Just to say it if you are not a tech person: You may want to skip this post .
Do you know if the Ryzen chip has all calls on each core like an i5 and i7 or is it still the same as the fx series where some functions are bridged between 2 cores?
My 8350 unlocked 4.0 4.2 turbos is blazingly fast on many things such as ordinary graphics apps and games but raw number crunching it seems to fall short as compared to a xeon of the same speed with half the cores.
From what I remember when I still had AM on my machine the render benchmarks where nearly identica between my 8350 and an 8 year old dual chip xeon 4 cores (8 cores total) running at 2.66 ea.
I think on a modern 4-6 core xeon system AM would really shine. Curious how the ryzen could compare.
FYI most Xeon motherboards do have dual sockets. Keeping that in mind you could consider dual 4 cores on them with the higher clock speed which woud actually be cheaper than a single 8 or 12 core chip and give you the clock speed as well as the extra cores for multi applications. The massive multi core chips, 12core +, will have lower clock speed due to heat.
As far as desktops if you were to get an i7 extreme (8 core) the extra cost of those machines make Xeons a better option for nearly the same money with the added bedefit of ecc memory which gives you incredible stability. Any thing less than am i7 extreme then AMD is a solid choice.
Bang for the buck I can't complain having my desktop in a thermaltake box casae (motherboard on its back) AMD 4.0 8 core, 32gb of memory adn rx 480 8gb all for under $900.
AMD is no longer using FX-based architecture (bulldozer) but a totally new one (Ryzen) closer to the one of Intel (but a little different because it is the much newer architecture). IPC of AMD Ryzen is much higher compared to the AMD FX architecture (more or less at the same as Intel to a little better, so it has to be said, that for instance the i7 7700k will win these single-core-tests in the end because it has a higher clockspeed... but we are talking about low % values here). Ryzen is supporting hyperthreading (SMB) and it is kicking anything Intel has at the moment when it comes to productivity/multi-threading for the same money by a factor of about 2. Actually the 1800x (8 core machine) is competing with the Intel Core i7-6900K (8 core machine) from Intel (about $1000) but only costs half the money (about $500). In some situations it even is faster then the 10 core intel which is much more expensive than even the 6900k.
The only CPU from Intel which is currently better suited for gaming (at a reasonable price difference) is the i7 7700k, but for productivity or multi-threaded applications it is only about half as fast, simply because we are talking about a 4 core vs 8 core systems (both with hyperthreading, so 8 threads vs 16 threads). For gaming that does not matter much (or is even a little less good to have more cores) and there you still can/should buy a 7700k but if you are after multithreaded applications or you are using your computer for gaming and productivity tasks, it really is a no brainer at the moment.
And while the 1800x is a little bit faster, it is basicly the same chip as the 1700 but the 1700 will save you some additional money.
So overclocking the 1700 will bring you close to the performance of the 1800x. Of cause the 1800x is a little easier to run at the same clockspeeds, but that is really up to you if 3% performance is worth $100-200 there...
For A:M we are really only talking about rendering... anything else in A:M will run with very equal speed on both systems, simple because both CPUs are very fast once. The i7 7700k might be faster or at a close to even performance if you are only using one instance of A:M to render, but if you are using Netrender or multiple instance, the Ryzen 1700, 1800 and 1800x will allow you to run 16 instances simultationously compared to 8 instances for the i7 and than AMD is the much better offer. Even the Ryzen 5 1600 will beat it here very noticeable but that chip is again less expensive.
Ryzen is currently quite a big deal all over the place. If you are only gaming with your computer (and it depends on the games...), than I recommend a i7 7700k which is faster on CPU-limited games or resolutions.
In any other situation the Ryzen is the better choice especially if you combine it with high frequence RAM.
If you are interested in benchmarks and technical stuff like that, you may want to have a look at this:
Intel is reacting to that with price drops and in a few weeks to month with the i9 will be out, but is to compare with AMD Epyc and AMD Threadripper-LineUps but that is not here yet and will be very expensive...
I'd say both (AMD Epyc/Threadripper or i9) are over the top for any person which is not using the computer in a work environment and really needs MANY cores in a full blown workstation.