Not sure but I'm pretty happy if it's not too far from Kabylake. 7700K does have higher stock speed, so it's interesting to see how's the single threaded performance of both on same frequency   
I'm aiming 1700 now since it's unlocked    and I have custom watercool so should be no issue maintain 3.6 GHz 

Haiyoh, you don't even run a Ryzen don't speak with so much confidence la.

The Ryzen is a totally new architecture that you can't go based on your knowledge wan la.

I spent the past days playing with it and while I can't give you numbers yet, what I can tell you that out of the box my Ryzen 7 1800X is almost the single core performance of the 7700K.

I will post the benchmark process on my Youtube channel once NDA is lifted.

That slide is what we were presented.

However, wait for my benchmarks for gaming.

Ya it is priced similarly.

R7 1700 priced around RM 1600 whereas 7700k around 1.5k?

But strangely, the review that i gave differs from most popular reviews
Most reviews state that Ryzen gaming is behind 7700k but from the link that i gave it is closer or on par with 7700k.
Something not right here 

Maybe goldfries can confirm why the discrepancy?

For whats worth, if someone chooses to spend more than RM 1.5k on the CPU alone then goes on to play at resolutions below 1440p seems kinda stupid.

Ryzen results seem pretty clear to me. You want 80% performance of a i7 6900K at less than half the price, you go for any of the Ryzen 7 chips. Provided you are clever enough to game with a decent 1440p/4K resolution.

You want to game at 1080p, do the world a favour and get the i7 7600K. RM 1.5k for a i7 7700K that seems only good for gaming is not worth it over the much cheaper and similarly capable in gaming i5.

And for those hoping that the 6 core and 4 core R5 will be better at gaming than the R7, you will be disappointing yourself. The six core is basically a less capable 8-core die, which means 2 cores are disabled but the performance would be roughly similar in single threaded applications and gaming. The four core would probably in the same boat as well, or it might be a different die all-together-I'm not sure.

Too many review/benchmark to read ( wait weekend ), so instead I read this interesting article. Compared a stock Ryzen 1700 DDR4 system against old i5 3570K ( OCed 4.2GHz ) DDR3, and Ryzen lost.
However based on comment/feedback from user, the gap close as display resolution get higher, and if the game are DX12 and Vulkan optimized. AMD also working with developers to optimize their games.

Sad result in The Division


Surge above in DX12 in AotS


http://www.pcworld.com/article/3176100/com...der.html?page=2

Specially, high end i7.
-snip-

I'm gonna jump ship when Ryzen 5 is out, bang for buck cpu  gaming performance I'd say it's due to games Un optimised for Ryzen, future games with dx 12 sure will make Ryzen shine

That's heavily overclocked old processor.
If you look at games with modern standard ( DX12, vulkan ), Ryzen can fight on par Intel. So it really depends on game developers now to optimize.

I remember when Intel introduce Hyper-Threading, also have issue with performance. Many reviewers said disable SMT on Ryzen increase gaming performance significantly.
Now just have to wait game developers to optimize their engine for Ryzen 
After reading few reviews, many mobo have issue with RAM setting, many not even able to set 3000MHz as advertised by mobo. Need wait bios update 

So I guess it's good thing that we dont have much mobo to choose now    hence I'm yet to pull trigger.

I did some 3D testing and eventhou there is not nearly enough data to confirm it, I'd say the SMT regression is infact a Windows 10 related issue.
In 3D testing I did recently on Windows 10, the title which illustrated the biggest SMT regression was Total War: Warhammer.

All of these were recorded at 3.5GHz, 2133MHz MEMCLK with R9 Nano:

Windows 10 - 1080 Ultra DX11:

8C/16T - 49.39fps (Min), 72.36fps (Avg)
8C/8T - 57.16fps (Min), 72.46fps (Avg)

Windows 7 - 1080 Ultra DX11:

8C/16T - 62.33fps (Min), 78.18fps (Avg)
8C/8T - 62.00fps (Min), 73.22fps (Avg)

At the moment this is just pure speculation as there were variables, which could not be isolated.
Windows 10 figures were recorded using PresentMon (OCAT), however with Windows 7 it was necessary to use Fraps.

You know what, that Witcher 3 chart was taken from MSI X370 XPower Titanium page: https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/X370-XPOWER...Feature-section

Seems like it's been copied from their Z270 board with addtional 2133MHz result: https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/Z270-XPOWER...Feature-section

Saw post before in baidu, tester test out that ram latency lower, and ask for info from amd staff, and get replied that amd utilize ram very well, latency should be lower than kabylake, just current benchmark not update yet for ryzen test. If this is true, so ryzen may get benefit as info u share D

The data fabric

The northbridge of Zeppelin is officially called as the data fabric (DF). The DF frequency is always linked to the operating frequency of the memory controller with a ratio of 1:2 (e.g. DDR4-2667 MEMCLK = 1333MHz DFICLK). This means that the memory speed will directly affect the data fabric performance as well. In some cases, it may appear that the performance of Zeppelin scales extremely well with the increased memory speed, however that is necessarily not the case.

In many of these cases the abnormally good scaling is caused by the higher data fabric clock (DFICLK) resulting from the higher memory speed, rather than the increased performance of the memory itself.

The highest officially supported memory speed for consumer (AM4) Zeppelin parts is 2667MHz (two single rank / sided modules in total) or 2400MHz (two dual rank / sided modules in total), however memory ratios for 2933MHz and 3200MHz speeds are available (not officially supported), at least on some motherboards.

You donno where to search is it?

Many shops have stock already. People already bring Ryzen rigs home.

really hope both 1400 and 1500x can oc to at least 4.5ghz.. if yes, hail to new king of gaming procs! 

From my understanding, early batch sure have lower clock limit, once factory/manufacturer are more mature on chips manufacturing, peak can go up slightly higher.

We have confirmation from AMD that there are no silly games going to be played with Ryzen 5. The six-core parts will be a strict 3+3 combination, while the four-core parts will use 2+2. This will be true across all CPUs, ensuring a consistent performance throughout.

Might need to dig more new review or feedback, as that guy mentioned he received huge Windows update. I almost cant believe the benchmark that 3.97GHz Ryzen 7 can win 5GHz i7