Ryzen BTFO! https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/201 7/03/amd-ryz

>>59207475
Gee who would've guessed

>workstation CPU
>gaymen
uhhh

>>59207475
Amd is finished, sell your stock now it is already dropping. Amd will be bankrupt soon

>arstechnica

>>59207475
>The ugly
>A higher-clocked quad-core chip like the Intel i7-7700K or 7600K is still the best choice of processor for no-compromise gamers

/g/ told you think 10 million fucking times, how is the
>the ugly

>>59207603
They marketed it entirely as a gaming CPU

>>59207603
Take a look at our Battlefield 1 comparisons!

Doom with Vega!

Sniper Elite!

>>59207663
You shouldn't make blanket statements like that anon :^]

>>59207663
>marketed based on Cinebench scores
>THEY MARKETED IT AS GAMING CPU DUDE

>>59207663
No, they marketed it as on par with 6900 in games, with it mostly is, show me one 1800x vs 7700k in gaming, you fucking can't.

>>59207663
absolutely not.

File: THIS IS OBVIOUS.png (317KB, 500x291px) Image search: [Google]

317KB, 500x291px

>>59207475
So what you're saying is wait for Ryzen 5, which is going to start at 4.0GHz

>>59207475
>8 core 16 t cpu
>vs 7700k (4c8t)
>faster clocks on intel
>less cores = faster individually

yeah who would've though
op is a shill

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

110KB, 790x720px

>>59207475
>Specialised AVX applications will perform better under Intel
AMD will still lick poojeet anuses in emulation. Shocking.

>>59207792
>implying serious VM work isn't done under a hypervisor.

This is only the beginning of Ryzen it's like the Core2Duo

File: 1430786332524.png (185KB, 955x896px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 955x896px

>>59207475
>particularly in modern titles

You mean when optimized for intel? This is why they should only bench an assortment of old games.

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

156KB, 633x758px

>>59207691
>>59207695
>>59207704
>>59207724
https://youtu.be/SJ87GLfX4lM?t=2m2s
>The dream gaming pc for 2017
>pajeet is in full damage control

>>59207916
>Powered by ryzen CPU
Funny how she didn't say 1800x isn't it?

>>59207475
any review showing an 1800x behind intel is a botched review not their fault exactly but some of this stuff should be slap you in the face obvious

>>59207475
>7700k has literally 2 more fps average which could literally be a margin of error

>LOOK GAIS IS FUCKING TERRIBAD FOR GAYMEN!

Gamers are fucking faggots.

As a developer, the Ryzen is a dream come true.

>>59207966
As a gaming developer, Ryzen in no way changed anything.

>>59207475
>A higher-clocked quad-core chip like the Intel i7-7700K or 7600K is still the best choice of processor for no-compromise gamers
"No-compromise"? There isn't even a budgetary advantage to getting an 1800. It's more expensive than the 7700k by $150...


>>59207906
Ah, yes, because nothing says "good purchase" like a product that only well on shit that no one plays anymore.

>>59207475
> the ugly
> the most expensive chip on the market is still the best option for something that mostly relies on gpu performance

I'll be glad if it doen't do games very well, that can be intels niche

>>59207989
>game developer
as game developer you are a cuck who only wishes to die every day.

>>59207475
why do they always use fucking Rise of the Dogshit Tomb Raider for fucking everything? oh right because Intel concentrated a lot of effort optimizing for it

File: amdloo.png (316KB, 882x758px)

316KB, 882x758px

>>59207945
>I-It's 4/6 core clocked to 5ghz btfoing intel I swear.
It's sad at this point.

>>59207603
Ok so it can render a scene in Blender faster and it can compile the linux kernel faster. Its really gonna fly of those shelves....

this board is autistic

The Intel chips AFAIK were typically 500-1000Ghz+ over the Ryzen. This held true for even the older Haswell parts. It seems to me the benchmarks were quite an eye opener as AMD seems to have it's shit together. Ryzen seems to do many things much more efficiently on the motherboard chipsets as well. I'm impressed.

>>59208153
> tfw intel abandons cpu and gpu for dedicated vidya processing units

>>59207475
At only double the price. What a deal.

>>59207475
There is literally nothing wrong with this review but shills from both sides will shitpost endlessly about it.

>>59208009
>$320 and $240
>most expensive chip in the market
what the fuck are you talking about

>>59207727
And so the wait begins

>>59208015

>mobile gaming

>>59207792
Specialized AVX already runs better on Xeon Phi's than anything else, but 80% or more of float heavy HPC workloads BTFO all CPU's with GPU accel, where the Zen server chips will far outperform Intel for cost, power draw, and density in the near future. The number of use cases for AVX where GPU accel isn't available or more optimal is incredibly limited and not even CERN could find a reason to write AVX heavy code, as it degraded performance rather than increasing it.
>He fell for the AVX meme.

>>59208025
>5ghz
how old are you that 5 ghz is not a counterpoint

Should I go AMD for my mITX NAS build?

Since Ryzen threads are being spammed nonstop, I will spam this question until I get a satisfactory answer.

im still on the AM2 chipset, feelsbadman

>>59210751
No iGPU and lack of mini itx boards could be a problem.

>>59210751

If you need your server to render/transcode on the fly, then yeah, go for the r7 1700. 65w tdp, 8 cores 16 threads.

Main issue is you will probably need to get an expensive hba card for your drives due to the lack of sata ports and limited pcie slots.

Consider waiting a couple months, asrock or supermicro will probably have a proper server/workstation itx.

>>59207475
>games
>>>/v/

I'd wait to see if there's Intel response to this AMD thuggery. But waiting always cheapest reaction

>>59207475
If it runs: Battle Brothers, Stardew Valley, RimWorld, CS 1.6, Company of Heroes, Empire Earth, SWAT 4, It's good for me.

>>59210708
Performance is ipc*clock speed retard. Zen is clocked 1ghz lower while having roughly the same ips as broadwell thus 7700k stopms it in anyting not using 16 threads.

File: 4957330-8928433131-42588.png (4MB, 1543x1615px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1543x1615px

>>59207475
welp, I've had enough of amd, if this gives any insight on how R5, R3 and Vega will go, off to jew land for me.

File: 1325452613326.png (158KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 500x281px

I'd like to see all the Intel fanboys pick up a 6900k for their gaymens.

Didn't think so.

>>59207475
If
>Excellent performance in workstation applications
is the only part of that I actually care about, would I still consider Intel?

>>59211340
whats disturbing is the 1800x falling behind a 6800k in games. similar clock speeds with the 1800x having the increased core count.

and i'm not talking about 5 - 7% difference. i'm talking about upwards to 20% and a few, 30%.

there is something terribly wrong with its gaming performance because in everything else, the 1800x keeps up with the 6900k and blows the 6800(6850)k out of the water.

well sorta, the only time where x99 in general "wins" is in memory bandwidth and latency sensitive applications because atm, ryzen is enduring very high latency (80-100ms average) and x99 is quad channel so increased bandwidth where a quad channel 2400 kit provides the same level of bandwidth as dual channel 4000mhz.

honestly i wouldn't be surprised if memory latency is causing some of this regression in gaymes as memory latency does matter. even bandwidth is mattering again.

>>59207475
>/gadgets/
dropped

>>59213654
The interesting thing to me is that it actually seems to be a colossal motherboard fuckup. The game review scores on Gigabyte and MSI are noticeably different than ASUS'. Sadly, it seems that the most common board sent to reviewers were ASUS boards.

>>59207691
>>59207695
>>59207704
>>59207724
>W-where did they mention games
>i-it was marketed as a workstation only cpu
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAMijA3uvsw
Fuck you, you ryzen fanboys are as fucking annoying as intel fanboys.

It's not the CPU's job to be massively multithreaded, it's the GPU's: >>59214968
AMD kids are illiterate in technology.
They pretend a CPU is a GPU.....

>>59207663
Is that why it supports ECC memory?

in all fairness, the cpu is actually way better than the reviews show it.

but again AMD managed to fuck shit up.

the reason for the shitty performance is due to the motherboards being autistic. if they where better optimized, then expect the 1800x singlethreaded performance to be on par with kaby.

again if AMD hadnt fucked it up, all would be great.

>>59207997
7700K is quad core though. 1800 is Octa core, price comparison is irrelevant. Or wait, sorta. Intel deca core cost like $1-2k while 1800 goes 2 less cores (20% less total cores) for over 50% price drop.

The most expensive/powerful CPU of a balanced performance/price set isn't the game changer boi. It's the lower end stuff that matters. Where else do you get a quad core / threads at 3.1 ghz, 14nm die size, modern processor at just $129?

>>59211330
>Company of Heroes
Top tier taste, anon

>>59208081
You do know that most people aren't as retarded as you and don't buy a $500 8 core processor that excels in multithreaded workloads just to play video games on, right?

>>59207663
Then you didn't pay much attention to their marketing.

File: amddotcom.png (1MB, 1896x899px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1896x899px

>>59207663
>mfw AMDrones now claim that it has never been marketed as a gaming CPU
>mfw all they have to do is go to AMDs main page

>>59216681
^This. SO. MANY. TIMES

I get that the 1800 looks sick with its 8 core. But that is just for show/workstation. The value for performance is where the shining gem is.

$129 for quad core, is absolutely sick. I give no jacks for the 1800/1700

>>59216712
I'm seriously baffled when I read this board, why are all these kids from /v/ arguing about which 6/8 core CPU is the best for gaming when you can just buy a quad core and get an infinitely better GPU with your money?

>>59216767
I guess they are all "But muh top dog of Ryzen can't compete against Intel hurr"

>>59216767
>I'm seriously baffled when I read this board, why are all these kids from /v/ arguing about which 6/8 core CPU is the best for gaming when you can just buy a quad core and get an infinitely better GPU with your money?
>kids
there's your answer.