How AMD Tricked Everyone by Rigging Ryzen Benchmarks

>>59206171
"At this point, you might be left feeling disillusioned when considering AMD’s tech demos. Keep in mind that most of the charts leaked and created by AMD revolved around Cinebench, which is not a gaming workload. When there were gaming workloads, AMD inflated their numbers by doing a few things:

In the Sniper Elite demo, AMD frequently looked at the skybox when reloading, and often kept more of the skybox in the frustum than on the side-by-side Intel processor. A skybox has no geometry, which is what loads a CPU with draw calls, and so it’ll inflate the framerate by nature of testing with chaotically conducted methodology. As for the Battlefield 1 benchmarks, AMD also conducted using chaotic methods wherein the AMD CPU would zoom / look at different intervals than the Intel CPU, making it effectively impossible to compare the two head-to-head.

And, most importantly, all of these demos were run at 4K resolution. That creates a GPU bottleneck, meaning we are no longer observing true CPU performance. The analog would be to benchmark all GPUs at 720p, then declare they are equal (by way of tester-created CPU bottlenecks). There’s an argument to be made that low-end performance doesn’t matter if you’re stuck on the GPU, but that’s a bad argument: You don’t buy a worse-performing product for more money, especially when GPU upgrades will eventually out those limitations as bottlenecks external to the CPU vanish."

>>59206242
"As for Blender benchmarking, AMD’s demonstrated Blender benchmarks used different settings than what we would recommend. The values were deltas, so the presentation of data is sort of OK, but we prefer a more real-world render. In its Blender testing, AMD executes renders using just 150 samples per pixel, or what we consider to be “preview” quality (GN employs a 3D animator), and AMD runs slightly unoptimized 32x32 tile sizes, rendering out at 800x800. In our benchmark, we render using 400 samples per pixel for release candidate quality, 16x16 tiles, which is much faster for CPU rendering, and a 4K resolution. This means that our benchmarks are not comparable to AMD’s, but they are comparable against all the other CPUs we’ve tested. We also believe firmly that our benchmarks are a better representation of the real world. AMD still holds a lead in price-to-performance in our Blender benchmark, even when considering Intel’s significant overclocking capabilities (which do put the 6900K ahead, but don’t change its price).

As for Cinebench, AMD ran those tests with the 6900K platform using memory in dual-channel, rather than its full quad-channel capabilities. That’s not to say that the results would drastically change, but it’s also not representative of how anyone would use an X99 platform."

File: Spooky Vision.png (148KB, 553x413px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 553x413px

>>59206171
6700k dropped $70 CDN and I'm grabbin'

Holy fuck

>>59206242
How is this allowed? Can they be sued for this?

fake thread

SAGE

>>59206376
How can you possibly say this is fake? Watch the video.

It's straight from Gamers Nexus' review here:

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

File: 1480524810695.png (1MB, 1166x718px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1166x718px

66 rupees have been shat into your designated shilling account, good work today Rakshit!

>>59206407
The only one getting paid to shill is clearly AMD. This is the shadiest shit I have seen ever in the hardware industry.

Biggest scandal of the year? This shit is so fucked up.

>>59206307
Wtf I haven't seen that in the US

>>59206242
Well that explains a lot

13 posts / 5 IP

keep up the circle jerk and self bumping fag lord.

>>59206171
someone needs to sue AMD for this.

HAHAHAHA

>If Intel does this they are the ultimate jews

AMD DOES IT

>hurr durr fuck off intel shill

HAHAHAHA

This board holy fuck

Jesus fuck the CPU and GPU market are fucking retarded o haven't see so many consistent fuck ups since P4 and house fire days

>>59208354
This. Can't they seriously face litigation for doing this?

>>59208588
Amd to /g/ is what nintendo is to /v/

>>59208588
/thread

>>59206242
intel got 70fps looking at the targets
amd got 76fps looking at the targets and 80 looking at the sky
also fuck off to >>>/v/ with your gaymer youtube drama

>>59208733
How does that excuse what they did?

>>59206365
>>59206439
>>59206522
>>59208354
I want /v/ kiddies to get the fuck >>>/out/

>>59209146
This has nothing to do with /v/

I love the
>amd is a nice company! They don't do the same bullshit Intel and Nvidia do!

meme.
It's like a fucking newfag detector.

I like how he put overclock 6900k on bench that amd win.

I really want amd to succeed but they keep ruining things.

>>59208653
What specific quantifiable claim did they make that was false?

>>59209629
See >>59206242

They literally tricked people into believing the performance was better than it was

File: 1488505366807.jpg (35KB, 636x390px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 636x390px

>>59206171
OY VEY!

>>59209287
B-BUT YOU ARE VIOLATING MY SAFE SPACE ECHO CHAMBER
ANY OPINION THAT I DO NOT AGREE WITH BELONGS ON /V/ BECAUSE /V/ IS INFERIOR
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE GET OUUUUUUUUUUUUTTT

>>59206171
jesus christ

>>59206171
>b-but AMD good
>b-but Intel bad
LOL, get rekt amdfags.
where's your good now.

File: 08CP4nL.jpg (122KB, 512x960px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 512x960px

CPU is throttling under full utilization due to it reaching the temperature threshold LOL

this is like when trump won. total vindication. amd shills btfo

File: 1488313330360.png (239KB, 512x384px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 512x384px

>every single review of Ryzen was favorable
>some faggot from gamers nexus benchmarks it in 720p cs:go
>suddenly ryzen is now shit because it cant get 500 frames in a videogame

this thread is literal shilling and you people are insane if you fall for this

>>59210030
You didn't even watch the OP video, you have no idea what you're talking about

>>59210011
>>59209990
>>59209967
>>59209945
>>59209933
>>59209789
>>59209629
>>59209496
>>59209328
>>59209325
>>59209287
>>59210051

samefag shill on his phone changing his IP with airplane mode, posting on clover to make it look like there's more than one guy in this thread

kill yourself

>>59210055
you fucking wish lol

>>59210051
That gamers nexus guy is a total fucking faggot. He posted the only negative review I've seen so far. Every single review for ryzen and "gayming" has been great, except for this one faggot who needs a haircut from gamers nexus.

>WE BENCHMARKED AN 8 CORE CHIP IN 720 CS GO
>IT CANT GET 500 FRAMES
>SO ITS SHIT

I'm not falling for your tricks

>>59208588
What are you talking about? No one is defending AMD

File: wow.png (18KB, 913x307px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 913x307px

>>59210055
Really makes you think

>>59210067
Mad because you got exposed. I'm going to get your cell phone tower's IP rangebanned.

>>59210074
Forget about the review, look at what he is saying about AMD's pre-release benchmarks

Watch the fucking OP video before commenting on the thread like a moron, you aren't even talking about the same thing

>>59210094

post pics or it didn't happen

>>59206171

>warhammer neckbeard tier long hair

chaotic proc justice warrior confirmed

>>59210094
go away poojeet.
AMD misled their fanbase once again.

>>59210167
every review has been favorable except for this one faggot from gamersnexus who is literally saying the chip is garbage because it cannot reach 500 frames

in 720p

like what the fuck reality am i living in

>>59210200
except the gamers nexus reviewers didn't say that. sorry that you have reading comprehension problems.

>>59210200
Holy fuck just stop

This thread is not about whether it's a good CPU

It's about AMD rigging their benchmarks

>>59210219
I'm not going to buy intel for my next CPU Mr. Shill

>>59210230
nobody is asking you to buy intel cpu. the point being made here is that they mislead the consumer with some roundabout tricks which have lead to everyone being pissed with them after they originally claimed ryzen was some beast for gaming which beat out intel's line up. they spent a whole load of time talking about gaming and even had more gaming benches on the actual unveil. don't blame us for calling them out for their bullshit. the fact you're defending them for being misleading makes me think you're the shill here.

>>59210230
For fucks sake, read the fucking thread. AMD is the one shilling the fuck out of people.

File: 1487730908734.jpg (22KB, 367x367px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 367x367px

>>59210263
>intel pays off dell to not buy AMD
this is okay to Mr. Shill
>intel sends out emails to reviewers telling them to trash AMD
>intel fucks with its compiler to make AMD perform worse
this is okay to Mr. Shill

>AMD benchmarks a videogame while looking at the sky
BIGGEST SCANDAL IN HISTORY WEE WOO WEE WOO

Your tricks do not work on me and I'm still buying AMD.

>>59210200
>like what the fuck reality am i living in
In reality if you weren't uderage b& you'd know why cpus are tested at low res

>>59210290
>>59210263
nice samefag pajeet really loving those 53 replies and 20 posters

File: 1486057857047.jpg (81KB, 259x383px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 259x383px

>>59210298
what are you talking about? why are you trying to deflect away from the point at hand? nobody is talking about that stuff and that isn't the point this thread exists.

you have basically confirmed you are a shill. unlike you i'm not retarded enough to have such brand loyalty and claim "i'm buying amd". when i upgrade i will buy whichever is better for what i want to do.

File: retard.png (7KB, 490x103px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 490x103px

>>59210312
Jesus christ

>>59210333
You're literally making bullshit up. AMD didn't lie about any of their benchmarks, in fact, every single review that came out confirms them.

All of them, except for this one autist from gamersnexus. Who should I believe? Every single review or one autist who is sponsored by intel and paid to say bad things about AMD

>>59210347
good job samefag you learned to use inspect element

go damage control elsewhere intel fanboy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wJQEHNYE7M

>>59210355
Wrong, nearly all the reviews get the same results.

The only difference with Gamers Nexus is that they expose the way AMD manipulated their pre-release benchmarks to make them look better than they really were.

>>59210369
>Wrong, nearly all the reviews get the same results.

Wrong again intel shill, nearly all of them are favorable to AMD. Gamersnexus is the only review deliberately making mountains out of molehills.

go shill your youtube channel elsewhere autist

>>59210379
Wrong, look at Gamers Nexus' numbers, they correlate with all the other reviews I have seen.

File: 1488420066835.jpg (42KB, 898x886px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 898x886px

>>59210298

File: 1454176825666[1].png (42KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 653x726px

>tfw you had extremely high hopes for Ryzen
>just tuned into Arteezy's (Dota 2 pro who is sponsored by AMD) stream which is advertised to be showing off Ryzen
>only 80-100 fps on average on Dota 2, with dips into ~30FPS territories

These Intel shills might be right afterall.

>>59210355
who said amd lied? did i say that? if so show me.

i clearly said amd "mislead" the consumer. you were the one with the blatant lies when you said "every review has been favorable except for this one faggot from gamersnexus who is literally saying the chip is garbage because it cannot reach 500 frames"

i have had a look through the gamers nexus benchmark and no where does he test a game at 720p. all his benchmarks are 1080p. no where does he say that it's bad either because it can't reach 500 frames. in fact he calls the cpu good for production uses but as with literally every other ryzen review, he states clearly that it lacks when it comes to gaming scenarios.

grow up.

>>59210394
>>59210404
Go away gamersnexus and go shill your shitty youtube channel elsewhere

>>59210408
This has nothing to do with Gamers Nexus, just look at the evidence

>>59210408
http://www.dsogaming.com/news/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-third-party-benchmarks-revealed-unable-to-beat-intels-i7-7700k-or-i7-6900k/

more gaming tests which correlate with what gamersnexus said. are these all intel shills now too?

File: ryzen muh games 2.png (1MB, 1190x661px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1190x661px

>>59210425
>>59210430
samefag working overtime and is so mad he has to reply to me twice

>b-but muh GAMERS NEXUS

File: 1700_vs_7700k.png (441KB, 1670x1250px) Image search: [Google]

441KB, 1670x1250px

>>59206171

File: ryzen muh gaymes.png (1MB, 1215x593px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1215x593px

muh gaymers nexus guys

ryzen is literally DOA because it can't get 500 frames in csgo at 720p

don't forget to like and subscribe to my youtube channel at gamersnexus.com

>>59210438
>4k

are you trolling or really this retarded?

>>59210438
>4K Very High

is this a joke?

>>59210455
>>59210459
Tell me samefag gamersnexus shill, is 720p a

File: 1463089344906.jpg (31KB, 250x251px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 250x251px

>>59210455
>>59210451
lol you forgot to crop out the res in the first one

>>59210469
>>59210459
>>59210455
and 720p is a better benchmark?

File: tombraider.png (27KB, 733x707px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 733x707px

>>59210438
You realize you are proving exactly what the OP is talking about

AMD telling people to benchmark in 4k because it creates a GPU bottleneck

Here's a benchmark without the GPU bottleneck so it actually tests the CPU. Notice the difference?

This is exactly why what AMD did is so fucked up.

>>59210468
>why amdrones are universally despised
Really makes you think.

>>59210485
i think it's just a troll desu.

>>59210469
kek, this AMD shill is so retarded

>>59210485
>>59210488

GUYS

MUH 720P

BELIEVE ME RYZEN IS DOA BECAUSE MUH 720P BENCHMARKS

B-BUY INTEL

lol Intel shills working overtime trying to prove AMD is bad for gaming because of cherry picked benchmarks

>all these Intel fanboys ITT
Wee lad they are doing damage control

>>59210505
They're still grasping at straws about 480p benchmarks

>>59210505
The only one cherry picking benchmarks is AMD

File: aa.png (17KB, 200x151px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 200x151px

>4K benchmarks don't count

>but these 120p minesweeper ones do

Intel shills are retarded

>>59210531
Go ahead and try to find anyone who mentioned a 480p benchmark, I'll be waiting

File: 1483080936712.gif (386KB, 540x380px) Image search: [Google]

386KB, 540x380px

Intel shills are out in full force today I see

>>59210545
KEK. Intel fanboys are getting desperate ITT

"It's okay if AMD does it!"

- AMDrones

>>59210556
These dumb fuck AMDtards just love getting scammed

AYYYYMDPOOJEETS are really showing their incompetence further proving that amd sells to complete retards.

File: vaporub.jpg (199KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 960x720px

>>59210451
>>59210438
>AMD winning in 4K gaming
>Intel shills will try to downplay this with gamersnexus 720p benchmarks

Holy shit are Intel fanboys poorfags? It all makes sense now, they can't even afford 1080p

>>59210555
>>59210550
The intel shills are just trolls. Still mad about losing in every 4k benchmark lmfao

Watch them post their poorfag 720p benchmarks

I don't care about anything lower than 4k. 1080 Ti and 1800X here we go.

File: 1487982723849.jpg (4KB, 208x206px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 208x206px

go away gamersnexus shills

you already got BTFO by linus

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wJQEHNYE7M

>>59210438
From this graph, I can surmise the best CPU to get is the FX 8350.

Even though it's shit in every other metric, it does well in 4K!

>Intel shills can't afford 4K

Really makes you think

>>59210438

>FX-8350

So I don't need to upgrade!
Thank you kind sir

File: 1487470165371.jpg (22KB, 317x267px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 317x267px

>>59210600
>intlel fans are the poorfags now

AHAHAHAHHA

*breathe in*


AHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHA

File: wat.gif (2MB, 236x224px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 236x224px

>>59210593
>BTFO by linus

>all this Intel damage control

N-no goyim don't look at the 4K benchmarks! Look at the 122p ones!

>>59210579

Intel shills are knocked out and AMD is too drunk to be shilling

File: bogphone.png (717KB, 1000x581px) Image search: [Google]

717KB, 1000x581px

>>59210625
It really is sad how far intel have fallen

One minute:
>oy vey goyim you need kaby lake for 4K netflix
The next minute when they get BTFO by AMD:
>n-no! a-amd is bad for gaming...look at the 360p benchmarks

DAMAGE

CONTROL

>>59210620
>AYYYYMDPOOJEETS SUDDENLY LOVE LINUS
really tickles the synapses

>>59210611
Best CPU ever!

(even though it gets beaten by an i3, it's dang close to a 7700K on 4K!)

File: 1488445481515.png (66KB, 650x363px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 650x363px

>AMD winning every gaming benchmarks in 4K
>4K gaming doesn't count but don't remember that you need to buy kaby lake for 4K YouTube

:thinking:

Intel housefires at it again, look at that power consumption LMAO

>>59210660
>543 watts

INTELHOUSEFIRES

>>59210401
Lol I'm watching his stream now, it's sad.

They forced him to use an inferior CPU.

>>59210482
BUT MUH 4K. I don't think these 10 year olds know at 4K, you're more likely to be GPU bound. That's why reviewers test CPUs at lower resolutions.

great thread

Are there more than two people posting in this thread?

File: leds.jpg (26KB, 280x280px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 280x280px

>>59206171
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/03/02/amd_ryzen_1700x_cpu_review/

and yet hardocp, which I actually trust:

>Gaming benchmarks on Ryzen are a critical mess.
>While the AMD Ryzen was not the "fastest" system in our VR gameplay, it did however show that it could fully deliver a top-shelf Virtual Reality gaming experience.
> If you are looking to build a system for desktop gaming alone, there is simply no way to suggest that Ryzen is your CPU as the Intel 7600K and 7700K still hold a great advantage especially if you are overclocking.
>Once you get past desktop gaming, the AMD Ryzen starts to look a lot more promising. In fact, when you look at video encoding, decoding, and content creation, the AMD Ryzen is an extremely impressive CPU showing that it can even best the $1000 Intel 6900K in some workloads.

finally:
>If you are building a machine with these applications in mind, there is no way I can suggest you build with Intel. It has been a long long time since we have made a statement like that

if people pushing intel (who I refuse to marginalize as shills) want to focus on games they're right. it's like bulldozer++, kinda

in everything else ryzen is viable. In games it's viable, it's just not best value.

Is it just that everybody wants it to be overwhelming one way or the other?

File: intel kaby lake.png (97KB, 300x198px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 300x198px

>>59210660
filename thread?

>>59210669
AMDtards don't seem to know their own ass from their head, so I wouldn't be surprised.

Should I go AMD for my mITX NAS build?

>>59210683
Yes goyim 4K is bad, don't forget to buy kaby lake so you can watch Netflix though

File: FX-9590.webm (3MB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x480px

>>59210681

File: weep.jpg (84KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 900x900px

Gamersnexus shills ITT be like: switch tactics pajeet

File: ryzen-photoshop.png (112KB, 722x554px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 722x554px

>>59210680
Sadly it's not just bad at games, it's bad at nearly everything.

I would only give Ryzen the edge in video encoding and rendering and other niche apps that are specifically optimized for multithreading.

>>59210700
Holy shit.

File: voltaire121.jpg (169KB, 789x789px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 789x789px

>>59210616
>intlel fans are the poorfags now
Oh, what a twist of fate, intelpoorfags can't even afford a 4k monitor

>>59210700
kek

>>59206171
It's funny because this isn't the first time AMD has lied or fudged benchmarks, yet the AMD fanboys eat it up every time.

>gamersnexus
saged
Intel damage control is getting desperate

Can't wait for volta and rypoo falling in 4k because of no more gpu botleneck.

Oh is this another Intel sponsored "benchmark" where Intel paid a reviewer to misinterpret a product

The jury says, yes nytimes.com/2009/11/13/technology/companies/13chip.html

>>59210438
>>59210451
>AMD doing the same thing they did in the presentation on /g/

LMFAO

You can't make this shit up

>>59210744
Seriously it's like they enjoy eating their own poo.

File: golden lel.jpg (10KB, 225x224px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 225x224px

>>59210438
>>59210451
>intelpoorfags will never get to experience glorious 4K

but the 720p benchmarks!!

>>59210680
Can't forget that Ryzen will also be manufactured in 6 and 4 core variants as well, perhaps with superior binning, lower TDP while retaining the same IPC and single core performance. Hopefully with the superior binning we might see a more stable overclocking capacity.

Anyways, has anyone attempted to disable cores and push superior overclocks in doing so with any of the released SKUs yet?

>>59210809
Where are these 720p benchmarks you keep talking about? I don't see them.

>>59210438
hooly shit

intel is finished

>>59210823
Don't mind him, it's just some intelfriend falseflagging to make AMD fanboys look even more retarded than they already are.

>60hz in 2017
I mean you may as well use bulldozer if you're gonna game at 60hz lmao

>>59210643
Because at 4K, the GPU is bottlenecking. Get it through your skulls you autistic sandniggers.

>>59210721
It's still fighting the 6900k for half the price, impressive to say the least.

>>59210846
poorfag alert

>>59210846
>Pootel
>4k gaming
L O L
O
L

>>59206171
any ryz owners in the thread?

>>59210855
>>59210861
You can't test a CPU properly at 4k

>>59210873
t. pootel

>>59210873
Intel is too shit for 4k.

>>59210875
Google "gpu bottleneck"

>>59210883
>only platform confirmed for 4k netflix

kys now

>>59210861
At 4K, the CPU is waiting for the GPU to finish rendering everything. There's really no difference in CPU workload between 1080p and 4K; only the GPU workload increases.

>>59210823
because HURR 4K DOESNT MATTER

>>59210885
>arguing with buttblasted ayymdfags
Just laugh at them when new gpus come and rypoo falls to i3

>pootel says 4k benchmarks don't matter
>pootel will shitpost about muh 4k netflix in another thread

which is it pootel

>>59210899

>smart tvs decoding 4k netkicks

>>59210917
the framerate at 4K is literally the same as bulldozer

ryzen confirmed as bad as bulldozer kek

>>59210932
its faster than bulldozer which is faster than anything pootel has to offer

>>59210945
cool

File: bleach.jpg (27KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 500x500px

>>59210945

>>59210915
It's pretty sad that Ryzen can't even beat an i3.

>muh my gaymes bla bla bla

Take and go fuck youselves!

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

File: 1478186028553.png (34KB, 500x413px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 500x413px

>the 4k gaming benchmarks don't matt-

>>59210903
Pootel is shit at 4k gaming compared to Ryzen

>>59210055
>MORE THAN ONE PERSON DOESNT AGREE WITH MUST BE SAMEFAG REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>59210932

shills confirmed not capable of forming a coherent statement

pootel shitposting shill guide

>inducing non-sensical discussions

>make false statement
>appeal to housefires
>appeal to financial capacity
>appeal to specific far fetched scenarios
>say is finished and dead without any logical conclusion
>still be right and induce trolling repeat
>research on dubious sources
>mention power draw and ssd storage technology
>remind them of past performance
>show a random gaymen benchmark vs higher price 4 core
>mention a dual core i3 out the blue
>mention 4k
>appeal to financial capacity
>mention netflix streaming

ffs

>>59210230
>I can't afford to buy Intel for my next CPU Mr. Shill
It's okay. :^)

>>59211012
You have like 100 posts in this thread, this is embarassing

FOR THE LAST FUCKING TIME: CURRENT GPUS CANNOT HANDLE 4K AT HIGHER THAN THE FRAMERATES IN THE RESULTS, EVEN IF THE CPU WERE FUCKING SKYNET. SHUT THE FUCK UP AND KILL YOURSELVES GAYMD FANTARDS

>>59210120
>>59211012
>>59211048

This is my second post, you must be mistaken. Also I don't get embarassed that easily

File: kate3.png (291KB, 404x406px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 404x406px

GUYS AMD IS SHIT NOW

BTFO


INTEL HAS NEVER SCAMMED CONSUMERS IN ANY WAY THAT'S BEEN WORSE!!!


GOOD GOYYYY


In all seriousness, I am not proud of AMD doing this shit but Intel has done worse things in general. Bad practice on both companies at the end. At least AMD is bringing Ryzen as a future-proof, cheaper, and more productive CPU than Intel (+competition = -prices overall).

Inform yourselves you shill fags:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sciuiEcrnzg&t=1562s

>>59211031
>>59210120

maybe it's the Anon who banned that cell phone IP tower, you're mistaken, still waiting for him to deliver

>>59210928
>pre-approved
>content
>cuckvision

>>59211072
Not only is AMD trying to scam people, they are doing it because their CPU is much worse in reality. It is both more expensive AND slower, a complete loss.

>>59211101
>>59210928
keep on hanging yourselves

>Couple days ago rumors about Intel reps telling reviews how to review Ryzen so that Intel would look better
>everyone losing their shit

>Proof of AMD doing the same shit
>everyone defending them

At least have some damn principles. Companies are not your friends. They aren't sports teams you cheer for and support. They want you money and they'll do whatever it takes for it. Never forget this.

>>59211117
>AMD
>scam

You spelled intel wrong. Last I checked, AMD haven't lost a dozen+ court cases for anticompetetive behavior like intel has

>>59211117
Inform yourself you shitposting faggot:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sciuiEcrnzg&t=1562s

And READ the post.

File: pete-carroll-reacts-to-missed-fg-in-ot[1].gif (3MB, 500x279px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 500x279px

>when the amdrone realizes he has to spend $700 and give his monies to nvidia for a 1080ti to play games at 4k with his 1800x

>>59211129
Watch the OP video and please explain how that isn't a scam.

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

156KB, 633x758px

>>59211133
BUT VEGA IS COMING

muh 1366x768, 4k dun matter p-poorfag i only got a $150 GPU p-poorfag


AHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>59211135
See
>>59211072

>>59211163
Doesn't explain anything about how AMD isn't scamming people.

File: 1487768905354.jpg (54KB, 564x445px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 564x445px

>>59211132

>37minute video of straight up face to face preaching shopping TV style

how do you watch these videos

also that would make a great cigar box

>>59211135

If you knew the history of Intel and AMD you wouldn't be so anal about it, Intel was convicted and just brushed off with a measly fine

seriously AMD doesn't have that many dishonest shills as intel becuse not a single argument holds up, these are just straight up customers that want to pay a fair price for a decent non enterprise usage that's it

>rigging
AMD didn't rig anything, the same benchmarks can be and have been repeated independently. The problem is many programs are so optimized for Intel CPUs these days that real world performance is much lower than it's theoretical (and synthetic) performance.

It's still a great chip for encoding, streaming etc. But it will need driver updates and games will need to be recompiled before it shines.

tl;dr early adopters got burned by unoptimized software, blame AMD

>>59211198
You are trying to say that AMD isn't scamming people, because Intel did it?

>>59211254
>AMD didn't rig anything, the same benchmarks can be and have been repeated independently

That's 100% false, clearly you have not watched the video.

File: not this shit again.jpg (156KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 1920x1080px

>>59211123

See >>59211129

AMD is not "scamming" anybody. Gamersnexus are confused retards not understanding the context, are literally sponsored by intel, and had to overclock the intel chip in their review by 700mhz just to make the chart look better

What AMD asked every reviewer to do:
>asked 1440p and 4K be tested, ALONGSIDE 1080p, to capture a complete performance profile of the product. 1440p and 4K customers deserve to know how a new processor might be useful to them as well

What gamersnexus mouthbreathers are trying to make this out to be:
>AMD SAID WE ARE ONLY ALLOWED TO TEST AT 4K REEEE

no, there's a reason gamersnexu are the only fucking channel sperging out at this, AMD said test it in 1080p all you want, but test it in 4k and 2K as well, to give a complete picture.

Again, funny how it's only gamersnexus reporting on this "problem." Everybody seemed to understand what AMD was asking, except for gamersnexus, the channel sponsored by intel.

tl;dr, OP is a fucking faggot. Watch a better review. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sciuiEcrnzg&t=1562s

>>59211283
Pretty much this

Basically gamersnexus completely misinterpreted everything, put on their tinfoil hat and started reeeing everywhere

>>59211283
Gamers Nexus is not sponsored by Intel

Not only that, the 4K issue is just one of many ways they rigged it, see >>59206242 and >>59206264

>>59211283
Im surprised gamersnexus being sponsored by Intel wasn't enough of a red flag for some people here

File: You made an attempt.gif (2MB, 336x296px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 336x296px

>AMD doesn't live up to the hype

Shocker

>>59211314
They aren't sponsored by Intel

File: pD5sCKGDXGcqFsEhrRsGAX-650-80[1].png (76KB, 601x830px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 601x830px

>>59211283
>Again, funny how it's only gamersnexus reporting on this "problem."

k

>>59211283
They're always fair in their gpu reviews, why would they shill now? They're not even sponsored by Intel, like you said, so why would I trust you?

>>59211283
So basically

AMD said they could benchmark it anyway they wanted but asked to do 4K on top of that

And then gamersnexus sperged out and interpreted that as AMD saying they could only benchmark in 4K?

fuck gamers nexus

>>59211338
how is this "proof' amd is "scamming" anybody?

>>59211265

No, anything false is not justifiable when you're in a market leader position you can make statements like 10 times the performance of last generation or obliterate by being dominant while the competition is misled on a wrong strategy and platform with an environment which is not optimized and branding is seen and despised as lower end

Calling it a scam is very far out because it's a side to side comparison in sales this is very lax because you're putting forward the merits of your product vs the competition in a controlled setting but you're not actually setting factual printed and written fake information, since it's actually live on the fly within a demonstration which doesn't bind any agreement and the main objective is to sell, you cannot call it legally a scam so to speak, fake information is spread more through the zeitgeist of reviewers and the behind the scenes development of tools that are used considering alot was built against ryzen the way it hit the mark implying some safeguards were set by intel it's still a fair performance to push the sale, this is a sales pitch on a side to side performance vs fake statements said and published by shill reviewers or posters

>>59211283
/thread

>>59210721
I disagree that it's that clear cut. I keep seeing sites trying to capture this in strange metrics like performance/$ and frames/watt but the debate is crying for a more clear comparison tool. We need a math/stats nerd to go to town on this 8-axis geometric mean style.

Currently running e3-1230v3 @ 80W, compy runs 24x7x365

real newegg $, right now:
1800x = 669$ CDN @ 95W
1700x = $529 CDN @ 95W
1700 = $438 CDN @ 65W
6900k = 1,369$ CDN @ 140W
6800k = 629$ (mysterious 7 day sale @ 594) @ 140W
7700k = $458 @ 91W
7600k = $324 @ 91W

I'll generalize and say you lose roughly 20% in all gaming from something like 7700k but I think ryzen might be able to run 2x VR gaming VMs with passthrough (the mobos seem to support 8x8x4x).

I'm going to watch and read but I need some clairity on AMD support for things like ACS before I pull the trigger.

My less objective side tells me these release benchmarks will be less interesting than the benchmarks a month from now for the same processors.

Also phoronix reviews:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ryzen-1800x-linux&num=1

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd-ryzen-gaming&num=1

>>59211344
They didn't "sperg out." In the review he explains that doing 4K games means they're not testing the cpu anymore and it's GPU bottlenecked. He even shows 1440p benchmarks just to give AMD the benefit of the doubt.

>>59211277
>If you disagree with the video you didn't watch it
The video isn't a fucking monk that converts units that view it

>>59211283
So let me get this straight?

>Hey gamersnexus it's AMD. could you review our blueberry, chocolate, and vanilla muffins?
>gamersnexus: *autistic screeching*

File: fg.jpg (61KB, 960x508px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 960x508px

>>59210987
>4k gaming benchmarks are all that matt-

>>59211375
Please tell me how you can repeat the tests done by AMD where they look up at the skybox. It's 100% false that anyone has repeated those tests, the poster I was replying to was a liar.

>>59211393
>wants to game on 768p instead of 4k

Literally Ebola and poverty tier.
As expected of Intelfags

>>59211362

again the side to side comparison within a sales pitch is acceptable because it's agreed that the product sold will be put in a better light to push higher performance but it isn't factual, it's done so to exagerate that, since it's live it isn't legally binding

in fact the truth is that Intel is so desperate that they can lawyer up to anything

>>59210480
Yes, because at low resolutions the GPU isn't the bottleneck, the CPU is.

>>59210441
Not sure what's up with Joker's gaming benchmarks. Literally everyone else is showing the i7-7700K stomping all three Ryzen SKUs in gaming. Something's amiss here.

>>59211372
in this case could the benchmarks not measure wait time on the CPU and put a number to this?

>>59211476
Nothing is wrong with his results. Steve from Gamersnexus confirmed himself, it depends on methodology.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04p_ryVM2ow

can't tell if op is retarded or just fishing for tasty (You)s

7/10

either way everyone who isn't sageing this thread should consider self termination

>>59210438
>Benchmark is at 4K, not 1080p or lower
>Results are within margin of error, excluding the FX-8350
Literally irrelevant.

>>59210451
this graph annoys me with it's lack of units and title

>>59211510
>Joker is wearing an AMD shirt

The guy who gets a complete outlier in results just happens to be wearing an AMD shirt, what are the chances.

File: amd review controversey in a nutshell.png (1MB, 3555x2198px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3555x2198px

>>59211283
Kek

I just made this

>>59211536
>b-but he is a tech enthusiast rooting for competition
AHAHAHAHAHAHA Steve how could you do this to your fans?

File: 1482899853257.jpg (5KB, 127x67px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 127x67px

>>59211476

This one is too good to be true and dubious, it's obvious at first glance and that's the locked 1700, if it's true then it needs to be replicated

>59211570
>thumbnail
(You)

>>59211552
LMAO

>>59211570
Can you please post a smaller thumbnail? I can still see that

File: x264.png (221KB, 602x685px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 602x685px

>faster than intel 8 coars.
>fyi no one does 2 pass, they use crf so pass 1 is irrelevant.

>>59210593
"can't just take AMDs word for any of this"
>zoom
>save us.FX

>vice grips @ 8:46

lol'd

not a bad review

>>59211552
Great, now make a noose and hang yourself. Retard.

>>59211591
Oy vey Pass 2 is literally another shoah

File: lel.jpg (199KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 900x900px

>>59211552

Guys, what CPU do I get if I want to game at 4k?

>>59211552
i like him but this is funny

>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

Someone literally PAID to use Ryzen couldn't stand the performance and had to go back to his Intel PC. I guess Ryzen was a meme.

>>59211605
big words for an edgy 12 year old pootel fan

>>59211552
This picture is completely false, not only did Gamers Nexus test at 1440p, tons of those in the other side didn't, such as PC Gamer

>>59211435
>Real world benchmarks
>720p gaming
Mutually exclusive.

>>59211552
lel

how will gamers nexus ever recover

>>59211617
X4-860K

>>59211621
Jesus christ

Ryzen is a disaster

>>59206171
I'm reading the text review and I like it.

>>59211630
The point is that gamers nexus is saying that AMD asking others to test in different resolutions is a "scam"

>>59211617
1700 and overclock it.
If you don't need cores just get some cheapo i5 and overclock it too.

>>59211665
That's not the scam at all, read the OP and the next two posts.

File: 1460249545243.jpg (12KB, 416x234px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 416x234px

>>59211583
>>59211586

>reposting alternative facts

original here

>>59210441

>>59211670
im not reading shit cockmongler

>>59211681
Obviously

>>59211570
Oh, now I see. He's running the 1700 heavily overclocked, and because of the lower TDP he's able to get that overclock without making the chip super hot like the higher SKUs.

In this case, as long as Joker's chip isn't just a one-off champion overclocker and is actually representative of an average 1700, then the argument could be made for the 1700 as a gaming chip. However, due to the higher stock clocks and higher TDP, the 1700X and 1800X are still DOA as far as gaming is concerned.

>>59211621
AYYYYYMD BTFO

>>59211634
IGNORE SYNTHETIC BENCHMARKS GOY

FOCUS ON 1366x768 GAYMING BENCHMARKS

>7600 and 7600k dropped 40-50$ in Canada
Time to buy

>>59210593
I think Linus BTFO'd both AMD and Intel fanboys.

>>59211672
Here is your explanation by STEVE oh "AMD rigging the benches" himself:
It depends on how you do the benches and settings used listen from STEVE HIMSELF
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04p_ryVM2ow

>>59211552
very nice anon

>>59211617
Intel i5.

>>59211698

If that perf is legit then the locked 1700 needs to be shilled heavily instead of waiting for 1600X

And "reviewers" need to review their stats from 1800X used for gaymen

And how he managed to clock that for pure gaymen, that just shows how much can be replicated on the X on a stable OC, it's impressive skip the X for gaymen

limited edition one off 1800 for gaymen

>>59209789
DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT QUANTIFIABLE AND SPECIF MEANS?

Like >more than 60mph less than 200 calories

You can't sue someone for saying something is fat or low calories. THESE ARE SUBJECTIVE FUCKING THINGS

You can only false advertise via specific quantifiable numbers that are false.

>>59211670
>cinebench
yes this was overhyped. It's good to know though.
>sniper elite skybox looking
I have trouble with this one, if they play an "on rails" demo then it's canned and optimized. How do you solve this? hook up the same mouse/kb to 2 different PCs? record 2 playthroughs and then play them on the opposite PC?
>most importantly 4k
he does stress this and present it very negatively
>blender
concerns seem legit, AMD may have cherrypicked settings. I don't use blender, what are defaults? is there a "reasonable" standard for this or is this just him saying "not the way I do it so wrong".

File: average corelet poster ITT.jpg (17KB, 634x424px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 634x424px

>4k doesn't matter 4k is irrelevant p-poorfag WAAAAAAW

>>59211848
AMD cherrypicked settings to favor their chip's architecture, while Steve is using settings more akin to what someone would actually use IRL.

>>59211885
Like 800x600?

>>59211894
1366x768 GAYMING

>>59211894
Steve didn't use 800x600, he only used 1080p+

>>59211894
The thinking man's resolution for immersible gaming.

Stupid AMDfucks don't realize, when more powerful GPUs show up 7700k will be a lot more faster in 4k and you'll be fucking dead

>>59212010
Stupid /v/cucks still don't realize, Intel is bringing 6c/12t threads to Kaby Lake successor Coffee Lake, new games will use moar cores!

official benchmarks, price to performance isn't being considered

kill yourself

>>59212010
>"Just wait"
>in another 4 years the GPU w-wont be a bottleneck!"

I couldn't make this shit up in my dreams.

Ah this day was a blast, I was shitposting here ever since the NDA lift, I've seen everything, from angry and sad on both sides, complete plot twists, sudden reversals, uncovered mysteries.
This day could be made into a biography.


At the end of the day, who has the last laugh?

>>59212071
I like how he assumes everyone will get a Titan XP/XV/X(?)
We've barely exited the state of GPU's being a bottleneck at 1440p and he's talking about bottlenecks on 4k, something years later.

Delirious.

>>59212120
>At the end of the day, who has the last laugh?

Only the trolls win, like usual

>>59212010
>lmao AyyMD waitfags gonna be waiting for Zen+ now right? LOL
>j-just wait for a more powerful GPU to be released, then my 7700k will be better, you'll see!

>synthetic benchmarks are meaningless, only real world applications matter
>no one pays $300+ for a CPU to play at resolutions higher than 768p the human eye can't even see higher than 1080p!

???

>>59206439
Not nearly as shady as when some gpu manufacturer like 10 years ago included some special hardware optimization for a popular game benchmark. It might have even been ATI and it doomed them so much they had to sell to AMD.

File: troll.jpg (62KB, 550x318px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 550x318px

>>59212339
the trolls are looking rather well fed.

File: slut.jpg (110KB, 790x720px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 790x720px

>>59212414
DELET

>>59206171
I like how he tries to make the argument that you don't want to buy a product that isn't future proof and that will potentially get worse as GPU technology gets better and possibly makes the CPU a bottleneck (lel not happening), however he doesn't mention that the AMD CPU is a fucking Octacore compared to a quad core and future games will take advantage of more cores making it obviously better as far as future proofing is concerned.

There's been a lot of evidencce of Samsung Exxynos processors that've also learned how to 'game' benchmarks by detecting workloads expected in these CPU simulations. Has AMD adopted these techniques as well? That's gonna take someone smarter than me to figure out aspects like opcode efficiency, hypervisors, and maybe even some ring 0-1 mechanisms whose knowledge hasn't been widely distributed.

>>59212542
>and future games will take advantage of more cores

why are you making this assumption ? Unless your game has a lot of stuff it can compute asynchronously it simply cannot take advantage of more cores. You cannot force whether your game is like that, its based on the nature of the game itself.

>>59212414
kind of like how nvidia releases game ready drivers that don't render certain aspects for a few days/week/till the majority of reviews are done?

>>59206171
why is he acting like such a passive aggressive pessimistic bitch?

>>59212591
I'd be mad too if AMD tried to scam me

>>59212414
Really makes you think...and now those same people are part of AMD...

>>59206439
>shadiest shit
>intel paid dell to not use competitor GPUs
>intel paid software engineers to write code to make competitor CPUs run slower on their compiler
>autistic video game youtube paid reviewers getting mad is shadier

Are you fucking retarded?

>>59212637
That's not what happened, read >>59206242 and >>59206264

>>59212575
you literally answered the exact reason why they will use more cores, stuff isn't really going vertical more than it's just moving horizontally with more fluff getting added onto engines and operating systems getting more and more bloat as well as more and more programs taking advantage of tools power users have

>>59212615
what scam? 1800x is a better buy than the 6900k by miles

AMD didn't rig benchmarks, they cherry picked them, as usual.
Learn the difference my intel-pajeet friend.

>>59212719
The scam is here >>59206242 and >>59206264

Or just watch the video in OP

>>59212699
that doesn't answer my question at all.

>>59212720
>AMD didn't rig benchmarks, they cherry picked them

Wrong, watch the video in OP

>>59212734
>taking beta reviewer this seriously

everyone has already done non-biased benchmarks all this is is stupid finger pointing at shit every tech company does

>>59212794
Please tell me where Intel purposefully looked at a skybox in their benchmarks to increase their CPU scores

>>59210451
here is the fun thing:
at 1440p and higher 7700K gets occasional stutter once in a while, rare but it's there, 1700 doesn't
honestly I don't care about HIGHEST FPS it doesn't actually measure potential of CPU, because it's misleading and old fashioned measurement from early 2000

what I care about if it has stutters or not, that's the only thing CPU responsible for in gaming graphics part

>>59210482
>GPU bottleneck
how do we measure GPU bottleneck?
as far as I know it's about utilization of GPU, so if it works at 100% all the time = CPU is fine no?
ie i72600 can't keep up with modern GPUs

are there any decent 1700 reviews?

can't seem to find one, 1800x might be a dud 1700x looks good considering price

>>59212908
pc gamer reviewed it: http://www.pcgamer.com/the-amd-ryzen-7-review/

>>59212922
>decent

they are barely passable, and clusterfuck to read
thanks

>>59212908
>>59212937

better one imo

http://hothardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-1700x-1700-benchmarks-and-review

>>59206307
Why don't we ever see this so-called drop? Amazon, Newegg and Tigerdirect is still full price, fuck I think after Ryzen reviews have been released it came up a few cents.

>>59212971
Sadly there is no Intel price drop because Intel has nothing to worry about.

Intel has done shit way worse than AMD, you hypocritical fags

stupid question, every single one review is with 1080
can it be just nvidia drivers shitting the bed?
my reasoning is that it works too well in non gaming workloads, there just must be 6900k gaming performance, but how nvidia drivers work on profiles can it be because of that?

>during Bulldozer we haven't heard a peep about AMD besides Radeon
>Ryzen
>fucking AMD fans everywhere all in a short time period
>IP location either UK, Pakistan or India

File: 1481046559569.png (15KB, 624x444px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 624x444px

really makes you think

File: 1468783215266.png (16KB, 625x479px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 625x479px

>>59213060

not meant for 1080p obv

https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/245204-amds-ryzen-7-1800x-reviewed-zen-amazing-workstation-chip-1080p-gaming-achilles-heel

>>59213073
I want to see more frametime graphs against 7700k, because on those ryzen looks great.

>>59212811
prove that this was intentional obfuscation.

>>59212811
>implying 15% performance increase in sysmark is not same thing

>>59213060
Yes, makes me think if they are supposed to be the same benchmark, why is it the Ryzen renders 2000 fewer frames? Did it just crap out after 85%?

>>59213110
Watch the video. Hell even better go watch AMD's actual presentation.

>>59213124
says nothing in article meaning they just stopped recording

>>59213148
I did.

File: 1463003420310.png (11KB, 683x336px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 683x336px

>>59206171

Guru 3D

https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-processor-review,1.html

>>59213158
If they were running identical benchmarks wouldn't they run and record them both to the end?

>>59206171
The top end chips are never worth buying, the R7 1700 is the best Ryzen chip to buy right now

File: average-gaming.png (72KB, 601x830px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 601x830px

>>59213321
>the R7 1700 is the best Ryzen chip to buy right now

They're all shit desu senpai

>>59213351
So the intel chips are 10fps faster on average in games? but slower in all multi-threaded applications until you hit the $1000 8 core?

Why would I buy the intel chips? I don't need an extra 10fps to go from 100fps to 110fps

>>59213351
But it's the best shit per $.

>>59213370
>>59213351

If you're gaming in 1080p, read:

>>59213073

>>59213379
Sadly it's actually one of the worst

The top CPU is a $340 Intel 7700K

The closest Ryzen is a $500 1800X

>>59213370
The Intel chip is not only faster, it's also $160 cheaper.

>>59213391
>>59213351
Is the Ryzen chip over 60fps in 90% of decently optimized AAA games?

Yes?

Then it's fine, it's not like the FX 8 cores which can barely keep up while running at 5ghz

>>59213411
Okay? But it doesn't have 8 cores/16 threads

>>59213426
>Then it's fine

You like paying $160 more for worse performance?

>>59213404
>The top CPU is a $340 Intel 7700K
You are comparing CPUs with shit. The 1700 is still the best value shit.

>>59213453
It has more performance when using it's full 8 cores/16 threads

if all you do is gaming, then a G4560 is enough for 60hz gaming, and an i7 7700K delidded at 5ghz+ will be what you want for 144hz gaming

it's very simple

Based gamers nexus telling us all the truth. Fanboys will argue against this objective truth

>>59213614
>smug face and smirks through whole video

it was cringe to watch even though graphs are true but not full, they still ignore frametimes in their graphs masking it with mins/max

max fps means shit if frametimes are not smooth as demonstrated by both nvidia and amd cards
8 core has leverage there maybe not huge but it's there

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

8KB, 480x360px

>>59213905
>this faggot has an argument
AMD BTFO ETERNALLY!
INTEL FOR BEST MONOPOLY WHOSE COCK I SUCK!

>>59213471
>>59213426
>>59213391
>>59213370
>>59213073
>>59213060

BUT MUH FILENAME!

>>59206171
Don't be suckered into this bait tech blog. Everyone who pays attention knows that it is an Intel/Nvidia shill site

>>59206242
>At this point, you might be left feeling disillusioned
A condescending statement designed to prey on the weak and Intel shill who would love to believe negative new about AMD

> most of the charts leaked and created by AMD revolved around Cinebench, which is not a gaming workload
>leaked
This is a completely unfounded statement, considering the vast majority of Cinebench graphics were from outside sources or occasionally individuals with engineering sources. AMD released its own data and had no reason to "leak" the same published data with fancy Chinese script. Additionally, this CPU is predominantly for Rendering, and AMD relatively rarely even mentioned gaming and instead focus on other metrics, BECAUSE THE CURRENTLY RELEASED RYZEN CPUs NOT FIRST AND FOREMOST A GAMING CPUS. Intel's high end is not first and foremost gaming chips, either.

Therefore "Steve" is grasping at straws when he implies that AMD mislead anyone about the gaming potential of Ryzen, considering the vast majority of the time it is shown in a 60FPS situation. Anyone who MISINTERPRETS these results as misleading (like "Steve") is too stupid and naive to read the actual data in the benchmarks and instead substitutes his own erroneous ideas regarding Ryzen's performance, whereupon he can feign disappointment for an emotionally fuel shill article.

>And, most importantly, all of these demos were run at 4K resolution.
And it's also important to know a limitation of most 4K displays (and 1080p displays, for that matter): the monitor runs at 60Hz. AMD is advertising the CPU as a 60FPS CPU (which it is).

1/2

>>59206242
2/2
>There’s an argument to be made that low-end performance doesn’t matter if you’re stuck on the GPU, but that’s a bad argument: You don’t buy a worse-performing product for more money, especially when GPU upgrades will eventually out those limitations as bottlenecks external to the CPU vanish.
This whole conclusion is moronic, because NONE of AMD's Ryzen CPUs are worse performing than their counterparts (by core/thread count) AND more expensive. Again, these are workstation CPUs, NOT gaming CPUs primarily, but of course they can be used very well in gaming situations as well. Additionally this moron "Steve" makes the percentage difference between Ryzen and a comparable Intel CPU in gaming seem large, but in fact it is quite small and often only after both CPUs produce framerates in the 100s of FPS. The naked eye will likely not be able to distinguish between most of the demos (say GTAV), so there will be no "outing" (Steve can't stop thinking about how what a faggot he is) of any noticeable performance difference at any resolution, considering CPU requirements don't really increase or decrease with resolution, only with settings such as draw distance and shadows.

>>59211621
That means even if MORE COREZ Ryzen still performs worse than Kaby Lake when used to game and live stream at the same time?
If yes then holy fucking Jesus Christ.

File: 1488519469977.png (900KB, 4000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

900KB, 4000x2000px

>Resolutionlets

File: Screenshot_2017-03-03-01-38-26-1.png (102KB, 984x456px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 984x456px

>>59206171
How is this biased?
It's a logical conclusion based on the benchmarks.
Other tests showed the same thing

>>59214902
>Gets 100+FPS in games
>Not good for gaming

What did they mean by this?

https://youtu.be/BXVIPo_qbc4