AMD Ryzen 7 1800X AM4 8-Core Processor Review



/ 3 months ago

Next Page »

Introduction


AMD Ryzen 7 1800X AM4 8-Core Processor Review

The day of Ryzen has finally come and while I’m sure many of you have been eagerly awaiting this, we’ve been even more excited to be some of the first people in the world to get our hands-on the new hardware and see what it can really do. There have been many leaks and lots of speculation hitting the market, and we’ve seen some cherry picked benchmarks from AMD and other sources floating around, but now it’s time to put our best foot forward and see what all the fuss is really about!

We kick things off today with the flagship Ryzen chip; the Ryzen 7 1800X, which offers up 8 cores, 16 threads, and an incredible launch price of just $499, which comes in at less than half the price of a similar specification Intel Core i7-6900K. While we want to see AMD set some top scores today, even if it’s a close call compared to the performance of the Intel hardware, at half the price, we would still chalk that up as a huge win, both for AMD and consumers.

All Ryzen CPUs come with an unlocked multiplier, that feature is enabled by the motherboard rather than the chip itself. Of course, we’ll be putting the 1800X we have in one of the latest X370 motherboards, so we’ll be pushing this chip to its limits to see what it can really do. The chip can overclock itself using Extended Frequency Range (XFR) and can push the speeds up to a tasty 4.1GHz assuming that the CPU has thermal headroom, so a powerful cooler is recommended to get the most out of it, but that’s true of overclocking on any CPU or platform.

  • 8 Core with 16 Threads
  • 4.00GHz clock speed
  • 14nm FinFet Process
  • 16MB L3 Cache
  • Dual Channel DDR4 Controller
  • 3 Year Warranty

With the promise of greatly improved multi-threaded performance, AMD look set to bring more cores to the masses, along with the benefits that it can bring to multi-tasking, video editing, gaming, and much more.

Packaging and Accessories

Ryzen is a pretty special occasion for AMD and for us here at eTeknix, so we received this lovely Ryzen box with the sample in, it’s just a shame that consumers won’t get this kickass box!

DSC_3446

DSC_3447

The consumer box is a little more down to earth, with a simple and clean design. The SKU we have doesn’t come with the stock cooler, but we’ll be using our own AIO water coolers anyway.

DSC_3450

DSC_3451

Here’s the star of the show, the Ryzen chip, noticeably smaller than most 8-core chips, certainly a lot smaller than the high-end Intel offerings.

DSC_3465

The build quality looks good and the top panel looks pretty heavy-duty too, which I’m hoping means good heat dissipation. The design itself is familiar to anyone who’s used AMD chips in the past and uses 1331 pins, seems they missed the opportunity to use 1337.

DSC_3470

On the other side, pretty much what you would expect.

DSC_3471


Topics: , , , , , , , , , ,

Next Page »


  • Ken Kirby

    Good job Intel at beating garbage AMD at damn near every test. And good job to the reviewers to act like there’s still a reason to buy AMD

    • cyphacipher

      These numbers didn’t look like this when Linus just did his review…

      • Ejivis

        Yes it did. Ryzen hasnt beaten Intel in gaming for a single review yet.

        • Luca FiltroMan

          I’ve actually seen multiple reviews and numbers were all over the place. In some it crushed Intel, in some it has been crushed, in some others they were trading blows.

          • Ejivis

            Not a single relevant review has AMD ahead of Intel for gaming. Not a single one.

          • David Hall

            Are you actually reading the same reviews I’m reading?

    • IronMetal 🤘 PutoPeludo
  • Maurice Fortin

    Ken Kirby talking smack for nothing, like Intel or Ngreeedia have not had many similar problems. give time for optimizations and code to let Ryzen shine, then open your stupid mouth. if all we had was either Intel or Nv garbage, guess where performance and pricing be, in the toilet PERIOD.

    Many sites are biased towards Intel and Nvidia, so will always show their numbers best bu subvertly adjusting things and not saying what they have done for many reasons, and in the same manner do on purpose to show AMD/Radeon in worst light, cause they are paid to do exactly that. live in a world where there is just 2 main companies, and the world is held back, remember that. At very least, this cause Intel and partners as well as Nvidia and partners to rush to address pricing and performance issues, dont be a tool!

    • Ro-mine lottery248

      if the AMD is gonna issue another better processor like hypothetically a 1900(X) with 12 cores, at less than $750 or 800 (pretty sure at a 75% expected price in case of lower clock), even for the people prone to Intel or Nvidia, won’t leave a relatively low marks on verdict.

      wish AMD can issue a 12 core Ryzen like Intel. lawl.

  • Hossein Almet

    My 6800K clocked at 4.1 MHz for a mere 1.199 V with absolute stability, and every reviewer complained that it was hot when it first came out. Now, the 1800x, clocked 4.1 MHz for 1.488 V, and none will be complaining, I suppose. Of course for haft the price of the 6900K, it’s a no brainer.

    • Maurice Fortin

      AMD and Intel totally different design so cannot and should not expect similar voltage, heat, power used, temperatures given etc.pretty sure you mean Ghz, not Mhz, cause if you really mean only 4.1Mhz that high of a voltage will blow them up :D..and no not all sites are reporting need that crazy amount of voltage, read elsewhere they could get 4.1 at 1.34-.137v rock solid, many sites seeing as they got the review samples often only days before could place said review up i.e very limited time to do so, which ends up being they rush through overclocking and benchmarks, in overclocking tests, if you do NOT take time to tune, and just brute force approach, sure you can get the higher speed, but that much extra voltage really limits performance and clocks you can achieve, cause it means more heat, more heat, less speed, and quicker things will break.

      Funny how you said that yours only needed 1.199v for 4.1″Ghz” when every review I have just looked at showed that exact processor needing in the range of 3.65-1.477 volts AND the actually power consumed in watts and heat given off when clocked past the 4Ghz range starts to skyrocket, so, its a wash as far as “old” vs “new” Intel vs AMD, all the modern intel chips unless clocked high from the factory really really start to suck back power and get so much hotter when clock speeds are pushed up, this is not me saying such, this is 100s if not thousands of reviews to back it up, they are efficient if left at “stock” but, power(watts and volts) go up as the speed goes up, dramatically once a certain amount is reached.

      Could be you got a 99% better then any other 6800k ever released, could be it was like this for awhile with not a true 100% stability, it could be you are lying through your teeth for nothing but trolling.

      • Hossein Almet

        No, It’s a true 100% stability. The initial voltage is a mere 1.194 V, and it survived a 16 minutes CPU-Z stress test. I also used the 1.194 V setting to browse the web and watched YouTube all day without any issue. But, when I tried to export a photo of 611 MB from Adobe Lightroom, Windows crashed, Adobe Lightroom is a very power-hungry application, more so than gaming. With the 1.199 V setting, I ‘played with Lightroom for several days’ without any issue. So, 1.199 V is definitely 100% stable. But, 4 GHz @ 1.168 V is my prefer setting, as it consumes on average 10 w less, and my second favourite profile is of course the 1.199 V setting.

        • BraveLabrador

          you didn’t just win the silicon lottery, you won the silicon jackpot.

  • Illusio13

    Eteknix, why is my comment being deleted? Please can somebody ( a mod ) respond?

  • AbsoluteGenocide666
  • AZ

    So your telling me my $490 7700k is close to a $685 1800x ? I feel good mate

  • Be Social