95w ... I've seen 115w, according to software, and on a different board, with less tweakability, it would probably engage shutdown protection features .... but hey, this CPU only has to last two years ....

I've only got a small basic AIO water block on my cpu, with a push/pull fan configuration, and a bonus fan over the VRM at its exhaust, yes I know what I just said, it blows the not at all hot air over the VRM, I've just done 5 games to make graphs from, the max temp during game was 59.3 c, with an average of 41 c .... temperature isn't really the problem with these chips .... when we get the next gen ryzen on 12nm, it will probably have much better headroom over the current gen, but realistically, everyone with a ryzen *could* get 4.2 ghz stable, though many will not feel comfortable about the increases required to do so .... and realistically, 5 ghz isn't all that far away, but it blows out the efficiency .... anyway, going to do some graph stuff / game analysis ...

#11 Ed Steele

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood Bound
  • The Blood Bound
  • 3,312 posts
  • LocationSolaris 7

Posted 28 September 2017 - 11:24 PM

View PostBill Lumbar, on 28 September 2017 - 05:51 PM, said:

IMO, if you can swing the extra cash, go with the 1700, and not the X. Not sure on pricing, but I love the 1700. I could of gone 1800X or the 1800 but I don't think it's worth it. You might get really lucky with the chip lotto, and if you set up a custom water loop, you can push the 1700 just as hard as an 1800X even. Yeah, custom water loops cost money, I have around $400 into mine, but..... they can be used for years if you do them right, and can go from build to build. I have 2 of them now, my first one is over 7 years old and still running just fine.

It was a hard bullet to bite, but once I set mine up, I never regretted it. My 1070 EK seahawk stays 29C, never seen it hit over 35C even with gaming. Ryzen is sitting at 24C right now.... loving it.


The reason I was looking at the 1600X is because it has a higher single-core clock speed which would be better in games like MWO, where is does not matter how many cores you spread the load out across, it matters more how much raw processing power each core has (which is why Intel still performs better in older games). Also, I do not care about overclocking anymore (since I have to keep my computers functional for many years), so I just want a CPU with the highest per-core clock speeds out of the box. Anyway, I will be building my PC soon, so if I go with the Ryzen, I will be sure to post some performance data here.

Edited by Ed Steele, 28 September 2017 - 11:29 PM.


#12 Ed Steele

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood Bound
  • The Blood Bound
  • 3,312 posts
  • LocationSolaris 7

Posted 28 September 2017 - 11:28 PM

View PostNARC BAIT, on 28 September 2017 - 07:49 PM, said:

I've had to tweak a lot, as did many of the 'early adopters', even though I actually bought in a little late hoping to miss that wave, and I've since recommended that people buy RAM that states ryzen compatibility, to avoid the hoops I've jumped through ....

I'm not unhappy about having to learn a lot either ... news from the last few days implies that the current generation AM4 socket will get at least two generational updates, over the next few years .... with a processor first at 12nm, and then at 7nm in a few years ... that will be mental ... but the full benefit will probably not carry over into the lower end boards .... time will tell ...

I specifically picked the 1600X because it had a higher TDP ... and for me, that's been a good choice, because according to monitoring software, with a decent overclock, on 12 cores, the cpu has no problems exceeding its rated TDP of 95w ... I've seen 115w, according to software, and on a different board, with less tweakability, it would probably engage shutdown protection features .... but hey, this CPU only has to last two years ....

I've only got a small basic AIO water block on my cpu, with a push/pull fan configuration, and a bonus fan over the VRM at its exhaust, yes I know what I just said, it blows the not at all hot air over the VRM, I've just done 5 games to make graphs from, the max temp during game was 59.3 c, with an average of 41 c .... temperature isn't really the problem with these chips .... when we get the next gen ryzen on 12nm, it will probably have much better headroom over the current gen, but realistically, everyone with a ryzen *could* get 4.2 ghz stable, though many will not feel comfortable about the increases required to do so .... and realistically, 5 ghz isn't all that far away, but it blows out the efficiency .... anyway, going to do some graph stuff / game analysis ...



The 1600X only has 6 physical cores, but it uses unused CPU cycles to create virtual cores, much like Intel processors do. The Ryzen CPUs are also more power hungry than the newer Intel CPUs and overclocking them would just make that worse. Of course if you have a monstrous PSU, power consumption really isn't an issue (as long as you don't mind the electric bill).

#13 NARC BAIT

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 439 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 29 September 2017 - 10:35 AM

View PostEd Steele, on 28 September 2017 - 11:28 PM, said:

The 1600X only has 6 physical cores - power consumption really isn't an issue (as long as you don't mind the electric bill).
not quite technically correct ... on my 1600x, I actually have at least 7 cores, normally it uses two groups of three cores per CCX, but I've spent time messing around with four + zero configurations, and at least one of the CCX's has 4 fully functional operational cores .... and I would honestly think there would be some NDA agreement about no one enabling 4+3 until at least the next generation come out ... I haven't found any details on supposed lasering of one core or anything either ... but you would generally assume that in the 1600 bins, at least one INT or FPU pathway failed a some test, but maybe theres still some hope of using the other piece, like maybe the INT is lost, but some smart guy could work out wether the FPU pipeline was still good ... you'll see this as a 'feature' on MSI boards in a few years no doubt ....

and I wouldn't quite bet my left testicle on it, but I'm pretty sure my current build, pulls less power out of the wall than my last FX .... the FX was 125 W before you started overclocking it, not after .... I've seen some vids from them guys who don't have to buy their hardware where some builds were pulling 700+ watts from the wall .... my PSU is probably the oldest piece in my system, a 650w thermaltake from way back when, I think I got it secondhand too, without the modular cables, of course ... but I certainly dissipate less heat than my old FX ... the last run of FPS graphs averaged about 70w during game for the CPU, and up to 120w for the GPU .... I certainly dissipate less heat into the surrounding environment ....

#14 Ed Steele

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood Bound
  • The Blood Bound
  • 3,312 posts
  • LocationSolaris 7

Posted 29 September 2017 - 11:22 AM

View PostNARC BAIT, on 29 September 2017 - 10:35 AM, said:

not quite technically correct ... on my 1600x, I actually have at least 7 cores, normally it uses two groups of three cores per CCX, but I've spent time messing around with four + zero configurations, and at least one of the CCX's has 4 fully functional operational cores .... and I would honestly think there would be some NDA agreement about no one enabling 4+3 until at least the next generation come out ... I haven't found any details on supposed lasering of one core or anything either ... but you would generally assume that in the 1600 bins, at least one INT or FPU pathway failed a some test, but maybe theres still some hope of using the other piece, like maybe the INT is lost, but some smart guy could work out wether the FPU pipeline was still good ... you'll see this as a 'feature' on MSI boards in a few years no doubt ....

and I wouldn't quite bet my left testicle on it, but I'm pretty sure my current build, pulls less power out of the wall than my last FX .... the FX was 125 W before you started overclocking it, not after .... I've seen some vids from them guys who don't have to buy their hardware where some builds were pulling 700+ watts from the wall .... my PSU is probably the oldest piece in my system, a 650w thermaltake from way back when, I think I got it secondhand too, without the modular cables, of course ... but I certainly dissipate less heat than my old FX ... the last run of FPS graphs averaged about 70w during game for the CPU, and up to 120w for the GPU .... I certainly dissipate less heat into the surrounding environment ....


There is no doubt about it, the Ryzen CPUs are far superior to FAX CPUs, I was comparing power consumption vs an "equivalent" Intel CPU (I5 7600k).

#15 Ed Steele

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood Bound
  • The Blood Bound
  • 3,312 posts
  • LocationSolaris 7

Posted 29 September 2017 - 04:04 PM

I guess I will hold out a little longer, Intel's Coffee Lake processors and Z370 Mobo chipset are expected to be out some time next week and the specs for the I5-8600 look pretty sweet.

#16 Bill Lumbar

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • 2,070 posts

Posted 29 September 2017 - 04:48 PM

View PostEd Steele, on 29 September 2017 - 04:04 PM, said:

I guess I will hold out a little longer, Intel's Coffee Lake processors and Z370 Mobo chipset are expected to be out some time next week and the specs for the I5-8600 look pretty sweet.

Don't do it man... its a trick. Posted Image

#17 Ed Steele

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood Bound
  • The Blood Bound
  • 3,312 posts
  • LocationSolaris 7

Posted 29 September 2017 - 05:09 PM

View PostBill Lumbar, on 29 September 2017 - 04:48 PM, said:

Don't do it man... its a trick. Posted Image


It is all about the IPC though.

#18 NARC BAIT

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 439 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 29 September 2017 - 09:41 PM

View PostEd Steele, on 29 September 2017 - 11:22 AM, said:

There is no doubt about it, the Ryzen CPUs are far superior to FX CPUs, I was comparing power consumption vs an "equivalent" Intel CPU (I5 7600k).
yeah, think I might have been watching vids for current I9 builds that were pulling them insane wattages .... but personally, I couldn't imagine buying a 'brand new' 4 core .... while its true that *this* game doesn't use multi core environments to the maximum, I wouldn't buy a new pc, just to play this game ...

after overclocking my 1600x, the single core performance gets to 2% less than the 7600K at reference, but yields 50% more over all cores, that's a pretty big difference assuming you might use any software not designed in 2013 ... and semi unsurprisingly, uses twice the amount of power to achieve that ... that single core performance is going to get a jump going from 14nm to 12nm, and then a *massive* boost when it drops down to 7nm, but that may be limited to the people that brought the current highest chipset board ...

a lot of people are not tweaking their ryzens overly hard .... 'good' settings come easily for most, and then never bother going further .... the same would be true for the majority of intel builds ....

#19 Ed Steele

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood Bound
  • The Blood Bound
  • 3,312 posts
  • LocationSolaris 7

Posted 30 September 2017 - 01:08 AM

View PostNARC BAIT, on 29 September 2017 - 09:41 PM, said:

yeah, think I might have been watching vids for current I9 builds that were pulling them insane wattages .... but personally, I couldn't imagine buying a 'brand new' 4 core .... while its true that *this* game doesn't use multi core environments to the maximum, I wouldn't buy a new pc, just to play this game ...

after overclocking my 1600x, the single core performance gets to 2% less than the 7600K at reference, but yields 50% more over all cores, that's a pretty big difference assuming you might use any software not designed in 2013 ... and semi unsurprisingly, uses twice the amount of power to achieve that ... that single core performance is going to get a jump going from 14nm to 12nm, and then a *massive* boost when it drops down to 7nm, but that may be limited to the people that brought the current highest chipset board ...

a lot of people are not tweaking their ryzens overly hard .... 'good' settings come easily for most, and then never bother going further .... the same would be true for the majority of intel builds ....



My point is that if you already have a Ryzen, you should most definitely do whatever you can to optimize it to it's full potential, but if you have not bought one yet, I would strongly recommend that you save your money and buy an Intel 8th gen Coffee Lake processor and Z370 mobo for the best gaming experience for your money. Yes Intel has the most market share and everyone loves the underdog (AMD), but this is your money and you should buy what actually works best and not something that promises great performance in the future, because Intel will just come up with something better and AMD will always play catch up. The same goes for Nvidia Vs ATi (AMD), Nvidia always ends up with the better video card and best driver support. As far as Mobos go, though, I think Bill is on to something and I am seriously considering an Asrock Mobo for my next PC.

Edited by Ed Steele, 30 September 2017 - 01:11 AM.


#20 Ed Steele

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood Bound
  • The Blood Bound
  • 3,312 posts
  • LocationSolaris 7

Posted 30 September 2017 - 01:18 AM

Here, the theme song for the 90s, when "gaming" PCs were first invented:







1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users