HOLY FUCKING SHIT AMD DELIVERED

oy vey

File: 1486432355781.jpg (24KB, 480x542px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 480x542px

>>59070443
BRUH

Will there be wide spread Mini ITX for Ryzen?

File: i7-6900K Cinebench R15.png (33KB, 378x655px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 378x655px

>>59070443
Good luck with that OC

>>59071050
Good luck with that credit card debt.

File: Kimmy Granger and Sydney Cole - Grounded - 2.jpg (313KB, 1044x1566px) Image search: [Google]

313KB, 1044x1566px

>multithreaded performance
wow it's bulldozer all over again

File: 1486956227518.jpg (136KB, 750x740px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 750x740px

>>59071050
>nigga it's half the price

>>59071078
You can literally see the abysmal Bulldozer performance and see how much they've improved.

>>59071078
>get shit on by massive margins in multicore
>barely squeak out a 5% single core lead while at higher clocks
I-its bulldozer g-guys please don't buy it or intel will stop paying me

>>59070443
now gimme a dual CPU workstation board

Doesn't Cinebench utilize AVX? It's quite amazing Ryzen does it so fast with 128bit width SIMD.

>>59071078
That bitch on the right is prime breeding material.

>>59070443
Hey man can you please delete this?

>>59070443
hello

>>59071989

>>59070443
Man that 1800K looks sick as hell. It's only 500 bucks and you get better performance than a 6900k for half the price!

INTEL FINISHED AND BANKRUPT

Intel is finished. FINISHED.

>>59070443
Source?

FINISHED

File: ryzen_physics.jpg (135KB, 979x706px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 979x706px

Somebody call 911

>>59070443
Who gives a shit about multi thread performance. Gaymes only use 1-2 cores. Any single core/thread benchmarks?

>>59072412
>AMD owns Havoc
Try again Jewtel

>>59072435
>>> /v/

File: deletthis.jpg (60KB, 780x438px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 780x438px

>>59070443

>>59072498
Don't pretend you do anything that uses more than 2-4 cores

File: ryzen_r15_single.jpg (126KB, 979x710px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 979x710px

>>59072435
Ryzen single core has Broadwell-E performance

>>59072562
Damn was hoping it would be closer to 6700/7700 performance but still not bad.

>>59072613
Put turbo speed to 4.2 Ghz and you have 6700k. No need to even overclock

File: 1465117076355.jpg (64KB, 750x900px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 750x900px

>>59070443
This is actually pretty fucking nice, lol pahjeet actually delivered.

>>59070443
Intel is literally finished and bankrupt.

>>59072638
Yeah thought so. If they overclock well it's a guarenteed purchase pretty much.

>>59072613
>3.5gh vs 4.2ghz
Sure it does got low scores

File: cb.jpg (326KB, 1280x804px) Image search: [Google]

326KB, 1280x804px

>>59071050
Good luck with that OC
>haHAA

>>59071050
>6900k and a Titan XP
Just end yourself man

>>59072804
That's on LN tho.

Looks like 4.5 on air at best

>>59072703
They are soldered and have a much less TDP, they will be overclocking monsters.

http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-world-record/

>>59072804

That's an anemic clock speed for such an insane voltage, perhaps this is shit silicon.

I was hoping to pull 5ghz on a custom loop and lapped cpu but it seems impossible now, even if its 1.6v for 5 ghz no one wants to give that to a 14nm chip 24/7.

>>59071050
sorry :(

>>59071050
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAAHAHHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

File: told.png (143KB, 437x282px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 437x282px

>>59071050
>>59071078
DAMAGE CONTROL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!DAMAGE CONTROL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!DAMAGE CONTROL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!DAMAGE CONTROL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!DAMAGE CONTROL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!DAMAGE CONTROL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>59071163
Nope.

...wait, there's no avx?

>>59072725
IPC should be clock independent.

>>59073295
there is

>>59073335
They are talking about single thread score not IPC.

>>59072896
Damn

>>59073124

Some people saying that the way the voodo magic that makes the r7s 65w and 95w causes the shown voltage to look higher, people are reporting the actual power draw is dam close to stated tdp.

>>59071078
>stepsiblingscaught

Caught with what?

>>59071078
bruh, this is my life.

>>59074639
Is that total package draw or the cores themselves? Because I guarantee you the 1800x stock only puts ~65-75watts on the cores alone...we still have GMI link, memory controller and L3 cache (the "uncore" elements) power usage to consider.

Just about every high performing CPU is targeted for no more than 10 watts per core maximum usage factoring in single-thread turbo states because that is the general safe limit for these process nodes.
I would be surprised to see Ryzen chips using more than 7.5-8.5 watts per core in typical >95% confidence use cases.

Heck, my old Xeon only reports ~80-90w of power use being overvolted from 1.005 to 1.275 and overclocked from 2.6/2.9Ghz to 3.9/4.1Ghz, when in reality the platform is using more than 140w when ran full tilt.

>tl;dr
Ryzen at top bin clocks is likely consuming ~8.5 watts per core.
12-15w per core is generally the upper limit for safety and 24/7 longevity if you have a monster cooling solution.

Since /g/ is so contrarian, are we going to start sucking Intel's dick once AMD is the market leader? People used to always say they bought AMD products even though they were inferior because they didn't want to give Intel/Nvidia money because of their near monopoly position. I wonder if people will start saying the same things about Intel...

File: 1454820048219.png (256KB, 498x486px) Image search: [Google]

256KB, 498x486px

>be AMDrone
>can't use Thunderbolt accessories because Thunderbolt is an Intel technology

>>59075514
Jewtel needs to sell 8+core CPUs at reasonable price or I won't give a fuck.

>>59075560
Well now that AMD is competitive, they have to lower their prices to compete. And they will.

>>59075540

>Thunderbolt
>macfags
>This much of a try hard

>>59075540
Thunderbolt still exists? I thought that died the instant USB 3.0 was available everywhere

>>59071073
If you can't afford a $1000 cpu, you probably shouldn't be buying things on credit.

Not making a judgement on the merits of getting a 6900K or ryzen here, just good financial advice.

>>59070443
AMD HAS RYZEN FROM THE GRAVE

>>59072804
>1.875V

you fuckin what.

>>59071205
>itty bitty titties

not really.

>>59075084
it's porn. caught fuckin each other.

File: vK4GqBr.gif (2MB, 423x278px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 423x278px

>>59072804
>that core voltage

>>59075642
Thunderbolt isn't a Mac thing.

>>59075540
Not even Macs use Thunderbolt any more.

>Intel BTFO

I'm sorry, but did Intel already lose? Oh, that’s right. Ryzen isn't even out yet. In fact, it’s only coming out in a week. Does having more or less the same performance as a chip that's as half as expensive count as a loss? Is that what you’re saying? Because if you’re saying that I can assure you that you’re wrong. Why would you make this topic when the real benchmarks aren't out? Intel are still R&D right now and they have been the best microprocessor manufacturers in the industry for how many years now? They’re against one of the worst company in the industry who just happen to have a lead because they’re feeding off the energy of having hired Jim Keller. But you know what? They still fucking suck. Intel own the best fabs, they increased their IPC by 5% last year and would of continued if AMD fanboys didn't shill so much. Maybe you should shut the fuck up before you make retarded topics like this. You know why? Because you’re going to be embarrassed when Intel releases decently priced CPUs and someone bumps this topic. Oh look at that, AMD did not say anything about the R5 where the real market really is. Are you a fucking drunk? Are you retarded? Are you autistic? You are a fucking idiot and you should never make a topic on this board again and I’m fucking serious. I almost have a feeling you’re the only guy making all these anti-Intel topics because you’re a faggot hater who doesn’t like Intel because they’re good. Fuck you, be good at something in YOUR life and then maybe try to troll these fucking companies on the board, like I give a fuck. It’s so easy to spot out your threads now, you’re a retard. Always doing stupid shit like this. Why don’t you try to be a good poster? Just for once? For once in your fucking life try not to make a topic like this. That’s just you, you’re always right at getting it wrong. Fuck you. You are nothing.

>>59075793
saved

>>59075440
Ryzen is roughly 10W per core @3.6Ghz, plus 15W for uncore.

any info on the Ryzen 5s yet?

File: 1487703183647.gif (2MB, 260x320px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 260x320px

>>59072804
>1.875v suicide run on LN2

>>59075540

lol I'm a macfag and don't use thunderbolt. Fuck thunderbolt.

>>59075718
>>59075942
Why do you retards associate thunderbolt with Apple? It's not an Apple thing. Plenty of PCs have it. It's just a higher speed connection. If you want to use an eGPU on a laptop, you'll need thunderbolt, which means you'll need an Intel based laptop. If you want to get the most out of an external SSD, you'll need thunderbolt.

>>59076026
Apple was the first one to adopt it/advertise it heavily.

How soon can I buy it?

>>59075540
>Buying products that use proprietary connections.
Have you learned nothing over the years?
What happens if they just "stop " supporting it?
All those things you paid for become worthless or you have to keep around old computers just to use them.

>>59076037
They were one of the first to use USB C as well. And they were definitely the ones that pushed it the most.

>>59075866
Yeah we're all gonna need hardcore sauce for that claim.

No way the uncore only takes 15w

>>59072804
>1.8V

ENJOY YOUR HOUSEFIRES

>>59076140
But, Thunderbolt wasn't taken up heavily by non-Apple hardware vendors because of the high prices Intel charged for Thunderbolt components.

The take-up of Thunderbolt outside the Apple ecosystem is miniscule.

>>59076218
Most laptops that are designed to compete with the MacBook Pro have thunderbolt.

>>59076026
Because Apple was the only one to really use it and make it relevant. Yeah, some PCs had Thunderbolt, just like some had Firewire. It was still associated with Apple, because they were the only ones that made it standard.

Now, even Apple has completely dropped Thunderbolt in favor of USB - C. Thunderbolt could not be more irrelevant.

>>59073124
>I was hoping to pull 5ghz on a custom loop

Why, are you mentally retarded? Intel's octa cores don't come anywhere close to 5GHz. You get 4.5 if you're lucky under water. More cores equals more difficulty in achieving stable overclocks. The idea that Ryzen was going to overclock beyond what Intel's HEDT chips do was always retarded. Broadwell-E can't even reach the same frequencies as Haswell-E on average, and runs a lot hotter in the process.

>>59076233
Jesus Christ you're retarded. The the new Macbooks DO have thunderbolt. Thunderbolt uses the USB C connector now. Apple didn't abandon it.

>>59076232
But does anyone actually use Thunderbolt port on a Windows workstation laptop when they also have an eSATA port and USB 3.0/3.1 ports?

>>59073124
Thats on all 8 cores. That's pretty fucking high in that context. Most of these extreme overclocks are on single core.

>half the price
37% is closer to a third of the price

File: Macbook.png (96KB, 1032x566px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1032x566px

>>59076264
Nope. MacBooks don't have Thunderbolt. It's just USB 3.1 over USB-C.

MacBook Air does have Thunderbolt.

>>59076325
>the lowest end modern Mac doesn't have it
Wow. Their new Macbook Pros still have it. You claimed Apple abandoned it.

>>59076281
I think the only people who really use it are people who use eGPUs.

File: 1474081899193.gif (567KB, 300x456px) Image search: [Google]

567KB, 300x456px

Good on AMD. Hope they deliver a good product.

At this point I'm pretty convinced that 1700X is the one to get, it seems to offer the best value unless you really need cherry silicon.

File: 1429728562830.jpg (68KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 633x758px

>just built an intel/nvidia computer a few months ago

I got cucked

>>59076433
Intel I can understand but novideo? It's 2017 senpai

File: whaddafuck.png (281KB, 443x333px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 443x333px

>>59072435
What are you talking about? The more cores/threads to give to your VM while utilizing a GPU passthrough to play games means better performance in both the host and the VM. What do you actually have Windows INSTALLED on your PC? I'm lmaoing at your life right now.

>>59076433
Unless you actually use programs that are optimized to take advantage of more than 4 cores/8 threads, you aren't losing out on much besides price. Ryzen's single core performance is on par with Intel now, so most programs will be about the same compared to Intel. By the time most games are optimized for 8 cores, it'll be time to upgrade your processor anyways.

>>59076356
That wasn't me, anon.

>>59076492
the 1060 was cheaper than the 480 when I bought it. I just hope AMD can stay ahead so I can make the switch next time I upgrade

>>59076492
Nvidia > AMD > Intel
>he isn't running an Nvidia GPU with an AMD CPU