Lmao Intel confirmed suicide watch. ZEN IPC is 1-2% of Kaby Lake.

File: AMD-Ryzen-5-1600X-Processor.jpg (45KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 600x450px

CPU-z

File: Intel-Core-i5-7600K-Kaby-Lake-CPU-z-Bench.png (183KB, 1326x677px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 1326x677px

Here's a Kabylake at 4.2

>>58984814
>overclocked

Ahahaha, obliterated

>>58984803
>>58984807
IF this turns out to be accurate, Intel are completely and utterly blown the fuck out. This would completely reshape the desktop CPU market.

>>58984807
>that voltage

>>58984826
It primarily runs on fanboi-grade salt. Electricity is only a backup.

>AYYYMD HYPE
nothing to see here

>>58984826
Might be an error with CPUZ, due to new chip.

Might be fake.

The wait is killing me

>testing overclocked against stock

Come on, the fucking KBL has a 800MHz higher base clock, meaning its has no fluctuating turbo like Ryzen that would lower the score.
At least put them on the same clock.

>>58984847
If ayyymd auto overclock works as advertised, this point becomes less relevant.

>>58984846
Its not, its just low idle power draw.
Desktop Ryzen chips idle around 10w~

reported clock speed doesn't match up and reported voltage seems to be completely retarded. considering this image was sourced from the amd subleddit there's a 99.9999999999% chance this is some bullshit made up by a fanboy.

>>58984846
These cores go down to 7W markets IIRC, idle voltage being that low isn't surprising, especially since it's a SoC and needs less voltage now that there's barely on the motherboard to communicate with.

>>58984840
Don't worry Ranjit, I'm sure you'll secure a position at AMD once Intel go under. They'll still need shills to see off... ARM?

>>58984871
The Raven Ridge SoC is supposed to scale down to 4w TDP.

I'll just wait till I read the reviews of several different sources before I make the decision.

>>58984871
>>58984857
Chip is oced though.

Not calling you liers, but damn that's a low corev for an OC chip, even at idle.

Again, can't wait for the results of this chip.

Everyone benefits from real competition.

>>58984869
>reported voltage seems to be completely retarded

The chip is clearly idle in that screenshot, meaning displayed voltage is irrelevant. Not to mention the fact that CPU-Z might not even be reading it correctly in the first place, since it doesn't support Ryzen yet.

>>58984888
It's not OCd, 1600X is 3.4/3.7 with an unknown XFR frequency.

>chink
Fake as fuck, I ain't trusting anything until an American tests it

>>58984889
>The chip is clearly idle in that screenshot,

it clearly isn't, otherwise it wouldn't be boosting to 3.45ghz over it's base clock of 3.3ghz.

>>58984857
Transistors won't even conduct at that voltage.

>>58984920
Don't make fucking retarded statements on topics you know nothing about.

>>58984814
>1.36

AHAHAHAHA
I HAD FUCKING NEHALEMS RUN AT LOWER VOLTAGE AT THAT FREQUENCY

FUCKING NEHALEMS

>>58984903
>12 threads

Ahhh, my bad. Didn't see that.

Still damn low corev though. Just less unbelievable.

>>58984935
They probably said just fuck it and amped the voltage instead of wasting time on stability testing. My 6700k goes up to 4.6 on 1.32

File: 1480266371487.jpg (55KB, 697x664px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 697x664px

>>58984821
amd-crippled intel compiler 2.0 coming up :^)

>>58984951
Its price is also FREE for the next two months! So everyone can use it :D

File: zr.jpg (91KB, 847x365px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 847x365px

Jewtel BTFO

>>58984803
>>58984814
>still 15% slower than Kabylake :))

Kek, welcome to 5 year old Intel performance AMDcucks

>>58985192
Without the iGPU/APU part

>>58985192
>>58984803
HAHAA AMDKEKS BTFO

>>58984920
You mean wattage?

>>58985220
No, he meant voltage, but hes a complete fucking retard.
The standard off the shelf libraries for 14 LPP have a range of .5 to .9v. Thats what they can pull off with a generic test chip, not including any specialized IP. Insinuating that a transistor couldn't switch at .3v is just stupid and wrong, even if CPU-Z is misreporting. The Zen design is made to excel in low power envelopes, and to have super low idle power.

>>58984803
Using simple math, it's ST performance is lower by 13% than KBL
However, its clockspeed assuming it can turbo to 3.8 on a single thread at all times is 11% lower.

I can come to a conclusion that its IPC is within 3% of KBL in this test, which I don't really know what it tests, FP/int/mixed?
What will decide if this architecture is superior is power consumption.

However things don't look all to swell for Intel, in 2018 AMD will have no problem surpassing them in IPC if Intel continues its 1-3% increases.

>>58985293
Watch Zen+ bring another 15% IPC uplift next year

>>58984807
Core voltage at 0.374V? I read something about 0.9 maybe its fake or is ryzen pure gold?

>>58985313
Probably CPU-Z shitting itself due to new arch.

>>58985312
Please don't say that

My boner is throbbing enough already

>>58985192
Look at the clocks, kike shill

>>58985324
Still 0.9V is very impressive if it is true.

>>58985192
>still 15% slower than Kabylake

Whilst being clocked just over 15% slower. See if you can do the math on that one, Sanjay.

>>58985343
It actually might bring moar IPC, Zen is a new arch compared to memelakes.
>>58985350
And considering you can control each core's voltage individually, sweet.

>>58984803
Even if its IPC is is 5% lower in FP of all things in a synthetic bench, that won't translate to 2% in gaming.

I can safely say that ITS OVER INTEL IS FINISHED

>>58984803
Oh wow, so Zen can actually do .5 step multiplier increases

>>58985400
You're not gonna see 15% outside of some types of specific workloads, more like 7-10%

Which is pretty much better than 3 years of Intel's update.

>>58985256
>Insinuating that a transistor couldn't switch at .3v is just stupid and wrong
Yes, it's possible if you're using germanium. Have you ever wondered where the ".5 to .9v" voltage range comes from?

>>58985312
If Zen+ brings at least 10% ND improve FP...
What a time, it's like the 90's.

>>58984803
That MT, and this is just 1600x. 1800x will go literally off the charts

>>58984935
I get 4.8 for 1.38v on my 6600k

File: HciQqW5.jpg (2MB, 7500x4217px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 7500x4217px

this came up.

>>58985483
>watt=volt

>>58985586
What?

>>58984803
I'd like to buy AMD but there is no alternative to Intel graphics.

>>58985599
Why would you need iGPU? Also APUs are h2 2017.

>>58985483
It comes from the physical characteristics of the gate, and the channel region its sitting atop, you clueless autist. Standard libraries of 22FDX will switch at .4v. Surprise surprise, gate topologies and specific Vts are designed around different voltage domains. .5v is not a bottom limit for a silicon transistor.
Don't talk out of your ass about a topic you know *literally nothing* about.

>>58985604
Suddenly everyone needs an igpu ;:^)

Wow, if it ends up that Intel's core is less power efficient then they should consider suicide.
And if AMD isn't lying saying it has the same perf per op like Excavator then AMD has this in the bag.

>>58985617
That's uses half the die and offers less perfomance than 5y/o entry-level cards. :^)

>>58985604
Intel has superior drivers.

File: 1482432082700.png (531KB, 915x510px) Image search: [Google]

531KB, 915x510px

>>58985621
>everyone complains about intels igpus
>amd releases cpus with no igpu
>WHAT THE FUCK AMD

>>58985632
Where? On Linux? Who the fuck uses Linux.

>>58985634
That's their job. Intel's about to fire shills anyway.

>>58985634
It's called shilling.

>>58985636
Everyone who isn't a /v/ secondary?

>>58985599
You're not their market then. AMD is competing with Intel's higher end chips that don't have any iGPU.

>>58985678
I'm using an i7 and I'm pretty sure that one has built-in graphics. Which intels don't have those?

File: 1482181698906.gif (2MB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x180px

>mfw 1600x is probably 260$
>6 cores, 12 threads
>mfw upgrading from 2008 pentium

File: 1472678654943.gif (1MB, 200x163px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 200x163px

>>58985711
oh fug wrong file nononon

>>58985710
Actual HEDT parts starting with 6800k, goyim.

>>58985710
cpus that have more than 4 cores.

>>58985710
>Which intels don't have those?
The ones that Zen are competing with. The ones with 8 cores and 16MB cache.

>>58985737
Literally useless for 99.99% of people

>>58985739
Nice argument, schlomo.

>>58985739
right, i guess intel is just selling these useless cpus with 6 cores theyve got no market

>>58985739
That's because people didn't have a choice until now.

>>58985737
What do you do with all those cores?

>>58985754
This. Most people wouldn't pay $600-1000 for a 6c/12t cpu. Now that there's Ryzen's offering of ~$300-350, they will.

NO iGPU
O

i
G
P
U

Ryzen is literally useless for anyone who isn't a gaymer.

Sorry, but nobody wants to buy a dedicated gpu just to watch videos on youtube.

>>58985770
>shilling this hard
Poojeet no.

>>58985776
>giving obvious shitposts replies
>81 posters, 26 unique IPs

Really makes you think.

>>58985770
That's child tier bait. Enjoy collecting cow shit for human consumption when you're fired shill.

>>58985762
modern games use them. video editing uses all the core it gets. etc.

>>58985711
Get on my level, Athlon 64 X2. From mid range game rig to shitty facebook machine.

Jesus people with high voltage on the newer Housefire Lake chips. My Haswell @4.6 is just under 1.3v and the bonus is it doesn't catch on fire.

>>58984803
>>58984807
does good IPC translate into good single core performance?

>>58985834
Yes.

File: dindu.png (946KB, 1122x643px) Image search: [Google]

946KB, 1122x643px

>>58985818
must've been nice back then, i bought one of those for half life 2 and the cancerous smoke in css

>>58985830
Name 1 case in which an Intel processor caught fire.

>>58985855
My Pentium 4 went up in smoke after 6 years :^)

>>58985830
Congratulations on winning the lottery. Lucky bastard.

>>58985834
Usually. Basically it's a factor, instructions per clock and clock speed together make up single core performance. More instructions = more performance.

File: LP0riIJ.gif (879KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

879KB, 450x450px

>>58985830
>mfw trying to push my 4690k past 4.6ghz at 1.3v
>cant get 4.7 no matter how much voltage i pump

>>58985770

I just bought a $1600 Intel setup (that's just mobo, cpu, and ram)

It has no iGPU either.

File: .jpg (36KB, 420x460px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 420x460px

>>58985894
>mfw I hit 4.6 under 1.3v on my 4690k with auto overclock

I really dont know if I did fuck up by buying a i5 7500.
I mean I was waiting for zen until my phenom ii set up gave up after 8 years.
Dont know if I could wait 2+months without a pc.

>>58985912
>$1600
>It has no iGPU either.
Good goy.

File: dead.png (239KB, 430x424px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 430x424px

>>58985919
>mfw 80c on air
atleast it doesnt get that hot in vidyagames

>>58985928
What cooler? I used an aio h90? Corsair with 120 rad and fans older model I think. Worked about as good as any air cooler so switched it out for a Noctua that would cost about the same. No pump worries.

File: 1464311021611.png (973KB, 801x1500px) Image search: [Google]

973KB, 801x1500px

>>58985855
>goyknighting

>>58985943
Cryorig H7, probably gonna jump to Zen because I could benefit from moar cores.

>1888
lol how can they get away with being so shitty, my i5 4670 non k gets 1672 on this
DOA

>>58985984
Thankfully for Zen, it's unlocked.

>>58985984
It's 3.4ghz. That's EXTREMLY impressive considering the fuckup that was faildozer.

>>58985970
Nice. Yea I might go Zen we'll see. I'm looking at used Xeon's or Maybe splurge for Zen. I want to upgrade my home media server. I run a ton of shit like nextcloud/plex and other various services. I serve video/music and mobile content to 10-18 users (mostly family). My big family is off the Google botnet completely. E-mail and everything is handled here at home. I could use more cores for more HD streams etc.

>>58985992
still terrible performance considering I have a 4y CPU
I don't think I will be upgrading any time soon if this is the sort of performance boost I'll be getting from it.

>>58985992
>>58985993
Don't respond to trolls.

>>58986007
Dude he's about to lose his job.

>>58986005
Upgrade to 7700k, it's much faster :)

>>58986013
Intel already fired 12k people, they'll let him there for another few months.

>>58986016
if I were to upgrade I would much rather buy a used 6700k for half the retail price of the 7700k and still get the exact same performance
that being said I have no interest in k processors since I have no interest in overclocking

>>58986026
>buying used cumrags

Lel

>>58986025
That's his only possible job, let's feed him.

>>58984803
>>58984807
kimmler is a god of cpus

File: Speccy64.png (21KB, 859x135px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 859x135px

>>58986007
>everybody that is not into my AMD cult is a troll

>>58986056
How can you be so clueless? How much do you think a TOP OF THE LINE Intel processor gets at those clocks?
Hint, look at the second post of the thread.

>>58986056
So AMD is 11% faster than Haswell clock per clock? Neat, that means it's slightly faster than KabyLake per clock too.

Thanks for doing some benchmarks for me, at 3.7GHz too, just like what the 1600X is running!

You're a lifesaver.

>>58985584
Price tag at Fry's?

>>58986080
>you're either with us or you're an intel shill
read my posts idiot
I said that I have no intention in upgrading because the performance gain to me is not worth the money I'll be spending

>>58986095
When will an upgrade be worth to you? When IPC is 50% higher?

See you in 2030

>>58986093
see >>58986095
this cult mentality you guys have is scary to be quite honest with you familia
>>58986101
when I can see actual gains that justify dropping $600-800 on computer parts

>>58986095
Hes responding to you saying it's DOA and thinking that you have a low single thread score.
When the top end intel cpus get comparable scores to ryzen how can you say it's DOA?

>>58986112
>When the top end intel cpus get comparable scores to ryzen how can you say it's DOA?


4 year old Intel performnce
no iGPU
expensive motherboards
unknown stability problems, with Intel you know you're buying something reliable


There's a reason Intel is more expensive, quality of life and features > pure performance

File: 1485624881498.png (234KB, 800x612px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 800x612px

>>58986056

>>58986112
it's DOA because it's matching what Intel has to offer, not destroying them like all the threads have suggested
>but it's much cheaper
which will change nothing because, AMD has been cheaper and better with their video cards for 6 years now and they barely hurt Nvidia sales

>>58986124
>with Intel you know you're buying something reliable
Oh i love my sweet microcode errors. Shitty TIM too.

>>58986125
That image doesn't even make sense. I have 4y old CPU. I'm not upgrading to the new intel line either for the exact same reason

File: 1481910125107.jpg (153KB, 600x339px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 600x339px

>>58986124

>>58986056
i too have an i5 4670, i don't feel any need to upgrade soon, but if ryzen will make it i will buy amd next time.

>>58986153
>downgrading from Intel to AMD

kys

>>58986153
be careful, since you don't want to upgrade you'll be called a shill

File: 1469878333151.png (35KB, 654x551px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 654x551px

>>58986158

>>58985634

Nobody complains about intel iGPU.

About 90% of Macbooks Apple sell come with an Intel iGPU and macfags are fine with it.

The only people who complain about Intel iGPU are retards who buy cheap laptops and still want to play vidya on them.

>>58986124
>expensive motherboards
how much does intel pay you?

File: file.png (40KB, 816x402px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 816x402px

Why does my shillntel score so low on this shitty benchmark? I know it's old, but it's pretty good on other benchmarks, certainly better than a fucking i5 in multithreading

>>58986165
>4GHz faster than 3GHz

WOW AMD ONLY 20% SLOWER PER CORE

>Intel
>Got blueprints from IBM
>didn't want to deviate at all from them
>AMD found more optimal way of doing things right away
>Cyrix backwards engineered a better x86 CPU than what Intel ever could
>Only way Intel could survive was shady business tactics

Intel was always 10 years behind competition.

This is a large reason people are excited for Amd's new CPU even if they aren't buying one, it's a new architecture, something Intel lately hasn't done for... since the Pentium 3... so Intel has been floating along on the back of Pentium 3 nearly 20 years, and will be over 20 by the time they make something new, while AMD has had 3 different cores in that time frame with 2 of them being good, one of them being good for specific applications for a short time, would likely still be good enough today if they released full desktop variants but fuck it, when gamers are concerned its hard to argue in favor of construction and cat cores.

Throughout the entirety of the bulldozer base, look at what AMD did gen over gen... and now look at Ryzen, and imagine it to be Bulldozer levels of optimization left to happen. now realize Ryzen currently on engineering samples that throw errors like a mother fucker, is within/over 5% IPC of Intel's current CPU.

>>58986128
Right, guess I'll just buy a 1000 dollar intel cpu instead of a 400 dollar cpu despite them being within 5% of each other.
>>58986124
>unknown stability problems, with Intel you know you're buying something reliable
silicon doesn't die unless you cram a fuckton of voltage into it. your cpu will survive the next 10 years, unless you're using an intel atom, which'll probably die in 18 months. :^)
do you seriously think chip makers don't manufacture cpus to last 10+ years?

>>58986181
I cant wait to see if either there is a performance stand still, you can't get much faster than Intel is, or if we have been rammed up the ass by Intel for so long we forgot they were even there and its only now that we finally see real vagina we remember a cock is still lodged up our asses.

Intel has way more fuckups than Bulldozer, Bulldozer is AMD's only spectacular fuckup in the CPU market in 40 years, the only other minor fuckup was Phenom which was not even a architecture fuckup since it was fixed in B3 stepping, the other fuckup was K5.
But these are fucking nothing compared to Presshot, Itanium, Larabee, iAPX 432, and their own fuckup with P5 FDIV that wasn't nicely fixed with a stepping, but a fucking recall.
What about their complete failure with the Atom? What an abortion, mobile market? 14nm and lower lithography woes where they allowed their competitors that were lagging 4 years to close the gap to less than a year?

These magnificent failures would destroy 5 companies over, it's a good thing Intel has more money than sense to live through it all.

>>58986169
gonna go ahead and call bullshit on those single thread results
the jump from 3xxx to 4xxx wasn't that big

>>58986128
>not destroying them like all the threads have suggested
nobody said that, ever
it is destroying broadwell-e though, it is in 5% ballpark of 4.5ghz 4core
what is so hard to see?

I'm quite ready to sell my i72600 if it all confirms, because I pretty much get KabyLake but with 8 cores instead of 4.

>>58986177
The i7 6950X has an all core turbo of 3.5ghz.
Its also a 10 core 20 thread CPU losing to an 8 core 16 thread CPU.

I can't wait for Zen to come and and be another massive flop like Bulldozer,

AMDKEKS ON SUCIIDE WATCH

>>58986169
>>58986195

I have a 9 year old e8400. it gets 1020 on single.

>>58986197
>I'm quite ready to sell my i72600
How do you even sell it?

>>58986211
ebay

>>58986195
Except that's a Sandy Bridge(-E) chip.

>>58986195
There is a chart above showing a i5 4590 scoring 6100 in multithread @ stock freq. There is no fucking way that i5 scores more in multithread than my i7 3820, as any other benchmark will show. This CPU Z benchmark is some serious bullshit.

>>58986211
they are still quite popular

>>58986182
>Right, guess I'll just buy a 1000 dollar intel cpu instead of a 400 dollar cpu despite them being within 5% of each other.
Unless you're planning on buying thousands of them you're not going to change the market.

>>58986197
>nobody said that, ever
There are people who said on this very thread. So fuck off

>>58986219
With cheapo-cheapo Ryzen on the way their popularity will drop.

>>58984803
Literally 4 year old performance, how can AMD not be embarassed? Some Intels reach 2600 without issue, that over 60% the performance!

>>58985762
CPU folding?

>>58986124
(You)

>>58986225
you overestimate the intelligence of people buying computers
people will pay hundreds more for intel for the same performance as AMD

File: Screenshot from 07-02-2017 20:25:19.png (447KB, 1885x956px) Image search: [Google]

447KB, 1885x956px

Daily reminder that Intel is currently on meltdown.
Woken up with a kick to its fat ass.


And it's hilarious.

I know I'm gonna get called a shill but this no iGPU is a problem to me.
I was planning on building a HTPC that could output 4k@60hz. Now I'm stuck with intel.

>>58986223
>Unless you're planning on buying thousands of them you're not going to change the market.
No shit, really?! I never realized that. Guess nobody is buying Zen.
I'm gonna go buy that 1k USD Intel CPU.

>>58986270
Wait till 2H 2017 for Raven Ridge

>>58986273
if you want to keep misinterpreting what is I said it's on you

>>58986289
Yes, now fuck off.

>>58986286
>wait for something without a definitive release date

>>58986270

Wait for raven ridge.

Or you can buy a bristol ridge based on excavator as a place holder for raven ridge.

>>58985921
you did fuck up by buying kaby lake i5.

>>58986270
>hardware acceleration for a HTPC
Enjoy your no filters and no postprocessing or custom shaders.

>b-but muh 15 watts so green

File: 1484243851381.jpg (380KB, 1592x806px) Image search: [Google]

380KB, 1592x806px

Stock, non K, i72600

>>58986311
>hardware acceleration
Is everybody in this board a retarded strawman poster or is this just a AMD hype threads thing?
Who the fuck said anything about hardware acceleration?

>>58986321
Integrated Intel GPUs don't have enough power to run any powerful scaling so you either need a AMD or Nvdia GPU

>>58986270

Intel is retarded as well since Kaby Lake does NOT support HDMI 2.0 so no 4k 60fps through HDMI.

>>58986263

Must be why they laid off thousands of engineers who apparently sat on their asses all day.

>>58986336

I don't need your autistic scaling or shaders.

>>58986270
how new are you retards?
Back in the day, there were no iGPUs, motherboards used to have GPUs on them.

File: 1480399506819.png (19KB, 581x260px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 581x260px

>btfo

>>58986349
They didn't sit on their asses, they were told by management to cut costs and that means no new architectures or large changes.

Really interesting that a company with quarterly 3B profit cuts off its means of profit, eh?

Dumb fucking CEOs, that's what you get for putting a fucking chemist instead of an engineer to run the place like Nvidia and AMD have

>>58986379
90% of this board have never seen Athlon64 live.

>>58986370
Adorable excuses.

>>58986336
My current G3258 can actually do 4k fine with 8bit content. It only struggles a bit with 10bit

>>58986379
How new are you to not remember the onboard gpus were all absolute crap?

>>58986413
opposed to what period of time?

>>58986406
>I don't need to scale using NNEDI3
>excuses
fuck off

>>58986420
They were crap enough that it was worth getting low end video cards. Now it isn't because low end video card will give you the same or worse performance than 6600k iGPU

>>58986438
I don't even know what you are smoking, I would like to smoke that too.

>>58986301
How is that a problem scholomo? Enjoy your babbylake

File: cpuz_2017-02-17_08-01-38.png (14KB, 403x402px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 403x402px

stock 4790k here

>>58986396
AMD CPU's before the IHS meme started. Graphite pencil to connect specific bridges on the CPU to overclock etc. Kids who don't have experience with Slot 1 or Slot A. No experience using ramdrives two decades ago to play quake or tribes.

>>58986407
My fucking i7-920 can do that, it can't do

scale=ewa_lanczos
cscale=ewa_lanczos
interpolation
video-sync=display-resample <- my HD4000 Intel shits the bed with this enabled for some reason, even without the lanczos scaler

>>58986535
>4.4GHz single core turbo

Wow, Intel is literally on its knees

File: [email protected] (55KB, 814x404px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 814x404px

i5-2500k @ 4.5Ghz

I only upgrade when I can get double the performance for about the same price. Zen might finally be it.

>>58986609
>double the performance
In what? Because you'll be getting a lot more than that with a 8 core Zen

For single thread, you'll get 10-15% boost I guess

File: 1484857165b9Q0qmS6fl_1_6.png (13KB, 620x336px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 620x336px

Reminder that intel fucked you all in the ass with shitty TIM, again.

>>58986618
>For single thread, you'll get 10-15% boost I guess
His 4.5ghz Sandy Bridge - 1705
3.4ghz Ryzen - 1888

At 4ghz 8c/16t Ryzen is a fucking beast.

File: 1469888557955.jpg (212KB, 853x1137px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 853x1137px

>>58984803

>I3 price - I5 single IPC and i7 Extreme multi IPC

Please, 2 units!

>>58986618
The Zen hexacore in OP is double the performance of a i5-2500k for sub $300. $259 if the rumors are true.
Double the perf/$ ratio is a good indicator that it's time to upgrade.

>>58986650
Tyzen is 3.7 zurbo dont forgwg its ipy is aimprwssive but not that umpressive

>>58986094
it seems so.

File: 930.jpg (193KB, 969x503px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 969x503px

>tfw probably have the oldest CPU in this thread

still does the job though

File: Capture.jpg (95KB, 829x424px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 829x424px

Well fuck, Intel is in trouble.

>>58984803
>same performance per clock as Intel
>obliterates consumer crap when more cores are used
>probably uses less power per core too
>much cheaper
>every SKU is overclockable


What a time to be alive

>>58985894

once you start getting to that point its not just vcore boosting that gets ocs.

File: e8400.jpg (169KB, 959x500px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 959x500px

>waiting AMD for 5 years to deliver.

finally I can build a new pc.

>>58984951
Does anybody even still use icl unironically?

File: test.png (41KB, 439x429px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 439x429px

>>58986786
>1st gen i7
feels ya bro

>>58984803
Now I know why AMD kept their mouths shut on Zen.
They wanted Intel to learn about this as late as possible.

>>58987026
Intel is already in full damage control mode.

>>58987026
Its pretty incredible

>>58987026
>>58987033
>>58987059
Stop bumping your own advertising thread, paid AMD marketing shill.

>>58987074
Nice damage control you got there, mr. Krzanich.
t. Dr. Lisa Su

>>58987074
Try again, fag.

>>58987074
nearly everyone is using Intel here and we are fed up with its shit. that's why we are happy you faggot.

File: kek.jpg (9KB, 167x159px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 167x159px

>>58985894
tfw 4670k at 4.7ghz at 1.25v at 65C max

>>58987004
Yeah, pretty much everyone. What, you thought C++ developers compiled their software with GCC, the slowest and buggiest compiler out there? You must be joking.

The Ryzen chip in the OP is only 65w.

>>58987154
Nobody cares about power stupid fag..
FACT is that its 15% slower at least than Kaby Lake,

>>58987164
Now that's some quality shilling.

File: ss (2017-02-17 at 09.04.03).png (37KB, 407x403px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 407x403px

I'm fine with my i5 3570.

This is just regular turbo boost without extra voltage.

>b-b-but Samsungs process is shit!
>intel has a 10 year process lead
>hurr 14 LPP can't clock, its made for cellphones
>Zen will never clock over 2.8ghz
>its only sandy bridge IPC
>it'll be a house fire
>AMD will be bankrupt!

Now here we are with a 65w 6 core 12 thread CPU clocked at 3.3ghz/3.7ghz that is trading blows with a $600 i7 6850k.
And the Ryzen chip in question is under $300.

Jim fucking Keller does not fail.

File: jimkeller2_qvq6.jpg (365KB, 1772x1750px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 1772x1750px

CERTIFIED

>>58987587
SHIT

File: Speccy 9-26-16.jpg (260KB, 808x861px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 808x861px

>>58984803
b-b-ut my almost 3 year old 5820k is better than that D:

>>58987228
>Now here we are with a 65w 6 core 12 thread CPU clocked at 3.3ghz/3.7ghz that is trading blows with a $600 i7 6850k.
I paid $290 for my 5820k ~2 years ago

>>58984821
It still is not as good as an Intel chip.

>>58987692
>4.4GHz

lmao

File: [email protected] (79KB, 383x373px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 383x373px

>>58987731
Yep, I've even gotten it stable up at 4.7GHz, but that's not my daily OC.

>>58987736
Neat, you managed to nab some good silicon.
If Ryzen can reach those clocks it'll be fantastic.

>>58987763
Yeah looking online I got a VERY impressive chip, most 5820ks need atleast 1.3v to get to 4.4GHz, let alone past it.

But I mainly just encode blurays or similar tasks, so I don't generally need anything over 4.4GHz. Temps are good, never see anything over 70c.

intel is really fucked by Nvidia, as AMD allows re-branding, so Apple can claim they have custom shit that's better than anything else.

File: 1st gen best gen.jpg (90KB, 417x413px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 417x413px

>>58987009
I'm getting Zen if it runs good on win7, but there is really no point yet. On 3.54ghz it runs everything I use flawless, can bump it to 3.85ghz on my current air cooler (phanteks ph-tc14pe) but runs a good deal hotter, and 4.2ghz on water with 1.4v+

Its amazing how well these badboys hold up 8-9 years later!

>>58986177
>10 cores vs 8
>$1700 vs $370

>>58984803
what is IPC?

File: intel-xeon-phi-compare-table-1.jpg (89KB, 660x339px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 660x339px

>>58987866
If someone is willing to spend 2K on a fucking processor they might as well get knights landing ones.

Hope AMD unleashes something to compete with this soon.

>>58987125
This.

This is also why AMD never really took off, even when they had a better product than Intel.

It isn't just about the hardware, it's about the entire ecosystem, and operating systems and compilers in general have much better support for Intel CPUs like it or not.

AMD will never really be relevant I'm afraid.

>>58987903
Knights Crest is in production already.

>>58987903
Unless whatever you're doing can't be paralleized past a few cores, or it would take more work to make it parallelized to work on 40+ cores when you could just use it as is with 10 more powerful cores.


It's not always about having more cores, different tasks can demand different clockspeed/core configuration for the best results.

You can't just throw more cores at the problem

>>58987813
zen does not have window 7 support

>This is also why AMD never really took off, even when they had a better product than Intel.

You must be a Trump supporter with that kind of logic: AMD has never ever in the history of their existence had a better product than Intel.

Ever.

Bitch.

>>58988095
Something something K8.

>>58984803
>IPC is 1-2% of Kaby Lake
Nice fucking stats faggot.

>>58988095
>AMD has never ever in the history of their existence had a better product than Intel
how old are you kiddo?

Are Intel/AMD shills the most retarded creatures on this board?

>>58988162
no, it would be Nvidia/AMD shills.

>>58988126

Old enough to have used Intel products since long before AMD ever existed, kid, and AMD has never made a product that flat out beats/improves/stomps the shit out of an Intel product of a similar nature.

You kids all think if it's cheaper in price for similar performance that means it's better and it's not: performance is either better than or not better than and AMD has never built a processor - not even the Opterons - that outperformed an Intel of a similar class/production run regardless of the pricing.

Yes, I'm older than 99% of you, yes I've been building computers far longer than most of you have been breathing or even existing, and yes I helped make the Internet what it was years ago and is now the shitfest that it is.

Deal with it.

>>58988162
Apple/Nvidia/Intel/AMD/Microsoft/Google ones share the same spot.

>>58987975
Compilers are only relevant to application programmers and they a very little subset of the entire userbase.

>>58988188
>Old enough to have used Intel products since long before AMD ever existed
>AMD founded in 1969

are you 70 years old? I don't think so.

Athlon fucked Pentium so hard, you are still butthurt about it.

>>58988162
>this board
you mean the internet as a whole

>>58984803
What's with all you chinks and poos and jews using these weird tests? Fucking SPEC suite or go home.

>gee maw look at this fucking """"""""""benchmark"""""""""" (((suite))) I just invented with my ass

>>58988270

No, not 70 but close enough and AMD didn't produce an x86-class processor till 1979, son. Intel had been at it for a decade prior to that. AMD's first x86-class processor was built on spec from Intel, for the record, under contract.

Unfortunately you have to look shit up to know it while I actually lived through those years.

>>58988059
Well i'm gonna wait and see what that means.

>>58988188
So your arguments are:

>I'm old so I know better
>Because my personal experience is that AMD never bested Intel
>I made the internet so all my arguments are correct

Your post is a one big fallacy. Why did you even write this.

>>58987656
WRECKER

>>58988302
then learn your shit grandpa, look up what K8 is.

>>58988210
You wish. The "entire userbase" doesn't wanna be left using software unoptimized for their CPU. That's why Intels have always outsold and will always outsell AMDs: users want the best CPU not simply engineering-wise, but also with the best support.

>>58988407
>software unoptimized for their CPU
this is horse shit and always has been, you're a shill

intel's own software is unoptimized for intel's processors even their own compiler

seriously why would you just get on here and lie?

>>58988425
Look, you're arguing against facts. Are you denying that Intel CPUs outsell and have always outsold AMDs? AMD has never had any relevant CPU marketshare.

>>58988302
>60 years old
>still has nothing better to do than autisticly screeching on /g/

thanks for making me feel better about myself, gramps

>>58988440
>facts
it's a fact that zen executes the intel instruction set better than intel

>marketshare
they indeed have competed at many junctures with intel even despite the best efforts of shills like you

i don't like shilling and i don't like intel, intel's shilling has put me off buying any of their products again

so here's your you, tell your boss that new server racks without their products in them will be deployed all over Insta

>>58988036
>You can't just throw more cores at the problem
Tell that to video encoders, 3d modeling software, and super computers.

>>58988487
>it's a fact that zen executes the intel instruction set better than intel
Irrelevant. Are you even paying attention at the discussion?

>they indeed have competed at many junctures with intel
Indeed they have, but yet again that's beside the point. The point is: they never reached any significant marketshare.

>>58988440
Intel has bribed OEMs. Intel has bribed parts sellers to push forward their CPUs to customers.

>>58988487
>intel instruction set
You mean AMD64?

>>58988525
yes, those are tasks specifically made to work on many many cores. That doesn't mean EVERYTHING can be parallelized like that. Which was my fucking point.

>>58988546
Nothing's stopping AMD from paying OEMs too. Stop blaming your competitor for your own shortcomings. Git gud.

>>58988598
Bribery is illegal and Intel was fined for it. Of course the fine was not equal to the damage done to the market or AMD.

>>58988532
As much as you Intel shills want this to be a big victory, nobody cares about Intel. It's the Folger's of CPUs. No loyalty, it's just the default.

AMD's market share is irrelevant to Zen's performance and ability to outdo the wintel chips, it's like you haven't even been following the conversation.

>>58988598
>Intel breaks laws by being Jewish
>"Well you should have outjewed us goy!"
This type of shilling is why I will never buy any Intel anything ever again.

>>58987727

90% of Intel performance
75% of Intel cost
110% of Intels power consumption

Intel literally BTFO.

File: spics.png (66KB, 642x575px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 642x575px

>>58986101
I only upgrade when IPC is 100% higher. I have a Phenom II X4 and I will get 115% IPC with a Ryzen. Time to upgrade.

>>58988645
>it's like you haven't even been following the conversation
Literally the opposite: YOU haven't been following the conversation. See >>58987975. The point is: Zen's performance is irrelevant, because at the end of the day, AMD can't compete because it can't deliver the same level of support Intel does.

>>58988610
>>58988655
Enjoy your nanny states telling you what business practices are kosher and what aren't, you statist cucks.

>>58988686
>because it can't deliver the same level of support Intel does.

Only businesses care about support. I've never met a single home user who used Intel support or said that was their decision behind buying their product. Literally nill.

>Enjoy your nanny states telling you what business practices are kosher and what aren't, you statist cucks.
Knock yourself out, ancap prick.

>>58988710
>4chan /g/ is socialist now
Welp, time to move to endchan!

>>58986166
>>58985634
I'm actively using the iGPU. When I'm streaming with OBS I use Quick Sync so the iGPU records, while discreet GPU is rendering frames.
Not shilling, just giving a use-case

>>58988744
are you really THIS new?

I've been coming here since it was /g/uro. /g/ has always been fairly liberal, even back then.

>>58988744
>you're either a socialist or an anarchist

>>58988686
>Intel support
Like what support? Call Support? ir their support to their chipsets? Or warranty support? Srsly, what in the fuck did you try to say with that?

>>58988319
This. Either >>58988188 is senile or lying.

>>58985770
I'm fucking glad, no wasted die space on something I never fucking use to make more room for a larger cpu die.

Next year hopefully 10 core Zen+

>>58988929
It'll be 12 core or nothing at all.

A CCX won't ever have 5 cores.

File: coolio.png (56KB, 1012x666px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 1012x666px

But will it be as cool?

>>58986702
Did you have a stroke while typing this?

>>58988999
Zen is on 14nm, it'll be the same as intel chips.
considering the IPC it might even be lower, especailly in the coming mobile device Zen versions.

Man, looking forward to being able to buy an AMD laptop and NOT be retarded

>>58989154
>it'll be the same as intel chips.
thats not how it works, Global Foundries 14nm is NOT the same as intel's 14nm

They might be called the same thing by marketers, but intel's 14nm is decently smaller by like 20%.

>>58989127
No, it's just difficult to type while walking downhill on a 4.7" screen.

>>58987813
Why stick with windows 7? It's a shit OS. Install gentoo motherfucker

>>58987125
Most people use GCC or LLVM or MSVC for Windows.

>>58989226
Haha no, most people use either ICC or MSVC or C++ Builder. GCC and LLVM aren't even on the map.

>>58989211
But I like windows 7 :)

>>58989154
> looking forward to being able to buy an AMD laptop and NOT be retarded
Same.
They are quite good in GPU already, but I don't want to downgrade the CPU.

>>58989245
> GCC and LLVM aren't even on the map.
There are either gcc on clang for Linux.

>>58989245
Source? At my job at Cienna we use custom GCC for ARM and some weird MIPS compiler that nobody likes.

>>58989305
>Source?
his ass obviously

>>58989305
>fringe architectures
Yeah, that's pretty much the only niches where open source compilers shine.

>>58989289
>Linux
So... fringe platform? Yeah, sounds about right.

However, I must tell you that I've done a lot of scientific computing on TACC's Stampede (which runs Linux obviously), and it does have ICC available. So no, GCC and LLVM aren't the only options available on Linux.

>>58989341
>So... fringe platform? Yeah, sounds about right.
Do you seriously think Linux is a fringe platform? Let me guess, you only use your PC to play vidya.

>>58989341
>fringe platform
have you ever worked at a big IT company?

What do you think their backend runs on?

>>58989424
>>58989442
>replying to bait

>>58989442
>have you ever worked at a big IT company?
yes
>What do you think their backend runs on?
Windows Server for OS, IIS for web server, MySQL for database, .NET for web apps

File: 1421283746734.png (49KB, 1305x892px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 1305x892px

>>58988744
gtfo classcuck

>>58988773
Ancraps aren't anarchist. They just try masquerade as one.
>>58988757

>liberal
GULAG

>>58989507
well when you work for someone besides Microsoft or one of their subsidiaries, let me know

>>58984803
It's a shopped fake FYI (that's why the IPC matches).
That benchmark is meaningless anyway.

Would it be worth upgrading to this from a 3770k @4.2ghz?

>>58989518
well when you stop moving the goal posts let me know

File: liar.png (24KB, 737x482px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 737x482px

>>58989424
No, I develop software in C++ and AdvPL.

>>58989442
I work for TOTVS.

http://en.totvs.com

>>58989507
You are not me. Pic related.

>>58989524
No, unless you really-really want moarcores and newer platform.

>>58989518
That guy wasn't me. See >>58989534

>>58989534
>>58989545
>damage controlling this hard

>>58989574
I know you're >>58989507. Stop.

File: 1434114592272.gif (2MB, 371x331px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 371x331px

>>58984803
>Copying 5,852 items from ZOA (D:) to Desktop

>>58989534
>I work for TOTVS.
>integrated system management software for 3rd world countries.

So as a developer in the US, why should I give a fuck about your opinions? You know nothing of the development world in a REAL first world country.

>>58989628
daz raciszm

File: cpuzspecs.png (54KB, 821x402px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 821x402px

>3570k @ 4.5

i really wasnt expecting to be tempted for another year

well done lisa su

>>58989592
>>58989574
>>58989545
>>58989534
>>58989507
imagine being autistic enough to fake an argument with a bunch of sockpuppets

>>58989628
>US
>REAL first world country
As a guy who's worked both in the US and Europe before coming to Brazil, I can tell you your country sucks compared to everything I've seen in Europe. Now, Brazil is not so great, but they're paying people with my expertise (I've worked for SAP) the big bucks, so Idgaf. Plus I get to spend most of my time in Argentina, which is a not bad country at all actually.

File: faggot.png (10KB, 694x192px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 694x192px

>>58989664
>fake
The real puerile autist was the faggot who got in the way of my argument with other folks with this stupid post right here >>58989507.

>>58989680
the US is so large, you're full of shit. Work for an IT company in kanas? Sure it's gonna be garbage. Work for a major IT company in santa clara? Or Redmont? Fuck off.

Low level US companies are shit, just like ALL companies in brazil, and MOST companies in europe.

The european companies who DO make something decent, quickly sell out to US companies because they know they have the funding and backing to actually make legit use of their product.

>>58989746
I didn't work for an IT company. I worked for a university in Chicago.

Rest of your post is just buttpain.

>>58989699
>I posted something dumb in an argument and am now backpedalling: the post

>>58989769
You are this guy >>58989507 and you're not fooling anyone.

>>58989760
>I worked for a university in Chicago.
Chicago....?

And THAT'S what you're basing this statement off of?
> I can tell you your country sucks compared to everything I've seen in Europe

Holy fucking shit, you're actually retarded. you've never worked in a true high level development environment in the US. It's basically all linux you dumb fuck 3rd world shithead.

>>58989821
You are this guy >>58989592 and you are not fooling anyone.

>>58989869
>>58989821
But then who phone

File: osoutlook.png (200KB, 1385x945px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 1385x945px

>>58989855
>you've never worked in a true high level development environment in the US.
You're basically trying to win this argument by definition: you get to "define" what is "high level" or not, and your definition coincides with the point you're trying to make, ergo you're right. Except you don't get to do that, faggot.

>It's basically all linux
I beg to differ, and I have the experience and evidence to think otherwise.

File: 1469136680663.png (34KB, 274x200px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 274x200px

>$220 dollar ryzen crushing 6850k

>>58989924
see
>>58987692
>>58987707

>>58989898
>330 business technology professionals

Ah, I remember you!
You got your ass reamed repeatedly and still haven't given up.

https://archive.rebeccablacktech.com/g/image/Qrk9LGW70s54pWuAJl_SRg

Hopefully MS is paying you well.

>>58989950
>can't refute evidence
>ad hominem
>conspiracy claims
You're dead in the water.

File: laughingwhores.jpg (22KB, 340x330px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 340x330px

>>58990009
"I've been in IT for 11 years and have never seen Linux used"

>>58990033
Who are you even quoting?

Hello? Thread about Intel tears, not your shitty OS marketshare.

>>58986093
>>58986056
4670 is 3.8 Ghz turbo (440 per 100 mhz)

the AMD 3.4 is 3.6 turbo (524.44 per mhz)

~20% better per clock

>>58990203
I guess? But we know haswell can easily enough hit 4.5GHz, can Ryzen?

>>58990225
haswell 4.5 would probably get about ~2000 score

AMD 4.0 would ~2100 score, if its at 4.5, then it would be around 2400.

I doubt it will go that high. 4.0 or 4.2 is probably the max Ryzen will get. So around 2200.

>>58988302
how does it feel to be arguing with people half a century younger than you?

>>58990278
...so it's literally the same performance as haswell ~3 years later?

File: speccycpuz.png (67KB, 1095x491px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 1095x491px

>>58986872
explain this:
I'm not overclocked.

>>58990417
Well fuck, AMD is in trouble.

>>58990453
There's at least half a dozen posters that posted their scores ITT, this one is the first outlier, unless it's overclocked.

>>58990477
Well fuck, Intel is in trouble.

>>58990278
>haswell 4.5 would probably get about ~2000 score
we have proof this isn't the case
>>58987692
>haswell-E 4.4GHz, 2130


So haswell certainly isn't 2100 at 4.5GHz if we have proof of 2130 at only 4.4GHz

>>58985855
>ignoring Prescott-log

>>58990312
OP benchmark is 50% faster overall than stock 4790k while costing $50-$100 less.

>>58990503
http://valid.x86.fr/kh6skq
Haswell 4.7Ghz, 2139

>>58990576
>50% faster overall
wont matter for single core
>than stock 4790k while costing $50-$100 less.
if only it wasn't ~3 years after the fact. The 4790k released in May 2014. It's now Feb. 2017.

Not to mention, the 4770k which is VERY similar in performance to the 4790k came out in June 2013, almost ~3.7 years ago.

>>58990626
Good thing Intel hasn't increased its performance at all in 3 years or AMD would be in trouble!

>>58990626
>muh single core
just stop already.
50% more performance for $50-$100 less is orders of magnitude better than anything Intel has done in the last 6-7years.

>>58990669
It did..!
Raise clocks.