Ryzen DOA

>>59033768
t. bullshit

where is your source?

>>59033853
>source
There isn't any source because OP is a Intel shill, we already know Ryzen is a meme and I can't wait until it releases to see the look on Intel's faces

>>59033902
>wait X amount of years for the best AMD gaymur CPU
>fanboys flock to /g/ with bogus benchmarks
>day of release "b-but it is cheaper than Intel for less and same performance"
>real life performance worse than Bulldozer
Mods sticky this please as a reminder than you.

>>59033768
I know you have a shit source but honestly you can't trust the poo in Loos after the stunt they pulled with polaris being the same speed as a gtx 970 and 980, we all know how that turned out

File: perfrel_2560_1440.png (35KB, 500x810px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 500x810px

>>59034000
How did it turn out?

>>59033768
t. retarded Jewtel shill

Also don't you fucking sully the image of Duchovny you heathen.

>AMDumbfucks constantly posting bullshit leaked benchmarks
>not waiting for the actual release where we will see the true performance because every time we've listened to leaked benchmarks they've been wrong
>call everyone who is skeptical a Jew or an intel shill
You wonder why everyone thinks ryzen waitfags are annoying
You guys have literally been waiting 5 years for your favorite company to deliver performance Intel had 3 years ago

>>59034186
I like how you forgot to mention it's the same performance Intel has now.

>poo in the loos outright lying saying it has skylake IPC
>nothing happens
>point out it actually has sandy IPC
>lol Intel shill t. Jew XD XD

>>59034203
Except it isn't
The IPC is haswell tier, the reason it pulls forward in benchmarks is because MOAR COARS

>>59034214
>actually
No.

>>59034231
Yes, and Kaby Lake is also 15% faster than Skylake.

>>59034241
Nice source you have there
Gonna post your multithreaded benchmarks again?

>>59034186
the leaks for polaris were pretty much on point, see >>59034099


it's just really fashionable to hate on AMD. Nobody is saying Intel's parts aren't fast, they're saying the parts are overpriced.

>Intel had 3 years ago
Yeah, so within 10% of what they have right now? .....i mean

>>59034252
You sure about that? The 480 crossfire meme and the first leaks showing it to be furyx tier?
>>59034249
Except literally nobody is saying that, you're just spouting memes as a defense

File: you.png (33KB, 1020x426px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 1020x426px

>>59033768

>source
>my fucked ass

SAGE, HIDE AND FUCK OFF!

>>59034276
First Skaylake leaks showed it had 20% more IPC than Broadwell, you really wanna argue leaks?

Your dad who works at AMD is not a credible source

>>59034295
Yes
All leaks are fucking retarded and it seems nobody here as learned anything from trusting them

File: IMG_1854.jpg (67KB, 1084x481px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 1084x481px

>>59034251
Fuck off.

>>59034304
The bulldozer leaks were actually spot on
They showed it being garbage

>>59034326
>wccftech
>leaked benchmarks again
What excuse will you guys come up with when the actual release comes

>>59034342
Even those were wrong
It showed bulldozer being better garbage

>>59034276
uhhh...all the leaks i saw placed it around the gtx 980, which is exactly where it is now. I saw zero leaks saying it would be a fury x. I don't doubt those leaks exist, but obviously most people didn't take that seriously, so neither should you. If you can show a leak for Ryzen saying it has better IPC than Kaby Lake, then I'll call that leak bullshit, but literally every leak we have is showing the same results.

Are you saying that everyone who has gotten their hands on Ryzen engineering samples has somehow, independently, managed to inflate benchmark scores just to fuck with you? Have you ever heard of Occam's Razor?

>>59034359
Way to move the goalposts nigger. No one has official benchmarks faggot, we're working with what we have.

(((source)))

1 more week and we will see how Ryzen will fare against Intel in real world applications.

>>59034276
>The 480 crossfire meme

They said that it performs like a 1080 in AoTS, they never said anything about other games.

>first leaks showing it to be furyx tier?

You mean the bar graph where the 480's bar literally went off the chart, which obviously was a joke? Again, wccftech might have been spouting bullshit per usual but I don't recall AMD saying anything like that.

>>59034391
And building stupidly high amount of hype on leaks
>>59034389
Are you saying everyone who received engineering samples showing skylake to be 20% faster faked it?

>>59034399
Like Skyrim?

>>59034326
How come a $1000 CPU has near equal single thread performance like a $389 CPU from AMD?

>>59034410
All hype is the responsibility of its owner

>>59034418
because of the jew

>>59034410
>Are you saying everyone who received engineering samples showing skylake to be 20% faster faked it?
No, they just made bullshit graphs with photoshop and posted them online, like over half of Zen leaks are.
The very first real verified leak of Skylake was some 2.0GHz or slightly higher part, I don't think you remember.

>>59034409
And it wasn't 1080 tier
And no I wasn't referring to the joke graph

>>59034412
Yes, games, and video decoding/encoding, winrar and so on.

Not some synthetic benches.

>>59034445
But anything 'real world' will shrink the difference in synthetics between Intel and AMD so that just makes Intel look worse.

>>59034465
Except Intel actually does better in real world apps

>>59034410
feel free to post links to these leaks claiming 20% better performance, because the three I just found on google all say 4-8% performance gains. Again, there will always be outliers. This is simple stuff that even children understand; if everyone in a child's class says the school bus is going to be 5 minutes late today and Henry the Idiot says it's going to be 20 minutes late, only the other idiot child in the class is going to say that everyone is wrong because Henry is an idiot.

Do you want to be an idiot like Henry? If not, stop picking the most outlandish claims you can find for use as a benchmark for all others.

>>59034509
citation needed

>>59034509
Intel has more powerful hardware that isn't fully utilized in the consumer market outside of synthetics, so no, it's not doing better in real world apps.
Here's a /v/ example, you know that 5-10% difference in IPC between Ryzen leaks and Kabylake? That's not gonna be even 2% in games because games don't hammer the FPU like a drunk hooker.

>>59034445
>>59034509
There are leaked gaming benchmarks out there for Ryzen and the results fall in line with everything else we've seen.

>>59034531
Sure thing bud
>>59034519
Go test it yourself if you aren't poor

>>59034545
Leaks are only valid when it reflects poorly on AMD.

>>59034545
Wheree are they ?

ayyyyyyyyyyy lmao!
FINISHED & BANKRUPT!

>>59034545
No there arent

>>59034555
>go test it yourself
I would love to senpai, but how do I get a Ryzen CPU right now?

File: shot0001.png (711KB, 1280x532px) Image search: [Google]

711KB, 1280x532px

>>59034555

>>59034556
Leaks are only valid when they reflect greatly on AMD
If not then it becomes
>muh ram
>c-clockspeeds
>backhand tactics

>>59034582
>how
stop being poor

>>59034563
They were part of the Cunard PC leaks back in December.

>>59034610
Show them then

File: bench.jpg (162KB, 708x733px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 708x733px

>>59034577
uh... yes there are

>>59034651
>French nobodies from last year
Lmao

>>59034682
The same frog nobodies that leaked K8 half a year before it was released? You know that chip 9 years before you knew the first thing about hardware?

>>59034709
Literal nobodies leaking fake shit early
Disgusting frogs

File: 1266347064507.jpg (41KB, 477x475px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 477x475px

>>59034729

>>59034682
>>59034729
next time you haven't got a clue what you're talking about, I invite you to use google to find information before making blind claims, OK?

>>59034740
John, haha. Where did you find this one?!

>>59034774
Read the filename to find out.

>>59034758
>frogs did in fact leak false shit early
>dood imma need you to use google man google it

>>59034797
>false
what makes you say that?

I remember you from that /v/ thread. You got BTFO fairly hard there, "anon". You should try shilling on lereddit instead.

>>59034651
So Ryzen is way behind in games?

>>59034797
>>frogs did in fact leak false shit early
What did he mean by this?

Source: Intel marketing department.

>>59033768
jew lies

>>59033768
stop pretending to be retarded

>intel shills are restless today

File: 1484180842925.png (475KB, 782x1080px) Image search: [Google]

475KB, 782x1080px

>>59034871
>6c 12t ryzen 3% behind 6c 12t 6800k
>way behind

>>59034938
It's also behind the $230 6600K, but yes, I'm the shill I guess.

File: ASUS-Crosshair-VI-Hero[1].jpg (291KB, 1500x1500px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 1500x1500px

>mfw looking at the ryzen motherbaords
What the fuck is wrong with mainboard manufactures? All I want I a high end motherboard will useless BIOS options that I don't even understand that doesn't look like it was designed by a 12 year old with a pirated copy of auto CAD. WHY WHY WHY.

>>59034967
>people actually buy this shit
What is wrong with guts threads

>>59034966
Ryzen engineering sample had a locked clock of 3.4ghz on all cores, while the Intel CPUs were still able to turboboost single core performance. Retail ryzen won't have this problem

File: 001440.png (351KB, 1060x578px) Image search: [Google]

351KB, 1060x578px

>>59034938
That is also the benchmarks for the 8c/16t version of Ryzen you shill fuck

>>59035021
What is clockspeed?

>>59035019
>>59035030
You were already proven as a liar based on your earlier post. So I'm not going to believe you.

>>59035043
Not me, retard. Also don't dodge the question faggot.

>>59035055
>not me
sure
I can't answer the question because I don't speak frog.
But based on the other benchmarks I don't believe the clock is locked otherwise they would be lower
https://nl.hardware.info/nieuws/50470/eerste-onafhankelijke-amd-ryzen-benchmarks

>>59034651
>$400 AMD chip that is not released yet
>20% slower than 2 year old $300 Skylake chip
I don't want to be the first one to say this but, it looks like AMD might actually be finished this time.

>>59034871
Nah, the top end Ryzen part is clocking at 4ghz, and that's an octocore. The quadcore parts will certainly clock that high, if not higher. The jump from 3.4ghz to 4ghz will net about 20% more performance, putting the Ryzen part neck and neck with a 6700k.

The only unanswered question about Ryzen, really, is what kind of overclocking we can expect, because that will be a big deal against the Intel parts.

I don't really know why there are so many that are so resistant to the notion of AMD bringing high performance parts to market that undercut Intel's price points. That's what AMD has always done. If they didn't do that, the company wouldn't exist. I'm guessing it's kids who aren't old enough to remember how irrelevant AMD made Pentium 4.

>>59035078
>not realising I'm moving you in the style of a Jeopardy answer
kys

>>59035089
*mocking

>>59035043
Not sure who you think I am, or what your beef is, but this is my first post in this thread friendo. You don't have to take my word for it, canard PC and other engineering sample holders confirmed locked clocks. Review samples with unlocked clocks are already being sent out to reviewers under NDA, we should see the results in a couple weeks and then there will be no shred of doubt.

>>59035081
>>$400 AMD chip that is not released yet
At 3.4Ghz
>>20% slower than 2 year old $300 Skylake chip
at 4.2Ghz

3.4/4.2 = .81
So, at 81% of the Skylake's clock speed, it's 80% as fast as it.

>>59035087
The 6600k they're testing is not OC'd either and I know for a fact that you can push 4.5GHz on air

>>59034967
why do you care how it looks like if it functions as it should?
you put it in case and forget about.

Honest question from a newfag: How much was the improvement Sandy Bridge had over their previous architecture? As far as I've read it remains the most consistent improvement in the last few years.

>>59035087
>The jump from 3.4ghz to 4ghz will net about 20% more performance
Does it hurt when you pull information out of your ass or are you just used to it by now?

>>59035140
>why do you care
hard to explain that to 18y-20y olds

>>59035129
yes, which is why the overclocking on the quadcores will be interesting. On the one hand, we've seen nothing from the leaks that suggests the chips will manage significant overclocks, but on the other hand, Canard PC reported a 5ghz single core overclock on Ryzen.

Personally, I don't really give a shit about overclocking, though, so Ryzen I might get an XFR Ryzen part and forget about it.

>>59035157
nehalem to sandy? seriously overrated
sandy to ivy actual 10-15% as far as I know
then it went into 2-5% to this day so in 5 years it improved whole damn 8%

that's why everyone is excited, CPU side of things was stale and boring for too long

>>59035206
OSD? you can't use orange motherboard even if you can't see it?

>>59035216
Why the leaks so far I'm disappointed.
The only reason I need a fast CPU is gaming and by the looks of it they'll fall behind once again despite the hype.
I give no fucks how fast it is on Cinebench if it costs more than 6600k and performs worse

File: asus_rog_swift_curved_ips_display_2[1].jpg (254KB, 1404x1135px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 1404x1135px

>>59035140
Because I want my shit to look cool, just... not like that. Also I refuse to pay for something that looks so fucking ugly.

>>59035018
I think the problem with all the asus rog shit is that people buy it because of the features and then asus thinks people like the design so they double down. At least that's what I want to believe. I seriously hope nobody spending 400€ on a motherboard thinks this looks good.

>>59035245
You do realize that they'll also release 4 core/8 thread and 4 core/4 thread parts, right?

File: 1479477113848.jpg (453KB, 2323x1305px) Image search: [Google]

453KB, 2323x1305px

>>59035246
this one is semi decent, their WS stuff is good

>>59035171
Difference between 4ghz and the 3.4ghz sample Canard PC had is 600mhz, which is ~17% clockspeed improvement over the sample.

I'm flattered that you'd suggest my ass is the source of mathematics, but really I just did a simple calculation on my computer.

File: ASUS-Z87-Motherboard-lineup_7[1].jpg (71KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 720x960px

>>59035284
But it's no the high end product. I want high end, without tacky design. Why is this so hard? Also the printed lines on the PCB are shit. Asus midrange motherbaords from 2012/2013 looked so much better. What are they smoking?

>>59035279
When? For how much? Why do you assume those will be anywhere near the performance the 8c/16t?

>>59035303
>+17% clockspeed = 17% more performance
Seriously killurself

File: c ccscssas.jpg (64KB, 634x581px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 634x581px

Hello, Peter. What's happening?

Uh… we have sort of a problem here. Yeah. We are gonna need you to go ahead and uh... train Raji here on all our systems.

Yeah. If you could just go ahead and make sure you do that from now on, that will be great Mmmmk?

File: 1483264932293.jpg (254KB, 1599x999px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 1599x999px

>>59035246
>freesync monitor looks better

really makes you think

>>59035316
>all that faux gold
>"looked better"
Get the fuck out.

File: 5-630.3415661307[1].jpg (19KB, 630x420px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 630x420px

>>59035347
Design is the sole reason I'm getting the Freesync eizo monitor with that AVHA panel instead of a gsync one, because they are all so fucking tacky it makes me want to puke.

File: Gigabyte_GA-Z87X-UD4H.jpg (288KB, 550x634px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 550x634px

>>59035354
At least the gold makes some sort of sense. It looks like it servers a purpure, the thing being electronics and all. It's still tacky, but more subtle. This is my current motherboard. I really like this design. Why can't more mainboards look like mine?

>>59035405
because people don't like having a gigantic BLOCK for the southbridge.

>>59035405
You have weird taste, I like the Gigabyte you posted but that ASUS from before is dogshit. Gigabyte are most likely putting out some UD series models too, don't worry.

>>59035424
remember when boards sued to ave fans on them?
fan died on me in a year, had to use case fan pointed at it, it didn't die by a miracle

File: GIGABYTE-AX370-AORUS-GAMING-5_3-840x630[1].jpg (58KB, 840x630px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 840x630px

>>59035461
>Gigabyte are most likely putting out some UD series models too, don't worry.

The thing is, if I want the fully feature package I have to go tacky. Of all the high-end ones, I think this is at least the least offensive.

>>59035484
the problem is fans add clearance issues to the board for larger video cards, and also potentially add to noise from it too.

I would really like if manufs just built heatpipe and fin coolers onto the VRMs and SB but they just can't seem to step away from their big blocky shitpiles they love tacking onto the VRMs and SB.

>>59035319
At the end of February, like the other Ryzen products.

The 4 core without SMT will almost certainly be cheaper than 6600k. The 4 core WITH SMT may well be cheaper as well.

Because, in case you hadn't noticed, most games don't really scale well with more cores. And even the ones that do tend to get GPU bound pretty quickly once you move past quadcore.

>>59035539
Airflow for cooling VRMs is going to be complete garbage though.

Personally going to go for the Taichi and hope ASSrock doesn't fuck it up.

>>59033768
>IPC identical to sandy bridge Xeons

>but runs at higher frequency, has moar, coars, and can overclock

>>59035561
I'll hope there is a way remove this tacky """io-shield""". I wish there was such a thing as after market VRM and chipset coolers.

>>59035596
>chipset
>2017

>>59035021
>$500 AMD Ryzen
>getting BTFO by two year old $200 Skylake
How will AMD even recover?

>>59035596
you can always get some copper heatsinks and thermal glue them to the VRMs and SB.

>>59035604
Southbridge. Whatever.

File: 1fx2km.jpg (71KB, 888x499px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 888x499px

>blender doesn't count
>passmark multi-threaded doesn't count
>passmark single threaded doesn't count
>cinebench doesn't count


I wonder what doesn't count next.

>>59035617
>you can always get some copper heatsinks
Where? I don't have spare motherboards just lying around nilly willy.

>>59035021
>engineering sample at 3.15GHz (locked clock confirmed)
I can't wait for official benchmarks, fucking kike shill.

>>59035613
Look at the frequency you nigger faggot

It has higher IPC

>>59034433
>And it wasn't 1080 tier

Do you have an AoTS bench to prove that? Asking out of curiosity since AoTS is known as an AMD game.

>>59035641
games, just you see how 9 games out 10 going to have higher fps with 8core than i7
and they going to complain how that game is very very important to them so they have to go i7 for it

File: 1432259490310.jpg (68KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 700x700px

>tfw no matter if ryzen is good or bad the shitposting will never end

>>59035669
https://www.amazon.com/Enzotech-MOS-C10-Forged-Copper-Heatsinks/dp/B004CL89D8
something like this.

>>59035736
do you glue them?

>>59035736
That's just for the south bridge. What about the VRMs? Also I'm not even sure those sizes are standardized.

>>59035641
I'll wait for eventual
>games don't count

>>59035762
Never mind, I'm a moron who can't read.

>>59033768
>intel shills damage controlling this hard

>>59035720
>>59035783

Of course games won't count, wit the sort of monstrous floating point and integer performance ryzen looks to have games don't matter either. Then again single threaded games might count when run on a 5ghz kaby lake chip.

>>59035815
>5ghz kaby lake chip.
Dude housefire lmao.

>>59035762
>>59035785
you can just glue more on until you've covered the die. It's not going to force you to only glue a single heatsink to a single MOSFET or SB die.

>>59035753
You use thermal glue or thermal tape. Regular glue will insulate the contact and fail at higher temperatures.

>>59035823

Thats okay because as long as Intel is winning double standards

>don't count

>>59035851
If
>games don't count
why do we need Intel then?

When are they going to release the Vega/GPUs?

>>59035937
Some time in Q2.

>>59035899

For servers.

>>59035982
>Naples
>Snowy Owl
>HPCA APUs

>>59033768

>My dad works for Nintendo

>>59036022

Erm, Xeon Phi?

>in b4 tesla

>>59035641
>>59035783
see
>>59034651
>>59035021

>>59036148
Yes, Tesla. Xeon Phi fucking sucks. Also new Radeon thingies.

>>59035555
>will almost certainly be cheaper than 6600k
unless it's much cheaper, which I don't really think it's possible I'll take the 6600k since it performs better at literally the only thing I care about
games

File: 1424715856582.jpg (32KB, 312x342px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 312x342px

>>59036175

>3.4ghz old stepping with turbo disabled on a test motherboard that wouldn't even detect a gtx 1080 among other things

>AHAHA, RYZEN IS A BLUNDER

>>59036214
>3.4ghz old stepping with turbo disabled on a test motherboard that wouldn't even detect a gtx 1080 among other things
The article doesn't say anything about that

>>59036175
Hmm so it's Broadwell-Skylake level IPC for cheapo? So, why do we need Intel?

>>59036235
It says exactly that. At least try to shill properly.

>>59036236
Because $300 is more than $230.

>>59036273
Hmmm how much does Ryzen 4c/4t cost?

>>59036297
I don't know but we don't even have leaked benchmarks for those so what is even the point?

>>59036321
The point is that Ryzen has Broadwell-E IPC while being cheaper than Intel's good goy offerings so why should i EVER feed the jew?

>>59036363
I have no idea what you use your computer for but I will get whatever is cheaper and performs better for the things I care about (gaming). Right now, unfortunately, that's Intel

>>59034186
>You wonder why everyone thinks ryzen waitfags are annoying
This is the first time I've replied into a Ryzen thread. I want ryzen, snowy owl and naples be really fucking good to rise all boats. I want zen+ to be magnificent.

I've owned Intel stocks for years and enjoyed the dividends but I fucking despise their cpu crippling tactics. You want to overclock? Better pay $50-500 more for a cpu. Oh you want AES-NI? Only on some cpus. What, vt-d? Here's a handful of proper cpus with $200 premium. FUCKING JEWS GODDAMNIT.

I want AMD to finally compete with intel. It's good for me and every paying customer. It's good for you, anon.

But I'll wait till NDA's over and I get anandtech's and others benchmarks. Poo in the loo journalists can go suck a dick.

>>59036417
>You want to overclock? Better pay $50-500 more
You mean $10 to $30 more, right?

>>59034651
Ryzen clocked at 3.1. try again.

File: 1482820652906.jpg (264KB, 684x912px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 684x912px

>>59033768
>"So from a credible source at AMD"
>not including said source
So you're saying you have no source then?

>>59036461
yes, and it't still right there with a 6900k, what is your point?

>>59036461
It says 3.4 right there.

File: $50-500.png (271KB, 2478x1283px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 2478x1283px

>>59036417

>>59036505
Single core turbo, if that's even working.
Don't even bother looking at those 2nd GHz numbers, the 3.5 Turbo 6950X can turbo to 4.0 on a single core, and that's not mentioned anywhere on Intel's site.

Base clocks are important, turbo is very specific as it has different numbers running one core, two cores, four cores, 8 cores, etc etc which companies usually don't make easy to find.

>>59036550
Usually you'll need a better chipset as well, you know who licences those off to motherboard manufacturers?

So your pictured $30 is not the real cost here.

>>59035021
Hey you dumb cunt, that's clearly a lower clocked engineering sample.

File: 3849fh34frfb3 039.png (82KB, 295x162px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 295x162px

>TFW Intelfags will get BTFO a little over a week from now

>>59034233
>Does that mean AMD proessors are just a good as Intel processors?

"Keep in mind that ..."

tl:dr
Let me summarize.
no.