For the Intel shills on /g/

>>59211864
Video games are software though

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

112KB, 722x554px

>>59211864
Then why does it suck with work apps too?

>>59211864
i dont even understand the "gaming" meme because all of the ryzen chips are WELL above 60 frames per second

we're talking the difference between 350FPS in counterstrike vs 400 FPS in counter strike, at 720p

who the fuck cares and why is nobody noticing the fact that intels $1000 broadwells are getting demolished?

but where is my budget cpu
i dont want to buy a g4560 and locked myself to kaby lake lineup

>>59211920
>still faster than 8c 6900K

And?

>>59211975
Here are your options:
If purely for goyming get the i5 7600k.
If you think you may want run multiple applications then R7 1700.

>>59211920
optimisation and intel compiler

>>59211927
they are trying the hardest to make ryzen look like shit, so they create these absurd situations that make the small advantage they have look absurdly bigger

>>59211864
how many years have we made fun of AMD for this exact thing

now their new lineup is finally out after so much waiting, and it turns out it's yet another MOAR COARS meme

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

72KB, 601x830px

>>59213520
>absurd situation
>playing games

You people are insane

>>59211920
>Adobe

The only relevant benchmarks are GCC, 7-Zip and Cinebench Multithreaded.

>>59213982
yeah bro all those people with monitors that can do more than 60 frames

>>59213982
>5-7fps slower
>4 more physical cores
>all on early benchmarks, bios/os errors and all (smt disabled showing big increase)

This is bad?

File: ryzen_photoshop.gif (60KB, 722x554px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 722x554px

>>59213982
>absurd situations

>>59214026
You forgot WinRAR. My business is built on it.

>>59214082
Twice the hardware for slightly less performance in common tasks such as gaming, image editing, and office software.


yes it is bad

File: jim i bankrupted amd keller.jpg (82KB, 515x657px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 515x657px

>>59214082
>>5-7fps slower
are you blind? it's 8 fps lower vs stock i7 7700k which can oc easily to 4.8-4.9ghz which will make thing worse up to 10-12fps. Jim "SCAM AMD FAGS" Keller was a mistake

>>59214082
Umm it's 12 fps slower and also costs $160 more

Ryzen is a complete failure for gaming

Why is it shit though?Single core perfomance?

>>59211920
> Photoshop
Eh. Bet they didn't expected it to run on a 16 threads. Probably a higher clocked i5 is even better for a PS.

>>59214146

Excellent shit posting.

Your use of hyperbole and exaggeration to undercut and undermine others thoughts is A+ shilling we expect from you children.

>>59214193

Because it has some multithreading teething issues. And some bugs in the BIOS to work out still.

>>59214026
Damage control

>>59214293
try harder next time when Ryzen+ come

>all problems happened at once
>Yet managed to perform very well
Truly a zen moment

http://www.pcworld.com/article/3176100/computers/amd-ryzen-7-1700-vs-a-5-year-old-gaming-pc-or-why-you-should-never-preorder.html

>People who preordered Ryzen 7 CPUs to replace an aging gaming PC—like the venerable Core i5-2600K and 3570K parts so many gamers still cling to, myself included—may have very well purchased a $300-plus processor that actually delivers equal or significantly worse performance in some common gaming scenarios.

HAHA OH WOW

>>59213982
Damn I'm looking (or was) to buy the 1700 for my first build. SOMEONE EXPLAIN THIS.

>>59214328

Further shit posting, excellent.

>>59214432

What's to explain? Teething problems. In a week when the dust settles, and the shit posters desperate to keep the narrative about AMD is bad grow bored, and the problems are sorted the results will improve.

What the shills don't want to talk about is the power consumption being phenomenally lower while being 4.5% slower in 1080. And less than one percent difference at higher resolutions.

I can still hit 100+ fps in nearly every game, it has higher .1% frame times, which means less drops.

Use your own judgement, evaluate the data given to you away from the noise, and look at what your needs may be.

For many people, having an X99 equivalent for 500 dollars is superior to having 4 cores.

wtf is smt? shaking my ...?!

The only reason R7 cpus look like shit right now is because of shitty bios problems. Only the Gigabyte mobos seem to work properly. If you look at Joker's review, you'll see some proper benchmarks.

8 cores and 16 threads, very similar i7 7700k peformance, and at $330 is a fucking steal and wrecks said i7's shit for the price.