How to start with Ryzen?

I made a post talking about choosing the right platform to stay for a long time or a while, i made my decision to stay with Ryzen. I know Intel has better performance with their CPUs (i7 and i5) in gaming but i value more how much i can have my computer to last. I think with Ryzen i can have only a motherboard and upgrade to whatever CPU i need for my usage (i think AMD will still support the socket for more years).

But i need to know, where to start?
I was thinking on going with the Ryzen 1500X, 4c/8t would be enough for my use (i dont do too much multi tasking) and for the motherboard go for a X370 to keep for a while. But i don't mind a little help about what to look first. Anything i should know?

Thanks in advance :slight_smile: and have a great day.

4 Core processors are the past.
I recall a recent comment where someone made me laugh by saying that if Ryzen wasn't so new that these R5's would be binned, as in dumped in the rubbish bin. I know many disagree, but I can see the point as if you look at the fact that R5s are not just less cores, the existing working cores are not uniform in speeds. For that reason I've changed my mind and am buying the R7 after all.

1 Like

I think the 1500x would be a great start, there's not many applications that make use of one than 4 cores. If you're happy with overclocking the 1400 might be worth a look too.

Edit: that article goes into far more detail than I ever will, should help you decide between the ryzen 5s.

As for the motherboard I'd go with B350, X370 is only really useful if you want sli.

1 Like

If you don't mind me asking. What are your plans for use with the chip? There are some upcoming technologies that will be drastically changing how they optimise for computation. IE: Shit may be getting more multithreaded soon.

Something to consider that I haven't seen discussed is that the R5s are different than R7 in that there is an "All Core Boost" that is much lower than the top clock-speed. If any one core is incapable of stability at the top clock it will limit manual overclocking to the lower speed of that one chip, correct?

Most modern games are now capable of using 4-5 CPU cores, so it seems that we are finally gaining some real momentum behind multi-threaded code. Therefore, IMHO, 2, 3 and 4 core CPUs no longer make sense for a general purpose machine. Also, keep in mind, that while your game is using 4 cores, there are +/-200 operating system services running in the background, which also require CPU resources. I simply don't want my game to be put on pause, while the OS checks to see if there are any new updates to my browser, or to update a few gigabytes of telemetry.

Back in the day, it was obvious with single core CPUs when there was contention for system resources. I've been fortunate to be able to use 6+ core CPUs since the Phenom II x6 was released and to quote a phrase, "What happens in the background, stays in the background" with these CPUs, because 6+ cores by and large isolate the user from what is going on in the background.

I am currently using an i7 5930K and it just plows through everything I throw at it. Sure, it doesn't have the peak performance of the mainstream desktop i7, but the X99 CPU can run multiple applications, without any indication, whatsoever that there are other things going on in the background. It is the very definition of a workstation class CPU. Similarly, the Ryzen CPU is also a server/workstation design processor. It may only be capable of 95% of the performance of the latest i7 desktop CPU (at half of the price), but the Ryzen will be able to do that, while simultaneously running several other applications.

IMHO, 6 cores should be the minimum that you should consider, but if you want to get ahead of the curve and have a machine that will be viable for years to come, an 8 core CPU is the way to go. The fact that AMD's new Naples server processors contain 32 cores, merely reinforces for me where the industry is headed. If you still aren't convinced, just have a gander at the ARM CPU world, where there has been an epic proliferation of CPU cores. The industry has clearly boarded the multi-threaded bus and it has already left the station.

If you're a gamer I'd say just go with the 7700k if you only want 4 cores.

If you were going to get 6 or more ryzen makes sense.

As to where teh "industry is heading" i wouldn't get my hopes up you're going to see any substantive amount of games come out worth playing on more than 4 cores in teh life cycle of your CPU.

Games worth playing that do it right now are basically non existent, and even if trends change you'd have to have some good games that do it not just a significant percentage of the games released.

Thanks to all for your replies :smiley:

@BigBrothersBinary I think the most intensive thing i do in my usage is gaming, other things are school related or just web browsing a little bit. I will have a laptop for school too so i think this desktop will be more as a gaming and maybe some very light multi tasking. So i think the 4c/8t i feel would be enough. Gaming would be in 1080p mainly.

I feel that with ryzen i can stay in the platform for a good while and have more upgrade options depending on what i need. The performance on Intel platform is great but the price is a deal breaker for me. I need the best price/performance i can get.

I don't plan on going with SLI so i think with a great B350 motherboard i'm set i supose.

1 Like

Sounds like you know what you're looking for. Good.

Yeah, I think getting into the AM4 platform is a good idea for you if you're looking for longevity. I suppose your not looking for video editing, etc. So I think a high clock speed, is what you're looking for. I'd recommend a Ryzen 5. However, if you ever think you may start wanting to record your games, know that Ryzen does not have any hardware accelerated video encoders. Ex: No quicksync. But if you're a Nvidia guy, shadowplay is still pretty good. If you don't have a Nvidia card, then you would need to CPU record, and this is a multicore hog if you want any quality.

If you are into programming, I would recommend going to a few more cores. There are a lot of testing suites, and development platforms using more and more cores nowadays.

I wouldn't be worried about the number of PCI lanes available in the motherboard. I suspect, a very very small portion of the market ever inserts more than 2 PCI devices. You should concern yourself with getting a motherboard that has great build quality if you want it to last you a while. IE: Reinforced PCI slots, thicker boards, more copper, good name, high-quality capacitors, good MOSFETs, good MOSFET coolers. Especially if you plan on overclocking the chips.

1 Like

Thanks for the insight, yeah i'm more into programming and well maybe some extra cores can come in handy. I would like to learn on how to record audio like a hobby the extra threads can usually help. More in a future can help me even when i start working on something related on my engineering (Comp. Eng.).

Any suggestions on a good combo (CPU/MB/Ram)? I think i have a budget about 400 but i can stretch a little bit. That's what i was thinking on getting a X370, maybe can have a little better quality (not all mb of course) in some of the components. I'm open to suggestions :slight_smile:

Edit: I also plan on getting a 1080p 144hz monitor for competitive games like CS:GO or for online games for example. If i go with intel should i be worried about having the platform (Z270) for a long time? That's what i'm worried, or should i stick with Ryzen?

And I have a follow-up question :slight_smile: :

Is it worth buying DDR4 RAM rated at clockspeeds higher than 3200 MHz for Ryzen CPU's ? (I seem to get the impression that 3200 MHz is the maximum they allow RAM to operate at, is this correct ?)

At the moment no, you're better off putting that money towards a better gpu or cpu

AMD cards have a feature called Relive, which does the exact same thing as Shadowplay. I tried it a few times and it seems to work without any problems.

Must be pretty new then. I remember their software having some built int CPU recording function. But no hardware accelerated encoding on my AMD setup in windows. FX9590 and Radeon 380

It's part of their Crimson driver suite. Are you sure you don't have it? (It should work for you 380)

That tab looks new to me. I will admit I haven't used windows in about a year.

Ok considering this it is new :smiley: I think they released the first crimson driver in Novembre, but I'm not sure. Ealry they used Rapture (??) or sometihng like that, but after a while they stopped shipping their driver with this software...

Recording audio is typically a single core thing. Especially, because of quality > speed for audio. Plus audio encoding hasn't been difficult since the Pentium 3 days. If you can't encode a flac recording or a super high-quality opus/vorbis in realtime... then you're literally using a potato, or a potato powering an Arduino. Fun fact, I made a legit 8 bit DAC from an Arduino.

A good advantage of having a few extra cores for programming is also the virtualization aspect. Even if you just using windows virtual box to virtualize Linux/windows.

Well amd is known for going SEVERAL YEARS without releasing a product. So if you're looking for future upgrades , I wouldn't buy a top end ryzen product as that is most likely going to be their best cpu for the next 3 or 4 years.