New Benchmarks Leaked: AMD RYZEN ~= Stock i7-7700K

>>58078397
But zen has 100 points more than the 7700k even at 5ghz

>AMD: Another Massive Disappointment

the benchmarks look bretty good

am i missing something here

>>58078481
It can beat a 4c/8t cpu with TWICE the resources....

I still need moar evidence on this tho

>>58078440
>AMD RYZEN (8/16)
>17693

>Core i7-7700K (5GHz)
>19891

>Core i7-7700K (Stock)
>17049

>>58078397
>worse than haswell

POO
O
O

>>58078499
see
>>58078497

AYYMD IS FINISHED & BANKRUPT

File: shoot.png (16KB, 764x210px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 764x210px

>>58078440
>even @ 5 GHz
nigga what?

>>58078397
What the fuck, amd?

Why don't they link to the chinese forum?

>>58078397
>can't beat 4c8t
wow another faildozzer

File: 1481793841715.jpg (7KB, 250x228px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 250x228px

>currytech

>>58078397
Seriously what the fuck

Damn this is better than I expected.

we've known since the AotS and geekbench leak that Zen is only roughly on par with sandy bridge clock for clock.

>>58078397
>wccftech
:^)

>>58078750
You were expecting an 8 core that's worse than a quad core?

7700K BTFO

>>58078809
zen has 10% more IPC than bulldozer

i am happy

>>58078775
Those weren't anything close to official, the Blender benchs, which are actually official and scrutinized by the media, put Zen at a higher IPC than Skylake
And at higher clocks too

>>58078809

it's an amd meme. they love to hype a product and then damage control with 'it was always meant to perform poorly' once its shown to be shit.

>>58078397
I don't know, the thing is competitive with a 6900K and will probably cost half as much. Seems like a winner.

>>58078481
Intel cucks don't understand $/performance. If AMD delivers Zen at a fraction of the price of Intel this is a solid win.

>>58079038
This. I don't know what some people were expecting. I'm just happy intel will have some competition now.

>>58079072

price/perf doesn't mean shit if you only match intel chips from 6 years ago, you can literally buy a 2600k or 3960x for $100-150 today whereas any zen chip will be $300 minimum.

File: 123412122112.jpg (21KB, 105x161px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 105x161px

>>58078397
>core i7 7700k> core i7 7700k(5ghz)

You w0t

File: 1481918605312.png (3KB, 597x493px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 597x493px

>>58079105
Intel can barely match a chip from 6 years ago ',:^)

I just want a decent performing chip that isn't cucked out of pci-e lanes.

>>58078397
>The AMD chip is clocked at 3.4GHz. No overclock.
>This is also the slowest chip in the set.

Actually looks pretty good assuming the chip is going to be priced at $200 or less.

>>58079153
That's a nice source you got there.

Wish it was true.

File: amd-rx-480-polaris-3.jpg (187KB, 1920x1135px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1920x1135px

>fury amd cherry benchmarks
>polaris amd cherry benchmarks
>now zen

I'm not even surprised but lets wait the non official test

>>58079105
>any zen chip will be $300 minimum
No, you're thinking of Intel. The 6700k is under $300 USD.

>>58079153
>priced at 200$ or less
top fucking kek, no

File: 1454958664170.jpg (14KB, 264x264px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 264x264px

>>58079153
8 cores

>>58079168
Did you read the article? It actually tells you this.

File: 1880228.jpg (49KB, 300x450px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 300x450px

Not good enough for me to feel any buyer's remorse over my 6700K.

>>58079153
>Actually looks pretty good assuming the chip is going to be priced at $200 or less.

sr7 will be $500.

dead on arrival as usual

rehashed fx meme real

>>58079177
If they don't beat Intel in price they really are fucked.

>>58079201
I think they will price them competitively, but definately not 8 cores with SMT for less than 200 bucks

>>58078532

>8/16 loses to kaby 4/8

pathetic desu

That cinebench score is pretty good though. Beating a 5GHz 7700K.

>>58079185
Are you dreaming or are we not reading the same article? Only mention of pricing in that article is to expect more details @ CES 2017.

>>58079212
I thought they were only releasing 8/16 chips. There's no point in releasing lower core counts if they can't compete with Intel.

Normally you run Fritz w/o HT.

>>58079239
>pretty good assuming the chip is going to be priced at $200 or less
Nowhere in that statement is the need for a source. If they don't price it at $200 or less they lose to Intel.

>>58079241
>I thought
Lolno.

>>58079258
Guess Zen is DOA then.

>>58078532
This has to be fake. I think the chinks just got confused re: 7700k vs 6900k and which one the Zen chip was supposed to be just slightly better than.

There's no way AMD could demo Ryzen completing those Blender/Handbrake tasks at about the 6900k level otherwise.

File: TKRv5iY.jpg (208KB, 800x1000px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 800x1000px

>Core i7-7700K > Core i7-6900K > Core i7-6950X
You stupid faggots.
The real winner here would be that Zen is better than both of Intel's higher core options. You can bet your ass they will release 4 and 6 core counterparts clocked to oblivion, competing with Intel's mainsteam processors. They already have an advantage in TDP, that's only an indication that they'll get faster with less cores. Also, stop parroting cheap prices, Summit Ridge will be at least $500.

On another note
>Core i7-7700K > Core i7-7700K (5GHz)
What the fuck am I reading? Fuck wccftech.

>>58078397
What clock was that Zen CPU running? What memory was it using? A high end (binned) 8 core Zen would hit probably that 1500 cb mark with decent memory and boost enabled.
These ES samples out there might run only at 3.0-3.2 ghz with boost disabled.

>>58079256
And the original reply here >>58079185
implied otherwise. Regardless, you're free to speculate about pricing as much as you like. If they somehow do price this at $200? That'd be amazing. But I'm not going to hold my breath about it, because it does sound very farfetched.

>>58079267
Maybe Handbrake with a special optimization on the command line/extra encoding option?

>>58078397
>zen es

wew lad, its not the final thng.

>>58079241
>compete with Intel.
6900k is $1000
7700k is $350
ryebread will be $500 and perform in between

Pretty sure my 990x at stock clock could hold it's own against ryzen

>world coolest curry

why is this site not yet banned on /g/?

>>58079315
>7700k is $350
it's not for at least another 5 months.

File: AMD_RYZEN_ZEN_CPU_Cinebench_R15_1.jpg (66KB, 802x492px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 802x492px

ITT dipshittery.

I've got the REAL score here. Zen annhilates broadwell-E and /g/ refuses to admit it.

yea I'm actually done with AMD

getting new x99 mobo and intel cpu asap

gave them a chance and really hoped to beat the shit out of intel

forget it it will never fucking happen - being behind some x year old intel processor in 2017 is just not good enough

time to upgrade my ancient shit

>>58078397
Seems like a winner there. Essentially 8 core haswell/ivy with very efficient SMT. Perfect for all the content creators out there. Especially if it does so at 95W TDP.

>>58079169
this this this this this

File: 1364019565746.gif (350KB, 500x344px) Image search: [Google]

350KB, 500x344px

>Chinese forums leak
>Screenshots don't even show which GPU was used
Nobody can be this gullible

>>58079471
You've got to be shitting me. If I hadn't upgraded to X99 last year I'd be all over Zen. You're a year late on X99

>>58079169
What's wrong with this benchmark?

>>58079509
*CPU

>>58079509
It's wccftech. You could make a bar graph with MS Paint and if you posted it claiming that it's a leaked benchmark, they'd still publish it.

File: zen vs broadwell.png (867KB, 1515x850px) Image search: [Google]

867KB, 1515x850px

>>58079539

..and /g/ would believe it because Israel demands you appease it.

AMD FX-8150 Zambezi 3.60 GHz 8 cores 11867

AMD has said about 1.4x IPC so:
11867 * 1.4 = 16,614

What were you expecting?

File: crossf.png (320KB, 2416x656px) Image search: [Google]

320KB, 2416x656px

>>58079514
>AoS meme game
>51% 'utilization'
>cf meme (pic related)

>>58079557
>broadwell
it's clearly skylake

>>58079585
Is that seriously how CF 480s run or is that the result of bad drivers?

Because that is literally not working at all.

>>58079606

You'd be wrong, but thats ok.

>>58079579
>AMD has said about 1.4x IPC so:
No they didn't, idiot. 1.4x IPC compared to excavator, 2.0x IPC compared to bulldozer.

>>58079609
Devs and AMD are lazy, and I don't talk about micro stuttering

>>58079606
6900k is broadwell-e

https://ark.intel.com/products/94196/Intel-Core-i7-6900K-Processor-20M-Cache-up-to-3_70-GHz

>>58079458

>look mom I changed the numbers!

>>58079585
TPU is such a fucking joke.

>>58079669
Why? The crossfire/SLI driver suck on a lot of games. CF/SLI is not relevant in 2016...

>>58079666

Yes so? It is just as legit as the original picture. It features a random number and the cinebench results screen.

>no cpu-z screenshot
>not even some sort of task manager screenshot
>absolutely no additional system information

So yes, my picture is as authentic as this leak (actually its not even my pocture - its from Anandtech).

File: 1482077877689.jpg (185KB, 1698x1140px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 1698x1140px

>>58078397
>>58078481
wasn't this cpu supposed to beat the 6900?

amd lied

>>58079153
try no less than $400

File: crossfire.png (90KB, 1166x696px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 1166x696px

>>58079669
>he fell on the cf meme

Can you elaborate?

>>58079193
thats ok, the 6700k is not good enough to make me feel buyers remorse over my 2500k

>>58079730
I don't think anyone really expected that

>>58079783
amd put it against the 6900k twice and it supposedly beat it

Ryzen is Windows 10 only

won't work on 7 or 8

>>58079637
That's beyond lazy, that's just negligent

>>58079805
Oh, marketing. I was thinking of the shit they said when they first started talking about it, you know, "40% IPC improvement over bullolzer" and whatnot

File: 1459087879754.png (858KB, 734x804px) Image search: [Google]

858KB, 734x804px

>>58079458
>screenshot cut off right above processor name

>>58079822

It beat a 6900k in the two live demos they presented at the new horizons event. The first one is handbrake (ala >>58079557 ) and the second one was a blender render of the ryzen logo - the file for which can be downloaded from AMD's website.

Even mr "fuck AMD" Kyle Bennett at hardocp matched the blender demo results with his broadwell test system.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2016/12/15/amds_new_ryzen_cpu_smt_ipc

>>58079072
> B-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-but it's cheap!
AyyMDPOORFAGS never change

>>58079730
no they didnt

File: 1470164253770.jpg (271KB, 1630x998px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 1630x998px

Yep like usuall you fags get panties wet to some some sketchy as fuck phone photos.

No speccy, no cpuz, no detailed info. Just cut out result that might as well be completely different CPU. Just do what you did for last fucking 2 years sit on your ass and watch chinese cartoons. And with tests wait for fucking retail version benches instead of giving v to WCF-CLICKBAIT.

>>58078960
Excavator has more than 10% IPC increase compared to bulldozer. You were expecting the IPC to decrease? They claimed a 40% gain.

File: IMG_0137.png (341KB, 1005x742px) Image search: [Google]

341KB, 1005x742px

>Intel fails to make a major advancement since Sandy Bridge, hitting the wall in performance

>AMD still couldnt catch up to them

I refuse to believe it

so how much would you pay for it?

I feel like 300$ is to much for this garbage

>>58079899
You must be a macfag.

File: images.png (6KB, 286x176px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 286x176px

>>58079941
> tfw Apple's Hurricane ARM core is 30% faster than Skylake/Kaby Lake

>>58079941
This isn't really true.

>>58080020
Seriously?

File: maxresdefault.jpg (271KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 1920x1080px

>>58078499
>http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-zen-cpu-benchmarks-leak/
>comparing stock cpu to an overclock cpu

>>58080055

Geekbench is one hell of a drug.

File: CINEBENCH Windows 64 Bit_2016-12-19_20-28-09.png (1MB, 1920x1017px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1017px

My result. Post yours. Don't be a fag like chinese forum poster and post full results. I want to see how i5-2500k and i7-3770k guys do in this shite.

>>58080095
>Core i7-7700K (Stock) (4/8)
>17049

>AMD RYZEN (8/16)
>17693

>>58079822
excavator mein neger

>>58080118
Unrelated, but I'll try just for fun with my 4690K

I'll never understand brand loyalty people. How can any of you be so heated over anything except making two companies compete for your business by offering better deals?

It's as if both camps want none of them to do better while not realizing that one of these companies being far worse than the other means we all end up getting screwed.

How can you actually be loyal to any sort of commercial business? It's ridiculous. Have you nothing else going on in your head?

>>58080185
At least for me it's not so much that I'm for AMD as I'm against Intel. Because fuck Intel, seriously.

Huh. Zen scores twice as much on Cinebench as my processor.

Will wait for real benchmarks but mildly excited.

>>58080230
When I sit at my computer, I think of the performance, not which brand it is in it.

>>58080231
Nobody cares, poorfag.

>>58080185

nice blog post moralfag

>>58079870
>screenshot
>it's literally taking a picture of the screen with his cellphone

>>58078397
I want to know the single core performance. If the benchmark is true then they basically didn't get any performance improvement compared to excavator.

>>58078397
T-this is single core, right?

If Ryzen cant absolutely kill a 4c/8t i7 in multicore theres just no point to it

>>58080323
It has to be multicore

otherwise a '5GHz' 7700k would show more benefit over stock compared to the way lower clocked 6950x

Fritz chess shows prefetch and branch performance of a single core, you tech illiterate retards.

>>58080106
So is Jenkem.

>>58080364

Like Jenkem geekbench is also full of shit. remember a kabylake geekbench leak that had it 30% faster than skylake? fun times.

What's the price of 7700K? What's the price of that 8c/16t zen cpu?

File: c1a9f21aea19a27f5b16df6f4d79ef383717ad333efa2df9ff2be3a3fd6729ff.jpg (82KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 600x600px

>>58080293

>>58078397
>WCCFTECH

Wew lad.

thanks AMD for being so innovative, sandy bridge performance in 2016 is a great achievement, everyone should spend $500 of their hard earned neetbux on zen now, praise AMD and their engineering team that consists entirely of imported indians on H1B visas

>>58079181

She or He?

>>58080505
>>>/lgbt/
>>>/mlp/
>>>/y/
Take that shit to the right boards.

>>58080363
Then why is 7700k so much different from the 6950x?

File: Untitled.jpg (197KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 1920x1080px

>>58080118
Theres something wrong with your 4790k.

>>58079899
>that comment
-1 point of faith in humanity

>>58079328
Because it's fine to link it if it favors AMD showing some fake pics of oced 480RX competing against 980 Ti. It only gets problematic and pathetic when it badmouths an AMD product you filthy brown animal.

>>58078499
So it barely neats beats it despite having twice as many cores?

It's great that AMD is coming out with something new after all these years, but is this just going to be bulldozer again?

>>58080564
What about now when it's literally the exact opposite and /g/ is eating it up :^)

>>58080552
Probably bottlenecked by some slow cheap RAM. He was stupid enough to buy a fucking 390.

>>58080592
huehue

>>58080564
>AMD showing some fake pics of oced 480RX competing against 980 Ti
That was two rx 480s with one amd optimized game

>>58080397
Yup

File: Cinebench.jpg (543KB, 1213x713px) Image search: [Google]

543KB, 1213x713px

Here's mine, stock 5820k

If that Ryzen score by some miracle is accurate, that one article that compared it to the 6850k is fairly accurate.

>>58080363
Its run on all threads concurrently but scaling factor is irrelevant. It is a synthetic that tests the front end of a core. It shouldn't be used to test anything but one given arch at various clock speeds when all else is equal.
The bench means nothing if you don't understand the results.

>>58080592
1600mhz crucial ddr3s BalistiX line

I had found nice "getting rid of stock" sale on XFX390 when there was no 480. Nice termal paste made it behave nicely.

I would get 480 but all those fags who make mining rigs bought out everything. EU zone ~20% of vat is fucking annoying when you buy electronics.

File: cine.png (1MB, 1217x746px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1217x746px

>>58080655
I was so close to buying a 5820k but didn't want to buy a new mobo at the time.

>>58080440
1188 divided by 8 is 148.5 not 125.

Would someone with fx-6300 or fx-8350 show their bench results?

>>58078497
But it beat the 6/12 $1,000 processors for rendering/conversion tasks.
It also only uses 95w TDP.

If it's cheaper than a K processor, I'm buying it.

>>58079818
Sure it is. It's not like they're targeting the enterprise that have clusters and clusters of computers running Lincuck.

File: totally legit guise.png (290KB, 1500x714px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 1500x714px

That ryzen cinebench looks legit - its just shit compared to what Intel has.

ITT: /g/ amply demonstrates they have no idea what benches are or what they represent

>>58080794

Yea. Still worse than a i5 6600K in single core perf. Basicly dog shit which will be dead on arrival.

>>58080953
Nice chinese cartoon streaming machine.

>>58078397
why do people keep posting currytech """"""leaks"""""

>>58080839
fs-8350 is about 830

>>58081022
Because $hintel damage control
>>58081054
I unfortunately got a pretty shitty binned 8350, it's running pretty hot for an 8350.

>>58080779


I'm glad that I went for that CPU. It handles everything I can throw at it.
Not to mention at this current rate of CPU improvement, it's going to die of old age before it manages to grow obsolete.

An unidentified CPU without CPU-Z screenshot - Checked
Dubious Chinese forum - Checked
Carry on, everyone. This "leak" sounds as truthful as all of those other "leaks" claiming that GTX 1080 could clock 2,5 GHz on air or Rx 480 would come 1,6 GHz straight out of the box.

>>58080118
forgot to screenshot but

2500k @4.5Ghz got 572cb

File: th.jpg (8KB, 300x168px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 300x168px

>>58078397
I'm going to ask this cause this is the closest to an amd thread.
I have the msi rx 480 4gb version, and play at 1080p currently I'm playing deus ex mankind divided, and through the recommended settings with my gpu I'm supposed to be getting average 60fps, but it's actually 30-60fps even with vsync disabled or enabled what is going on here?

I tried uninstalling, and reinstalling the drivers, I activated it's full power limit on msi after burner.
I'm lost right now

>>58082141
dont play the game on a pentium 4

>>58082159
I'm playing with an i5 6400 though

>>58082141
Have a 480 as well and had the same problem. No graphics settings could give me a stable frame rate so I uninstalled it.

>>58082200
the card or the software?


these are my specs by the way
Operating System
Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit SP1
CPU
Intel Core i5 6400 @ 2.70GHz 44 °C
Skylake 14nm Technology
RAM
8.00GB Single-Channel Unknown @ 1064MHz (15-15-15-36)
Motherboard
MSI H110M GAMING (MS-7994) (U3E1) 41 °C
Graphics
ASUS VC239 (1920x1080@59Hz)
4096MB ATI Radeon RX 480 Graphics (MSI) 58 °C
Storage
931GB Seagate ST1000DM003-1SB102 ATA Device (SATA) 37 °C
Optical Drives
ZEVUD RG5AZWT SCSI CdRom Device
Audio
Realtek High Definition Audio

>>58082223
I uninstalled the game.
Specs
RX480 8gb XFX
16GB ddr3 1600mhz duel Channel
8320 FX OC'd to 4.7 ghz
Tried everything like you did, reinstalled and uninstalled everything I could think of. I thought it was my CPU bottlenecking me, but after burner showed my cores running around 80% oc'ing the GPU seemed to give a higher frame rate, but not much. I put DE on the lowest settings possible, but alas it still ran and looked like shit. DOOM runs at 120fps max settings so my thoughts are that DE:MD a bad port.

>>58082336
And I also run win 10 enterprise and ran the game in DX 12 mode. DX 12 performed the same as DX 11.

why is it that intel fags can't take actual demonstrations in a live stream presentation at face value and yet they treat wccftech leaks like gospel

>>58082417
>intel fags
Found your problem. Also, they are scared.

>>58082336
>>58082387
That makes sense, I get weird fps with rise of the tomb raider also, but to a lesser extent so maybe it's an issue with the way square enix ports their games.

to be honest even batman arkham knight runs better than DE:MD for me.

Thank you for the reply by the way, I was thinking something was wrong with my card.

>>58082141
>Deus Ex Mankind Divided
It ran like shit for me, I was using an i5-4690k at 4.5GHZ and an R9 390 at the time. It kept stuttering no matter what settings I turned down/off and after a while it became infuriating. I wasn't interested enough in the game to want to keep playing it with all the graphics on low, or at 1024x768, so I just stopped.

File: CINEBENCH Windows 64 Bit_2016-12-19_22-43-43.png (1MB, 1920x1040px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1040px

>>58081054
i just got 646 cb at 4 GHz

File: barf.jpg (58KB, 312x312px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 312x312px

>wccftech's comment section

Holy fuck, I just took a quick peek and I must say that this place has one the worst congregations of meme spouting 13-year olds I've ever seen in my life.

>>58082448
I'm actually glad for this, deflates my post-new-horizon hype to the reasonable levels of expectation it was at before

perf wise this might be another bulldozer/sandy bridge debacle but at least we know the power draw and single core core perf won't be complete shit

>>58080440
Photoshopped crap.

>>58080505
It

Worst case scenario the 8/16 chip will sell for $300 to compete with the $350 7700k

File: 1482177860004.png (157KB, 1008x854px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 1008x854px

>ayyyyymd

>>58082481
I'm a bit tempted to stop playing myself, but since I played the originals, along with human revolution I feel a obligated to continue, despite shit performance or annoying characters.

>>58082141
Isn't that game very poorly optimized?

>>58082483
I stand corrected :) I mistyped.

>>58082542
Xir/Ze

>>58082710
MD was rushed out, Square kept fucking with the devs and forced them to cut the story up into dlc and divided the team to work on that stupid mini game instead of polishing it up.

File: 0b3d726fce3ef2b5f127ca5f0157c6bc.jpg (12KB, 240x240px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 240x240px

>tfw bought a 6850k for $179

>>58082550
>worst case scenario
That would be a total disaster for AMD. That won't happen.

>>58082840
>telling lies on the internet

Also CAPTCHA:
>select all tiles that feel romantic
>images of deserts and empty restaurant tables
What the fuck? I don't know, Captcha, fuck off.

>>58082880
>Intel retail edge isn't real

>>58082899
You didn't say you had to digest like 8 hours of intel propaganda to get the discount.

>>58079609
CF support is fucking trash and only a few DX12 games support mGPU in the first place. There's nothing wrong with CF itself, when there's a proper profile it can work very, very well but AMD barely give a fuck about their CF users. At least with SLI we have access to SLI bits and various other SLI-related tweaks/hacks and the community is often able to come up with something, with CF you're just fucked.

>>58082950
I did them at work in my spare time during scans/windows update.

Jesus fuck I hope these results aren't true, I was thinking of upgrading my 4.7GHz 4790K to a Ryzen 8 core and getting shitloads more CPU performance, but if this is true it looks like I'll be holding on to it for a while yet and then probably upgrade to some Intel enthusiast platform, fucking hell. This shit better not be true, if a 7700K is nearly equal to an 8 core Ryzen CPU in multithreaded benchmarks it's fucking over.

>>58080185

That's a common thing among poor people. They can only choose 1 product so they start doing heavy mental gymnastics to justify their purchase and convince themselves that they've made the right choice and disregard any evidence to the contrary. It's specially common among the AMD crowd, that is always chanting about some supposed turnaround someday somewhere in an undisclosed future that they're promising since the pre-bulldozer days, i.e. people clinging to ashes of singularity's benchmarks, you know, that one game literally nobody cares about.

>>58082840
I almost managed to bag 2 Xeon E5-1650 V3s for $290 both. Almost.

>>58079267
>>58079302

Its likely what I have been saying for the passed few months, the fpu is better with intel and intel will beat it out when fpu is the benchmark

The performance when intel isn't forced into lower fpu workloads is about what I expected, the 8 core intel will beat out 8 core amd, and 4 core will give amd a run for their money.

What the real question is, in real world scenerios, how often is the fpu load pushed to intel advantage?

>>58080592
What's so bad about a 390?

>>58083046
Before I bought the 6850k I was eyeing used xeons and a dual socket asrock board.

>>58083000
but is the 7700k not also nearly equal to the 8c/16t intel variant that the Zen CPU ties/beats?

>but muh low clock

Again, dont compare 8c/8t or 4c/8t to a 8c/16t.

They both shine in different areas, its why the intel 8c/16t are also rather shit for gamessssss

>>58080982
Only pricing can save it really.

Isn't 7700k $350? Aren't Zen 8 cores like $500+?

>>58082141
>falling for the amd meme

>>58083000
It's fake as fuck dude, don't worry.

>>58082955
Can't think of the last time a major game was released that didn't just support CF right out of the box or in a major update several days after release. You're basically completely talking out of your ass. CF/SLI are both massive compromises that have potentially great benefits as well as large drawbacks. To paint one as better than the other is a joke especially since it's largely game engine dependent as to which one is going to have better scaling and performance. Anybody that doesn't understand this isn't paying attention.

>>58083059
I was just looking to score a cheap 5930K basically. Those E5s don't do dual socket but they are completely unlocked and supposedly better binned, so they can OC pretty easily in the 4.5GHz+ range, allegedly.

>>58083000
Why on fucking earth would you ever want to upgrade from a fucking 4790k @ 4.7 GHz?

Jesus, gamurrr kids are stupid.

File: 1469909971934.gif (3MB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 500x500px

GOOOO AMMMDDD GOOOOOOOOO

>>58082798
That's fucking sad.

>>58080505
xhe :^)

File: ayy1.jpg (34KB, 413x395px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 413x395px

>>58082141
The card is shit.
- Deus Ex is an unoptimized pile of shit
- 480RX is in reality a hotter, newer, shittier 970 gtx. First week benchmarks and youtube footage showed it hundreds of times. You just fell for the /g/ meme where same 10 dedicated retards will try to prove to you that every AMD product is 20-30% better than in reality while linking a single chart/video made by some Indian Raja fan who hasn't even showed us any sort of footage with actual fps in it.

Bottoms line stop being a retard and watch actual "x vs y" footage where actual gaymen record footage using rig similar to yours instead of listening to bunch of anons who use charts made by some professional scam artists that will hype and sell every new product because it means more free hardware samples in the future (that's literally every hardware reviewer out there).

>>58083078
Intel's 8C/16T CPUs aren't really shit for games because we know they OC quite decently. We don't know shit about Zen, though if this benchmark is true we know that their IPC is quite a bit behind Intel even if the clocks are similar. Multithreaded benchmarks are where the 8C/16T should shine, yet it barely manages to squeeze by a 4C/8T CPU in these results. Meanwhile Intel's own 8C/16T variant has a sizable lead.

>>58082798
basicly square thought AAA gaming was done, and were going to make everything like hitman, then they found out AAA gaming isn't dead, and had every team put the games back together except hitman as it was to far along.

>>58083121
The only thing I'm worried about is cooling this fucker. Doubt my 212+ will keep it cool and I'll need a heavy oc to up the single threaded performance.

>>58083112
>talking out of your ass
Not really, I take it AMD has made vast and overarching improvements to CF support in the last 6 months? Because that's about when I sold my 2 290Xs and support was crap.

>>58083112
Nobody has mentioned "no support" you just obviously ignore the fact that in some cases CF's latency is like 4 times higher than SLI's while also causing stuttering.

>>58083123
Live video encoding and more PCIe lanes for 4K mGPU.

>>58079805
when the fpu is not stressed, it can match the 8 core intel, when the fpu is stressed a fuckload of performance is sacrificed, benchmarks will show this, real world performance will show another thing.

What it comes down to is how often you have a high fpu workload, and amd showed two of the more demanding things you can ask of a cpu and ryzen was doing great.

>WCCFtech ALWAYS overhypes AMD shit
>WCCFtech is always wrong

>this one time, for some reason, they're making AMD look like shit.
>WCCFtech is always _____

>>58083123
You probably don't play games (consider yourself lucky) so you don't know how bad things are.

It seems that since 2015 big majority of AAA games need at least a bottom line i7 with HT to prevent bottleneck. My i5 3570k was shitting itself in Witcher 3 even at 1080p. Newer games like Watch Dogs 2 etc. are even worse, cutting my fps in half even though I have a 1070. I really want Zen to be good, I need a fucking upgrade ASAP.

>>58079585
games with no profiles (at the time of these benches) not benefitting from crossfire? what a shock.

>>58083055
Blender is also float heavy. If zen does well in blender then why is the cinebench score so bad? Also the chink guy didn't post any system specs so you can basically throw these leaks into a trash can, there is barely any info.

>>58083183
Yeah, if you really want to push a 6C 140W CPU I imagine you'll need quite a bit more cooling than that, yeah. I've got a water loop still from the Nehalem days, I would've been more than ready to push one of those Xeons if I could've gotten my hands on one.

>>58083257
>waste money for sli/cf

>>58082141

game ran fine for me and i have a 2600k and cuck card

>>58083271
Planning on going with two 480mm rads to cool it down. Heard they're harder to overclock than haswell e.

>>58083268
I never take blender as a good source, unless you can tell me it uses more than 128 bit float by default without tweaks.

Even if it is fake, this is exactly what i'm expecting, a cpu that can match but under a heavy fpu load will go down to a quad core level, if its better then this, fucking awesome, if not, its exactly as expected.

>>58083291
With crossfire/sli, if you have money you can light on fire and not care, its a good option, because when it works, it fucking works well, when it doesn't, you have half the power.

>>58083294
I take it you're adding GPUs to the loop too, right? If not that's complete overkill for any CPU. A 360mm rad with decent high static pressure fans should handle like 300W easily, should be more than enough for Broadwell-E.

>>58079696
ever notice how every bad amd benchmarks is almost exclusively from them?

>>58083056
absolutely nothing. he probably has a 780ti or something and is butthurt

>>58083342

>>58079758

>>58083355
no shit crossfire sucks, multi gpu is always a bad idea either side, but crossfire has this funny position of when it works its better but less support for it.

I mean every bench from tpu is always showing amd gpus significantly worse then they actually are.

>>58083322
>With crossfire/sli, if you have money you can light on fire and not care
Yeah but RX480/1060 owners are poor, CF/SLI is shit tb-h

>>58083335
Yea gpu and maybe chipset. From what I saw people were having issues cooling it with one 480 when going over 4.3ghz.

File: a.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>58083236
there's enough good games out there i haven't played yet, i wouldn't buy new hardware for the sole purpose of making a game playable
the latest game i picked up, a few days ago, was megadimention neptunia re;birth, a 2015 expanded port of a game originally made for the PS3
runs perfectly fine on my mid-end 2012 gpu with foss drivers with wine

i play it using a ps2 controller i bought a decade ago with a usb adapter i picked up for less than $2

>>58083236
>My i5 3570k was shitting itself in Witcher 3 even at 1080p.
That sounds like a shitty buggy game.

>>58082525
>Photoshopped
How do you know it was CorelDRAW'd or PaintShop Pro'd?
Just call it "manipulated" or "doctored".

>>58080246
I would know every day that I had to pay a company who has business practices I despise.

Its why Im still on a phenom II, That said, zen is the limit for what I can wait on and its wither zen or intel.

>>58079927
>only 10% IPC increase
That sounds terrible, wasn't this new processor supposed to trade blows at least with haswell? I don't see how they're going to compete if they keep having those fucking shit ass CPUs that can't match relatively old Intel shit.

>>58078481
>am i missing something here

It has TWICE the cores.

It's gonna be Bulldozer all over again.

>>58080620
Nah, the bench they are referring to was a golden silicon that could clock high pre launch that had leaks, everything falls in line if you can clock that high.

>>58079105
>you can literally buy a 2600k or 3960x for $100-150 today

And then you'll be missing PCIE3, NVME, USB3/3.1/C, and have less PCIE channels and less SATA3 ports.

>>58079888
>The first one is handbrake (ala >>58079557 ) and the second one was a blender render of the ryzen logo

question, how multithreaded are those benches?

If they use anything more than 4 cores, then AMD has a huge advantage in them, which means that being only something like 10% better will translate to exceedingly bad single thread scores. Which means Zen will suck hard.

>>58083146

Disguting

>>58083408
That sounds extremely unlikely to me. Look at the Fury X, 300W worth of GPU being kept at ~50C load with a single 120mm rad. I can't imagine you'll be able to safely push a single CPU to such ridiculous power draw to need a 480mm rad alone for cooling. Do you plan to rape that CPU with ridiculously high voltage or what?

>>58083571
Learn how to read, you spastic.

>>58078397
NIGGAS IT'S THE BASE MODEL!!!!!!

>>58083547
>And then you'll be missing PCIE3, NVME, USB3/3.1/C, and have less PCIE channels and less SATA3 ports.

so what? none of those provide any tangible benefit to the typical gaymer, and z79 and x79 both have usb3 and sata 3.

>>58083408
how does cooling work: the post

>>58083790
It's 8c/16t, so it is the desktop flagship model.

>>58084047
It's some SR7 Zen, doesn't necessarily mean it's the one with the highest clock. There probably wouldn't be a huge difference anyway though.

File: 1480764423621.jpg (34KB, 318x318px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 318x318px

>/g/ believes wccftech 'leaks'

you idiots from /v/ really are fucking this board, and badly

jim fucking keller, the legend himself, worked on this architecture. It's going to be on par with 6900K, without question. Or beat it.

it won't be surprising if by next year they're double intel's performance

We've all known for the better part of a year that Zen has half the floating point throughput of Intel's last two (skylake doesnt count) generations.

I don't see what the issue is here.

File: machi14.png (564KB, 623x720px) Image search: [Google]

564KB, 623x720px

>>58083475
>that faggot who complains about people using the word "googling" when they use other search engines
Consider suicide you deranged autist.

>>58084214
>It's going to be on par with 6900K
[citation]

>>58084239
https://searx.me/search?q=jim+keller

>>58084239
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DEfj2MRLtA

No problem.

>>58084244
>>58084261
>from amd

read this>>58079169

>>58079181
All I want to do is suck her feminine penis

>>58084293
>jim keller

>>58084214
>jim keller
>legend

he's an obese job-hopper who helped design one good uarch 15 years ago, everything else he's been involved in was mediocre at best.

Can we wait for a leak to appear on a non-curry respectable website before AMD becomes a meme again?

>>58084352
He also was on the DEC alpha team, P.A. Semi, and now at Tesla...

What mediocre things did he do?

>>58084352
>>Apple A4, A5
>>Mediocre

>>58084384
>He also was on the DEC alpha team, P.A. Semi, and now at Tesla...

so nothing of note then, thanks for backing up my argument

>>58084419
>t. mactoddler

File: 1321666354976.gif (1MB, 266x268px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 266x268px

>>58084419
>so nothing of note then

File: amd zen.gif (2MB, 164x275px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 164x275px

>>58084384

>>58084352
>first memory controllers in chips
>first multi cores
>best mobile shit
kys

>>58084440
edgy

>>58078397
Give me something more reputable than wcc"the rx 480 is totally as fast as a nano you guys, for real"tech and maybe I'll believe you

>>58084229
I bet you call tissues "Kleenex" as well, you fucking faggot.

File: 1480931277008.jpg (52KB, 568x612px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 568x612px

>>58078397
P...please .. delete this

so its on par or slightly better then the kaby lake quad core 7700k, witch will cost $350?

if ryzen 8/16 comes out over $400 its DOA, if its under or around $300 it has a chance in budget builds

>live demonstrations of Blender and Handbrake workloads are fake
>even when the test files are released and hundreds of people verify the results
>this terrible Chinese forum post that intentionally obscured the CPU name and is so heavily jpeg compressed that no one can detected if its photophopped is totally legit

Average IQ here has to be like 70~. You're all easier to fool than the average downy.

>>58085425
lol this
if they faked live blender and handbrake demonstrations the only thing they could have done was had a 6900k with turbo vs a 6900k without and that'd be just fucking stupid to claim one was the ryzen..

>>58079212
Could you imagine though? Think of the market share AMD would get by doing this. Every single "build a pc" video on youtube would be telling people to build with Zen. Every single one.

File: gee.jpg (2MB, 3322x1122px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3322x1122px

>>58080118
here ya go
4770k at 4.5

>>58085425
People here don't realize what Cinebench and Fritz actually test.

>>58086723
>>58080118
I beat your 4790k at same clocks with a 4770k, how strange. were you running shit in the background?
I have shitty 1600mhz ram aswell, low profile corsair

>>58086764
what do they test
just floating points?

I know handbrake etc are using lots of built in memory capabilities for encoding.. assuming h264

File: Cinebench.png (244KB, 1919x1078px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 1919x1078px

>>58086723
>tfw my 6700k at 4.5GHZ is 10% faster than haswell at the same clocks

That's a big difference

>>58086847
Cinebench is *supposed* to be indicative of rendering performance, but somehow actual rendering workloads usually more closely reflect Blender and POV Ray results.

Fritz Chess, as pointed out already in the thread, measures branch performance in the front end of the core. Its not something that accurately measures total performance of a core.

>>58087005
wouldn't the 6700k be more comparable to the 4790k though
even if comparing the 4770k to the 6700k, it took them 26 months to create such a small advance in core performance?

File: Capture.jpg (272KB, 1826x1068px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 1826x1068px

plebs

File: Cy_G_wRUsAAZMcb.jpg_orig.jpg (128KB, 840x1120px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 840x1120px

>>58086773
Whole botnet son.

>>58083547
Who the fuck cares?

File: 2600K 4.4ghz 2,133mhz ddr3.jpg (264KB, 1833x741px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 1833x741px

feels bad man
my 2600K is getting OLD

>/g/ loses its shit over literal pajeet posting 'leaked' unvarified benchmarks at stock clocks
>AMD has not even fucking finished the CPU
>Offers around 8core i7 performance at a 1/3 of the cost
Fuck sake do you all have $1500 intel cpus? Oh no thats right your just benchmarking faggots.

i have a i5 4690 and if this new amd zen is half as good as the new intel crap its still a upgrade for me

not a Intel or AMD fag but
>wccftech
>260+ post

>>58088837
>Offers around 8core i7 performance at a 1/3 of the cost

muh PRICE TO PERFORMANCE

>>58083168
sauce?

>>58089073
>though if this benchmark is true
the article from rumortech

>>58089086
so the source = someones ass

Gotcha.

>>58088770
How so?, its almost matching a 4770k which runs at 4.4ghz stock

Id say its doing just fine, albeit that is a rather high voltage i guess

File: ah fuck.jpg (53KB, 500x625px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 500x625px

>>58082141
I haven't played it, but I've heard more than just >>58082481 and others ITT saying it runs like shit across the board. The new AMD driver release is also causing some people a lot of issues anyway.

>tfw still using an r9 280
>ReLive is pointless to me
>can't be bothered installing new drivers

>>58078397
I hope this shit is fake, otherwise we are looking at some really poor single thread performance.

>>58078397
AMD needs to get their shit together. Up until ~6 years ago I only had AMD CPUs. Now I have none:

>i3 5010U
>i5 2500K
>i5 4300U
>i7 4770K
>Xeon L5640
>Xeon E3-1220 v2
>Xeon E5-4620 v3

I miss AMD, I hope there will be a better option when I dump the 2500k and demote the 4770k

>>58078397
An AMD chip that's capable of competing with an i7 is a disappointment?

They used to struggle with beating i3s. This is tremendous news.

>>58078397
Well, I hope they dont charge 999 for their CPU like Intel does.

>>58079730
Kinda, too bad they can't beat it on two synthetic benchmarks heh?

>>58083055
Floating point?
On a CPU?

Well it all makes sense now, since AMD's long term plans is to have APUs. If they can send the flopsy shit to the GPU-part of the APU, and keep the other stuff on the CPUs, then they'll be doing very well. It's also pretty close to what Apple wants to do in the future too.

Zen-based APUs sounds like they're made for the MacBooks.

>>58079888
Underrated post.

Jesus, the Intel damage control is real. I just bought a 6700k earlier this year, and I'm still stoked the market could finally be de-stagnating. Just be happy for AMD once, you fucks

>>58084229
You don't belong here.
You should go back to /v/.

>>58083013
>Especially common amongst the AMD.

Thanks for stealth turning my post into the exact shit I was protesting again. It's common in both camps because the nature of idiots is to create a persona out of purchases from companies who exist to exploit you.

Not even a freetard. Literally just basic marketing. These companies have literally zero interest in your personal welfare, your financial welfare as a consumer and for the most retarded and invested: As an actual person.

You would get better deals and stats if you made both companies fight for your business instead of fighting each other.

Shit is ridiculous. Is it just a ''''high IQ'''' thing for people into computers to be retarded over this?

>>58089051
isnt that literally the point of AMD now?

Its not like its 2006 anymore is it!

Fuck sake i swear to got this board is pathetic.

If the cpu is good its good, if its shit its shit!

>>58089547
well they had 4 years to unfuck themselves so yeah that should hardly be suprising

>>58083547
>missing PCIE3, USB3
pretty sure you could get boards with those as far back as phenom 2. mine has USB3 anyways.

File: 2016-12-02 (5).png (1MB, 1920x1040px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1040px

>>58080118

File: 1472774926818.png (12KB, 200x243px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 200x243px

I wish I was dead

>>58079758
>posting cf results for dx12
>trying to be a smartass
>fail to mention that dx12 uses a totally different rendering system than dx11 regarding cf/sli config
>bashing amd for it like its their fault
kek typical /g/

>>58086764
considering the idiots here kept claiming "they dont care about blender on 128 bit" despite the fact amd on their page told its avx 256 shows how much they actually know
>bu-but amd takes a massive hit on 256bit!
zen beats 6900k while takes a massive hit
>bu-but zen is only 11% faster than a 7700k oc at 5ghz
totally forgets to add the plus 10% from the stock one..

literally /g/ just needs to be renamed the intel and nvidia shithole because this is what it is

>>58089964
follow ur dreams

>>58090030
hey it's not our fault AMD needs to get its shit together

>>58090047
yeap its amd fault we all know that..the fact that this thread is full of miss information pretty much seals it

>>58079585
>>58079758

CF only works with games that have CF profile wich are provided by AMD. If there is no CF profile for the game, you get nothing.

>>58090068
hush hush random anon dont give them precious intel about how a game works...
also dont forget to mention that a cf profile doesnt do nothing if the dev hasnt dev the game to have a proper scaling..

>>58083440
>That sounds like a shitty buggy game.
yeah that's pretty much every big game lately. it used to be every once in a while a big game was annoyingly buggy. now that is the standard and the "every once in a while" is the game being basically unplayable for a large amount of user regardless of what hardware they have. it feels like powerful hardware is being used more and more to just brute force your way past terrible optimization and such.

But can ryZen beat my 119 buck dual 2670 sr0kx?

>>58087033
ok, so cinebench likely plays to intel's strengths, but real world doesn't really conform to bench, got it.

fritz chess, this is I think the first time I am looking at this close. are you able to tell us what this means? at least how it relates to real world performance.

>>58089051
There is such a thing as 'good enough' performance.

single core, new zen is good enough, and its now all on the multicore side.

so far we have seen
blender on avx 256 being on par with a 6900k
handbrake beating a 6900k
cinebench better than an highly oced 7700k worse than a 6900k
chess kinda all over the place

>>58090083
Same shit to SLI.

>>58090119
yes and no.

If the program yo use uses both cpus, then no

If its limited to one cpu, then yea it will most likely beat it
and if you are limited to single core performance, it will most likely beat it.

>>58090222
well yeah obviously but here people keep trying to say that nvidia magically adds a profile and it works
/g/ is literally the worst place to ask for anything related to hardware parts

>>58090216
the wonderful difference between real world and benchmarks.

its one of the reasons why for a long time, the 8 core bulldozer and derivatives were seen as shit, but many people who used it and lets say an i5 generally preferred the amd cpu, only in gaming did the cpu single core matter as they could not scale well, but when they do, they give current i7's a run for their money.

>>58079585
AoS doesnt use CF, it is DX12 explicit multi GPU, wich is diferent.

>>58090258
you can't be serious

>>58079241
I believe those ones comming in february will be only 8 cores the cheapest at 3.4 ghz costing around the 300 and all above the 4.0ghz up to 600?
Later on they might give us the 4 cores, 6 cores and even, maybe a 2 cores with smt to compete with the i3.

>>58090258
lol

>>58088837
but 7700k costs $350. Are you saying I'll be able to buy 8c/16t Zen for less than $150?

>>58090452
>$350
>350 my ass, they gonna charge over 400 at release.
If I remember correctly intel has steadly been increasing average price by over 10% each generation since bulldozer.
If AMD don't get their game up the future 9700k would cost like 500 bucks.

>>58090452
>but 7700k costs $350
it doesn't it's like you missed recent 5 years

>>58089578
it's just one guy with that endless stream of "ayymd lol pajeet"
people keep biting so it's hard to have any real discussion about zen on this board

>>58083571
Retarded, rendering uses cpu raw power, it means that it will fill all the empty space that cpu has to finish its task, there is nothing better than rendering to bench a CPU.

>>58080020
>tfw modern i3 processors have more single core performance than the iphone 7 has multicore performance

>>58090119
How much did the mainboard cost?

>>58091206
>a x86 plugged to a wall is stronger than a SoC of the size of a pinky fingernail running on a 0.3V battery

WOW

>>58091343
0.3?

bretty shure its 0.5

>>58078397
Even if it is beating out a i7 at the worst case senerio benchmarks it it still infinitely better than bulldozer

Bulldozer could barely compete with a fucking i5