Gadgetory

AMD's CEO has been busy for the last couple of weeks personally signing all of the 2,700 ex gold additions by which I mean probably probably signed once scanned it and then well it's it's been laser etched on there but we have the 2700 ex gold edition today we're sort of reviewing it this is the same as the 2700 ex for the most part so if you want to know how the 2700 extra performs in any any regard check that review but we were looking at some basics with this frequency just making sure it's not any different and then most importantly seeing if there's any additional overclocking head room because Intel and it's 80 80 60 K has somewhat trained all of us to hope that anniversary edition special CP is are specially Bend as well so that's what we're looking at with this $330 version of the 2700 ex before that this video is brought to you by MSI's r-tx 2070 gaming z8 gigabyte card the RT x 2070 gaming z uses MSI's dual fan design with large blades which we've previously tested to have them on the best noise normalised thermal results in the class MSI is 2070 gaming Z has a fat heatsink furthering the focus on reduced noise levels by allowing the fans to spend slower RGB LEDs naturally are abundant on the card but can be blacked out to match the carbon and blackout shroud learn more at the link in the description below so really basic stuff here it's a 2700 X it has the same specs as a 2700 X the frequency is the same but we're gonna prove it just really briefly and a frequency comparison and with three benchmarks just to kind of blow through it quickly and other than that there's really no difference the IHS is etched a little differently so it's got the a.m. the 50 logo on it so just AMD it has a Lisa su laser etched signature which isn't isn't quite as exciting as a real signature but at the same time a real signature would get rubbed off as soon as you put rubbing alcohol on this to clean the thrown face though anyway so beyond that you get a cooler that you're probably going to replace and a gold box and as far as Gold Edition looking into this further gold we think is the the material for a 50th anniversary so that that would be kind of clever except the actual 50th anniversary Gold Edition naming on this is more to coincide with the division to Gold Edition so it's a little bit less prestigious in that regard but you do get a few things with this in addition to the laser-etched commemorative signature separately we've noticed some really small differences between our original pre-production sample which has had its identification laser etched off because we got it elsewhere and this one and that's mostly that the text is a little larger and bolder on the new one but that should match all the retail samples so basically they took some existing IP addresses and added a bit to it but beyond that let's talk about the frequency the game performance and then most importantly the overclocking Headroom Andy doesn't claim a frequency difference so there's no reason to expect one but we still want to definitively demonstrate the lack or existence I have a frequency change in stock operation will start with frequency validation to show how all core behaves on the stock 2700 X and the Gold Edition 2700 X in total war Warhammer two's battle test we observed load frequency at about 40 66 megahertz all core on the 2,700 x stock cpu which is shown here with single threads under low load boosting to about 43 40 megahertz max although that was not all core and as xfr always works it's short-lived the 2700 x gold cpu did almost exactly the same thing variants in this chart comes into play marginally but the end result is always within 10 to 20 megahertz all core at all times depending on the load level of the application so in short there's no difference in the frequency last there be any concerns or doubts about the 2700 x gold's stock performance here's a quick result listing for our in-house blender benchmarks with the GN logo ray traced render we observed a time requirement of 28 minutes stock and 28.3 minutes with the gold edition which is well within our error margins here these two are the same unsurprisingly just for additional proof the GN monkeyhead renderer also puts the 2700 X and the 50th anniversary edition within zero one minutes of each other or six seconds so it's the same result on each CPU GTA 5 at 1080p also produced identical results at 90 FPS average for the 2700 X original and gold edition CPUs the very NCC between them are with it's within margin of error once again it's tenths of places in performance for average fps and the one percent and 0.1% lows are also within error margin so no difference between these two unsurprisingly a total war warhammer twos battle benchmark also puts us within margin of error again seeing as they're literally the same processor under the IHS the 2700 X stock runs at 139 FPS average with the Gold Edition at 141 FPS average we are within error tolerance for this particular game the lows are also within margin of error so no change once again overclocking is the real question here when Intel did its 8086 K CPUs we remarked that they really weren't worth buying unless you wanted a semi guaranteed overclocked adder above five to five point one gigahertz with a normal 8700 K chances were that you were probably within 100 megahertz of the 80s 86 KB between 4.9 and 5.1 maybe 5.2 so the cost difference was tough to justify for an extra sort of guaranteed 100 megahertz boost in your overclock potential it's even harder to justify here because Rison is already largely maxed out on frequency out of the box overclocking has a sort of dangerous territory we're settling on too low of an all core OSI will result in worse performance in some applications especially those that are using fewer threads than all of them this is because XFR and boost can hit 4.2 gigahertz and above as we saw earlier depending on the load of the application it won't be out all cores but an all-court OC will cut off the top end of that range if you're not careful we were disappointed in our 2,700 X Gold Edition sample to say the least it was Gold Edition but not a gold sample far from it the hope was that it be really good but it's just not we couldn't maintain 4.2 gigahertz even at one point for one to five volts and going beyond this would require children or a bigger loop that 280 millimeter CLC allowed for our 2,700 9x actually performs better than the 2700 X Gold Edition sample that we bought hitting 4.2 gigahertz at one point four volts with stability in blender even which is one of the harder tests to pass for overclocked stability after the disappointment of the worst overclocking Headroom than a product that's $220 the 2700 9x the Gold Edition by the way being 332 the hush so quite a disappointment we decided to under volt instead so the hope was okay well we thought we might have a Content piece here if we could do like 4.3 or something that would be excellent or even 4.2 at like 1.38 that would be pretty exciting as well but but but not even 4.2 at one point 401 volts it's just it's sad and it's basically I mean it's akin to losing the silicon lottery on any other 2700 X CPU except this one he paid more money for but yeah so after that we did try under vaulting this table will kind of briefly show those results we eventually found the CPU to be stable at about one point two four volts 4.1 gigahertz all core although at this point you may be better off sacrificing all core for stock frequencies instead so you can hit XF are the only real benefit of 4.1 gigahertz all core is if your workload is always all core like blender either way both CPUs settle around the same place the other 2700 X we have was 4.1 gigahertz and about 1.25 volts so yeah we honestly it would be better off we left the frequency to auto and then under bolted it as much as we could there but either way it's it's this one's not different than that one so it's an effort in futility so yeah for what it's worth the r7 2,700 X Gold Edition does come with some small bonuses so clearly this is a commemorative product it's not really being marketed as a performance thing which we will credit AMD with that stance because it's not like Andy went out there and said this is specially Bend they didn't go out there and say this will hit higher frequencies so that was just us kind of projecting our oops onto them that spending more money would result in a better product but actually what it results in is you get the laser etched signature which is just like again it's not a real signature it's not like she actually sat down and signed it and then you get World War Z or the division to Gold Edition Bundle which is what we think this is probably named after in reality it also has a year 1 season pass to the division 2 and that's that's really about it so it's the same thing where we were talking about the 8086 ok it's like there's kind of there's one main reason to buy something like this which is you're a massive AMD fan or well that's probably the main one is you just you have been a supporter of a new products or maybe you've been in the industry for a long time you've been building pcs for longer than we've existed as a company for example and you want something to commemorate your own milestones and with like the 8086 k as an example it was obviously a call back to the 8086 so we could see the argument that people might just want something like that because of personal reasons or just because it's kind of interesting and neat historically even if Intel didn't make hundreds of thousands of them and it wasn't really that limited but the 8086 K at least would clock a bit higher basically across the board and and that was the main draw of it is you spend more money and you're hoping that based on the sampling we saw out there in the wild you're hoping that your sample will also more or less have 100 megahertz Plus over the 8700 K original CPU and that's that's what you're paying the money for but in this case you don't get that you're just I mean it's worse than our 2700 that's sad it's for us I mean it's not like a comment on AMD it's just sad for us as for comments on AMD it comes back to the same thing as always which is that these rise in CPUs are pushed so damn far already that overclocking is just not quite as exciting in terms of a raw frequency higher number better game because it's already there you can't really get them that much higher the Nanak CPUs there's far more room to play because they're not clocked as high out of the box so 2,700 we've always recommended over the ax for the 2600 over the X because you're probably going to be able to hit the same frequencies with minimal effort and you might even be able to go beyond like our 2,700 at 4.2 gigahertz for example on average outperforming at 2,700 X in most all core use in all quarries cases and that's a cheaper processor so it's nothing has changed and these processors are at the limit already and you know if you're buying this your I guess the point of the few benchmarks we showed was to say that don't buy this for performance because that's not what you're getting by it if you're acknowledging to yourself that I'm spending extra money on something that frankly has no functional add unless you really want those games and you weren't gonna you would buy them anyway so if you buy it admitting that to yourself it's fine just like any other product but if you buy it hoping that there's better overclocking Headroom sample size of one side our understanding is that there shouldn't be any on average so don't expect that but maybe someone else will get a better one let us know if you see someone get a higher overclock something that's not actually disappointing otherwise maybe we'll put it under the crew nitrogen or something like that with Stefan Z next time he comes by thanks for watching subscribe for more you go to patreon.com/scishow and excess to get our newest behind-the-scenes video which talks about our 3d printed then testing apparatus and we'll see you all next time