>People comparing a 4 core i7 with 8MB cache to an 8 core

>price
>performance in various applications and use cases
these are the only 2 things that matter, everything else is damage control and autism

File: 1419634154238.jpg (1MB, 1845x1923px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1845x1923px

>>59137011
>People comparing two things that cost the same and are intended to compete directly
kys you kissless virgin faggot

its the price that compares
1600x will be the best cpu of the ryzen lineup

>>59137064
They only cost the same because intel overpriced their shit. Amds 8 cores are unfairly being compared to 4 cores which will obviously overclock better. The i7 should be compared with the 4 core 8 thread r3 series.

>>59137143
>>59137064
Fuck off the r7 series are meant to beat the 2011 cpus. If you compare intels 4 cores to 8 they have an unfair advantage. Its 4 more fucking cores. i5 and i7 are r3

>>59137178
1600x better compares because its slightly cheaper and 6 cores

>>59137151
Only over priced because AMD cant conpete

>>59137178
Unfair? Lmao you cant nake this shit up.

AMDrones are already in damage control and zen isnt even out yet