Thread replies: 24
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2
File: tmp_9347-416901846269770.png (30KB, 550x420px) Image search:
[Google]
30KB, 550x420px
This is for all the Intel shills comparing Ryzen to Bulldozer. Why don't we do just that, with the numbers we now have?
The 8150 was 67% the single core speed of an i5 2500K, and the 8150 was more expensive.
The R7 1800X has 5% MORE single threaded instructions per clock than Broadwell-E, which is still the top Intel processor. The R7 costs 1/4 of the Intel chip.
Yes, AMD has moar cores than comparably priced Intel chips. But unlike Bulldozer, these are full cores with their own pipelines and FPU.
Ryzen has one major disadvantage, it runs AVX2 instructions at half speed. Consumer software however almost never uses AVX2, and GPUs handle AVX-style workloads better anyways. Maybe this will be a problem for datacenters?
Going into the next few years, Ryzen is a major advantage for AMD: it's a fresh, new, unoptimized architecture. Intel is still pushing Skylake optimizations and their basic architecture dates to P6. Their hyperthreading implementation is based on the Pentium 4. AMD's SMT is significantly more efficient.
Finally, Bulldozer was priced like shit. It cost more than the same performance from Intel. With Ryzen, comparable performance is cheaper at every SKU.
>>
File: tmp_9347-AMD-Ryzen-7-1800X-Single-Threaded-Benchmark-WM1163437254.jpg (66KB, 1079x477px) Image search:
[Google]
66KB, 1079x477px
Ryzen compared to Intel chips, single core. Note this earlier test had Ryzen turbo disabled. See the difference, how Ryzen compares to i7s versus how the 8150 compared to the 2500K?
>>
>>59066402
Looking at it now the 8350 wasn't that bad if the price was right.
>>
>>59066426
It wasn't a terrible budget chip, especially if you got one that could OC well. It just was never good enough to justify over an i5.
>>
>>59066426
I have an FX-8370 and it's a hot, awful piece of shit that can barely get 100FPS in Overwatch @ 1080p with an R9 Fury.
>>
>>59066380
Now do one without an Intel from the 1960s shill.
Try at least a 4790k.
It's 2+ years old.
>>
>>59066426
It was only bad in single threaded applications. Which at the time was everything. Which made it a bad processor outside of a few specific use cases.
Let's not pretend that AMD didn't totally fuck up.
>>
>>59066492
it was also extremely overpriced at launch
>>
>>59066492
>only bad in single threaded applications. Which at the time
Can you all shut up about "the bad old days of single threaded"? You will NEVER get away from needing single threaded performance on CPUs. They are not fucking GPUs that work by definition in parallel.
Get it well in your stupid autistic skull.
You.will.always.need.it.
>>
>>59066486
kek what
my fucking i3 can get 100+ easy with an RX470 on max everything
I actually went to 150% render scale because my monitor is only 60hz
>>
>>59066525
Typing.like.this.is.fucking.dumb.
Yes, single thread performance will always be relevant, but don't be a moron and pretend it's all that matters in 2017. Even fucking browsers are multithreaded.
>>
>>59066545
overwatch tends to run better in intel/nvidia across the board
your i3 would probably lose at bf1 etc
>>
>>59066426
But the phenom was faster in single threaded applications and had almost as many coarz...
kitty coarz were still pretty good though and I don't think AMD should abandon the arch just yet
>>
>>59066525
it will always be needed, sure, but right now Intel is giving me 10% better single core perf and literally half the parallel power
given that I will inevitably need both these things, it makes sense to go with the option that's better overall, which in this case would be Ryzen
at least until 6/8 core mainstream i7 chips start coming out if they ever do
>>
>>59066590
Of course, it would be embarrassing if my i3 didn't lose to a nominal eight core in a multithreaded workload
>>
>>59066626
In FP heavy multi-threaded workloads they might be closer than I'd like to think. I cannot wait to replace this chip.
>>59066590
It's DX11 game which means single-threaded as hell and pretty much requires nvidia's hardware scheduling for it to not run like complete ass.
>>
>>59066770
>DX11 game
w-wasn't EA the first company really urge for low level apis ...
>>
>>59066380
>QUICK RUNDOWN
DIE IN FIRE FUKING FAG
AND TAKE YOUR FORCED CRAP WITH YOU
>>
>>59066380
>it runs AVX2 instructions at half speed
oh vey!, now its time to watch intel suddenly push AVX2 intensive applications and promote it, of course ignoring the gpu
>>
>>59067810
That will turn every jewtel CPU into furnace straight outta hell.
>>
>>59066380
/g/ ; Where you can tell how good a consumer product is by the number of shill threads telling you it's crap.
>More is better.
>>
>>59066806
Overwatch is Actiblizzard though
they're not exactly trailblazers in the technical field
>>
>>59067810
>>59067824
the thing is that workstation are a dwindling market segment, and server operators run whatever they feel like that they more often than not compile themselves anyway.
webservers and databases give absolutely zero fucks about AVX or any other sort of FP, SIMD or otherwise.
>>
>>59067810
Not possible, customer favorite G4560 doesn't have AVX at all
Thread posts: 24
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2