>Without a shadow of doubt the Zen microarchitecture is t

Pretty much, 1700x is good enough if not great for gaming in value terms but sometimes loses to the 17 7700k. However across the board it wins, I can't wait for the i5 competition r5.

>>59198948
>gaming
Its weaker in gaming, get something else cheaper, you don't buy a 6900k or 6950x for gaming.

For workstation stuff it's good ,low power and cheap.
That's real nice but for gaming and only gaming get a Intel

>>59198995
You can game on it but it's not 360noscope-tier.
So nogo for 144hz.

Intel's prosumer overpriced chips getting sandbagged for a third of the price.

http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image//skymtl/CPU/RYZEN7-1800X/RYZEN7-1800X-49.jpg

>>59198995
What if I want to game and stream though?

>>59199583
12 core

>>59198948
>if not great for gaming in value terms
>$50-100 more than an i7
>gets beat by both the 6700k and 7700k
>great in value terms

I don't get it.

>>59201950
He literally said NOT great in value terms. Better sign up for some more English lessons, Ranjit.

I like the R7 but I really would have liked for AMD to launch an R5 quad core as well. The R7s are all out of my range but the performance looks promising so far.

>>59198948
>is good enough if not great for gaming in value terms
>>59201959
>He literally said NOT great in value terms.

I think you're the one that needs English lessons,
"Good enough, if not great" doesn't mean "not great"

>>59201985
You're literally retarded. He was saying that the chip is good for gaming, if not great value. Sure, his punctuation sucks, but the meaning is blantantly obvious.

>>59201959
"Good enough, if not great" means

if(!great){return good;}
else{return great}

>>59202010
Again, the "good enough" part was referring to its gaming performance, not its value proposition. I'm staggered that anybody can read that post and have trouble with this.

>>59202007
How in the fuck is a CPU that's $100 more expensive than an i7 6700k but performs worse a good value for gaming? That makes literally no sense.

>>59202030
HE'S NOT SAYING IT'S GOOD VALUE. HE'S SAYING ITS PERFORMANCE IS GOOD (subjective) AND SPECIFICALLY THAT IT'S

N
O
T

GOOD VALUE COMPARED TO THE 7700K DESPITE THAT.

You're really making me think that Pajeets aren't a meme here.

>>59202030
for starters you shouldn't be purchasing these if your primary focus is gaming.

>>59202025
>>59202010
>>59201959
in standard english, "x, if not y" means "it's at least x, but could be y" in most circumstances

>>59201012
Found the retard.


At the end of the day boys and girls, only in very specific situations it has the power to beat a 6900k. I believe most people haven't tried it out of synthetic benchmarks, but I believe that processor will prove itself to be terrible for 3D rendering or just really high level animations as physics scores for the entire Ryzen line-up sucked massive cocks (that is also represented in the poor gayming performance). Streaming is also a no-go , with AyyMD just showing us how completely retarded their streaming demos were back in the day. Couple that up with the fact that it has fewer pcie lanes, not even something that resembles the proprietary technologies intel is providing in the near future (netflix in 4k, optane and the like) and no support for higher frequency memory and you have a 6850k with huge trade-offs only so you can beat the 6900k in every specific situations by irrelevant time gains (and not even coming close to a 6800k in some others). Overall, this processor makes no sense. I can elaborate further if required.

File: 1488468021974.jpg (33KB, 667x453px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 667x453px

>>59198914
In everything except for gaming, of course, which are the majority of the people that would be interested in hardware at this price anyhow.

Of course, /g/ will deny it because they're desperately grasping onto AMD and Linux to hold together their fragile hipster ego.

>>59202123
Papa, tell us more!

>>59202064
You need some english lessons, anon

>>59202065
what if your primary focus is gaming and streaming?

>>59199583
you get a cheap shitbox to handle the streaming

>>59202126
r5 and r3 might be better cause overclocking

>>59202126

>X and R7 buyers are majority gaymers
>Kids can make their parents pay for 500 dollars for a CPU...

Ryzen is the best productivity CPU that has been released for atleast a decade

Amazing power consumption
Amazing multi-threaded workload ---- Comperable to Intel in core/thread for core/thread
Good single threaded power --- Broadwell-E singlethread for lower power and heat, specially amazing for server farms and office enviroments where you don't even think about OC
Amazingly low heat generation --- Literally for the first time there is an actual 65W TDP serverfarm capable CPU
Amazingly priced ---- Literally half the price of every Intel CPU for core/thread for core/thread


Only think AMD needs to do is to get together with MOBO manufacturers and get this RAM speed thing fixed and there you have it,

Toyota Corolla of Productivity CPUs.

>>59198914
Does anyone have that image that was a screenshot of twitter or someone where someone posted a 100ns+ memory latency result on Aida64 Cache & Memory Benchmark and someone replied saying that they had the same and there was an update that dropped it down around 25ns?

I can't find it.

>>59202299

Btw, any mobos that fixed the RAM speed things? My office needs new machines for rendering and I am thinking of a 1700 but I don't know if there are 3200 MHz 32GB ram supported motherboards.

File: goodpc.jpg (86KB, 1408x736px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1408x736px

>>59198914
>Professionals and prosumers alike will appreciate everything that the 1800X can bring to the table, especially when you consider how much cash can be saved versus the i7-6900K.
Professionals buy prebuilts from established brand manufacturers.
These don't use AMD tech, because AMD has a hard time keeping the supply chain saturated. It sucks when your PC build line stops, because AMD is late again in delivering the ordered amount of CPUs.
So nobody will ever find AMD Ryzen inside his machine except gamers with their makeshift builds and cheaply made discount toasters sold over eBay.

>>59202350

>That img bait...

Ryzen seems to have better TDP and power consumption than Kabylakes, if they can get the mobile A/CPUs by the end of this year they will take a good chunk of mobile market from Intel actually.

test

>>59199060
144hz is a meme for retards who think they have cybernetic implants for eyes.

>>59202455
>can't tell the difference between 144hz and 60 hz
time for that eye check up kiddo

>>59202350
Considering Apple has already been using AMD mobile GPUs wherever possible don't be surprised when the next Mac Pro/Macbooks end up featuring Ryzen proccessors, they cost less and offer the same performance. Apple likes money, it's a no brainer for them.

>>59202455
consoleshitter detected

>>59202392
>if they can get the mobile A/CPUs by the end of this year they will take a good chunk of mobile market from Intel actually
Or not, because no manufacturer integrates them risking AMD fucking up yield again.
You know it's pretty expensive, when you have tens of thousands of ready made laptop mainboards lying around, which are all missing the CPU, because AMD didn't deliver enough.

>>59202501
I can tell the difference between 60 and 100 or 120.

But I can't tell the difference usually between 120 and 144, and still rarely can tell the difference between 100 and 144 unless it's a super fast paced game like a racing game where you see the ground moving fast beneath you.

100-120 is good for me.
I'll probably get a 100hz 3440z1440 for my next monitor once HDR10 monitors come out and are decent color gamut coverages.

>>59202549
They aren't even using their own foundries anymore

>>59198914
>equal
Isn't newer things supposed to be better, not just equal?

>>59198914
Was really looking forward to dropping my 4690K but meh not worth the price of CPU, motherboard, and RAM

>>59202549

Apple seems to be fine with using AMD GPUs, hell they go out of their way and use them when even their fanbase would be happier with Nvidia pro setup than an AMD one.

I wouldn't worry too much about it, specially considering that for mobile, TDP and power consumption comes before anything else. When AMDs 8/16 CPU has lower power and TDP than Intel's 4/8 ones, they will get very good market share from Intel. ıt's quite obvious. Specially in ''cool, thing I am a pro faggot'' laptops.

>>59198914
Like you AMDrones don't understand that AMD were promoting their ryzen chips for gaming, streaming, and all that other garbage. Plus they were just being compared to intels 6800k, 6900k and so on.

>>59198914
>prosumers
Is that a massive typo or soe word people made up to tlk about a higher tier of consumer

>>59202706
I remember a video that showed that it was better to get ryzen for streaming games but it seems like you'd be better off doing a separate machine for encoding with an i5 in your main tower. It's disappointing.

>>59202706

They beat 6800 and 6900k in productivity...

With lower power consumption
with lower TDPs

>>59201950
>gets beat by both the 6700k and 7700k
In some tests but it wins in a lot of other tests. Look at the reviews, it provides a great value for the people who is looking for a processor in that price range.

>>59202299
>amazing this, amazing that
ADVANCED
MARKETING
DECEPTION

>>59202906
Congrats, let's show off ryzen by streaming and playing battlefield

>productivity

>>59202710

It's a fancy word for workstation and hobo server/hosting

>>59202123
So AMD is still 2nd best then?

>>59202123
But anon at least Ryzen has made sure that Skylake X will be much cheaper. That makes this meme all worth it.

>>59203878
No, because it can actually beat the 10 core $1700 part as well in multithreaded stuff.

https://i.4cdn.org/g/1488479208263.png


Your best depends on workload.
The 6950X isn't Intel's absolute best, those are it's 24(32 Skylake) Xeonsand AMD's will be the 32 core next quarter.

>>59202123
why would you do any of that with GPU acceleration though?

are you literally praising Intel for wasting money on something better done on a GPU?

>>59202542
apple has been hinting at removing shitel from their supply line anyhow with in-house ARM shit. so it makes sense.

File: lol.png (27KB, 687x694px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 687x694px

>>59198914
LMAO THIS IS SUCH AN OBVIOUS PAID SHILL THREAD

RYZEN IS A COMPLETE FAILURE

>>59204004
>9 fps faster than a 8370

oh wow

>>59202549
AMD doesn't run the Ryzen fabs you dunce.

>>59204004
Why do you parade this one benchmark like it is the be all end all? It is only one benchmark and is not relevant to the point that zen is good for multitasking.

>>59204058
Just post the bench collection where it equals or beats a 6950X, that usually shuts these idiots up.

>>59204032
>9 fps faster than a 8370
Which is how you can tell the benchmark is bullshit.

They probably ran it with busted RAM.

These benchmark don't mean much to me, I don't game in 1080p and I usually run a bunch of software in the background when gaming. Sometines even (iddle) VM's.

I want to see some more realistic benches but it still is clear to me that getting a 1700 is the way of the future. More cores, more tasks. Also, the only games that perform "significantly" better on 7700k right now are the older ones optimised for dual core.

Also, a lot of reviewrs had problems with memory stuck at 2400 asn dtill had decent results for the money. I'll wait for more in depth reviews when better firnwares and OS patches are out. Not that I need a new computer or anything but I will next year.

>>59204004

Complete failure ???

Grow up dude, it's well worth the money, it all depend on your application.

Keep in mind that a complete Ryzen package cost less than the equivalent intel.

>>59202123
.>I believe
Good to know that your opinions outweigh facts.

>>59204497

So according to that chart

>+40% IPC
>twice thread count
>more cache
>faster cache
>similar clockspeeds

Result in a mere 9pfs? I would agree with your assessment that the chart is showing some odd results.

So does it support 24 hyper threads?

>>59203931
I am still saying that 6950x has no place in the consumer market. Maybe for scientists, but not for consumers to buy. You said yourself anon, at that point you may as well just get a Xeon.

>>59205621
>for scientists,

No ECC support..

>>59205621
You get pretty close with a 1800X though.
Make no mistake though, people do indeed buy the 6950X because no small amount of private and public people need the cores.

>>59204004
>Ryzen crushes Intel in Rise of the Tomb Raider in every other website's benchmarks
>random anomalous bench from a website that hasn't been relevant since the NVIDIA 7000 series back in 2005

fucking lmao jewtels shills get out

call the JIDF, I don't give a fuck

File: when-your-mom-says-yaass--full.jpg (106KB, 400x341px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 400x341px

>>59205698
You are joking right?

Intel faggotry is so strong

>>59201950
>gaming it´s the only thing you can do on a machine

>>59204004
Flawed benchmark

>>59205701
But seriously what is it's purpose in the consumer market. It is characterised as a i7 CPU which is for the consumers/enthusiasts.
What can a 6950x do that a 24 core Xeon can't do?

The /v/igger brain doesn't comprehend ECC memory.

>>59198995
That's unknown at this time.

GPU driver overhead is huge. Drivers that are optimized for bulldozer aren't going to perform well on Ryzen.

Once updated drivers are released, people are gonna be surprised.

>>59205856
It's what /v/iggers literally think.

>>59203985
>hintinh
The only who has said that is a fucking ¨apple analyst¨

>>59205805
You are retarded right?

>>59205923
anon you try to make me kill myself later. Wtf would a 1700 dollar CPU not have ECC support?

>>59205986
Cause you're supposed to buy the $2500 Xeon with the $500 motherboard :^)

> In nearly every situation it proved itself to be the equal to the best Intel has to offer.

Its like they just copy pasted whatever AMD told him to say because his own benchmarks in gaming show that the 7700k is better.

>>59205862
Workstations, hello? content creators and developers?
Xeons are even more pricier and the platform cost for them is ghastly.
Also Xeons also come lower clocked, so they lose on performance to gain features like remote bios management and ECC, stuff they might not even need.

It's there for a reason, and it's selling.

>>59205874
uh....
GPU and CPU doesn't work the same.
Most of the benchmarks done on the CPU is final results. Anything done differently is if the developers can use more threads efficently, is where RYZEN will show some results.

>>59206013
Ah ok. Excuse me while I find my wallet.

>>59198914
Does any of this even matter if I'm going to use an rx470 and play at medium to medium/high settings?

Was thinking about waiting till r5 comes out, but i5s are less than 180 right now at my local store and I'm antsy....

>>59205862
Not cost $7700 for a start.

would it make sense to test one of the new ryzen chips with 4 cores disabled and a good overclock?
something like 4.5 or 4.6 ghz

File: 04506119.png (164KB, 409x325px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 409x325px

if I'm an artist would this help me have hella huge canvases?

The only thing I'm butthurt about Ryzen is the memory lag and pci-e lanes but I'll probably only use 1 m.2 SSD and 1 GPU anyways.

Planning on getting either a high end 470 or the cheapest 480 I can get away with

>>59198914
6c/12t and 8c/16t cpus from intel don't rival 4c/8t i7s in single threaded tasks. Shouldn't we expect better single core performance from ryzen 5 and ryzen 3??

>>59206276
Probably. Hopefully some reviewers will try it soon.

A 1700+cooler+b350 is the same price as a 6600k+cooler+z270 anyway. It probably beats it at least as you'd have 4 cores and 8 threads over the 4c/4t.

>>59202263

Nah, the manufacturing process seems to hit hard cap at around 4.1 GHz:
https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/

It requires exponential voltage bumps after 3.3 GHz and it seems like the sweetspot is between 2.1 and 3.3 GHz.

File: sb-logo.jpg (118KB, 1013x1080px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 1013x1080px

>tfw no brandfag, I just buy what better suits my needs and has better price/performance
>my i7 2600k still going stable after years on 4 GHz
>I wanted to replace it with the 1700 Ryzen
>it's a massive failure


When will the next monarch CPU come out and finally replace Sandy Bridge?

>>59206449
its literally double the speed of a 2600k. Even in games Ryzen is 60% faster

>>59206449
At this rate you're going to have to wait another 5-6 years.

Only now is an i3 (7350K) about the same level as a 2600K.

So in about 5-6 years time, we can expect that an i3 will be about what a 7700K is today.

But its really hard to say what things will be like from now, going smaller is becoming increasingly difficult, simply adding more cores will reach thermal limits quickly, its just incremental gains at this point.

File: roaring feelings of inadequacy.png (198KB, 507x457px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 507x457px

>>59206479
>tfw i have a 2600k

So...time to upgrade I guess?

>>59206543
depends on what you use it for. If it's only for gaymes you don't need to upgrade unless you want to buy a high end ($500+) GPU

>>59206543
Not urgently, no. It'd be a comfort upgrade, but note that you're still pretty much around console & laptop gaymer specs almost everyone still PRIMARILY develops their games for.

Most games will work very well on sensibles settings.

It'd be an upgrade for having a little fun with higher settings and maybe a modicum of comfort.

>>59206627
in the next few years i plan to finish my bachelor's degree in civil engineering and another one in cyber security while at the same time starting a twitch gaming channel. so i may be doing a bunch of shit.

>>59206282
If you avoid the worst Adobe trash software, you should be fine with a mediocre desktop machine that has a bunch of extra (not particularly fast) RAM.

Decent 5-10 year old machine + 16GB RAM (or less RAM and a SSD) should be able to easily edit like 100MP sized photos.

>>59206282
>if I'm an artist would this help me have hella huge canvases?
isn't that shit all in the scratch disk and RAM? I'm not sure I would use a SSD for scratch though, might be too many rewrites.

File: Yao-ming-meme.jpg (36KB, 308x400px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 308x400px

>>59206202
>t.poorfag

>>59206703
Bullshit, you don't cause too many rewrites.

And SSD aren't really shortlived anyhow. This myth should be like 5 years dead now.

File: goyim.png (50KB, 863x653px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 863x653px

>>59202299
>>59203031

>AMD are GIGANTIC kikes, you can just see it in their marketing, always trying to scam DESPERATE madshills

hehehehe AMDrones are the best goyim.

>>59205923
ryzen has ecc support

>>59206698
>If you avoid the worst Adobe trash software, you should be fine with a mediocre desktop machine that has a bunch of extra (not particularly fast) RAM.
>Decent 5-10 year old machine + 16GB RAM (or less RAM and a SSD) should be able to easily edit like 100MP sized photos.


Hard to avoid adobe for many of us and when I was using a 4-5 year old processor bring in 24MP tiffs from lightroom for editing in PS things were definitely slowing down and I did have 16GB of RAM and an SSD

Unless your using premier or using tons and tons of filters I would stick to fast single thread performance for responsiveness

>>59204004
Shitty benchmark, they should be running at a lower res to remove gpu bottleneck which is obvious from the graph.

File: 127.png (69KB, 421x248px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 421x248px

>>59206649

>starting a twitch gaming channel

kys my man

>>59206916
>not letting people literally pay you to play video games

you better believe i'll have a fucking donate button.

>>59205681
>>59206261

AMD is not done in the gaming arena. Do not take current benchmarks at face value, it's just a bad AMD launch

File: amd3.jpg (66KB, 568x612px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 568x612px

>>59206993
>it's just a bad AMD launch

What is bulldozer
What is fury
What is bulldozer 2.0/Rypoo

You can spin it whatever you want.

>>59206832
> Hard to avoid adobe for many of us
Only PSP is hard to replace - and fortunately that's not the worst crapware Adobe releases.

It should run pretty decent on a halfway modern PC.

And if you are editing 600MP+ shots (http://www.in2white.com/, http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/images/gigapan/) I guess you still can just use efficient software for these.
> and when I was using a 4-5 year old processor bring in 24MP tiffs from lightroom for editing in PS things were definitely slowing down and I did have 16GB of RAM and an SSD
LR is very much trash. DXO or even the cheap Corel Aftershot perform much better, as do most editors.

This is a piece of software that you can replace. Same as Premiere and other Adobeshit.

It's the better option to tweaking your PC to maximum. Because it actually gets fast (go check Pro photographers processing their photos on LR with fully tweaked out PCs on fast storage, it's still shit).

>>59207024
Fury really wasn't that bad though it was just weird

>>59207024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXVIPo_qbc4

You can commit face-saving suicide now

>>59206276
I guess a Intel paid reviewers to not go too much into OC'ing to kill some of the Ryzen hype, alongside the lack of time