AMD Ryzen 7 2700X / X470 Review Out – Better Than Expected?

https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-x470-review-out-beats-i7-8700k-in-7-10-game-tests/

We’re mere days before the official launch of AMD’s upcoming Ryzen 2000 series CPUs on the 19th of April and the performance benchamrks are pouring in. The latest of which comes courtesy of a review from Spain, which includes both professional and gaming benchmarks to quench the thirst of excited enthusiasts looking to snag a Ryzen 7 2700X for $329 in a few days’ time.

►www.facebook.com/wccftech
►www.twitter.com/wccftechdotcom
►www.youtube.com/WccftechTV

Visit us daily at www.wccftech.com for the absolute latest in PC Hardware, Gaming, and Mobile News and Reviews!

Comments

TheSURGEofTech tech says:

Pretty much most of the CPUs we’re close neck and neck on the games a few frames won’t make difference .

Diglo1 says:

Still 1080p is the dominant resolution and GPUs fps output increases the fading of a GPU bottleneck. Intel still having superior single core performance would still have the edge, though the difference would now be much smaller thanks to higher clockspeeds and lower latencies in caches and between CCXs. 1440p or 2k is the likely the next step for mainstream and we are already seeing some visible shift to 2k so taking those results between the current mainstream and higher end 4k would be more ideal.
But then again we have to take into account that majority of the GPUs sold for average gaming PC is between GTX 1050ti and GTX 1070 and at that point even on 1080p Ryzen 1000 series can out put 99% of the fps that any Intel CPU can. So taking that into account having 5-10% less 1080p performance on GTX 1080ti which is stupid setup from the get go isn’t really a big deal. What it comes down to is overall performance per dollar and Ryzen simply rules even with 1000 series. Also Ryzen’s multicore performance really has made Intel’s older higher end platforms pretty much useless. Though Intel’s 8 core CPUs are coming, with 14nm they can’t compete with AMD’s Ryzen if they are not cheating their way out of TDP limits as they are doing with coffeelake.

Bisayan_Tek says:

shouldn’t have joined Wccftech. Wccftech is cancer. Now look at you. You’ve changed. Is it worth it? Selling your soul to the devil?

Cyberwolf74 says:

Ok Now I’m getting excited…can’t wait for later this week and the testing results from the reviewers I actually trust!

justdarylyeung says:

Will x370 motherboards work for these zen 2 processors?

Jingle Jangle says:

Giveaways? Ehehe

Pr Js says:

ballshit we need 720P to see the real gaming performance please don’t say no one play at 720p i know its a test for benchmark

Hakeem Hakim says:

what the heck was that at 1:06?

DeYoRa 84 says:

Any 2K benchmarks??

Oliver Lundström says:

What is that voice at 1:06 ?

sky walker says:

Those who disliked wants to see Intel return to selling 6 core CPUs for $1000.00 , they don’t like paying less . competition scare them,

LastManStanding says:

And Intel release the new 9 series next week destroying AMD once again

TheSURGEofTech tech says:

U can overclock the coffelake to 5.2 did they do those benchmarks

tigerbalm says:

I has a 1440p monitor, so think I’ll try Ryzen this time. Cheaper mobo’s too. I don’t care about 1080 or 4K…

Infernus Titan says:

Who plays at 1080p on such high end systems is plain stupid.

Burai says:

Eeeh, seems fishy, will just wait for the gods of benchmarks on the 19th

greasebob says:

I want the new Ryzens to succeed as much as anyone, but El Chapuzos “review” has so many things suspect I dont even know where to begin. For starters, severely GPU bottlenecked tests, no Cinebench ST score, 2700X platform draws 40W less than 1700X??! Umm, sorry, somethings very wrong with that claim.

Andrew Russell says:

At micro center the 8700k is now $300, 2700X $330, 2700 $300, 1700 $230, 2600 $200, 1600 $150

Tan Tan says:

65* Celsius. Thats like 149* Ferinhight. I wouldnt say thats , GOOD in any way shape or form.

pengwaffe says:

if the max boost on the 2700x is listed at 4.3ghz then I can’t imagine that it wouldn’t be able to overclock higher than that (same with whatever the 2700 boost is respectively)

Awesome Legend says:

02:10 8MB of L3 cache ?!?

Igorek says:

Why did they use DDR4 PC3200 with AMD processors and PC3600 with Intel processors?

Mo Bro says:

You forgot to mention “performance per core” . Makes you wonder if Intel will rise to the occasion yet again and maybe a 9700k 8 core equivalent maybe??? Who will win that battle LOL

Peter Jansen says:

Who is going to game @1080p with a 2700X on the long run and who cares about the difference between 160 and 180 FPS in some Valve game or e-‘sport’? That is a mismatch, if you buy a 2700X and you are a gamer then you will be buying a card on the level of Vega56 or 1070 Ti and you will have a 1440p monitor or upgrade to one. Maybe it will take a year or something like that before you can buy one but that would be the long term plan, wouldn’t itI don’t care much about the 1080p performance but it will certainly have improved given the better latency and some other develoments. It is about more than just clock frequency when it comes to the performance of a CPU!

Pepe says:

It is not gonna beat the intel i7 8700k in gaming for sure but it will force intel to drop its prices or increase its 6 core to 8 core which is gonna happend end of 2018 most likely.

aussiebear22 says:

Think I’ll hold out for the 3rd generation.
(Which is exactly what I did with the Core i series…I’m still using Ivy Bridge based Core i7).

Regardless, AMD is looking good so far. Caught up to Intel, and even giving Chip-zilla a run for its money.

Leviathan says:

Wow tested at 4k…. the great equalizer… so fucking stupid… u cannot test cpu Performance when the gpu is a limiter

pitiful anonymous says:

Now Intel will release the kraken i7 9700k 8 cores 16 threads @ 5.0 ghz

gvi341984 says:

Returning back to Bulldozer days?

mikey cuckson says:

amd is sooo premium

Fugboi says:

When Intel CPU wins by 10-30fps it’s “basically no difference”.
When AMD CPU wins by 0.4-2fps (margin of error) in a heavily GPU bottlenecked benchmark (with really weird results like R5-1400 having best fps), it’s a major victory.

Browarus Pierogus says:

Whoever buys any PC parts now is not very wise

Mikal Moen says:

What gpu is being used for the gaming tests? if it’s anything under a 1080ti, the 4k gaming tests are going to be gpu bottlenecked, and if the gpu is a 1070, the gaming tests are pointless to begin with, any ryzen 8 core cpu is going to be able to feed the 1070 in most games.

magottyk says:

They used a 1070, so it’s not really a cpu test as the GPU will be the bottleneck, they did do 1080p tests too but with a 1070 it’s not really a good indicator.

Nick G says:

does anyones that at 4k the gpu Limits the cpu….and that a gtx 1070 is a bottleneck in those resolutions…

Mythic Order Gaming says:

but can it run minesweeper?

Fred Flintstone says:

ryzen 2 is still going to be behind a highly overclocked haswell chip, which is kinda sad really.

SatiricalMonkey says:

MSI GeForce GTX 1070 Gaming Z
Just why would you use a 1070 to benchmark cpu performance in games?
Also, why use 3600mhz ram on intel and 3200mhz on ryzen 2?
https://elchapuzasinformatico.com/2018/04/review-amd-ryzen-7-2700x-x470/
Someone tell these guys how to actually benchmark.

Hoss Cartwright says:

Gaming tests should be done in 720p

John Hooper says:

AMD on Top position.. Wow.. just wow

Cimus says:

Why the f are u reading the whole story from the website

iamtheonewhoyoulove says:

90% of your reviews are wrong so why bother?

Julien Lauzon says:

farcry 5 ftw !! best game ever

TheSURGEofTech tech says:

Plus I got my 7700k at 220 so I saved quite a bit . And 300 on Rx 580 . I think I’ll be good till 2020 I’ll probably just switch video cards and that’s it .

Larry Gall says:

OK, this is the data from the flawed comparison I seen in other videos. Note how all of the Intel parts are running 3600 GT/s memory, while the Ryzen parts are below 3000 (as low as 2400 GT/s). This is unacceptable for a serious comparison. Also, the CAS is not listed anywhere, for either setup. There are no fewer than four memory speeds in these lists. If the numbers are this good for Ryzen 2, then just imagine how good it will get with normal memory speeds. This Ryzen 2 supports 3600 GT/s out of the box, and the Intels DDR4 fits the Ryzen boards and work just fine, so there’s really no excuse. The TridentZ 3200 CL14 (running 3333 cl14) said “For Intel” on the box, but works just fine with my 1800x in a CH6H (WiFi).

Defective Clone says:

Great news for AMD

Andrew Jatzkowski says:

Wait till someone actually reviews the cpu. So far all I see is the click bait

 Write a comment

*

Do you like our videos?
Do you want to see more like that?

Please click below to support us on Facebook!