>Ryzen chips with the slowest Single-Core speed is faster

>>59099534
Yeah and unless they also cut prices Intel is pretty much done.

>>59099534
They're in a state of panic because they can't keep pumping out poor to none improved chips at three times the premium

>>59099534
>Intel better come up with something...

They don't have to. They have all the OEM contracts, AMD has none, and they won't be able to get any new ones either as long as their portfolio is 3-4 desktop cpus.

They need to cover low, mid, and high range, plus server chips, and mobile chips, for OEMs to even CONSIDER using them.

>>59099534
Theres something that I don't quite understand.

Cycle for cycle comparisons don't really make sense because how the work they do within a cycle is drastically different. You can have reallllly old 3.0ghz from the 2000s and compare them to 3.0ghz processors from today and realize that new ones are far superior. The clock speed didn't change, but how the processor works did.

Given that in consideration, as much as I want jewtel to die and for there to no longer be a monopoly, shouldn't the comparison be of the processors at their base clock speed and not overclock/underclock the processors to operate at the same frequency?

If the processors are similar enough, then I suppose comparing it via similar clock speeds is fine, but what I really want to know is maximum performance.

A maximally overclocked ryzen vs a maximally overclocked 7700k would be the best comparison I would think, and not similar clock speed comparisons.

God I hope AMD comes through for once.. please make the jews stop.

>>59099697
They have those, they're just not being sold yet. Because you know, paper launches usually don't go well, and they probably already have their hands full as it stands.

>>59099699
What the fuck is wrong with you retard, did you not even bother reading the op image?

>>59099697
I'm a fan of AMD, but this.
AMD will get a market in the builder's scene and a small gain in desktops, but nowhere else.

>>59099862
stock ryzen comes clocked lower than stock i7s.

The image shows the ryzen 7 going to 4.5ghz. The i7s can literally easily get into the 5.0+ ghz range.

If the maximum of the ryzen was 4.5ghz, then intel wins again because intel can be clocked higher and perform better.

Average /g/ user amirite. Calling people retard when you can't read

>>59099534
but that's not the 1700, which is actually slow

>>59099945
>The i7s can literally easily get into the 5.0+ ghz range.
No. Less than 10% of i7 7700ks will hit 5.1ghz stable on a water loop.

Lying kike faggot.

>comparing top tier overclocked ryzen to a shitty 7500

LOL

Another
Massive
Disappointment

confirmed for not even trying.

Sincerely, 5.0ghz 1.26v 7700K owner.

>>59100851
tends to happen when the TDP is so low

>>59100955
IPC =/= single thread performance

>>59100895

Yo son you do realize 5.1ghz with AVX load stability means 5.3 or 5.4ghz non-AVX load stability, right?

Also only poorfags don't have a water loop, you're not a poorfag are you?

>>59100984

AMD < INTEL

Hey, I can pull these out of my ass too! \:D/

>>59101003
IPC is performance PER CLOCK
if you clock higher, it will perform better, even as a single thread.
if you want to compare IPC, take two chips from the same arch and generation and they're going to be the same at a given clock speed.

>>59099697
pure conjecture coming from a clueless moron.

AMD is selling prebuilts right now. they've got massive SoC contracts right now. they've got Ryzen prebuilts lined up right now.

this information can be found within seconds. are you ignoring it deliberately, or do you just speak out of your ass in general?

>>59101068
no shit

Look, I'm not a shill or a fanboy, but this particular image is just outright bullshit. No other benches support this. This is a total fabrication.

>>59101082
yes, then why are you complaining about them using a 7500? it's the same design as the 7700K core for core

INCEL AND NOVIDEO ARE GOING TO PAY FOR THEIR CRIMES
>https://www.wired.com/2009/12/ftc-sues-intel-for-anti-competitive-practices/
>https://techreport.com/news/8547/does-intel-compiler-cripple-amd-performance
>http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=49#49
>http://www.pcworld.com/article/3086895/hardware/eu-court-has-intel-inside-appealing-14-billion-antitrust-fine.html
>http://www.anandtech.com/show/2443
>http://hothardware.com/news/new-nvidia-drivers-disable-physx-if-a-nonnvidia-gpu-is-detected
>http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20100119134616_AMD_Accuses_Nvidia_of_Disabling_Multi_Core_CPU_Support_in_PhysX_API.html
>http://hothardware.com/news/indepth-analysis-of-dx11-crysis-shows-highly-questionable-tessellation-usage
>https://www.cryengine.com/community/viewtopic.php?f=355&t=80565
>https://www.techpowerup.com/165707/tsmc-gives-nvidia-priority-for-28-nm-manufacturing
>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-06-10/ex-amd-workers-at-nvidia-lose-bid-to-end-secrets-lawsuit
>http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2014/05/26/why-watch-dogs-is-bad-news-for-amd-users-and-potentially-the-entire-pc-gaming-ecosystem/

>>59099534

7700k is priced $50 less han 1700X right now

>>59100955
this is an IPC comparison, not a vidya benchmark.

go back to /v/ and come back in 4 days, you'll have plenty of those to happily shitpost about.

File: 1461789268757.jpg (877KB, 1280x927px) Image search: [Google]

877KB, 1280x927px

>>59101101
Oh-oh! You made a mistake there buddy.

You used a fact while "arguing" with a retard, watch out next time...

>>59099534
I'm sorry but what is this about scaling? Meaning they just 'think' that's how the it would perform at that speed or did they actually overclock it?

>>59100989
>wasting your money on something retarded as """"water""""
>caring to have a 0.000000001 sec. speedup for your overclock
hf with your huge investment + monthly high electrical bills

>>59100955
yeah, were gonna need pics and timestamps for that i fnot feel free to jump into a oven kike lover

>>59099697
>They need to cover low, mid, and high range, plus server chips, and mobile chips, for OEMs to even CONSIDER using them.

They have zen based chips planed that will all be released before the year is up

File: Smug_9d906d_5762907.jpg (42KB, 600x476px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 600x476px

>>59101105
>Incel
>Novideo
Go back to /r/ayymd.

File: autistic writing.png (45KB, 200x194px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 200x194px

>>59100989

File: 1479168033758.jpg (49KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 640x640px

>>59100989
>implying water cooling is any better than air cooling
Why aren't all the huge servers and data centers using water coolers exclusively, then? Oh right, because it's unreliable and requires a shit ton more maintenance to achieve literally the same. And that's without mentioning the higher upfront cost.

Waterloop faggots' state: Blown (kek) the fuck out.

>>59099699
Because we're not 100% sure how high Ryzen will overclock without liquid nitrogen. We don't have a few hundred water cooled numbers to average yet.

File: AMD-Ryzen-7-1700-vs-Core-i7-7700K-DinoPC_GTA-V[1].png (2MB, 2560x1312px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2560x1312px

this cpu will only be good for some operations and benchmarks
games and more complicated crap will still be faster on a intel cpu
and that's pretty sad, i thought they would fix their shit after the really disappointing bulldozer

>>59099697
>200 OEM machines til the end of march 17 at launch
>what is Xbox and Playstation
Sure this is a zero.
Just wait for ZEN ARM rocking smartphones, if they work out intel will be digging their own grave since ATOM is a total failure.

>>59101354
But you are wrong.

>>59101290
he will take a picture of the screen since the PC will frozen at a single keystroke.

>>59101354
>image posted in a video where the CPU or even the stock cooler are not shown

>>59101359
Zen ARM is K12, and apparently Zen is so good at low power that K12 has been put in the back burner

>>59101337
Because they mostly use multithreaded 20 core cpus at 1.6ghz and shit doesnt go over 40°C with AC turned off.

>>59101337
data centers are designed around splitting the load up as much as possible, as well as running in warmer ambient air temperature than you would want your desktop to run it. also, servers have much better airflow through the entire case, you dont need/want water cooling in a server

>>59100989

water cooling as it exists in pcs is just a more complicated way to achieve air cooling

literally only for autists

>>59101354
that shit is faker than Pamela Anderson's tits

>>59101354
2 the OY 2 the VEY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Fy87gUVisQ&feature=youtu.be

Shalom.

>>59101422
this is fact

>>59101388
The CPU is not even a Ryzen, the LID look like a FX. He probably just made a dummy to make the video.

>>59099534
Will they be good to emulate my chinese video games?

>>59101416
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HO6Ys3PPIw
I love this dork cannuck.

File: 1463726086702.jpg (64KB, 709x538px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 709x538px

>>59099534
>yfw the used sales corner on the tech site you always visit is full of people trying to dump their kaby lake cpu's

>>59101377
i really hope i am
but to be honest i expected something like this when news about zen started to pop up

>>59101354
oh no muh 3 fps

>>59101464
i havent seen him be serious about anything in months. like maybe his home setup videos which were more "look how much money i have to waste" than practical. his multigamer 1 computer videos were pretty useless

>>59101354
that's the 7 1700, a fucking 3.0-3.7 ghz 8 core 16t cpu, up against a 4.5 ghz 7700k, what do you fucking expect

Why didnt he oc the 1700

>>59101516
he said he would in another video.

>>59101354
why don't they do the same comparison of a 6900k vs 7700k and see how the results fare

>>59101354
Wheres the source on this?

File: kabymeme.png (2MB, 1778x925px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1778x925px

>comparing 3.4ghz 8core/16thread cpus to highly clocked 4core/8thread cpus
there's a reason why there little to no reviews covering these comparisons

>>59101549
it was on a video that was made private really fast https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mJIP0-1xDo
and here is a reupload https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Bwl0QndhS0

>>59099534
>at certain tasks that can be done faster because of additional cache
I'm a zen fanboy but common m8

>>59101600
But that wasn't the case with bulldozer my friend.

>>59101471
Oy goyim, pay twice to get 3 more FPS, your eyes see at 6 gorillion fps, 3 make a difference between stop motion and realistic fluid movement!

>>59099534

Stop quoting this goat fucker.

He claimed the 480 was as fast as a 980.
https://www.wccftech.com/radeon-rx-480-gaming-performance-review-leaked

>>59101637
they should have learned their lessons with bulldozer

>>59101636
Of course you retarded shill, you would know that of you had a clue of how your OS manages the cache, ram and the HDD swap

Stop quoting this goat fucker. He's a confirmed liar who wants to generate clicks.

https://www.wccftech.com/radeon-rx-480-gaming-performance-review-leaked

>>59101603

This shit is as legit as wccf.

>>59101354
a 4.2 base clock against a 3.4 base clock gets only 4fps avarage. Even worse, its a 95W cpu against a 65W

I really wish to know what kind of system he tested GTA V because how the fuck you can get this low fps in 1080p?

>>59101648
He's not wrong if he got one of AMD's golden chips.

https://youtu.be/zWASNajSdpg

>>59101743

He is wrong, if you have to include a qualifier after the fact it's a fucking lie.

>>59101716
at least they do show the motherboard and cpu

>>59101766
>putting "If you have to include a qualifier it's a lie" as a qualifier after "he is wrong"
So he's right.

>>59101809

Because he has to say it was a golden chip after hyping the average 480 could get that performance?

Or Because you are getting your nuts busted goat fucker?

>>59099534
I make 120k with coding c and I my war machine is powered by an 1st gen LGA1550 socket you little wankers muh cpu muh muh

>>59099899
And here's the good thing for AMD. The pre-built market is decreasing sharply for consumers, while the custom market is ever expanding. Just look at Nvidia having their best quarter, YET AGAIN. Desktop parts are well in demand, where as the average user is not buying desktops anymore because of mobile. OEM desktop deals are not as important anymore and will not be in the foreseeable future. Laptops still are though, so I will give you that. They need to start getting back in on the laptop/ultrabook market.

What AMD REALLY NEEDS to do though is get back into the server and business market. Which is possible but will be a steep climb. That exascale chip they have will be a nice step. But for right now, AMD is on the track to getting back big league into the custom desktop market. It was only a matter of time too, with the limits of silicon.

File: AMD-Ryzen-7-1800X-vs-Intel-Core-i7-6900K-gaming-performance.png (19KB, 477x264px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 477x264px

EBIN

>>59099534
windows 7

File: 1487967538470.png (17KB, 200x194px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 200x194px

>>59101068
I know what it is, asshat. Spoiler: IRRELEVANT.

>>59101101
Less cache, no overclocking (AMD has it), pointless numbers in the real world.

>>59101179
AMD still ruined, son.

>>59101269
I'm sorry about you being a poorfag if a few hundred quid is a "massive investment" :D I pay around 30 euros a month for electricity, which is like nothing at all.

>>59101290
>hurr durr because I don't believe it it can't be true
Grow up. I work in one of the biggest PC chains of my country, 13 years of constant growth and profit. I get to cherry pick batches before they even hit the shelves. My L639Gxxx says hi ^_^

>>59101333
Please see picture attached.

>>59101337
>b-but muh cost
What are you, poor?

>>59101422
Water performs better, that's what counts.


Now, would you lot please calm down? AMD is doing great at the 8-core market when running cherry picked multithreaded CPU benches against stupidly overpriced (60% profit margin) Intel high end, this is good for prices at that sector, but if they can't even come CLOSE to Intel top dog single thread performance they just aren't relevent in any way at the biggest market: Average consumers.

I hate the Intel monopoly as an idea as much as anyone but jeez, it's not like AMD is ever really coming back or anything, those days are gone :/

>"With our overclocked 1800x sample,under Noctua cooler given by AMD, we have passed beyond the stock single thread performance of 7700k, in a specific bench, and the temps were great. We had no concern about temps during our run which passes the ST performance of 7700k."
>"Single thread score will be so great. According to this performance we can say that 7700K will be history, even for gaming, from now on"
>"Overclock is no problem at all. Though we can not say a certain frequency due to NDA, I can say that it is impressive. Overclockers will be happy."
>"With one click I can reach great OC's. So I won't really bother with the manual OC no more."

Intel is fucked.

>>59102629

The 1700X can reach what, 4.1ghz? Intel is a full 1000mhz ahead, so even if ryzen managed to match or exceed clock vs clock single thread performance (which they can't) they still couldn't win :(

>>59102750
What will something like the 1200x or 1400x clock to?

>>59099534
JUST

>>59102766

Hopefully better, for all our sakes, but from what I've seen so far I have no doubt they won't make it.

This seems to me like Bulldozer #2.

I even had a friend, who knows a high lever pro overclocker personally tell me Ryzen would hit MORE mhz on air than Kaby, the hype is surreal when normal sensible people spout shit like that.

File: BcGDz6K.png (164KB, 1483x1418px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 1483x1418px

>>59102750
The 3ghz base clock 1700 clocks to 4.2ghz. The 1700x and 1800x both have significantly better binning and could easily do 4.5ghz.

>>59102585
yeah?
Grow up. I work in one of the biggest security contracters of my country, 13 years of constant growth and profit. I get to cherry pick batches before they even hit the shelves. My Leopard 2A7+ says hi ^_^

File: bulldozer_damage_control_.png (410KB, 1080x1795px) Image search: [Google]

410KB, 1080x1795px

>>59102856
It's like you weren't around before faildozer launch, there was no official hype around only damage control. AMD knew it was shit, motherboard manufacturers knew it was shit, reviewers predicted it would be shit. Fanboy hype is inevitable but doesn't amount to anything, especially reviewers now report very good results.

>>59103088
>JF-AMD
THAT FUCK

>>59101354
>that huge difference between low and high fps for the i7
that's not good...

>>59101394
K12 will probably be used as a backup if ARM servers actually take off

Will probably never see the light of day otherwise

File: 1487463731225.png (59KB, 209x241px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 209x241px

>>59102585
>What are you, poor?
>You shouldn't care about the amount of money you spend if you aren't poor
what the fuck kind of logic is this, caring about amount of money spent and having a high income aren't exactly mutually exclusive, and beyond that, watercooling only performs better in the short term, eventually it heats up to the same temp an air cooler would and it stays there for longer as well because of it's higher specific heat capacity - so that other Anon is right, there's literally no point in spending money on watercooling for servers/data centers where the load would likely be near constant, temps would be exactly same
And regarding the second to last paragraph, you say that as if average consumers buy Intel for any reason other than mind share
Normies don't even know the difference between multi and single thread performance, there's a reason why having moar cores is such a huge marketing point for any processor, regardless of the fact that having more cores doesn't actually affect performance in the majority of things normies actually uses their computers for

>>59099534
it's also important to note that the ryzen chip is overclocked to full and the 7700k is not so as a real world test this is bullshit.

File: 1454301616252.jpg (20KB, 480x451px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 480x451px

>>59101600
its a great comparison because of the price to performance.

>>59103275
It's not as bad as you think. Average is all that really matters in this case. Min and Max need to be taken in context. If the average is relatively the same between Ryzen and Intel chips, but Intel has higher mins and maxes, all it really means is that their outliers are not a very good representation of that particular set of data. Which is why we do average in the first place.

>memory over 16gb doesn't work above 2400mhz currently

great

>>59101892
>OEM desktop deals are not as important anymore

Go to your closest city's business district. Observe all of the glass towers. In every floor of those glass towers there are tens of desktop machines for workers. Each one probably has a support contract associated with it too.

OEM deals are important.

If Dell suddenly decided they're putting AMD in everything now, intel wouldn't die but they certainly wouldn't be happy about it.

File: 1474391931226.png (418KB, 627x627px) Image search: [Google]

418KB, 627x627px

>>59099534

>faster than the fasted

File: 1485606960998.jpg (70KB, 947x339px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 947x339px

>>59104745

>>59104712
Did you just scan through my post and not actually fucking read it?
>The pre-built market is decreasing sharply for consumers
>for consumers
>What AMD REALLY NEEDS to do though is get back into the server and business market
>business market
What you quoted was me talking about the consumer desktop market. That aside, even though desktops for business are healthy, it is still shrinking as thin clients and virtualization shrink become more and more prevalent. You mentioned high-rise office buildings, but another big buyer of desktops are college campuses. And having worked in and deployed shit on a campus, I can tell you that the entire library was moved over to thin clients.

>>59104795
>implying that troll is even a 1/10 as good looking as the shitwrecker

>>59104971
>implying its not actually him

https://youtu.be/qyD_Q8RZh_M?t=5m56s

>>59104848
>but another big buyer of desktops are college campuses
Sadly not so true anymore. Shit's moving to the Clouds. Shit, I've seen entire computer labs running on thin-clients.

>>59105001
teeth arent the same
checkmate, fag

>>59105010
>And having worked in and deployed shit on a campus, I can tell you that the entire library was moved over to thin clients.
>the entire library was moved over to thin clients.
God you're fucking dumb

File: 1486441296584.png (132KB, 640x190px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 640x190px

>>59104745

>>59105040
Computer labs have far more demanding requirements than libraries, anon.

Also, most of those thin clients are AMD embedded chips, usually some G-series dual-core SoC. So either way, AMD still wins.

File: 1470787835151.jpg (351KB, 960x1412px) Image search: [Google]

351KB, 960x1412px

>>59105027
>>59104795

File: 1357271286549.jpg (4KB, 80x91px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 80x91px

>mfw the only reason amd exists is because of gaming console contracts for the past 20 years

File: 1484189928406.jpg (71KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 512x512px

>>59105113
>past 20 years

>>59099945
only half can make it to 5ghz, less then 10% can make it to 5.2 and about 25% to 5.1
kaby clocking to 5+ easily is a fucking lie.

File: intelmeme.jpg (57KB, 1160x800px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 1160x800px

>>59099534

>>59101337
Honestly wonder if there would be a market for a water loop server room. use only copper plates and copper fittings for the server rack, and pipe it all out, having redundant pumps, sure it would cost a bit more, but a server rack filled is something along the lines of what 100-500K$ if not more depending on setup, at that point the cost of water would greatly diminish. and likely the power draw of a pump that could keep those cpus cool would go down in price as well apposed to all the fans necessary.

File: getaloadofthisguy.jpg (10KB, 200x219px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 200x219px

>>59105113
>MFW AMD has only had four gaming contracts ever, and only since 2012
Gee anon it's like you're stupid or something

>>59102585
>but if they can't even come CLOSE to Intel top dog single thread performance they just aren't relevent in any way at the biggest market: Average consumers.
right those average consumers who run delidded cpus with custom water loops at unstable overclocks

>>59105250
...As opposed to a temperate-controlled server room kept at 25 degrees Celsius with a fuck-ton of Delta fans running at 100% rpm?
Have you ever been in a server room before?

>>59099570
>Intel is pretty much done
Yeah because they have pmt all the market with computer manufacturers and servers and such.

Don't get me wrong, I want AMD to win so we can have nice things via competition, but it's not going to be this easy.

File: ishygddt.jpg (23KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 600x600px

>>59102585
>AMD showed Ryzen matching the IPC of the 6800K
>"they can't even come CLOSE to Intel top dog single thread performance"
>AMD's 8-Core has already matched Intel's 6-Core in IPC
>"they can't even come CLOSE"
Pic related

>amd has better processors
>still losing violently to intel
is any one company more cucked than amd?

>>59105359
b-bbut Bulldozer!

>>59105287
Not sure if you know, but you literally answered my own question, each fan takes power, and not a small amount, the ac takes power and its not a small amount, mean while, 2 or so pumps per rack flowing water through the server out the server, out the room to dissipate else where, possibly on top of the building, or just somewhere the heat is easily vented, yea, definitely a market, especially when you consider power savings over time.

>>59105349
No one in the enthusiast market who is even remotely aware of the market wont buy intel anymore

>>59105359
you are

back to the cuck shed svenb

>>59105420
>enthusiast market
That's pretty small in comparison

>>59105394

u dumb nigga
We're usually not talking about just one server rack, but dozens if not hundreds. If you multiply the costs of water-cooling equipment appropriately, it's cheaper to just run more efficient AC units for the entire room.

File: a6d364fe36d0402e827ca70dd3dccbda.png (357KB, 685x841px) Image search: [Google]

357KB, 685x841px

intel is done.

>>59105439
yea, looking it up, they make server racks that are built for watercooling that are largely plug and play.

The issue is the server room having the infrastructure, its something you purpose build a room for.

What you commonly see is just easier to retrofit existing rooms, or companies not willing to put the the initial cost when renovating a room.

>>59105436
Doesn't matter, word spreads out of the enthusiast community (anyone who builds their own computers) to everyone

>>59105491
It might, but that doesn't matter to the OEMs or server manufacturers.

AMD has a long battle ahead and needs good weapons to fight it

File: v.jpg (1MB, 2508x1613px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2508x1613px

>>59102585
>What are you, poor?

>>59105472
what is this meme even trying to convey

>>59105546
autism and a lack of friends

>>59102296
apparently every motherboard worth a damn has win 7 drivers for ryzen

>>59104795
Oh shit.

>>59103589
what it shows is quality of life, something I have been saying for god damn ever,

because of the clock speed, it will take bigger hits and get lower highs, but because all the background shit has 4 extra cores, 8 extra threads, you see the load balance skewing higher, meaning that intel spends significantly more time at lower fps than amd does, here is a very funny thing, scale the gta5 max down to amds max, the numbers are a bit funny when doing that, it just shows quality of life that amd is going to be bringing to games that hammer quad cores.

>>59105989
You don't need 8 cores, Windows 10 Game Mode will fix this problem

>>59106002
are you fuckin retarded or are you pretending?

>>59099945
the average single core number on userbench for the 7700k is already 140, so basically a maximum overclocked ryzen is just barely competitive with a stock boosted 7700k, in the real world the benchmark op posted is useless bullshit made to sell chips.

>>59106010
It's true and you know it.
8 cores are irrelevant for professional gaming

i want to live in a world where intel has some competition

>>59105113
the only reason AMD (still) exists is because of Intel's stupidity

>>59106030
>barely competitive
>is 5% faster

I think you should recheck the word 'barely'
Also even assuming you delid your Kabylake, void your warranty, get a water cooler, get one of the rarer samples that can actually hit 5.0 without burning down the house it'll still be in the 147-150 range.
I wonder if those 500MHz at best are worth it for 1-2% ST performance while getting absolutely destroyed in MT performance.

>>59106031
for pro gaming, sure, they go after higher fps and turn all the settings to minimum to get it.

for gaming? no, most games are going to be built on 4 cores/threads from now on, that is nothing new, but those games that use 4 cores, they are going to suffer, having lower averages, due to background processes, or even just leaving a browser open in the background, or doing ANYTHING else and playing games, when a process does something on an i5, you feel it bad, on an i7 4 core, you feel it less, on a 6 core, almost gone, and on an 8 core, nothing at all.

Even games that use all 8 cores, when you stress the cpu with a game, and then a background process starts, you still feel it FAR less then you do on a quad core.

This is something we have known for god damn ever, but 6 and 8 cores were to overpriced for qol it offered, now they aren't. soon 6 cores will make the i7 irrelevant, hell, would be shocked if benchmarks don't use this week to disable cores and extrapolate how good the 6 and 4 cores are going to be, shit is going to be fucking fantastic.

and lets just assume that these processors function just like intel ones at the same clock and have no overclock headroom, the performance they offer at base is STILL good enough for gaming for almost anyone, with the added bonus of the brute force power then intel has even overclocking the hell out of the kaby lake.

This is the game changer many of us have held on to old builds for because seriously fuck going from quad core to quad core.

>>59106075
its a shill, ignore it

>>59103360
>what the fuck kind of logic is this
It's troll logic.
There's a hook in your mouth.

File: gaemrer.jpg (8KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 480x360px

>>59106031
>It's true and you know it.
Yeah, everyone knows that Microsoft will slap on a sticker saying "gaming edition" that will have no actual improvement on performance, will log what games you play, and call it a day well making more fucking money off fools than even Intel.

File: 1422481127739.png (355KB, 500x447px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 500x447px

okay guys, let's talk about prices

File: 1486599117659.png (57KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 625x626px

>>59106170
>mfw

>AMD
>Faster than intel at single core, single thread
>Tones more cores anyway
FUUG

>>59106194
>no iGPU
>no HEVC 10bit 4k decoding/encoding
>no quicksync
>no optane
>no WiGi
>no hackintosh support

CPUs are more than just performance..

>>59106207
You forgot the DRM and backdoor and killswitch, Intel has quality like a Lexus, AMD is like a Mustang, fast but low quality and comfortable.

>>59106207
>no iGPU
>no HEVC 10bit 4k decoding/encoding
>no quicksync
if you spend 500 dollars on a CPU, why would you not get a GPU?

>>59106207
multi purpose CPUs are cancer

>>59106260
If my GPU dies I'm left sitting here until a new one arrives
With a iGPU I don't have that problem

>>59106276
Sorry, I forgot Nvidiafags have to replace GPUs every year because mosfets and caps burst all the time after warranty expires.

>>59106276
>if my PC component dies, my PC doesn't work
wew...in that case they should also add RAM some SSD and a miniature display on the CPU surface, just in case

>>59106276
What kind of faggot doesn't at least have a few GPUs lying around from old builds? A normalfaggot that's who, why did I even start this argument.

>>59103306
AMD will probably produce something other than x86 at some point but for now focusing on x86 makes the most sense. That's a proven area for CPU sales. The ARM market is crowded and jumping in is risky. Everything other notable ISA is kinda dead at this point and AMD backing them probably wouldn't change much. I think if their next few product launches are successful you can expect something different from AMD

Ryzen 3 and 5 when? Need more cores but not that much more

>>59106396
>Everything other notable ISA is kinda dead at this point
Wait for the MIPS resurgence lead by the chinks, and possibly RISC-V becoming something to avoid the botnet
Though AMD was full on in jumping on ARM on the server market, the SkyBridge project and K12 were proof of that
But since ARM servers haven't taken off, and with Zen doing insanely great, it seems that their ARM efforts went nowhere

>>59100955
This isn't top tier nor overclocked

>>59106276
You're like those retards who throw away their old phones the second they get a new one. Then when they have to claim warranty for whatever reason they have no phone for weeks.

>>59102629
what is that green from?

>>59106075
5% faster on full overclock against a non overclocked intel chip. you don't need to delid shit or have a water cooler.

who is really uninformed here. the person defending fake benchmarks with lies or the reasonable one.

>>59106560
Some Russians

>>59106578
anything trustworthy?

>>59106460
no ryzen chip is clocked at 3.8 or 4.5 shill harder earn those rupees pajeet.

Do we have a single core speed for the Ryzen 5s yet? The single core speed should blow anything into have away.

>>59106575
Good thing your "non-overclocked" Intel chip isn't just a few hundred MHz away from its OC limit at stock you dumb clown.
It's gonna need those theoretical 500MHz to beat the 1800X by about 2% if that and only lose by over 80% in anything else.

>>59100955
how asspained will you be when a $150 ryzen chip outperforms your 7700k?

>>59106595
Ryzen at 3.4 is beating Kaby Lake at 3.8 nigger, lrn2read

So the non-X Ryzen chips are best for non-overclockers?

Kaby Lake might beat Ryzen at IPC on AVX2 heavy programs like x265, but it's a "more threads wanted" parallel world at the same time.

>>59106702
X and non-X chips are identical, they can both overclock. The difference is that X chips are binned and are guaranteed to reach higher clock speeds.

>>59106614
the 1800x is $200 more expensive, how is it meant to compete with the 7700k?

>>59106032
Good thing Intel isn't springing up any form of competition

>>59106800
By blowing it out of the water in anything not gaming related? Kinda like Intel's own 6900k and 6950X

>>59106396
>>59106438

They've just released a very competitive x86 arch

There's no point in trying to shift the market away from x86 now

>>59106702
We won't know until reviews and user experience come around

>>59106817
except it's $200 more, so really your only solution to the argument is throw $200 more at the problem that isn't really a problem at all.

>MAH $550 CHIP BEATS YOUR $330 CHIP

you can take about 20% off ryzen is a good release amd doesn't need you to shill this hard. n

>>59106855
It's $200 more because it's a way more powerful chip? Are you retarded? Its throughput is nearly double of the 7700k

>>59106855
1800x has 8 physical cores

>>59106875
It's $200 which makes it a competitor for the x99 platform not the z270.

so basically you're only arguing with yourself, no one with $340 for a processor will be buying a 1800x

>>59106911
well yes, because they can't afford it. that's how money works

>>59106891
>>59106875

the point is based on direct competition based on price not on the 8 cores. amd fags used to be frugal now they're becoming the new intelfags with their "mah $550 chip" shit

>>59106920
The 8 cores go from $500 to $320, nothing's stopping you from getting the cheaper and one overclocking.
It's probably gonna overclock some 200MHz less, but it's much cheaper.

>>59106933
claiming that the $550 chip is meant to be a direct competitor to the 7700k is false it was meant for the 6900k where it cuts the price in half and offers marginally better performance.

seriously stop the idiotic shilling and be real for a minute.

>>59106956
Good thing there's more than one chip out there, huh?

>>59106966
Actually, no
Every Ryzen is made from the same chip
We still don't know how it will clock with cores shut off

>>59106990
I meant chip as SKU, not chip as die.

File: stop_making_stupid_posts.gif (598KB, 240x180px) Image search: [Google]

598KB, 240x180px

>>59107008
you've already proven you will say anything with no knowledge of what the fuck you're talking about,

>>59107044
Suck my cock, dude

>>59101354
And this, gentlemen, is why you don't trust Intel shills ever. Very little details were given in this video about clockspeed or cooler.

>>59101359
>if they work out
>jim keller
>still running best mobile fucking chips in iphones

yea, it'll workout.

File: ryzen benchmarks vs gaming.jpg (176KB, 646x696px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 646x696px

>>59106933
>OCUK staffer “Gibbo” reports successfully overclocking a retail Ryzen 7 1700 processor with an ASUS Crosshair VI Hero motherboard ($255) to 4.05GHz on all 8 cores. With this overclock the CPU would effectively be running 450MHz higher than the Ryzen 7 1800X flagship, which is very impressive considering the huge price delta between the two chips as well as the low 65W TDP of the 1700. “Gibbo” estimates, based on his results, that the 1800X should be able to hit 4.3GHz on all 8 cores.

>We just tested a 1700, it hit 4.0GHz stable in everything, but ONLY in the Crosshair mainboard ($255), the lower-end boards it was hovering around 3.80GHz as the VRM’s were cooking with extra voltage. It however was maxing around 4050MHz, so I’d say 1700 can do 3.9-4.1GHz, of course the 1800X will probably do 4.1-4.3 as no doubt better binned, but if your clocking the motherboard has a big impact on the overclock and so far Asus Crosshair and Asrock Taichi seem the best two.


>nothing's stopping you from getting the cheaper and one overclocking.
>nothing's stopping you
>from getting the cheaper and one overclocking.
>$250 mobo
>cheaper

Bulldozer 2.0

>>59107054
Right in the feels

>>59108954
https://youtu.be/LdqIsqwDRig?t=1m18s

Ryzen is faster then babby lake in gaymen

>>59099697
damn this hits the nerve.
Intel have all from the large scale oem contracts to gov industrial sector.
What amd have now is the small embbeded cluster servers and console processors licencing.

Reminder that Intel is entitled to whatever breakthroughs AMD comes up with using they're architecture.

File: tfw you will never fuck hot pajeet.jpg (17KB, 389x274px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 389x274px

>>59109008
>i7 7700k = $340-360
>R7 1700x = $400

NO FUCKING SHIT IT'S BETTER...

Also intel is on 500mhz lower than boosted clock which every i7 achieve. Nice fake shill video you got there.

>>59109056
the point is in games the i7 7700k is faster than the i7 6900k, and if the amd cpu is faster in both games vs the i7 7700k and professional applications vs the i7 6900k then it means that intel is fucked

>b-but muh 7700k can do 5ghz
nice golden sample then, most cant do it stable and less people are even going to bother overclocking it at all

File: no-rob-ford-crack-video.jpg (14KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 800x450px

>>59101105
>>59101313
I don't know what INCEL means, but NOVIDEO is fucking funny to someone hearing it the first few times.

File: joke.png (1KB, 99x94px) Image search: [Google]

1KB, 99x94px

>>59101313
>he doesn't get that r/AYYMD is a fucking parody/false flag run by turbo nvidiots
wew

File: 1487076117735.jpg (135KB, 1024x769px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 1024x769px

>>59109091
>>b-but muh 7700k can do 5ghz
>nice golden sample then, most cant do it stable and less people are even going to bother overclocking it at all

literal retard where i said anything about 5ghz you dipshit? , 80% can oc to 4.8ghz and it's enough to literally rape r7 1700 in any game

>nd if the amd cpu is faster in both games vs the i7 7700k and professional applications vs the i7 6900k then it means that intel is fucked

once again you compare $340 cpu (7770k) to $400 cpu (1700x) which is pointless

>>59109056
>10-15% faster in games
>60% faster in applications
>only $50 more
>future proof socket
I know which one I would buy

>>59109197
the 7700k was at 4.2 ghz in the benchmark
and the 1700x was at 3.4 ghz

do explain how 4.8 vs 3.8 would make any fucking difference what so ever other than razing both the intel and amd fps rather than closing the preformance gap

>>59109208
>10-15% faster in games
>15% more expensive
>>only $50 more
>fuck off
>>future proof socket
>it's not like you will buy new cpu in 3-4 years anyway


fuck off with your shilling

>>59109248
see >>59109231
BTFO intel shill

>>59109248
>omitting the 60% faster in multithread
1700x is so much faster for virtually the same price it's ridiculous.

If you only play gaymes you can buy the 1600x for $260 or $270 and still get much better performance than a 7700k

>>59099534
im so fucking sick of the screenshot evidence that rapes this board


links motherfuckers, sources.

it would just be so nice to know if i need to be building out my second pc with AMD or not. buts all this disinfo bullshit

either way im going to have two pristine motherfucking machines (7700k + ???) getting work done while you spergs roll from cat fight to cat right over epeen points

all i know is ram price and to some extent storage is fluctuating and not having real info is fucking bullshit.

>>59109362
>buying a 7700k when ryzen exists
top cuck

File: 7700K%20OC[1].png (84KB, 837x903px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 837x903px

Good luck getting an i7 Baby Lake to OC to 5Ghz

>>59106611
No, but I bet we can get an idea of the speeds using an 1800X with 2 cores disabled.

>>59109091
most people will get at least 4.9 stable. i got 5.1 admittedly i won the lottery though.

>>59101157
$75 less in aussie land

>>59101435
Costs $50 more
>Not an argument

>>59109636
>he bought a babby lake
wew lad seems like someone here got cucked

Who here waiting for the chip intel releases to hit back? That will be the cpu to get

>>59109776

Waiting a while for that. Intel has had their CPUs roadmapped out for years. We aill see how they adapt this close to the release of the next core upgrade.

>>59109729
yea and you can run two fucking gta 5's with how many cores

>>59109743
yeah and i have been enjoying my processor since august, with no fucking issues. why should i have waited based on rumors when what i could get then suits every need i had and will have for another few years. it's not like there was anything competitive to buy.

fuck off with the shilling already.

>>59109915

What did you have before that necessitated an inmediate upgrade?

Confirmed shill thread

File: 1469534921661.jpg (75KB, 706x688px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 706x688px

>>59109981

>Assrock Z270 Taichi allows 4 sticks of DDR4-3733
http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z270%20Taichi/index.asp#Specification
>Assrock X370 Taichi allows 2 sticks of DDR4-2667 or 4 sticks of DDR4-2133
http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X370%20Taichi/index.asp#Specification

Why is Ryzen's memory controller so bad?

>>59110042
this is honestly making me avoid ryzen

mem speed is so fucking under reported with gaming at high res

>>59099570
I actually want amd to win. But intel has gathered enough money these years. I am expecting them to pull out their best cpus on their next gen chips unfortunately.

>>59110042
Hmm I wonder, is it because the motherboards are still being tested for stability and aren't available for purchase? No way!

Reminder that EVERY AM4 board will support 2133MHz AND 2400MHz. The same cannot be said about every 1151 motherboard. Every 1151 motherboard only supports 2133MHz, some chipsets support higher frequencies, but not every chipset supports 2400MHz.
AMD wins once again.

>>59109522
>1.4v
Good luck not vanishing in an explosion

>>59110042
Ryzen supports up to DDR4-2667
Skylake supports up to DDR4-2400
Anything beyond is overclocking

The slight speed reduction when using 4 sticks will be fixed with a BIOS update according to ASUS. It's stupid to use 4 sticks on a dual channel architecfture anyway. Only costs more for no benefit.

>>59110042
wtf I already bought 2 stick of 3000mhz ram, how much will I have to drop on stupid MOBO for it to werk

>>59110676
It'll work just at lower frequency.

>I only care about gayming, not even multitasking while doing so

>>>/v/

>>59110774
8c/16t sounds aight for multitasking.
Why wouldn't a ryzen chip multitask just fine?

File: 8EeGLbZ[1].png (686KB, 1069x600px) Image search: [Google]

686KB, 1069x600px

>>59101354
>not posting the real interesting slide

>>59110793
>synthetic
>interesting

>>59110522
Am X370 Biostar mobo has some 3400 and 3600mhz G.Skill listed as supported. Neither competitor is limited by memory.

>>59110833
Cinebench isn't synthetic. Its a real rendering workload, the bench is rendering a fixed scene at a given resolution.

>>59101068
ipc is instruction per CYCLE idiot it has literally NOTHING to do with the SPEED of the cpu

the athlons are a primal example of having high ipc and low clocks....................

intel essentially doubled their DP from nehalem to sandy bridge thus resulting into the relatively highis score we see today

amd from bulldozer took the 4 wide fma(addued 2 4doubled wide) added a scalar design doubled the bandwidth between the cores to 18 dp and thats why they had almost 800 IPC score compared to 100+ of broadwell.. and the below 100 for 7700k......

the pipeline depth matters almost 99% for having a high ipc the clock speed doesnt add nothing WHAT SO EVER

>>59111010
Its a clock cycle, anon.

>>59111039
no its not because the bandwidth between the cores is what matters thats why those pesky 4 cores needs to be clocked to almost their limits to reach the 8c that have double or even triple(6900k 1700x) bandwidth to play with...

if you oc an 6900k even for 400 mhz it will smoke 7700k so hard that it will be laughable simply because it has a massive bandwidth to play with

the ipc has quite a lot of stuff behind it to even say "oh i will clock it higher and then magically the ipc will go up.."

for example you cant oc the registers or the EX or the fact that the memory access stays the same regardless of the speed and ofc the write back cycle which also stays the same..

those are crucial to extrapolate an ipc score and they CANT be affected

thats why people dont understand that a 7700k isnt the way to go and when the first benches of 1700x arrive you will understand it

>>59111090
Do you have fucking autistm?
When people say clock, or cycle, they're referring to the literal exact same thing. The full term is clock cycle.

Go take some meds and calm down, assburger.

>>59110042
asus ones claim to OC to 3200
all RAM beyond 2600 runs on OC anyway

>>59099945
>quad cores overclock easier than octa cores
Oh wow, you sure are special, aren't you?

>>59099534
As much as I am happy that AMD is competitive again, giving Intel some reason to release a good upgrade, for the majority of current Intel owners this means nothing, because their processors don't need upgrading for another couple of generations at the least.

>>59101354
nice fake slides you got there

>>59111103
do you even know what happens on a cycle? or what get affected by i and whats not?

no obviously no

>buy pre-built RYZEN pc
>it has Cinebench preinstalled and setup to auto start with Windows

>>59101354
its not fake there is a reason as to why they choose to compare a 3.0ghz 1700 vs a 4.2ghz 7700k... and they completely forgot about the 1700x

when the benches comes out and we see shit like this we will already know who got paid

>>59111210
I know what happens when you're on your cycle, you menstruating little autist.
Don't use terms if you don't know what they are. Sad little autistics pretending to be experts stick out like a sore thumb.

AMD themselves stated that we should expect 90% the IPC of haswell and yet here you retards are overhyping this thing like you ALWAYS do every single fucking time.

Can't wait until it comes out and people actually try it out on real world tasks instead of cherrypicked synthetic benchmarks and you faggots start pulling the good old 180 you always do and tell everyone it was always meant to be a piece of shit anyway.

God this is getting old.

>>59111242
oh another big talk in /g/ who would have guessed that..

care to explain as to why the ipc remains the same despite being clocked?

>>59111256
you do realise that those "benchmarks" are cherrypicked because its the ones that intel uses to show the world that "muh single core perf matters in 2017 despite the fact that 90% of the stuff is already multithreaded"

>>59111279
>despite the fact that 90% of the stuff is already multithreaded

Full retard.

>>59111265
How are you this violently autistic?
I corrected you on the use of a single term, and you still don't understand. I swear you mentally defectives should be terminated at birth.

>>59111287
prove it isn't

>>59099534

Intel have more money than god at this point. I hope they have not been doing an Nvidia and holding on to the good stuff just to trounce any competition instantly.

>>59111314

First you proof it is since it's your claim, you massive retard. Not everyone is encoding video and the things that are multithreads don't spread the load evenly. Not even fucking close.

>>59111287
sorry the 80s are calling they want their single core perf back

>>59111324
multithreaded*

>>59111328
at least wait more than a perfect minute and change the writing style a bit while you're at it, shill

>>59111340
and yet not a single evidence has been shown neither for the ipc that magically remains the same as you overclock

and ofc neither that the muh single core perf is important on 2017 oh yes i forgot there is still one game that uses the third thread of a cpu above all..minecraft.....

>>59111256
>AMD themselves stated that we should expect 90% the IPC of haswell

source? all i've seen them say as far as IPC goes is that it's 52% higher than excavator as measured in cinebench, which is 'cherrypicked' insofar as intel recommends it in their product testing guide. it does even better in SPECint06 but they're only advertising the lower number in cinebench.

are you sure you're angry about it being 'overhyped' and aren't just worried that all available indications point to it being a good product? hope you'll be okay on mar 2 anyway.

>>59111364
Doesn't IPC remain the same when you overclock, though? The real difference between differently clocked processors is how many instructions are done per second.

>>59110791
No im says the goys who fell for sky/Kaby don't care about multitasking.

I want to watch streamed video and have several games open at once so I'm getting a octacore.

>>59111256
AMD only compared it with Broadwell, claiming the same per core performance.

Never believe in any IPC claims because IPC varies with workload and even clock rate.

>>59111492
Instructions per clock does not change, but if you are doing 100% more clocks per second, you will still be doing twice the amount of work in a timeframe.

>>59099534

>to a Ryzen 7 1700X score that's been SCALED UPto 4.5GHz

So they didn't actually benchmark it, they scaled an existing score.

>>59111492
IPC is fixed. Its a what the arch can do in a single clock with a specific instruction.
Real world performance per clock can vary depending on clock speed because cache and uncore may not scale perfectly with clock speed.
Most people who use the term IPC don't understand it.

>>59106352
kek

>>59106207
you know software rasterizers exist, right? and with avx2... you don't need a gpu (although of course you need it for video output)

File: 1487816406625.png (1MB, 3823x1687px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3823x1687px

>>59099534

>Intel better come up with something...
They'd have to cut their prices at least 50% to be even remotely competitive.

I think that they simply won't give a shit and will just increasingly aim for the mobile market, while keeping their prices sky high.
After all, desktop CPU market is drying up and mobile is constantly growing.

File: pw1L1Es.png (174KB, 1726x405px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 1726x405px

INTEL IN DAMAGE CONTROL

it's good to see that the bastard child is finally screwing it's dickhead daddy
go AMD, make Intel suffer once again

File: 1485121720458.gif (140KB, 379x440px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 379x440px

>>59112453
Intel doesn't have the GPU technology needed to compete with AMD in mobile.
Zen's lower TDP combined with AMD GPU tech (Raven Ridge APU) will dominate the mobile market.
Basicly Intel is FUCKED.

This is what Intel will come up with.

'It's upsetting to have to say, but should be said. As an IT Director I have already been approached by an Intel representative to discuss the "special promotions" and "Incentive rebates" that they are willing to offer me for purchasing exclusively Intel powered servers. I was not well received when I explained that I would not be purchasing anything until I see the benchmarks of the new Ryzen (naples) core and compare the cost-to-performance ratio. It was at that point they made it very clear that they would go to great lengths from a financial standpoint to incentivize me to NOT purchase AMD chips.

These are the tactics that were used back in the day that AMD had feared would be used again. Intel offered "loyalty rebates" and other clever promotions to hide the fact that they were paying customers to lock out the competition. I sincerely hope that other IT Directors and all in IT in general do what's best for the industry and choose based off of what's best for the consumer and their environment. The rebates are nice and all, but if we continue to hurt AMD for a small rebate, we destroy AMD's ability to compete and enable Intel to continue their "Tick-Tock" releases and oppressive pricing.

Be aware folks, Intel is scared and is already looking to use their weight and $'s to NOT out innovate, but to obstruct competitions ability to enter the marketplace. Why else would they be contacting and attempting to "Incentivize" customers well before the launch of AMD's server chips in Q2-Q3?'

>>59113210
intel relies on the fact that people will buy an intel/nvidia laptop over an all amd one and for the most part they're right.

>>59106855
>>59106817

yeah not a fanboy here, but this. it's fucking $200 more.

how does a 1700 compare to a 7700k? it probably gets creamed, sadly...

1700x does seem like the good buy though.

why are people still comparing ryzen to the 7700K instead of to the 6950X in gaming?

shouldn't you realistically have a 6950X, 7700K, and ryzen on your graphs?

>>59115624
Similar price.

>>59099534

Fuck, is that IPC or I per second?

>>59112453
They already axed their mobile efforts since they couldn't make a dent at all in the market

>>59099899
>>59099697
Ryzen is performing better while using less power = golden ticket to datacenter heaven.

>>59116076
AMD is already king in datacenter land as far as I know, they don't need to make any gains there. Consumer market is where they can win back a lot.

>>59116258
maybe before the Bulldozer fiasco, but not right now. Intel has near complete dominance in the server and enterprise spaces because AMD simply did not have anything worth using.

Zen though should fix that if what the leaks and benchmarks say are true.

>>59116336
new super computers are still using bulldozer opterons and nvidia gpus cuz the cpus don't really do the load

>>59105447
T*rk here
I can confirm that they are the biggest reviews in TR and know what they are doing.
They said AMD is really kicking ass this time around.