Remember the day when everyone changed >/g/ suddenly started

File: 15864841841.jpg (78KB, 573x718px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 573x718px

>>59219348
better be careful or joker will eat you

Everyone on 4chan is a resident expert on any topic. These teenage wunderkids spend their lives exporting videos and doing "CAD work" (whatever the fuck that is, but don't say that out loud). When they relax for a game or two, it's in 4k under 240hz only and nothing short of hardware that doesn't exist will suffice.

The sad truth is, /g/ doesn't even play video games. Just shitposting, animus and ricing.

>>59219500
this is the most accurate post on /g/

File: Screen Shot 2017-03-03 at 12.28.14 PM.png (23KB, 383x212px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 383x212px

>>59219500
>animus
damn i like this double entendre

>>59219348
So pretty much from looking at all of the reviews ive read so far ryzen isn't worth it if you're playing at 1080p but 1440p and higher resolutions the performance is at or above the t 7700k/6900k, I don't see the problem with this? Why would you buy a $300+ cpu then pair it with a gpu to play at 1080p? lol

>>59219348
Remember when
>/v/ started acting like playing CS 1.6 at 320x240 was the only use for a high end CPU
>/v/ decided that anything above 720p was a meme because Ryzen didn't do badly at high res
>/v/ started acting like everyone ran their games at 320x240
>/v/ started acting like power consumption was irrelevant

/v/ pls go...

>>59219725
No it isn't you fucking simpleton. At 4k ultra the games become GPU bound.

File: 0918.png (102KB, 598x580px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 598x580px

>>59219348
It's almost like there's more than one person "suddenly" using 4chin

>>59219348
It started with bulldozer. Now it's part 2 with newfriends who were too young 6 years goo.

>>59219761
>Inducing a GPU bottleneck to avoid heavy CPU loads
hence why AMD was telling reviewers to stick to high res benchmarks

>>59219761
Stop it with the 240p GAYMEN meme
every major reviewer on youtube kept their reviews to 1080p and above

>>59219348
Ryzen isn't actually good for 4k gaming though. In practice it gets the same results but thats because of a gpu bottleneck. And keep in mind those same results would apply to a lot cheaper CPUs, so there is no justification in paying money for Ryzen for 4k.

>>59219797
>bulldozer was 6 years ago

wow

>>59219803
If you look at non-realtime benches where Ryzen does better than Intel's equivalents and how bad it does at RAM latency tests you can see that at 120+ FPS Ryzen becomes memory latency bound and not compute bound.

So unless you're running CS 1.6 at 320x240 or something Ryzen will be just fine...

>>59219863
>muh ram excuse again

>>59219822
Yes and at above 1080p Ryzen is fine. If you're going to spend $330+ on just the CPU you're obviously going to add a GPU with enough oomph to play at 1440p or greater.

>>59219902
>I can speak on behalf of everyone
People tend to prefer higher framerates over higher resolutions

>>59219902
Oh, so Ryzen is bad when performance is CPU bound but good when performance is GPU bound? How can you not realize how dumb you sound?

>>59219797
I was here when the Bulldozer hype turned into the massive disappointment that it was and I can clearly say that the Bulldozer fail was way worse.

With Ryzen non-realtime compute apps are just fine as they're finally well multithreaded and minimum FPS figures are actually better than Intel's offerings. The only problem with Ryzen is that it's (at least initially) got worse memory latency than Exavator and because of that becomes latency bound whenever games go well above 100 FPS.

At 1440p or higher, which you're obviously going to be playing at with a $330+ CPU, it does just fine even in games making it an all round good CPU.

>>59219348
You are right!

Who dares believes that border hopping wetbacks spic when good, honest, intellectual, reviewers exist like gaming nexus.

It's a known fact that /g/ has always, from the dawn of the board, has choose gaming nexus as its top...nay....ONLY reviewer.

Remember, if it's not from gaming nexus, it's not worth anything on /g/.

Gaming nexus, the only choice.

Gaming nexus, I want to cuck myself to them.

Gaming. Nexus.

>>59219348
i really like making idiots waste there money

>>59219918
It's not like doing 100 FPS rather than 110 is going to make all that big of a difference for the hurpa-derp crowd when most 1080p displays are 60 Hz anyway...

>>59219948
Yes, it's CPU bound in very high frequency real time tasks like games at low res, but if you look at non-realtime tasks it pretty much completely kicks Intel's ass when it comes to price-performance.

>>59219974

The only problem is that nobody is fucking buying CPUs anymore. Not like they used to at least.

>>59219948
That was literally their marketing excuse in plebbit ama.
>>59219974
I vaguely remember the "insider" troll posting shit like 20mb cache and benches. It was hilarious.

>>59219348
I'm pretty sure like half the battlestation posts had users with multi monitor setups to run games + do other shit simultaneously you greasy fat intellshill

Have fun with the constant chugging on your 7700k unless you shut everything down prior to launching a game each time.

tho i'd agree, gaming isn't r7 best attribute, kaby still wins here but the r5's at $200 are going to be hard to pass on in any value gaming builds.

The 1700 is a clear win in productivity + gaming value. Intel will have to massively slash prices to compete.

You're delusional if you're buying any $300+ cpu for gaymen only.

>>59219863
>If you look at non-realtime benches where Ryzen does better than Intel's equivalents and how bad it does at RAM latency tests you can see that at 120+ FPS Ryzen becomes memory latency bound and not compute bound.
so we just use faster ram? oh wait, we can't because ryzen doesn't support it.

guess i'll buy a good intel chip instead.

>>59219974
>At 1440p or higher, which you're obviously going to be playing at with a $330+ CPU, it does just fine even in games making it an all round good CPU.
>loses to i3 but when we bottleneck it it's similar so who cares
ok

>>59220098
>tho i'd agree, gaming isn't r7 best attribute, kaby still wins here but the r5's at $200 are going to be hard to pass on in any value gaming builds.
top kek meanwhile I paid $100 for a 2500k like 6 years ago, willing to bet taht oc vs. oc the 2500k is still faster

gonna kek my ass off when this is true

>>59220098
>>59220199
I think my 3570K @ 4,7ghz might be faster as well.

Sure I run dual monitor setup too, but I don't have to close any programs if I'm running some game. Often I have Elite: Dangerous + SPSS running with some youtube playlist and everything still works just fine. Why would I upgrade seriously? DDR4 is so god damn expensive right now as well

>>59220199
>>59220283
lol nope sorry not faster at anything and utterly crapped on outside of games.

>>59220283
>Often I have Elite: Dangerous + SPSS running with some youtube playlist and everything still works just fine
"silky smooth glorious buttery mouth watering savory 15 fps"

>>59220396
>>59220419
k
well saying it doesn't make it true but i don't care really
enjoy your delusion, someone else will eventually shatter it by posting actual benches, but we both know you'll simply ignore them

>>59220426
there's nothing to discuss. ryzen ipc count is 50% above bulldozer putting it ahead of all but kaby/skylake. your old ivy/sandy vagina cpu is not competitive in anything vs ryzen. you are a retard

>tfw you play everything in small res windowed mode on medium settings
>tfw mediocre specs can satisfy you

sometimes it's good being a pleb

>>59219348
>>/g/ suddenly started to care about power

This has been true for years now you memester

>>59219974
I remember that. I was still a newfag then and still are but the denial of Zambezi was something /g/ wasn't ready for. Intelfags must have had the greatest chuckle ever recording. This time around is different.

>>59219348
i7 7700k is a gaymin cpu, where its good enough for anything else you might want to use it for. r7 ryzen is a workstation cpu, that is good enough at gaymin. You don't buy a 6900k if all you want to do is game. You don't buy an 1800x if all you want to do is game.

File: The Courage to Open Me.webm (3MB, 622x350px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 622x350px

>>59219348
>hardcore video editing

How about hardcore video playback?

How quickly does you computer play this 1 second video; and what is your browser, core / thread configuration? What is the resource utilization during playback?

>>59220444
>there's nothing to discuss. ryzen ipc count is 50% above bulldozer putting it ahead of all but kaby/skylake
who cares? bulldozer is a failed CPU from 2011. i'm comparing $300 vs $300; one wins and one loses.

just stop posting

File: gaming cpu performance pentium wins.png (54KB, 450x887px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 450x887px

>>59220444
>>59220766
oh woops you're a different guy
well believe whatever you want lol

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

247KB, 665x1520px

>>59220778
>inb4 he sees the older chips lower by a few % and doesn't take into account OC
those chips OC from 3.x to 4.x easily btw, meanwhile ryzen barely goes from 3.8 to 4.1 LOL

>>59220651
>r7 ryzen is a workstation cpu
With the caveat that CPUs are mostly irrelevant for work which is done on the GPU. CAD, etc.
You could get by with an R5 in that situation. Or an Intel chip, if you wanted to game.

The argument for an R7 is very weak for most users. It's really the people that do all/most workloads in software that could use it.

>>59219348
/g/ i am just happy that i can put 4-6 vmware esxi machines. I am mostly opensource guy, but i like to test vmware shit for cert.
Is there also vt-d alternatice for gpu passthroug?