Guys, considering the 1700 chip is 30 dollars cheaper than the

forgot the source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5RP1CPpFVE

>>59203906
Just look at that benchmark and ask yourself the same question. The cheaper 16 thread CPU is going neck and neck or only a few fps behind the 8 thread i7. The Ryzen chip is also clocked at a lower speed.

Ten you have power consumption which for a 16 thread processor, it's very good. The included stock cooler is more than enough to cool the chip.

And lastly, you get to not buy from Intel anymore. AMD is officially a viable option for the high end. 16 threads for plain gaming isn't useful, but buying an Intel CPU for 95% of the price with half the threads only to get at most, 5+fps is stupid. This is coming from a guy who owns a 6700k/z170 setup. I'll be buying a 1700/x370 setup as soon as I can.

>>59203906
It really depends, if you mainly use your computer for gaming, get the 7700k, if you intend to use your computer as a workstation as well as gaming, get the ryzen. For me, the difference in gaming isn't significant enough, as I do a decent amount of rendering.

>>59203906
i'd still personally buy the i7 since i have watched multiple reviews who have said that they had issues getting the games to work well as opposed to it being a smooth ride with the i7.

>>59204025
What if I like to have lots of tabs I. 2 browsers and watch streams while I game?

>>59203906
30$ is completely insignificant.
price differences start mattering at 100$
fuck this "omg product A is 500$ but omg lol product B is 4.99 such a BETTER DEAL"

>>59204127
ryzen, multitasking on 4 cores is shit

>>59204127
>What if I like to have lots of tabs I. 2 browsers and watch streams while I game?
I've got like 100 tabs open over 2 browsers and while idle they're using 0.1% CPU (ff nightly and chromium)
when playing youtube video it goes up to 1.0% at most
you don't need an 8 core for that.
unless you're streaming yourself, 7700k is the way to go

>>59204179
>implying everything doesn't request core0 anyway
o i am laffin
/v/ kids are retarded.

>>59203906
AMD cpu does good on synthetics

However gaming is lagging a bit, not a lot bit a bit. It was expected to be around 10% weaker than Intel, thats what it is at in gaming.

I suspect with time, they will work out bugs with the CPU and you'll get a great value.

>>59204127
Even here, both cpu's will suit you fine, however your getting more towards the 1700s territory as it has more cores/threads, still not an issue in your scenario though.

>>59204025
This is where I'm at. 16 threads and over 60fps in all major titles at 1440p? I'm happy. This will boost my video editing and encoding like mad.

>>59203906
gBut most 7700k's can OC to 5.3 without problem, that test isn't fair..

File: stream.png (47KB, 954x651px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 954x651px

>>59204127
i have a quad core haswell i5 4690k and i can do all of this just fine on the quad core. i currently have 10 chrome tabs open, extracting my revenants splinter cell blacklist torrent and am watching the hardware unboxed ryzen review in 4k on a second monitor. my cpu is struggling at all.

>>59204207
>unless you're streaming yourself, 7700k is the way to go

this is bullshit. you don't need a high end i7 or ryzen for streaming.

1) all intel cpu up to 6800k have igpu and these igpu support intel quicksync which allows you to stream without any cpu performance hit because it's all done via the igpu. obs supports quicksync (pic related, its what i have been using to stream to my friends whilst my gpu is away for rma)

2) all gpu whether it's amd or nvidia support hardware encoding and you can do all the streaming via the gpu

File: ryzen-doa.jpg (386KB, 1301x739px) Image search: [Google]

386KB, 1301x739px

>>59203906
Dude they're only $10 difference

and the AMD chips gets absolutely assblasted in games

No way I would buy the Ryzen for gaming

>>59204308
isn't* struggling

>>59203906
There's no reason to go for the 7700k. It may be a few fps better in some places, but the Ryzen:
-Will age better
-95w tdp
-Lower clock speed (more head room)
-Better performance in work applications.

If you had a button that literally killed all /v/ crossposters, would you press it?

>>59203906
This is great, so it has very similar gaming performance, for cheaper, plus it destroys at everything multithreaded?

>>59204328
Five times.

>>59204303
It's fair when you consider every Ryzen chip is unlocked and if I'm not mistaken every board should allow overclocking.

>>59204319
Well don't, if you don't need or want 16 threaded cpu it seems silly to get one.

Yea these are for games that devs know how to optimize, there are games that are poorly optimize that runs like shit most notably newly released games lacking updates. There are also games which are straight up Intel shills that are optimized for Intel CPUs.

>>59204368
It would be silly to get one if it cost 1000 dollars.
If it costs like 350 dollars or so, it's not silly at all. There are no real disadvantages to having moar coars as long as your single threaded performance is good enough for gaming.

>>59204327
>-Will age better


lol computers are like fine wine

by the time it "ages" it will be out of date either way

>>59204278
This is what people aren't getting. It's narrowed the gap in single threaded performance, while leading in multithreaded performance. Both company's excel in certain situations, and there's good reason to buy either product. The cpu market is finally competitive again. Anyone who doesn't recognize this is just shitposting because they want their brand to be #1.

>>59204319
>muh low-res benchs

retard

Any 4k benches?
I'm not spending $700 on a monitor so I can play at 1080p

File: 500x1000px-LL-6b3b85d0_LL352.jpg (33KB, 500x361px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 500x361px

>>59204262
What I suspect will happen is developers will begin to program new games to utilise at least 4 cores as a minimum, hopefully allowing pic related to actually tie into game performance.

>>59204319
>Implying that 1366p and 1600p are relevant

>>59204487
You can clearly see it in the OP that's the case, else a 1GHz lower chip won't be equaling the 5.0 7700k, as they have similar IPC.
The number of games using more cores won't likely decrease because that makes no sense.

>>59204070
What in the fuck does that even mean?

>>59204262
How is it lagging at all from those benchmarks?

It's on par with the 7700k for cheaper, and it has much better multithreaded performance

>>59203916
>>59203906
>trusting a sellout youtuber
good goy

>>59204427
at 4k they all perform similarly (withing 1-3fps) because the main factor is the gpu

File: amd vs intel.jpg (89KB, 800x1000px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 800x1000px

>>59204487
huehuheuhehuehueuheu

>>59204595
7700K can overclock. Ryzens can't (lel ~4.1 Ghz)

>>59204586
>my cpu has competitive performance!
>only after it takes me 15 tries to actually get the game to not crash on the menu screen!

>>59204614
Oh good, so I have no qualms about getting a 1080Ti or Vega system with a overclocked 1700X when it comes out.

>>59204401
What people don't also understand is you can hardware accelerate your well threaded apps like Adobe Premier and the 1800X is still a waste of money.

>>59204319
Ass blasted? Those benchmarks show that the 1700x keeps up with Intel's CPUs at 1080p (which is the only relevant measure in that benchmark, mind you). Fucking hell, I'd take that.

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

66KB, 568x612px

>>59204414
>>59204523

>>59204618
Ryzen uses SMT too so this makes no sense

>>59204626
>7700K can overclock. Ryzens can't (lel ~4.1 Ghz)
>>59203906
>3.9GHz 1770
>5.0GHz 7700k

Wow? So a significantly slower clocked 1700 equals it in muhgayms?
You should REALLY start looking at images before shitposting.

>>59204670
that images is like from 2012 or something
it made sense back then

>>59204631
I'm surprised. There isn't really much that depends on the processor in gaming, do you have an example? Like which library may even cause an issue? The instruction set is just the same.

>>59204717
it was something to do with the power states and also something to do with ram speed

>>59204308

QuickSync is vastly inferior to software encoding for image quality. So are other decoder blocks aside from HVEC on high end new cards.

>>59203906
Bulldozer optimized GPU drivers are the opposite of ideal on Ryzen.

Why people are surprised is anybody's guess.

File: ryzen fallout 4 1080p ultra benchmark.png (247KB, 665x1520px) Image search: [Google]

247KB, 665x1520px

:(
this makes me sad

>>59204303

>5.3 without problem

Most can hit 4.9, majority can hit 5.0, few can hit 5.1.

5.3 is silicon lottery gold.

>>59204785
Fucking hilarious

Ryzen getting beat by Intel's sub-$100 chip

>>59204806
so is a 5960x - a $1000 CPU

>>59203906
>GTX 1080
99% GPU load
enjoy your bottleneck

>>59204743
Source me up senpai. I'm really curious as to what could go wrong with the CPU.

Power state might be reasonable but then again still it's not something that would cause an application to crash. RAM speed is not likely at all.

>>59204636

Nope, none at all. Although if you're spending that money might as well grab the 1800x for the better bin.

>>59204785
Fallout 4 is very memory speed dependant.

>>59204785
>no cpu reaches even 60fps...
what were they testing with?? a gtx 750?

It's the only Ryzen chip worth considering. The 1800x achieves a 200MHz higher clock for $170 more which is absolutely ridiculous.

>>59204829
>ultra, x16 af, taa
>clearly not gpu limited

>>59204785
>i3s beating i7s

fuck off with that

>>59204785
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/02/shares-of-advanced-micro-devices-fall-after-new-cpu-disappoints-with-gaming-performance-.html

ayy lmao

>>59204816

apparently there's issues with how Windows 10 specifically/applications use the L3 cache which can cause it in rare cases, but an update is being rolled out for it.

>>59204853
>da number bigger so it better
fuck off tyrone

>>59203972
Also consider that games will become more adjusted for higher core counts. And the 1700 overclocks to 3,9 Ghz

>>59204816
check gamers nexus, i think they mentioned it at the end

>>59203906

The better deal for gaming is a an i5 unless you can affort a 1080ti.
What I mean is that your gpu is significantly more important than your cpu in the first place.

But since most people play games with some other stuff in the background (like a browser, bittorrent, chat, etc) the more cores will help. at least in theory, nobody tested it yet.

>>59204839
Price scales always work that way, exponentially increased cost for linearly increased performance.

They're probably the same circuit, they may just be the samples that tested better so 1-5% of the whole production. It makes sense.

>>59204888
I've seen even as high as 4.0ghz on the non X 1700 and that's fine by me. 16 threads at 4ghz will make for a seriously monstrous encoding/editing machine. Only made more so with a video card for cuda acceleration. For instance my 980TI is great for gaming but still a viable force when editing.

In short the 16 thread Ryzen chips aren't meant solely for gaming. Not by any means. But at the same time, Ryzen single core IPC has increased so much, it and AMD's love of moar coars have come together to make a chip actually worth buying.

1800X is still kind of stupid though. If it was guaranteed to be able to hit say 4.5ghz+, it'd be worth the money.

File: C0rfm7hWgAAX9zr.jpg large.jpg (47KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 800x800px

>>59204884

>hurr look i3's beating R7's ayy AMD btfo XD
>wtf don't point out i3's beat i7's too!!!!

File: 1468280860085.jpg (3KB, 124x125px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 124x125px

>>59204983

>>59204785
>windows hasn't even pushed an amd optimized driver through windows update yet
>no software has been optimized for it yet
>no BIOS revision optimizations
>motherboards designed for it will get better
>first gen architecture and not waiting to see real benchmarks

The fact that it's only 11 FPS faster than an FX 8350 while architecturally shitting all over it should be A BIG FUCKING HINT. Guru3d specifically mentions the oddity of these results:

>So here is where we need to write an entire paragraph. You have been able to see that the Ryzen 7 1800X performance is good, but not just yet 100% where it needs to be. During the past week we have been going back and forth to figure out what could be causing the relatively lower game performance. To date, we have no valid answer to that. The graphics card runs properly at PCI-Express x16 3.0. We know from the RAW and synthetic performance benchmarks that the cores are fast enough, in fact VERY fast. Somehow that does not relate to game performance.

The fact more reviewers aren't keying in on these clear fucking outliers that drag everything down and don't make sense otherwise given the synthetic results and the overall ecosystem at the time...it really makes you think. I have no doubt that in a week - 2 months we'll start seeing wildly different results showing ryzen par in gaming and killing it in productivity. The outliers make no sense otherwise.

>>59204904
Couldn't find it in Gamers Nexus but I've only read the gaming related parts and conclusion. Are you sure it's in there?

>>59204875
Well, hope they'll fix it. I want cheap performance and fierce competition.

>>59205000
Trips for truth.

>>59204983
>>wtf don't point out i3's beat i7's too!!!!
...but I don't care if you point this out...
are you retarded?

>>59203906
I hope enough retards buy an AMD and force Intel to drop their prices by a couple of bucks. I'll buy a CPU AND a new pair of sneakers. Wew.

Bad mainboards. Lackluster single core performance. Hyper-threading actively gimping the gaming performance.
It's a fucking gongshow of a launch.

>>59205119

This is why they launched the prosumer chips first.

The chips gaymers will actually want are the R5 1600x's which will release after these issues are ironed out.

>>59203906
Stupid question, but does Ryzen comes with an IGP? because ive not seen anyone talking about.

>>59205467
nay

>>59205467
No.
Thankfully.

You'll get your mobile chips in the second quarter.

>>59204785
Bethesda and AMD teamed up to optimize Bethesdas games for Ryzen/Vega. It will hopefully get a nice performance boost

>>59205523
If Ryzen makes devs realize that coars exist, I'll be really happy. I don't have Ryzen but I do have lots of coars.

Unless the developer in question is Bethesda. Don't care about them, their games are garbage.

>>59204146
But it also destroys it at multithreaded applications....

>>59204672
This

>>59205552
>If Ryzen makes devs realize that coars exist, I'll be really happy.
Most games don't even utilize the 4 you probably have. It has nothing to do with hurp durp cheap cores.

Parallelism is hard.
Furthermore fast cores are more important for games because they need to tell the memory to load and unload shit fast.

Ryzen will not change that.
What could change that is cloud gaming which will make PCs obsolete anyway so that's beyond the point of the conversation.

File: tomoko_spin.gif (249KB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 480x270px

>>59204785
>tfw bought a i7 6700 in march 2016

>>59206187
I don't have 4, I have 12. So I think you can understand why I'm interested in games using more of them.

I mean not that it matters all that much, since games run fine for me, but I'd like games which take better advantage of high core count.

File: micro center 7700k.jpg (191KB, 1524x1159px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 1524x1159px

>Guys, considering the 1700 chip is 30 dollars cheaper than the 7700k it doesnt seem to be so bad for gaming right?


but it's not cheaper.


The 7700K is the cheaper option.

Ryzen is a paper tiger, real world is still lags behind intel in many areas.

>>59203916
This guy's overwatch benchmark is fucked up. He says overwatch uses only 2 cores yet using my 6700k at 4.6GHz (which should be worse than the 7700k at 5GHz) all my threads are being used, and using the same settings he says he uses (max 1080p) with the same GPU, a GTX 1080 I get 180 FPS minimum, with average FPS over 200. It's 100% GPU limited at all times.

>>59206436
>770K is cheaper because of anticipated Ryzen
Thank AMD for that and stop shilling for your company overlords in their ever continuing journey to achieve monopoly.

>>59206436
>Microcenter
>pickup only

https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Desktop-Processor-i7-7700K-BX80677I77700K/dp/B01MXSI216/ref=sr_1_1/155-5743025-5233939?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1488493863&sr=1-1&keywords=7700k

>>59204179
I agree. I was just pointing out that the difference in price is negligible. Ryzen is better value, that's for sure. Not because it's 30$ cheaper, but because it performs better.

>>59205000
>AMDelusion

File: 1467295616026.png (41KB, 802x799px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 802x799px

It's not fair, Intel made the 7700k too good, how the fuck are we supposed to compete with that?

File: Ryzen1.jpg (186KB, 1200x902px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 1200x902px

>>59208314

I found your problem.

Pic related: the main source of that problem

File: $199 4770K.gif (72KB, 652x137px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 652x137px

>>59206436

>tfw I got an amazing deal for i7 4770K, which is 4 yrs old and faster than $500 1800X.

pic related.

>>59204858
>http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/02/shares-of-advanced-micro-devices-fall-after-new-cpu-disappoints-with-gaming-performance-.html

People in /biz/ are just pumping and dumping the stock. I planned on doing the same thing but didn't pull the trigger

>>59208392
I got that too. Feels good man. Still thinking of getting a 1700 though. I don't just game anymore. Really shows where most of /g/'s priorities are thinking this is the only measure.

>>59204308
Which one has better image quality at the same bitrate, Quick Sync or NVENC?

And why up to 6800k? Later ones don't have igpu Quick Sync?

>>59210176
>I got that too. Feels good man. Still thinking of getting a 1700 though. I don't just game anymore. Really shows where most of /g/'s priorities are thinking this is the only measure.
you can't seriously think that anything more than a small % of people need 8 cores though... even if you only game once in a blue moon, you're still far better off with a 7700k as a normie

>b-but my gentoo compiling
nah

>>59210249
I would have hoped /g/ would be filled with people that would have uses for higher end hardware other than gaming. Most normies other than gamers would be fine with a Pentium. It just feels like /v/2.0 here right now.

>>59210276
>I would have hoped /g/ would be filled with people that would have uses for higher end hardware other than gaming. Most normies other than gamers would be fine with a Pentium. It just feels like /v/2.0 here right now.
Are you new here? /g/ is full of an ever-revolving set of underage kids and actual manchildren (not just joking or meming..) on welfare and similar. Most people here only care about either wasting time on tinker-toy operating systems or playing video games, or maybe recreational programming at most..

File: 1425991018847.jpg (129KB, 668x712px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 668x712px

>think about spending $1500 for a gaming PC
>it seems like a waste of money now

>>59210304
Most of the threads here try to shy away from gaming though. It's only when new hardware comes out that everyone starts using them as benches so I can't tell if it's just /v/ crossboarders that adventure here whenever there's a major release or if most of /g/ just hates /v/ but still plays video games. I hope for the former but it probably is the latter.

>>59210331
people who spend about $750 have the exact same experience as people who spend around $1200, and anything over that point is just someone falling for marketing bullshit
>muh RGB / custom loop / whatever
k

>>59210334
goalposts on /g/ come with wheels built in

>>59210348
I'm only doing 1080p anyway.

>>59210418
>I'm only doing 1080p anyway.
tfw $500 2500k/7950 rig has been chugging along for years and still runs everything at high/1080p/60 fps

>>59210276
Tell me /g/ how ryzen will handle 8 notes of a high cpu usage analog emulation vst like diva or lush-101? Not gaming.

File: 1469966982107.png (42KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 653x726px

>>59203906
This. While I have been shilling for intel's 7700k in other threads, the R7 1700 is pretty a good CPU, and its priced very well. The 1700x and 1800x are insta-fail for gayming and their "over-clocking" potential is garbage. They are good for workstation pc's though.

>>59204327
Lower clock speed isn't advantageous in this scenario.

>>59210977
If you're gaming at 4k the Ryzens might be quite nice.

https://i.4cdn.org/g/1488511506073.png

>>59204595
Benchmarks are made up.

>>59211019
THE PLOT THICKENS


Watch now how a bunch of poorfags claim 4k doesn't matter and they all run $150 GPUs

>>59211040
>Watch now how a bunch of poorfags claim 4k doesn't matter and they all run $150 GPUs

That's already happening in >>59206171


full of absolutely nothing but intel fanboys claiming 4k doesnt count

>>59211088
Oh man what a day this was.

>>59211019
Until the GPU is no longer the bottleneck and you'll wish you woulda got that 7700k

>>59204396
False, we have one more process node after 10nm hits (7nm) and then thats it. Since intel's processor s the last three generations were ~5-6% faster than the previous generation how much faster do you think we can go??

File: 1481991813808.png (205KB, 3340x3176px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 3340x3176px

I play alot of Cpu dependant games like WoW and enjoy multitasking afk in Dalaran while tabbed looking at xnxx and listening to youtube music.

So realistically Ryzen is a better choice for me since more cores will benefit based on my computing habits

File: amd shill.png (91KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 653x726px

>>59211019
>>59211040
>What is a GPU bottleneck.

Lol you might aswell buy an i5 for 4kay gayming then.

>>59211244
Yeah, might as well, enjoy your 800x600 gaming, poorfag.

>>59211255
Thanks. I only have a single Voodoo 2 anyways. Can't afford a second one for SLI and 1024x768 yet.

File: amd suicide.jpg (156KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 633x758px

>>59205000
>windows hasn't even pushed an amd optimized driver through windows update yet

More like:
>AMD hasn't bothered working with microjew and other developers to produce stable drivers at launch, like every single GPU they have ever made.

Honestly I expect AMD to "take feedback" (read: panic) when R5 launches and clock it higher even if it's a housefire

>>59211255
>lee poorfag
Considering the main selling point of Ryzen is its cheap price, you should work more on your come backs panjeet.

>>59211405
>cheaper
>faster
Considered the fact that your kike shit at 60% margins is just overpriced and simply inferior?

>>59204025

Does running a few softwares and 20 browser tabs count as "not only gaming" ? Because that's what gamers do, they don't just play games on a virgin windows install.

>>59204146

Cpu is 30 Cheaper, plus you need a cooler (a good one for 5ghz OC) plus the mobo is at least 30$ more expensive...

now the platform difference is more like 100$.
I would rather invest 100$ in a better gpu/screen/anywhere

>>59204319

those benches are known to be complete garbage.
not a credible reference....

File: crying laughing pepe.jpg (83KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 900x900px

>>59211458
>cheaper
>faster
Is that why is laggs behind the (now cheaper) 7700k in nearly every test

>your kike shit
Lmfao I was on the AMD hype train until a few days ago when I saw leaked gaymen benchmarks where Ryzen was getting crushed by the 7700k. Looks like AMD is having issues with multithreading as disabling SMT improves game perfromance. I'll still probably buy a Ryzen CPU though, I'll just wait till the price comes down even further and they sorted out their shitty driver/bios issues.

>AMD still can't release stable drivers upon launch
SAD!

>>59211535
Except they're not. It shows that older games running on DX11 are more reliant on CPU clock speed and IPC, then they are on core count.

>>59204319
Why would you game @ 1366x768 with a fast computer? At 1920x1080 everything is pretty similar.

>>59211632
The SMT thing is on window's end.
They were bribed by intel to not release SMT support for Ryzen during the initial benchmark season.

THANK YOU BASED JIM KELLER

>>59204523
You mean 768P and 900P.