Saturday, 4 March 2017



I have been waiting for the independent reviewers to review Ryzen and I watched as many as I could and I become a little confused. Suspicious at times too.

I .. I .. I just do not know what is going on? Lol.

There was one guy I used to like watching videos of and he was unusually negative about Ryzen when there was no need to be. Considering what was realistically expected of the processor.

For instance I never expected Ryzen to beat Intel's fastest IPC processor.

But the reviews from almost everyone had them react as if they was disappointed that they did not and almost like it was another AMD failure?! WHAT?! REALLY?!

Everyone was complaining that the gaming performance was lower than one or two Intel CPU's by a few frames per second?! Really?

Before I go onto anything else concerning the benchmarks and reviews I am going to point out the elephant in the room here when it turned out that while running games and despite having to read the fucking numbers to see that Intel was faster ... there was a visible stuttering going on, i.e. something you can actually fucking see, with the Intel rigs with a number of reviewers where it did not occur at all with the Ryzen rigs!

These stuttering issues were pointed out by a couple, glazed over by several others and even not mentioned at all by some others?! WHAT?!

Is that how up their arses most reviewers have got that the only thing that matters is the numbers? SO much so that visual imperfections you can see are not bothered about? So what was the asynchronous gaming fuss all about then?

Jesus Christ.

I am not bothered by the benchmarks in any way. It is only in gaming the results are a bit off and even then only in some titles. That's it and that's all.

However ... there should be one thing that should be pointed out and that is that this technology is first of all new, as is the chipset along with the motherboards...

There will be inevitable changes to the motherboards and drivers as always and you do not know whether or not games in the past year will get patches, like Bethesda stuff after the teaming up with AMD announcement. Not that it is needed that much.

Then there is the Ram issue and not working that well with 3000 MHz or faster. Something else that will no doubt be improved.

These results are not miles back from Intel like the Bulldozer family, it is a lot closer.

Also the lithography is new too and this will no doubt go through some improvements in time, before we even get to Ryzen Plus, or whatever they will call the next version of Zen.

Plus they keep going on about true gamers and keep on about only needing four cores ... no, just NO!

The only reason only four cores have been programmed for is that up until now anything more than four has been a tiny percentage of the market, due to the price of the 6 core and 8 core Intel processors. This is something that should have come down to mainstream level several years ago now, but odd how you do not hear anyone complaining about that?

So if I buy and build a Ryzen rig now, I wont just yet, I will know that it would run everything butter smooth without stutter and that going forward things will only get better. A true gamer thinks about what games are going to be released over the next few years and in this area it is not a concern as most, if not all, games will be coded with Ryzen in mind. You may well ask how?

Well now 6 and 8 core processors are going to be mainstream and I believe that a hell of a lot of them are going to be sold throughout 2017 and I think that the game developers have known this for awhile as have the motherboard manufacturers. Which is why we are getting the Intel treatment when it comes to motherboards now.

The fact that the three eight core processors are selling like hotcakes you can pretty well be assured that the 6 core Ryzen's will sell just as well if not better. Maybe even the 4c/8t Ryzen's too?

Bearing in mind but by the time the 6 cores are released some, if not all, issues may well have been ironed out on the Ryzen side of things.

This is the most narrow minded things majorly missed by a whole list of game tech reviewers some of which like to sound like they are really, really smart. Yeah ... .sorry but you missed the part that many things in games and software have been held back due to a tiny market share of 6 and 8 core CPU's which AMD with Ryzen is now going to change moving forwards.

Yeah, sorry but your part and parcel of the stagnation process that has gone on for years now but at least with Bulldozer, as much fun of it as you can make, that was a technical error in design. Those things happen and you are not designers and therefore could not have designed something better. You would not be reviewers if you could.

Hardware Canucks is one of only a few that has impressed me with their reviews of late.

Another thing I have noticed is a bunch of videos going up crybabying to crybabys that themselves do not understand what is going on, or what happens often with new tech. Especially when you do not have the resources of Intel. Things take time to sort themselves out and settle down to any form of normality. I imagine this would take 6 months to a whole year.

So some reviewers have done some patronising videos and even the titles of some have been patronising. Yeeaaah that does not look very good. It shows you do not like criticism and do not like being called out as wrong. Yeah they may well be crying at you like babies but you have to ignore them ... it is the Internet and YouTube ... it is the nature of the beast.

There are plenty of people that like to think themselves as wise and intelligent and use big words but then start crying over stuff they are wrong about, or just vanish altogether at times, or even resort to name calling. Yeah that sounds really mature. Tip, if they do not sound mature do not interact or react.

Of course there is also the fact that there will no doubt be faster Ryzens and if I build a rig then I am on the AM4 platform and if and when a faster Ryzen comes out, Ryzen or Ryzen Plus, I can just slot it in.

I was intitially thinking about the Ryzen 7 1800X but now thinking about a Ryzen 7 1700X or 1700 and just waiting to see if something faster comes out and switching that one for the 1700 model. Ryzen 9 anyone? Ryzen 1900X anyone? Ryzen Plus anyone? You see where I am going with this?

Also you have 8 cores in the first Ryzens so why not a model later with 10 cores? Intel has one so I am sure AMD have thought about it.

Every single reark I have seen about Ryzen being a fail by someone commenting I want to reply and tell them what narrow minded idiots they are and they have no fucking clue what they are talking about and should leave things to the grown ups. But I do not.

I know that by the end of 2017 even the stupid and pointless brand haters on the hate AMD side are going to thank their lucky stars Ryzen came out. If they ended up getting the i7-6900K they really wanted for half the price it was 6 months or so previous. The same applies to other models. But the truth is that as I spent years following tech things got more powerful as well as cheaper and at the end of the day things only progresses as this increase in power dropped into the mainstream. That has not really been happening for a number of years. To the point that Intel's latest Kaby Lake was in fact a bitter disappointment but not one of the reviewers was a negative about that as much as they have been about Ryzen.

That latter point just ... well, boggles the mind! "Oh Kaby Lake does not give you much of an improvement over Sky Lake to "Oh God, Ryzen's gaming benchmarks are really disappointing!"

I for one am both pleased and relieved that AMD has come back with Ryzen. In more ways than one and no I am not one of those idiots that will tell you that all you need is four cores, even if you ARE just fucking gaming .. unless you only intend to play old and out of date games only over the next couple of years.

If 6 and 8 core Ryzens sell like effing bucket loads over the next 6 months you can bet your life that games that utilise more than four cores will follow, if they are not in development already. Because once there are millions of them out there the developers will code their games to appeal to these millions of users. Tens of millions of users? Hundreds of millions of users?

As for games using four cores only ... yeah like these things are only computers ... it is not like they are capable of multi-tasking or heaven forbid you might want to be actually doing something while your gaming? Sheesh.

So Ryzen is out ... well, partially and now I wait to see how things change in that area and also waiting for RX Vega, as it seems to be called now, and see how that plays out.

EDIT: Oh and is it not funny how Cinebench benchmarks and other synthetic benchmarks suddenly become null and void over night? Lol. How long have they crowed about all these benchmark suites?

EDIT: I now note that many reviewers are uploading videos explaining their use os lower resolutions with Ryzen and about things coming back to haunt users further down the road ..

But ... is this not the point of all the benchmarking suites? They show what can be achieved with Ryzen so if they sudden do not then why do you use them in your benchmarking if only gaming frame rates matter?

No ... sorry, many have clearly got up to big subscriber numbers by clearly sounding like they know what they are talking about but in actual fact do not.

The evidence of this is already out there as many games developers have come out and stated very clearly how excited they are by Ryzen's appearance and a large part of that will be the rapid take up and increase in core numbers in mainstream gamers. Well at least those that do not have blinkers on or listen to YouTubers that sound like they know what they are talking about but as I stated clearly do not.

Remarkably they are using what happened with bulldozer to defend their opinions? WHAT?!

Oh dear.


If they did not show how little they understand things before they certainly do now.

I was excited at the idea of bulldozer and the design decisions sounded like a good idea but inevitably were not. This did not mean, as I have long since stated on here, that you could not play games on it because you did and I do. Admittedly my system will not be good enough going forward and is not with a few titles already. Except I am not prepared to turn down the graphics setting so waiting for my next system before I play them and/or buy them.

Zen and Bulldozer are two completely different animals altogether and to claim that you are saying what you are over Ryzen because of bulldozer is clearly a fail.

It is obvious that it being far too easy these days to build a PC has had its drawbakcs where tech reviewers are concerned as many now think they can just state things, probably due to their over-inflated numbers, and all is correct.

Also by their own logic you should go and buy one of those dual core Core i3-7350K processors to game and nothing else. In fact another view of their argument is that the only Intel CPU worth buying is the Core i7-7700K as everything else, including every other Intel CPU is crap. Lol.

Jesus, you really cannot make this stuff up.

Another give away with their knowledge base is when they state they turned to everyone else either in conversation and their benchmarks. Really?


So every game developer that has stated they are excited for Ryzen have all got it wrong while all the reviewers having conflabs to fine out why, so obviously do not know, have got it right?

Yeaaah I think not.


One of the best videos regarding what the Ryzen was and was not doing was by Joker Productions, good old Joker, not sure what game he is using, GTA V or Mafia 3 I am not really sure as I have not played either ...

.. but he shows the loads on every core and was hitting 180 frames per second, good God what a faiure, but interestingly was not far from the Intel Core i7-7700K and even more interestingly was the loads on the cores.

Intels was going between 80% and 100% in the game at the start while the Ryzen 7 1700 (non-x) was only hitting around 40% to 50%.

Now THAT is interesting.

Sometime after 3 minutes in he runs through a benchmark, sorry not sure which one, and the loads were half for the AMD Ryzen than they were for the Intel chip..

Later in the video he benchmarks The Witcher 3 and a couple of cores on the Ryzen CPU actually hit 0% a few times!

Not a fanoby, if AMD's RX Vega is not faster than nVidia's 1080 then I will but a 1080Ti ... sorry just had to wash my mouth out with soap as I actually realised I typed I would buy an nVidia 1080Ti ... ooh wait a minute just while I grab that soap again! Lol.

No comments:

Post a Comment