>AMD fanboys say it's the best thing ever >Intel fanboys

>>59202754
listen to yourself.

all the benches support what AMD claimed, massive IPC enhancement from previous gen that is somewhat comparable to slightly older intel offerings.

the fact that it does as well as it does is honestly shocking.

all the benchmarks suggest to me it might be worth it over Intel's "consumer Xeon" lines so I might buy one if the Ryzen 7 supports ECC

It's 8/10.

AMD fans hyped it to be an 11/10 as usual, and Intel shills it at 5/10

>>59202754
http://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/2822-amd-ryzen-r7-1800x-review-premiere-blender-fps-benchmarks

Does what advertised for Workstation use, sucks dong for gayming.

if you care about gayming wait for the R5/R3 or simply buy a 7700k

>>59202754
>every benchmark out there is biased in some way to make it look good or bad

That really isn't true though. Every review says it's good for productivity, but not for gaming. This was blatantly obvious even before launch, just as nobody but a retard would buy an octa core Intel chip for gaming.

>>59202754
If you're actually creating content (you're not, you sit on your arse whole day while browsing /g/) then Ryzen is really, really good.

If you're just using your PC as a shitposting machine while occasionally moving a file between drives and playing video games then buying Ryzen is like buying a 2500k for $500.

>>59202754
Trust AMD.

Here's why:

http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/intel-and-the-x86-architecture-a-legal-perspective

Intel has a 30 year history of manipulating everyone from IT professionals to the press to the legal system itself to keep AMD from competing. Intel has NEVER been able to compete with AMD fairly, except for this recent generation with Bulldozer.

>>59202850
They never advertised it for workstation use. Hell even ecc isn't certified for the consumer parts.

>>59202900
>They never advertised it for workstation use

And? Why does how AMD chose to advertise their chip have any relevance? That's their dumbass fault. All that matters is the actual performance.

File: tanaka blows your mind.jpg (23KB, 425x292px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 425x292px

>intel shill thread
>someone posts something BTFOing intel shills forever
>404

ryzen is better. there's no question. more cost effective, smoother gaming, better at productivity. all with shiity unoptomized mobos. as per the usual, intel has paid review sites to hinder amd's prime time selling which is within the first few months of a product release. nvidia does the same thing.

The gaming benchmarks which show Ryzen crashing and burning.

Unless you need *non-accelerated* rendering, where it's a good buy.

>>59202754

Yourself and base it on your needs.

>>59202810

>if the Ryzen 7 supports ECC

It does.

>>59202850

It isn't even that bad at gaming. Lol

>>59202923
Because people are going on and on about how gaming was never a focus for the chip. It absolutely was base if you listened to what was coming out of AMD. This was not positioned as a workstation chip.

And in all but a handful of things it doesn't even offer $100 worth of 'workstation' performance compared to the 7700.

>>59202754
Amd hid the for too long and motherboard vendors did not get it soon enough to really make the bios run well.

it will take a few weeks to really get good benches, but overall, good enough to justify 400$, not sure if its good enough to justify 500.

>>59203154
For the price, it absolutely is.

>>59203194
So is broadwell-e

>>59202754
>tfw you'll never get a realistic benchmark

>RX 480/1060/1070 + Zen vs Intel
>in 1080/1440p Medium/High/Ultra detail

Instead we get >720p low detail "benchmarks" and 4K ULTRA detail benchmarks

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>59203249
Can you go be retarded somewhere else?

I actually can't comprehend how someone can be so stupid. Are you testing GPUs or CPUs?

>>59202754
Don't believe the hype. Wait for Ryzen to release and then judge.

>>59203214
>Compared to this ridiculously overpriced Intel CPU, it's not doing so badly!
It's comparable to processors that came out 3 years ago retailing at $250.
For gaming, it's strictly DOA.
It has advantages, but not in games. And even in production, it's a bit iffy, since you are often leveraging the GPU, and CPU is less relevant.

>>59202754
Everyone is shitposting for one side or the other. Pretty much Ryzen has a large lead in multithreaded workloads, and falls behind in single threaded workloads like gaming. So if gaming is your main priority, and your not fine with losing around 4-6 fps in games, you'll probably want to go with an intel cpu. However if you intend to use your computer for anything else like photoshop, rendering, streaming, anykind of content creation, you'd want to go with Ryzen. Both have their strengths, and both are good enough for anything you need to do now adays, it just depends on what you find more important.

>>59203258
Testing the realism and usability in real work environment, not theoretical workputs.

>>59202754
>Intel

Just works

>AMD

History of hardware bugs making the CPU worthless
History of burning down houses

hmm

>>59202754
You can trust your heart, anon. All you need to do is listen.

>>59203140
Don't you fucking lie to me anon.
Is this really true?

>>59203046
post it pajeet

>>59203274
>Let's ignore the fact that this 8c/16t processor is much more similar to this other 8c/16t processor and compare it to 4c/8t processor instead!
Literal retard. It isn't even DOA for gaming. It might be worse value, sure but it's competent enough to do it without shitting itself.

File: Screenshot_20170302-140859_01.png (1MB, 1080x1476px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1080x1476px

>>59203294
>intel
No history of hardware bugs
O i am laffin

>>59203294
>Intel

History of screwing their customers.
History of using anti competitive tactics.

>AMD

Just works.

hmm

>>59203343
>AMD
>just werks
Top kek

>>59203322
>It might be worse value, sure but it's competent enough to do it without shitting itself.
"It can push the frames" is a meaningless statement. The processor exists in a marketplace with an MSRP and the aim to be sold, not only in a benchmarking suite.

People for whom value matters (99% of people) looking to purchase a CPU for only or mostly gaming should under no circumstance buy Ryzen. It's a bad processor. For gaming. Due to the bad value.
>Value doesn't matter to me!
Buy a 6900K.

>>59203475
>ignoring the greentext above it
What I'm saying is that, relative to the 7700k, it's bad value but relative to the 6900k, it's a much better value. But it can also do gaming if you want to game alongside whatever workload you're doing that requires 8 cores. Stop comparing it to the 7700k for fuck's sake

>>59203294
> >Intel

> Just works
What is 67 series SATA bug? What is Atom LPC bug (and vendors silenced by NDA)?

>>59203140
and if this is true then Intel x9xx whatever Xeon bins are literal waste of money trash compared to Ryzen.

>>59202850
>Does what advertised for Workstation use, sucks dong for gayming.

Which leads me to believe it is a chip meant ot be stacked with layers upon layers in datacenters, with user PCs as an afterthought.

Which makes sense, since normies watch porn and facebook on their ARM equipped phone.

File: ryzen_ecc.png (32KB, 826x304px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 826x304px

>>59203307
From earlier today.

>>59203294
>Intel
>just works

http://danluu.com/cpu-bugs/

wrong moron.

>>59202754
real world performance

https://youtu.be/V5RP1CPpFVE

>>59203625
based ayymd.

do all the lower bin economy models support it as well? if yes holy shit. I'm going to build a storage pool with this shit.

>>59203584
Whole 32 core Xeon rigs can be bought used for less than your 1800x alone. Your point is invalid.

>>59202754
If you care about gaming and gaming alone, you should still look at buying a Kaby Lake or Skylake chip. Ryzen's lower IPC and single thread performance mean that it loses out to even lower-priced Intel ships in terms of raw FPS.

However, if you are looking for productivity performance and don't have infinite money to throw at Intel's highest offerings, Ryzen is a no-brainer. It boasts 80% to 90% the performance of competing Intel chips at half the cost or less.

>>59203703
>used is cheaper than new
woah, never heard of that one before

>>59203700

It's enabled by the bios. Which means the memory controller is the same in the 4c/4t as it is in the 1800X.

>>59203726
what's actually happening here is unoptimised use of a new cpu architecture

future games will reveal the true potential of ryzen

>>59203766
windows scheduler is also probably screwed for now too many contradicting reviews

>>59203766
Potentially. Right now Ryzen excels in tasks and workloads which are heavily parallelized thanks to its high core count and excellent multithreading performance. Games are difficult to parallelize due to the fact that they rely heavily on player input in order to determine what operations to perform next, hence why they favor a small number of very fast cores.

>>59203795
yeah. and then this thing with non stable memory clocks in certain configurations..

there are many little things which needs to get fixed before we see the true results

good thing AdoredTV will get his bench suite delayed for a week.. because he certainly didn't miss anything as of now

>>59203810
yeah the fact that deactivation of SMT actually increases fps is ridiculous

>>59203703
ok and was this mythical blade been sitting in a 1U blade in some mega hot rack for 2-3 years?

no thanks.

>>59203766
There's no doubt Ryzen will get faster, but it's impossible to really take that into too much consideration today, unless you have a crystal ball. Most users aren't going to purchase a CPU on hopes and dreams.

>>59202754
It's just like a beefed up 8150

File: 1484330533247.jpg (37KB, 427x640px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 427x640px

>>59202754
No one

>>59203617

Makes sense. Gaming might be what's marketed to hell and back, but workstations and datacenters are where the money's at.

>>59203475
>Buy a 6900K.
it's just double the price, famalam

>>59203766

There is no such thing as optimising for a specific CPU microarchitecture. Stop shilling Raja.

File: WHENWILLTHEYLEARN2.jpg (2MB, 2000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2000x2000px

>>59202754

AMD has a track record of lying and overhpying
Die hard AMD fans devote themselves to the company while Intel/Nvidia fans only buy it because it's the best product

Occam's Razor says Ryzen is more overhyped bullshit

DONT LISTEN TO THE GAYMER BENCHMARKS
THEY'RE WRONG
>>59205681

>>59202754
This is the single best look at Ryzen on the internet right now.
https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/

>>59206868
Is this the new strategy for intel shills?

>THEY'RE LYING ITS NOT THAT GOOD

http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/intel-and-the-x86-architecture-a-legal-perspective

Intel has a decades long history of not being able to compete with AMD on fair terms. Why should we expect this to be any different? Just because AMD shat the bed with Bulldozer? Did we forget how Phenom II BTFO'd Intel already?

>>59206908
Exhibit A.
Angry AMDtard when confronted with claims that AMD is false advertising Ryzen's performance

>>59202754
if you don't mind funding the missiles that kill palestinian children, go intel.

>>59206985
Kind of like how Intel did when they got sued over the Pentium 4 benchmarks?

>>59202754

It's clearly not the worst thing ever but it has some issues.

For some reason even professional software like AutoCAD or Solidworks have subpar performance on Ryzen and some scientific calculation software don't work at all.

>>59207014
Lol what the fuck are you even talking about, there is literally no consistency in your replies, just firing off like a underpaid Indian shill

>all these amd shills

When will you learn? Single Core Performance is the only thing that matters.

>>59207023
Tom's hardware noted that a bunch of professional software is compiled only for intel CPUs.
Some of the Spec metrics not working is likely the software not being able to recognize the architecture.

>>59203294
nice revisionist history. the only thing that ever burned down a house was an nvidia product.

File: HOUSEFIRE.jpg (117KB, 400x1227px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 400x1227px

>>59207422

>house was an nvidia product.

le meme

File: intel oy vey.jpg (145KB, 1500x1054px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 1500x1054px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXVIPo_qbc4&t=0s
this fat fuck made a pretty decent benchmark video

>>59202754
This is a chip which is 100% comparable to intel's Broadwell (which is not the same as broadwell-e, which amusingly has slightly slower IPC then broadwell desktop). It overclocks the same, has about the same IPC as well.

So now think about it like this. You can get a low clocked broadwell 8c16t chip for the same price as a high clocked 4c8t kaby lake.

Now you can make your choice.

I am about to build a new pc, but keeping my 980 TI. I cannot decide between 7700k, or 1700x...

>>59202810
Lisa Su confirmed this in an AMA today

It's somewhere inbetween the 6900k and 7700k which seems about right. It's a power user chip. Intel is in full damage control shill mode right now because the chip is clearly on par with Intel's best right now.

>>59202754
listen to the stock markets, amd down 7% today

If Ryzen 7 supports ECC then it's a no-brainer over Shill-tells overpriced Xeon processors.

If you're a crying baby gamer though you should stay in >>>/v/, no body gives a shit about your platform-specific optimisations. If these games were compiled with Ryzen in mind their performance would be up to speed or a little slower than Intel's offering, which is what we told you faggots all along.

Ryzen is all about high speed, low power, low price. Intel can't compete.

>>59202879
Would Ryzen be a better choice for video game development? Intel has the better gaming performance. Not sure if more cores matter?

>>59207750
>If Ryzen 7 supports ECC
It does m8
As do all x370 mobos
We've known this for a few weeks.

>>59207750
>tfw Ryzen is clearly the better choice for my work but have to buy Xeons because of OS X support.

I really hope the new Mac Pro is Ryzen. It only makes sense that it would for all this delay.

>>59207863
it does but hasnt be certified for consumer facing equipment

>>59207890
Yeah but it works. You can turn it on and it's fine.

>>59202850
>sucks dong for gayming.
>slightly lower or higher framerates for almost every game
>sucks dong at gaming
>implying gaming isn't bottlenecked by your monitor for older games or your GPU for newer games

>>59202810
/thread
Leave /g/ and come back in two months.

>>59203475
>1700 is slightly less than 7700k
>performs slightly worse to slightly better than the 7700k depending on the game
>horrible for gaming
>inb4 shitty Fallout 4 bench

>>59202850
But as far as all the data that's being showed, the R5/R3 aren't going to be clocked any higher though, so why would you assume that on the same architecture that there would be a difference?

>>59203703
Except you can't, unless you're looking at pre Nehalem hardware
A Xeon mobo will be the same price as a new Ryzen 7, the CPU's will be about the price of a Ryzen mobo
But you will get a shitton more power consumption and used hardware that has been hammered to death

>>59203186
It was positioned against Intel's HEDT line, aka wannabe workstation
Not against the enthusiast gaymen parts

>>59202879
Your a fag it not 2500k it is 4750k

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

19KB, 477x264px

>>59202824
>It's 8/10.

I think it's more than 8/10. Anything that can make Intel cut prices as deeply as they're going to have to cut them is pretty awesome.

On several benchmarks, the 1800X is pretty damn close to a 6900K in performance -- but it's half the price AND two-thirds the power draw.

I know that pic is cherry picking -- but the fact that AMD absolutely slaughters Intel so brutally on price and power even on even just one benchmark makes me want to stand up and do a slow clap for AMD and say "bravo for a job well done, gentlemen".

FYI, all 6 computers I have built in the past 10 years I have deliberately put an Intel processor in all of them, so I'm no AMD fanboy.

>>59207032
>pajeet projecting

>>59202754
It's AMD, they always have been - and always will be - one notch above Cyrix

>>59208347
Don't forget that on top of murdering Intel on CPU price/performance/power they are also killing them with motherboard chipsets too. You can buy enthusiast almost server grade boards for FAARRRRRRR less than the x99/z170/z270 at launch and even now. I mean holy shit it's overpriced for Intel.

>>59208378
>Intel
>Got blueprints from IBM
>didn't want to deviate at all from them
>AMD found more optimal way of doing things right away
>Cyrix backwards engineered a better x86 CPU than what Intel ever could
>Only way Intel could survive was shady business tactics

Intel was always 10 years behind competition.

This is a large reason people are excited for Amd's new CPU even if they aren't buying one, it's a new architecture, something Intel lately hasn't done for... since the Pentium 3... so Intel has been floating along on the back of Pentium 3 nearly 20 years, and will be over 20 by the time they make something new, while AMD has had 3 different cores in that time frame with 2 of them being good, one of them being good for specific applications for a short time, would likely still be good enough today if they released full desktop variants but fuck it, when gamers are concerned its hard to argue in favor of construction and cat cores.

Throughout the entirety of the bulldozer base, look at what AMD did gen over gen... and now look at Ryzen, and imagine it to be Bulldozer levels of optimization left to happen. now realize Ryzen currently on engineering samples that throw errors like a mother fucker, is within/over 5% IPC of Intel's current CPU.

1/2

>>59208378
>>59208397
I cant wait to see if either there is a performance stand still, you can't get much faster than Intel is, or if we have been rammed up the ass by Intel for so long we forgot they were even there and its only now that we finally see real vagina we remember a cock is still lodged up our asses.

Intel has way more fuckups than Bulldozer, Bulldozer is AMD's only spectacular fuckup in the CPU market in 40 years, the only other minor fuckup was Phenom which was not even a architecture fuckup since it was fixed in B3 stepping, the other fuckup was K5.
But these are fucking nothing compared to Presshot, Itanium, Larabee, iAPX 432, and their own fuckup with P5 FDIV that wasn't nicely fixed with a stepping, but a fucking recall.
What about their complete failure with the Atom? What an abortion, mobile market? 14nm and lower lithography woes where they allowed their competitors that were lagging 4 years to close the gap to less than a year?

These magnificent failures would destroy 5 companies over, it's a good thing Intel has more money than sense to live through it all.

2/2

Bugger AMD bloody motherboard problems guess I'll have to wait anyway because broke

T. Poorfag

APU Ryzen will kick console ass

>>59208347
what a load of bollocks

>>59208438
Hell fucking RX 460's and 470's are cheap as fuck right now too. Might actually go APU next year if they can pull it off. Love to change out my roku's for full blown aio micro pc with amd apu.

>>59208397
Current Intel arch dates back to the Pentium Pro, the PIII was a Pentium Pro with SSE
So that's 24 years of riding the same thing, they haven't been able to make another successful arch, we know how EPIC/Netburst/Silvermont ended

>>59208413
As someone who fucking hates Intel but put up with them for gaming because fuck buying a AMD CPU from 2010-2016 I can't wait for shitjews inside to get btfo by amd

JUST WAIT FOR RYZEN+ GUYS IT'LL FIX EVERYTHING
2018 YEAR OF AMD

File: AMlosi.jpg (259KB, 670x768px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 670x768px

>>59208509

>implying most of us didn't have enough of waiting....

>>59208489
Current Internal Combustion arch dates back to the Model-T. The Nissan Ultima was a Model T with fuel injection
So that's hundred years of riding the same thing, they haven't been able to make another successful arch, we know how batteries/hydrogen/compressed air ended

>>59208630
Kinda sad that the government has killed off innovation in the automobile market.

>>59202754
Ryzen 7 is made for workstation use and not for gaming. Video games tend to rely on high performance per core and generally aren't optimized to use many cores, while processors with more cores have to be clocked lower because of the additional heat and power consumption from those additional cores. That this needs to be pointed out to people shows what a shit state /g/ is in. Wait for the lower core count/higher clocked Ryzen 5.

>>59208763
Shit, forgot to add if you're wanting it for gaymen to the last sentence.

>>59208763
Single and low core benchmarks have shown AMD to hit 4.1GHz and sometimes beat high end i7 chips worth the same money, or up to twice as much. It might not be better, but the fact it's right up there is a big deal.

File: 1266126008249.jpg (68KB, 305x196px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 305x196px

>>59208660
>actually thinking this

>>59208839
I'm not saying it can't match comparable i7 processors. I'm just pointing out the problems with how people are literally benchmarking this processor with fucking video games and then acting surprised when software that wasn't optimized for use with more cores doesn't see a significant increase in performance from using more cores.

>>59204683

Intel just got served

>>59207721

pump and dump, it will come back after the next round of products are released

File: 1444341111243.png (276KB, 424x412px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 424x412px

>>59207721
>stock going down
>investors start panic selling from news
>not buying the dip and going to the moon tomorrow

File: dfgasdgbab.jpg (113KB, 759x528px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 759x528px

>computer/properties
>Intel Core i5 2500k

*leans back comfortably in chair*

>>59202810
Depend on your budget, its the one thing that will decide what you choose between the two

Poor and low income consumers=AMD Ryzen
Rich and privilage elite consumers=Intel

Thats all you need to know

File: 14885090136342.jpg (114KB, 759x528px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 759x528px

>computer/properties
>Intel Core i5 6600k

*leans back comfortably in chair*

In gaming <4K, you might want to look for a very fast quad core instead. Otherwise it is a very solid debut.

>Twitch streamer Arteezy (sponsored by AMD) streams on Twitch advertising the new Ryzen in his stream title
>only 80-90FPS in Dota 2, with dips to 30fps at times
>after a few games he stops the stream to "go eat"
>comes back in a few minutes, removes the AMD Ryzen stream title and his FPS is 140 again like usual

Not looking promising if someone literally PAID to use Ryzen couldn't stand the performance and had to go back to his Intel PC.

>>59211847
So it's good for 4k and ultrawide 2K monitors?

>>59202850
>workstation use
>no ECC

toplel

>>59202754
if you multithread get zen.
if you gaymen, get ps4 pro.

>>59202754
I pre-ordered it amazon is taking forever though

I'll run w/e people want when I get it

except winshit

>>59203307
yes.. derp

Guys, please help
Has there been any bench proving Ryzen is better than Intel for video editing/VFX?
I'm too old and out of the /g/ game to be sure, but from what I understand, Ryzen has better multicore which is better for this kind of use?

File: 1484662594574.jpg (688KB, 756x4315px) Image search: [Google]

688KB, 756x4315px

>>59202754

full review hear:

https://hothardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-1700x-1700-benchmarks-and-review?page=1

File: ultimate_gentoo_cpu.png (52KB, 609x765px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 609x765px

>he thinks gayming is the only thing that matters

>>59207541
it's not a meme though

amdfags must be shot on sight for the retarded shits they are

File: 1467247622412.jpg (170KB, 1048x1187px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 1048x1187px

>>59212385

yes and for the price go for it

CPU: 1700X (1800X marginally higher difference)
RAM: 16GB or more GSkill Ripjaws V at 3200mhz
Motherboard: Asus X370 Prime

>>59207557
well ryzen certainly looks nice
glad I got it

>>59212513
Thank you my friend.

>>59212385

Also get a seasonic platinum 1000W power supply for the lulz

>>59212513
>2666 / 2400 / 2133 MHz
Isn't it better to get a mobo that supports 3200? Or no real difference?

>>59208347
Yes AMD shitter, it's not 11/10

>>59212385
Ryzen completely fucking destroys Intel's productivity high-end.
If you're going for video editing/vfx there are no intel processors even close to being worth buying.

>>59212515
Amazon hasn't shipped mine yet...

>>59207557
I'm kind of amazed that the Ryzen chip does as well as it does with a 65W TDP. I won't be upgrading at all this gen, but this seems promising for the next wave of chips.

>>59212746
If I remember correctly, only the 1700 is 65W, the 1700X and 1800X are 95W.
Which is still pretty impressive considering that the 7700k has half the cores and is 95W too.

>>59212312
Ryzen has ECC dipshit.

>>59212975
>workstation use
>no quad-channel memory

>>59212328
>f you gaymen, get ps4 pro
>the ps4 also uses an AMD 8-core CPU
kek

>>59212641
Most Ryzen boards *support* 3400, but there's a problem with the memory controller to be fixed in a coming firmware update.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_6rs9cBzvE
>R7 1700
>terrible overclock
wow 1st gen really gets the shittiest bin

>>59212385
yes,
however, x265 is slower than intel 8 cores because it uses avx.
for x264, it kills intel.

>>59212991
>quad-channel
>mattering 99% of the time for almost anything you'd do with a conventional workstation
>http://www.pcworld.com/article/2982965/components/quad-channel-ram-vs-dual-channel-ram-the-shocking-truth-about-their-performance.html
>comparing a feature of a US *$2,800* chip (not counting server CPUs since we're talking about workstations) to a US $500 chip
Nice try. I'm sure you'll still get your five cent deposit though.

>>59213107
>1700, 1700X, and 1800X all come from the same die and are separated by what frequencies they can handle stably
>surprised the 1700 doesn't overclock well
If it could reliably hit higher clocks it would have been sold as a 1700X or 1800X.