Daily reminder to never take advice from /g/ anime posters.

A 4.5ghz cpu out runs another at less than 4 in single threads. Amazing.

File: 1480584954565.jpg (54KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 1280x720px

>>59231095
>ad hominems
>Shilling one image instead of the entire set of images
Click your heels three times
>>>/v/

>>59231109
>even 2 core i3 cpu demolishes amd's 8 core

There's no excuse for that poojet

>>59231095
Buying AMD has been a mistake for like the last 10 years desu senpai, nobody should fall for that shit

>>59231109
either way the 7700 compares just as good or better than a 1800x to a 6800, 6850, 6950X.

more cornz; more moneyz

little benefit

>>59231095

ok OP, but if thats the chart you went by then you are an idiot.

the 4.6ghz beats the 4ghz by 5%.

i imagine 1440p and 4k tell a different story.

>>59231095
>pre-bios patch that improved performance 17%
ok, be stupid

>>59231159
>i imagine 1440p and 4k tell a different story.


they dont tho

they only show the GPU slowing your ass down


and guess what? the 7700 is feeding those as good or even better.

amdnards keep saying it will age better and yeah im sure all that work you do in cinebench will really pay dividends but real shit like games and photoshop, nah it wont.

especially games for as gpus can devour more and more data you need it fed to the gpu as fast as possible and of course the amd part cant do that.

File: IMG_1090.jpg (19KB, 250x241px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 250x241px

>>59231159
>>59231182
My point exactly. Show me a chart where ayymd gets more fps than 7700k in any game without 3 cinebench processes running in thw background

File: file.png (133KB, 601x830px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 601x830px

>>59231206
and this is pre-BIOS patch still

>>59231135
>this

File: topkek.jpg (52KB, 700x466px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 700x466px

y-you just have to wait™ some more

File: IMG_2929.jpg (24KB, 258x245px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 258x245px

>>59231225
>$150 i5 destroying 1700

Thanks poojet

>>59231095
HAHAHAHAHA WHERE'S THE 52% IPC NOW?

Bulldozer 2.0 again!

>>59231319
Indians lied as always

File: 1440p.png (224KB, 1274x695px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 1274x695px

>>59231189

you are right.

btw the Gigabyte board seems to be the only motherboard not buggy at the moment.

File: rekt.png (2MB, 1285x672px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1285x672px

>>59231276

>destrying
>gpu bottlenecked

go away homo.

File: IMG_8521.jpg (67KB, 258x360px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 258x360px

>>59231326
Even in your cherrypicked benchmark 7700k still wins in most scenarios

>>59231326
Nah MSI is fixed

>>59231344

>cherrypicked.

literally has all the games benchmarkers use.

nice try tho :)

>>59231345

about time. sadly for amd. a few days too late lol

File: 1473046804988.jpg (69KB, 700x540px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 700x540px

Even reddit have admitted that Ryzen will get BTFO by i5 chips for gaymen.

NEVER

TRUST

AMD

File: 1488288078839.png (56KB, 209x248px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 209x248px

>>59231344
>10 games
>3 1700 wins
>1 direct tie
>3 within 2 FPS
>1 within 3 FPS
>2 7700K wins

>5ghz OC on the 7700K

File: IMG_2558.jpg (478KB, 1997x1232px) Image search: [Google]

478KB, 1997x1232px

>>59231340
You tried

>>59231385
Ayymd won in 2 games within max 1 fps.
7700k won in most games with over 3 fps lead

File: F49AB6B1E3014A1CBA10D507DE5224BE28900000069F9CF3446_tmp.png (133KB, 487x622px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 487x622px

>>59231397
At that point does framerate even matter?

I wouldn't be surprised if it capped out due to power saving stuff.

>>59231411
Seeing 4, 10, and 11 FPS wins

>>59231419
Higher fps means lower input lag for csgo because the devs are retarded

Muh gaymens!! I need 5 more fps!!!

>>59231419
Or amd low performance can't keep up with the gpu at over 200 fps

>>59231440
That's absolutely retarded. They didn't use interrupts for input?

Even then that's still 3.238 ms polling rate vs 2.067 ms, hell even the 8350 gets 5.247 ms rate. You think that'll actually affect input?

>>59231509
good monitor gets 3ms at best of input lag, then count keybaords/mouse that's what? another 3-5ms
very fast human has 130ms response times,average is 180ms, you can argue that 10 ms can change that match if something is noticed earlier, but I highly doubt it

>>59231225
once rasheed fixes the bios you're gonna be sorry, that bios is gonna add at least 50% to the benchmark skewing.

suddenly, all of /g/ was into eSports and needed 110 frames instead of 105

>>59231767
Cores and productivity doesn't matter anymore. Everyone is running to buy 2 core i3 CPU in 2017.

File: 1488485994763.png (366KB, 1144x888px) Image search: [Google]

366KB, 1144x888px

Not gonna lie, former poo in loo here. This is fucking hilarious watching AMD crash and burn. But in all seriousness we can't let them get the cores.

File: ryzen-productivity.png (22KB, 650x200px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 650x200px

>>59232240
>productivity

Ryzen is horrible for productivity

>>59232279
>single threaded synthetic
Really activated my almonds anon

>>59232279
That image only tells me that 6900 is ridiculously overpriced and that sysmark 2014 is outdated.

>>59232317
>synthetic

SYSmark® 2014 ver 1.5 is an application-based benchmark that reflects usage patterns of business users in the areas of office productivity, media creation, and data/financial analysis. SYSmark 2014 ver 1.5 features the latest and most popular applications from each of their respective fields.

>>59232372
So it's a synthetic

>>59231344
>4.2GHz processor with similar IPC but 4 less cores has better performance in games than a 8C/16T processor with a just recently launched architecture and clocked 1.2GHz lower

No shit you little /v/ baby. Intel shills are fucking retarded for going ape shit over something everyone else was already expecting. They're also probably too young to remember that Intel's Nehalem and AMD's AMD64 architectures experienced similarly rocky launches and that it took months for them to properly mature.

>>59232461
It literally runs actual applications

>>59232509
So, single-threaded applications? The office suite isn't a computationally intensive application and it needs to stay that way, M$ literally has no reason to optimize it for multi-threading.

File: 1486967195245.png (82KB, 750x750px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 750x750px

>>59231095
Anime website, /v/igger.

>>59232471
It doesnt matter

im a pro CS:GO player and im gonna be a millionaire from it in a couple of years

all that matters is framerate, 300 fps wont even cut it and the 450 frames the 7700k is marginally acceptable, my reflexes are that fast, yes, i shit you not

Amd got rekt again by intel and soon, nvidia after we see the vega fiasco

>>59233130
300fps is max you can get with CSGO without enabling sv_cheats 1

basically you are full of shit, but we already knew that.

File: Selection_20170304_13:55:01.png (25KB, 998x186px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 998x186px

>>59233130
>im a pro CS:GO player
It shows.

Programmer here:

All the intel shilling on a Linux forum just makes me want to buy AMD more. No one here games, and by annoying all of us with shill posts you are driving people to buy AMD for their workstations.

BTW, pretty much everyone who uses a desktop computer wants to run multiple programs. It seems Intel is designed for single purpose game consoles, not serious computing.

t. someone who never gave a shit about the CPU wars until you flooded my board with spam.

Take this shit back to /v/ or you're just going to convert more people to AMD who would have otherwise never cared.

>>59233143
My friend gets 250-350 fps with 5930k on offical MM servers

>>59233143
wrong
>>59233150
>replying to copy pasta

>>59233150
>oxford comma

>>59231095

IIRC Ryzen is way cheaper then Intel so sacrificing a few frames per second makes absolute sense.

>>59233150

>grammar on 4chan bothering you
>being this autistic

Who fucking cares about 10 FPS, when you gain every other single thing? You can multi-task, stream, compile, faster and all without a single LAG.

You people are just fucking retarded. No shit, a 5GHz CPU beats a <4GHz one in single threads, wew.

>>59233237
You retard, you are literally paying twice as much for less performance

$240 Intel processor is beating a $500 Ryzen

>>59233074
The point is that 99% of apps are going to be way faster on Intel

Ryzen is literally only good for dedicated encoding/rendering machines

>>59233357
>for less performance
But you are not tho, you are paying for more performance
>$240 Intel processor is beating a $500 Ryzen
Yea, no, no it doesn't not even in games, only in 800x600 min but on max 1080p Ryzen beats it hands down

>>59233368
And those 99% are going to be really low-powered office shit that won't see the difference between clock speed and coars. You might as well get a pentium for all its worth.

>>59233382
Holy shit you are blind, look at the OP

$240 i5-7600K is beating $500 1800X

>>59233480
it's minimum setting, on maximum it would be on par with 6900k

>>59233504
LOL NO ITS NOT

It's 1080p at complete max settings, it's from the pc gamer review

>>59231135
Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM/Intel

>>59231397
>3,5Core game works better on higher clocked CPU
STOP THE PRESSES!!

>>59231095
>Gets his CPU cheaper
>Thinks those two month were wasted

>>59231326
PS this shill benchmark posted by a beaner turned out to be wrong because of GPU bottleneck. He rerun it again on lower settings and it turns out Ryzen is 20% behind 7700k.

So much for the AMD shilling, you literally can't even have a single fake bench to prove it.

>>59231206
>>59231276
>>59231344
dumb frogposter

>>59233717
At 5.1GHz vs 3.9GHz, Ryzen is ~40% weaker in single threaded performance compared to the 5.1GHz 7700k. This is of course assuming that clock speeds scale linearly to performance. But even if it doesn't, lets say it's closer to 30% which is still a lot.

Keep in mind that Kabylake has 8% higher IPC. That combined with a 1.1GHz higher clock means 40% higher ST performance.

I can tell you following.

The 4 and 6 core Ryzen will be total shit.

They don't go much higher clockwise than the 8-core CPUs, should tell you alot about the performance.

The R5 1600X will lose against the i5-7600K, believe it or not.

>>59231095
I said it would be shit in December.

File: thats decent.png (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

Just trying my new ryzen
seriously u damn Intel Trolls realy are a bunch of dickwads

>>59231095
>benchmarking CPUs with gaymez

>>59233942
Pretty sure R5 stropnger chips will do fairly better than the R7 line-up and they should also be a lot more stable at launch compared to right now, can't see them doing worse than the 7600k, considering the 1800X already outperforms it. Less cores also means it will perform better in games that run better on less cores, just like you see in benchmark comparisons between the 7700k and the 6900k. It'll be more of a question of whether their lower cost will in fact justify getting them over the 7700k in terms of bang for buck. 1600x/1500x vs 7700k should prove to be a pretty interesting comparison.

File: Potrait_29.jpg (2MB, 3889x3873px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3889x3873px

>>59231095
Tbf in ryzen defense their shit isn't really optimize. Wait for drives

File: 1485816705768.png (400KB, 922x720px) Image search: [Google]

400KB, 922x720px

AMD went from the Piledriver FX-8350 which can't even beat the Sandy Bridge i7 2600K to being competitive with Kaby Lake. I didn't believe their 40% more IPC claim until just very recently so it's already exceeded my expectations and I can't say that I'm not happy.

> I buy $500 cpus for 1080p gaymen

>>59234320
Can someone benchmark VA-11 Hall-A on ryzen?

AMDs strategy is pretty sound.

Release high-end server/workstation CPUs now -> Pulverize everything intel has to offer in the high-end application cpus -> Make microsoft and other software vendors optimize their software towards CCX scheduling -> Release 4/6 core mainstream "gaming" cpus once the software landscape has adjusted itself towards Ryzen and AM4 motherboards match the mainstream price of the cpus.

>>59234542

In other words don't buy Ryzen now if you are not a video maker or you don't have a server.

So far the 1700x/1800x seem like duds (will change as manufacturing matures). Memory compatibility is a thing, and you'd want to match memory as it affect performance 5-10% in some cases. Windows scheduling for SMT (AMD hyperthreading) seems to be completely broken in current windows builds (expect patch).

On motherboards that work as expected the ryzen cpus work pretty great for gaming, but the issue is reviewers received buggy EFI/BIOS motherboards.

Expect the ryzen 1700 (non x) to age well (think i5 2500k) unlike the 7700k.

>>59234431
Only a retard woul buy 1700x/1800x over 1700 (non x) in current state of manufacturing.

They're more expensive and require expensive cooling for overclocking (they're binned for max frequency rather than good TDP)

>>59234564

yes.

But to be honest: If you want to game everything beyond $300 for cpu is thrown out money.

>>59231189
>real shit like games and photoshop
Do you even understand the difference between #cores and clock speed?

>>59234592

I am doubtfull about that. It's just a first iteration destined to be superseded in a short time. It will go to the bottom and remain unoptimized in a market that generally fail in optimization and go for the brute force approach with newer models. In other words: wait.

>>59234564
The motherboards available don't seem suitable for those kinds of tasks. No ECC memory even tho the CPU itself supports it. Most motherboards are marketed specifically to gamers.

Will be a while before we see motherboards with dual NICs and workstation/server featuresets. You have a com port still tho. Just get one of those cables that plug into the header on the motherboard.

>>59231130
Because it's a single threaded application you moron

>>59231189
Cinebench is a real game you nigger

>>59234782
Asrock seems to have an option to enable ECC in the BIOS. https://youtu.be/G_6rs9cBzvE?t=8m46s
The only thing that AMD can guarantee is that the functionality is there but not validated. Otherwise, wait for Naples if you're into that.

>>59231095
Falling for amd meme, amd is a meme tht onky retard fags still live if u love amd kys look in tge mirror and im certain ull see a 300lb neckbeard staring at u

So a 12% reductions in performance for a 50% reduction in price. I'll take it.

>>59234667
zen+ will probably age like the 3770k. The issues seen with launch reviews will mostly be resolved by microcode/bios/EFI updates and windows scheduling fixes.

>>59234895
This. Always have been intel and will remain so until the day I die.

>>59234869
Does ECC actually work tho? Some lower end chipsets from Intel will function with ECC memory, but the ECC feature won't work.

>>59231276
7600K is like $240 buddy

>>59234980
It probably will, otherwise, that enable function shouldn't be there. However, I'd be waiting for Level1Techs to make a video on that before making a definite conclusion. The tests they talked about are just preliminary tests and they're planning to do a more indepth look at it some time later.

>>59234980
Seems to be the case with the motherboards so far. AMD said ECC is supported by the CPUs, but I'm not sure wether the chipsets support it, or if it's just manufacturers disabling it.

File: 46.webm (1MB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 320x180px

>Buying AMD ever.
lmao

>>59235049

It's a selection in the BIOS to enable it if it's supported by the motherboard manufacturer

>>59231095
Already been proven that it's a Windows bug affecting the Ryzen gaming performance, how much is Intel paying you?

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/official-amd-ryzen-benchmarks-reviews-prices-and-discussion.2499879/page-128#post-38774366

File: 1344598775944.jpg (15KB, 175x278px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 175x278px

Is there even a point in getting a 7700k instead of a 6700k?

>>59235277
It overclocks better.

>>59235283
source? all I ever find is people complaining that it's the same

>>59235144
Hey my 480 had 4 monitor ports and let's me play wow with the gf all for 175.

>>59235224
>already proven
>links to rando web forum

Come on Team Red+, stick to the server meme! At least that makes a little sense.

>>59235321
480 is a great card. I paid $200 for a sapphire nitro 4GB card that can do the same memory speeds as a 8GB version, but that's just pure luck.

>>59234951
at least it doesn't brick CPU like intel at launch of haswell-e did

but it's okay when intel does it

>>59235341
>Provides an explanation for why Ryzen performed better in benchmarks when SMT was disabled
>N-no! You're lying! I have zero arguments to back this up, I'm just right!

At least put some effort into your trolling

>>59235224
how long do you think it will take MS to fix it? They knew about cache restructure since last november.

File: 1481400580000.jpg (66KB, 450x600px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 450x600px

>>59235597

AMD said it should be within a month.

>>59235597
It's odd that it hasn't already been fixed really. It's just like the internal amd testing didn't have the budget to find this or MS have been told and are dragging their feet for a fix, waiting for a big update for example. AMD's budget is probably correctly assigned to enterprise and mobile, gamers are trash to get a cheap buck

Just too many teething issues with this launch has soured it quite a bit, even without the militant intelshitposting, damage control if I've ever seen it.

>>59235882
MS was told about it
there should be monthly update soon-ish maybe then

File: 1488645058561.jpg (133KB, 577x719px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 577x719px

>A FUCKING MOBILE CPU IS BETTER AT EMULATION
CAN'T MAKE THIS SHIT UP

>>59235882
it's kind of good launch, you'd have no idea what this place would be like if it existed in amd64 days
Ryzen works acceptably even with bugs,
athlon64 didn't have an effect at all on performance at first

>>59235927
>nobody cares about emulation except 10 autists

>>59235984
>poojeet doesn't care about benchmarks which show how shit rypoo is real world cpu bound tasks
ftfy

>>59236028
>avx2 compiled by hobbyist specifically for intel
>real world

File: 1481486808496.gif (1MB, 392x400px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 392x400px

>>59235927

in alot of benchmarks I see that the Ryzen 1700 is just above the FX 8350/8370/9590 CPUs.

Look at the one in OPs

>>59231095

Theres a video on Youtube that shows this in 3 games, BF1/Assassins Creed and Deus Ex

All they've learnt is to lower the TDP,.

>>59235957
I remember there being a uplift at the time of A64, wasn't there the new IMC which gave it a boost over the previous athlons? I was a dirty presscot peasent t at that time, but I did jump onto a64x2 pretty close to launch though.

But yeah, ryzen is good, but just soured a bit from these issues. It's dones what it needs to do and cause an upset in the market, to truely get that effect though it needs the mobile, mainstream and server chips to come. Whilst probably the most interesting to /g/, ryzen 7 isn't as important as the rest of the zen launchs to come.

>>59236128
Fucking this. Ryzen is actually just an improved bulldozer that still can't compete with Intel.

>>59236128
1700 ~ 9590

>1700 is 52% better ipc
>9590 is clocked 66% higher
Seems about right, 1700 is low clocked part, it's not like any of these benchmarks are showing the i7 6700nonK and i5 7400 part, most of the sky and babylake chips are clocked under 4ghz too.

>>59236070
Fork it and "optimize" it for amd.

File: 1af.jpg (145KB, 890x890px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 890x890px

>>59231095
>getting an 8c/16t chip for gayming
shiggy

File: 1488205393827.jpg (71KB, 552x661px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 552x661px

>>59236186
>52% better ipc
>still gets shat on by 3 generations old i7s
You couldn't make this up.

File: 1487710620851.jpg (60KB, 960x892px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 960x892px

wow 10 less fps with a new platform that wasn't optimized for by even microsoft much less the actual game developers themselves, with brand new unrefined BIOSes. where microsoft doesn't even have a proper scheduler for amd's SMT

6-7fps less than a 7700k with smt disabled will be even closer with smt enabled when it's handled properly


tf lmao just wait
irrational babby

>>59235927
Seems it's intel again for me. Emulation is the most intensive stuff I do apart from occasional ps.

File: 1470469198350.png (104KB, 582x1048px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 582x1048px

>>59236227

>>59235882
The only thing that matters is that the bugs are fixed when the gaymer kiddies are pestering their moms to buy the R5 and R3 chips, because right now R7 shits on every Intel chip that costs less than $1000 in everything but vidya gaems.

File: 1479850120479.png (29KB, 741x568px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 741x568px

>>59231326
Anyone who will buy 7700k over 1700 is a fucking retard...you don't even notice that little difference in games, and you get a better overall cpu with 1700.

>>59236463
>over twice as slow in emulation
ahaha dumb frogposter

File: 1488507067095.png (191KB, 534x306px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 534x306px

>>59236508
and you couldn't even begin to explain why, could you?

>>59236540
did you read the thread
>>59235927

>>59233130
300 fps wont cut it...yeah if you are playing on a 300 tick server maybe..

not knowning how source engine works

>>59236553
now explain why that's the case or you're actually retarded

>will prefer to be retarded instead of educating himself on why that's happening

File: wG6NdeT.gif (2MB, 450x253px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 450x253px

>>59236508
>Buying a $500 8 core CPU for video games when you get basically identical performanes in gaymen with one that costs half as much
>Calling other people dumb

>>59236578
because amd are incompetent hacks

>>59236562
>not knowing how input lag works

he is completely high out of his mind about NEEDING 450fps but getting as much as possible is necessary.

>>59236585
did you herped so hard that you derped
what in that post suggest buying amd at all

>>59236615
he's saying why are you bitching about gaming performance on the ryzen cpus when you can get the 7700k for much less and have the same if not better performance

people complaining about the 1800x (or ryzen cpus in general) not getting the same gaming performance vs the 7700k need to also compare the 7700k to the 6900k or they're actually just screeching autists that should probably neck themselves

>>59233143
This isn't true, but it is true that over 300 fps is a meme.
fps_max 0 can be input without sv_cheats 1. I have it in an autoexec.cfg

>>59236654
they wont do that despite the fact that amd specifically said that they are up against 6900k

>>59236687
that's because everyone complaining about ryzen having lower gaming performance than the 7700k completely missed the point

not even completely convinced it's worse for gaming though. maybe because it cant clock to 5GHz, but overall performance is pretty solid. amd's infinity fabric and neural net prediction is helping frame times and general game smoothness to be better than ever.

>>59236727
adding on to this, ryzen might actually be the best/most optimal cpu for vr gaming

points being it performs the same or better in high resolution gameplay which VR is all about since the screens are right in front of your eyes, and amd's neural net prediction / infinity fabric mumbo jumbo reduces frame times and increases fluidity, it'll help the realism and immersion that VR DEMANDS

>>59236727
99% of them dont even remember the first nehalem or the first skylake how bad they were till ms fixed them...

i mean https://www.golem.de/news/ryzen-7-1800x-im-test-amd-ist-endlich-zurueck-1703-125996-13.html
they are the first that re do the benches with the new bios and they got an increase on average of +17%...

they will shit all over intel when ms fix their damn load balancing to be compartible with amd

First, the reason the gaming tests are not done on high resolutions is to force the bottleneck to the CPU. If the GPU is bottlenecking the cards, the framerate is going to be remarkably similar and not at all indicative of the CPU performance. I know several people are seeing these 4K resolution tests in benchmarks for Ryzen and believing that their gaming performance is similar to Intels. Many websites are reporting that these 4k tests are being specifically requested by AMD. They are all GPU limited, and that is why the fps is all so close - the tests are measuring the performance of the same GPU.

Second, Ryzen is currently performing worse clock for clock. If you have an Intel 7600k and a Ryzen chip, both clocked to 4.0GHz, the Ryzen chip will have poorer singlethreaded performance.

Third, Ryzen is currently not overclocking well at all. Multiple sites are running into 4.0 GHz as the limit these cards can be OCed to. For comparison, you could clock an ancient i7 920 to 4.0 GHz. All i3, i5, and i7 chips will overclock far better than Ryzen.

Fourth, gaming is still ruled by single-thread performance. With Ryzen performing worse clock-for-clock and overclocking much more poorly, single-threaded performance is still being dominated by Intel.

Fifth, Intel sells cards that will cost over $100 less than Ryzen but outperform it in gaming - at stock clocks. It will thrash Ryzen with overclocks added. From a gaming perspective, Ryzen is losing not only performance, but price-per-performance.

Right now, if you bought Ryzen for your gaming PC, you're retarded.

>>59236878
Then it's a good thing that the R7s are targeting the Broadwell-E series now isn't it?

>>59236878
the problem is when you throw 500 or 1000 on a cpu alone you wont care about how it perform on 480p or 720p or 1080p no one builts such a system to play on low res that is why its so stupid to measure high end cpus on low res it wont show NOTHING

>>59236878
4 ghz is the xfr limit.........................................................

>>59236615
That's exactly the point, why would you even consider a $500 8 core CPU just to play video games on when that's not what they excel at?

>>59236878
You're aware that the 8 core Ryzens aren't the only Ryzens that are going to be released, right? The 6 and 4 core Ryzens will almost certainly clock higher and overclock better because

>>59237177
Fug :--DDD

Because they're actually made for gaming, not for multithreaded workloads like the 8 cores are

File: IMG_2115.png (408KB, 882x1418px) Image search: [Google]

408KB, 882x1418px

>>59231130

>>59237234
actually wrong they're made for multithreaded workloads too, at least the 4c/8t

the 8c/16t ryzen chips are just two 4c/8t chips put together on the same substrate.

hence why i was trying to make this point earlier

>>59236540
>>59236578

chances are the r3/r5 won't clock well either which is extremely upsetting.

File: 12543345.jpg (2MB, 3024x4032px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3024x4032px

I bought this instead of ryzen. Did I make the right choice?

>>59236878
So you're saying buy a 6600k for gaming and the 7700k is retarded trash and isn't worth it?

Everyone knows that low resolutions on games make a cpu bottleneck. The problem is a game on a low resolution like that ends up not being much better than a sythentic benchmark.

Overclocking? Smells like there's not enough product and the consumer ryzen is getting shafted on the silicon lottery, people are clocking the 1700 to 4ghz as well as the 1800x, seems like they're all the same chip right now (probably not unlike the rx480).

I work with video games editors and those fuckers for sure are multithreaded like a bitch, I'm looking forward to this as I need threads and minimum frames, the xeon 1650s we have are okay, but we really don't need the quad channel memory or 40pcie lanes. R7 seems almost perfect in my field.

>>59237280
we dont know how they clock because no one actually did a manual oc...everyone used xfr but nothing much

>7700k does 5.0ghz on air with a 30 dollar CPU cooler.

Something AMD can only dream of doing.

File: file.png (390KB, 500x419px) Image search: [Google]

390KB, 500x419px

>>59237358

>>59237177
>6 and 4 core Ryzens
Which will perform like low tier i5s as r7's abysmal benchmarks seem to indicate. They probably won't even come close to the 7600k.

File: 1487524687596.jpg (63KB, 304x671px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 304x671px

>>59231095
>/g/ anime posters

>>59237395
yeah that's not happening

maybe the 4300/6300 but not the 8300 series

>>59237455
your sources are?

oh wait YOUR ASS

File: whocares.gif (864KB, 500x270px) Image search: [Google]

864KB, 500x270px

>>59235927
Sauce me up familia. I was thinking of buying Ryzen to upgrade from a 3570k, but if it's slower than it on emulation, then I might have to reconsider on this desktop. Also really bummed that you can't GPU passthrough with it. Might as well wait for Skylake-E while I'm at it and hope GPU virtualizatyion improves so I don't need to passthrough at all.

File: bench pc gamer.png (466KB, 600x805px) Image search: [Google]

466KB, 600x805px

>>59237484
>your sources are?
What about the large majority of benchmarks out there you retarded AMDrone?

>1800X at its best losing to the fucking 7600k
Literally couldn't make this up.

>>59237310
If you'd bought anything on Broadwell-E, then you'd have fucked up. If all you do is gaming then you're fine

File: skeleton-decorative-chair-halloween-imitation-human-sitting-yard-preparation-45951174.jpg (47KB, 300x450px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 300x450px

>>59237544
hmm

remind me what cpu was the 1800x supposed to compete against?

and does the 6900k beat, or lose to the 7600k?

please do answer
>im waiting

>>59235283
Unless you De-Lid it you wont get to that 4.9+ GHz without blazing into ashes because Intel Jewed the fuckout and put shitty thermal conductive material AND pricing it higher than skaylake

>>59237544
Why is this bad again? I mean, it's only 7 frames behind from the top tier single threaded CPU out there. I won't be buying Ryzen for gaming first, it would be a secondary thing. I'll be buying Ryzen for all its cores.

>>59237544
oh you mean the ones that didnt even thought to mention the problems that ryzen is facing?

obviously you dont remember how skylake was perfoming when they first introduced..or the nehalems...it took them 8 months to fix them

but you know bring 6% behind on overall on your own bench while having all the problems it have isnt good
its monstrous good kinda makes me think what will happen when ms patch the load balancer

File: 1488560570405.png (419KB, 900x946px) Image search: [Google]

419KB, 900x946px

>>59237253
saved

File: 1488223097723.jpg (540KB, 1100x1002px) Image search: [Google]

540KB, 1100x1002px

>>59237567
>AMDrone shifting the goal posts
I thought Ryzen was supposed to have performance on par with current generation intels? What happened to that? It struggles even against i7s from fucking 3~4 generations ago. It's absolutely hilarious.

muh eff pee ess

>>59237567
6900k Loses to the 7600 in games an single threaded applications but it destroyed it in any production workload.

But maybe you should just get a 7350k if all you do is game.

But if you are a professional (not a professional gamer) there's no excuse not to get a Ryzen unless you just like to throw away money for a shittier product

File: my sides.jpg (21KB, 340x340px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 340x340px

>>59237586
>a fucking i3 beating a high end Ryzen on gaming performance
>not bad

>>59237639
it literally does
now, as per amd, the goal was compete with the 6900k

it does that. now why are you comparing it to the 7700k and other high ipc high clock low thread cpus that are obviously going to be superior in gaming while being shit all useless for anything an 8 core 16 thread cpu is actually good for

kill yourself LMAO

>>59237609
>wait for future updates
AMDrone's favorite phrase. Even with updated BIOS Ryzen is still performing like shit. Nice try though.

File: ryzen-r7-1800x-bench-wd2.png (135KB, 806x696px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 806x696px

>>59237672
>it literally does
My sides.

File: Outer_Space.jpg (374KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

374KB, 1920x1200px

>>59237659
>an amd chip beating the 6900k and 6950x on multithreaded performance
>330$ chip beating 1050$ chip

>my fucking sides

see how stupid you are lmao

>>59237684
oh yeah its so shit
https://www.golem.de/news/ryzen-7-1800x-im-test-amd-ist-endlich-zurueck-1703-125996-13.html

and its not its final form

Why does anyone buy a 7700k when you can buy a 7350k which is better for gaming.

Cores and threads don't matter idiots! Only clock speed and IPC It's why I disable all of excess cores on my 7350K as well as hyper threading!

Go Intel! Any more than 1 core will ALWAYS be a joke!

>>59237659
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUNAvkY6Ops

future sure looks bright for i3 and i5

>>59237713
>a $200 7600k beating the 1800X which costs 2.5 mores in several benchmarks
>AMDrones will still defend this

>>59237707

Gamers nexus made 3 videos explaining their shitty methodology and how they "didn't gimp the Ryzen CPU on purpose", yet they gave about 4 reasons as to why they purposefully set up their system to run at "only a 10% disadvantage"

File: mpu2scome8hy.png (944KB, 1036x721px) Image search: [Google]

944KB, 1036x721px

>>59237707
im sorry, am i seeing an 1800x stock clock with smt off matching the 7700k stock with smt off? or are you just that fucking dense?

>3.6ghz base clock amd
>4.2ghz base clock intel

>current generation intels
this includes the 4790k, and even the 3570k + 2500k since people were so fucking dead serious about intel not actually having noticeable performance increase between generations

but where are the 2500k and 3570k on this graph

oh right at the bottom LOL

>>59237759
A 100$ 7350K beating the 7600

KYS you got hewed into buying a higher costing CPU for no reason! Cores and threads don't do anything it's all an urban myth!

Buy Intel!

>>59237790
>7700k stock with smt off
Who the fuck does that? Might as well get a 7600k instead.

File: Skärmavbild 2017-03-04 kl. 21.23.39.png (83KB, 550x751px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 550x751px

>>59237659
>Only i3 losing one is the 1700
>Known problem being worked on right now that only affects games run at frame rates well above what 99% of monitors can even display
>Still gets better minimum frame rates, which is what matters when you're playing at 1080p with a 60 Hz monitor like most people
Seems like results such as picture related have really gotten the Intel shills scared...

>>59237825
no idea, benchmarking purposes

but cherry picking two severely reddit-tier reposted benchmarks doesn't help anyones case

ryzen was a success, /g/ is on intel damage control mode right now because of it. pretty sad.

>>59237825
that's the point, windows thinks ryzen ahs 128mb L3 cahe,SMT has negative imapct on eprformance, it parks cores and BIOS is not finished.
All in all decent launch for fresh arch, no chips were bricked by motherboards yet.

File: Sad Holo.jpg (87KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1920x1080px

>you will never know the joy of shitposting

to think that intelfags is actually questioning the craftmanship of our savior kevin sorbo(his stage name is jim keller)

>>59237865
people fail to realize intel had issues with hyperthreading on launch too

but here we are
same deal with amd

sigh!

>>59237860
btw i say this as an owner of a 4790k.

Personaly, I think days I needed a strong cpu are long gone.
Video encoding is Gpu acelerated now.
Same with adobe.
Old I5 or FX can provide enough for RX480 or less capable card.

>>59231095
>>/v/
and stop being a retard

>>59237865
no windows is actually treating the logics on ryzen as a physical cores thus instead of throwing the big and heavy ops on the physical ones only it throws them on all of them making the threads to loose data on the L3->leading to the cpu thinking that it no longer needs the core->it parks it->making the windows thinking that it didnt do the op thus resending the same op inside on the l3 leading to the cpu pausing the new op to flush the old one
its a clusterfuck and the worst part is that its not really easy to fix the load balancing on windows

>>59237890
CPUs are overrated. Even a i7-930 can do well with recent GPU hardware without bottlenecking too much.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7k1X11Udhs

>>59237544
>a whopping 7 fps difference vs 7700k
>pc gamer notes the high ipc of ryzen means we're not even seeing all ryzen can do in the benches
it's funny watching retards posting pictures of things they have no clue about. you should stfu, retard.

>>59237786
its funny really

they didnt oced on any of their intel reviews so far LITERALLY NOT A SINGLE TIME

and then on ryzen they had the need to oc 7 intel cpus

then ryzen beats 6 benches and 6900k on 8 and in the conclusion he doesnt mention 6900k vs 1800x but the 1800x vs 7700k

then he concludes that it has an i5 gaming perf despite the fact that it beats them constantly and on a high margin

he literally was on a payroll which is sad i expect shit like this from tpu or toms shills hardware but not them

(well tpu didnt even publish a review and they were bashing amd)

>>59238068
it's horrifying how biased gamersnexus is for being one of the better reviewers out

:/

and if he isnt biased, his testing methodology was horribly flawed this time around

>>59237786
nope. even hardware unboxed said gamers nexus did a very good job in his latest video.

>>59238104
yes he tried to downplay his stupidity because he on the first he publicly said that amd said to him "dont bench on 1080 only on 2k and 4k" which was bullshit he later said that amd said to him that people need to see how the cpus performs on the higher res because we are going to sell to those people also

he was disgusting

>>59238068
gotta give him credit, he played it smooth
I believed him for one day, then I read several more reviews from germans and poles, amazing what broader view can give.
Heck even tom's is better review.

Why can't we have silicon industry to be as automotive industry with hundreds players around to choose from.
Automated AI design tools can't come fast enough.

>>59238138
nope. false again. he did nothing wrong and as i said, hardware unboxed backed him up and explained the exact same things gamers nexus explained.

the only people who think otherwise are assmad ryzen shills who can't accept their new cpu is shit for gaming.

>>59231206

>somehow twisting being able to run 3 cinebench processes while gaming as a bad thing

>>59237639
>I thought Ryzen was supposed to have performance on par with current generation intels? What happened to that?

Nothing, considering the fact that the Ryzens beat every Intel CPU that costs less than $1000 in everything but video games, and as your own benchmarks prove even the 7700k beat the 6900k in video games. Do you know what clock speed is?

It's funny to see all these dumb frog posters use gaming as an argument. Ryzen literally mops the floor with 7700k when it comes to doing some actual work on your computer. Ryzen is meant to compete with 6900 not 7700 you dumb video game fags.

>>59231454
Or the game is running on an engine from 2004 that is incapable of using more than 2 cores.
Really makes your noggin jog.

>3 frames
>THREE FRAMES
>√122+9e^(iπ) frames
IS OVER

>>59238068

the only thing I didn't get is why he didnt include Ryzen oc'd with TDP turned off. He showed Ryzen, Ryzen with TDP turned off, and Ryzen oc'd.

>>59235927
they take advantage of CPU features/ISA extensions...
the dolphin devs will prolly have to update their shit code

>>59236322
moving threads across the CCXs is worse than mis-scheduling for SMT.

that will give a nice boost to single threaded moderately parallel workloads, i.e. games and emulators

>>59238068
Are you retarded?

Gamers Nexus is one of the most reputable guys out there, they literally exposed the truth about the EVGA cards.

Everything he wrote was true, especially about the i5 beating Ryzen. Look at the benches yourself, the i5 does beat it and at half the price too.

File: rip.png (49KB, 812x341px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 812x341px

>>59237860
>ryzen was a success

Then why is their stock tanking?

>>59237586
>Why is this bad again?

Are you blind? The Ryzen CPU is literally losing to an Intel CPU that costs half as much.

It's truly horrible.

>>59235927
Toppest of keks

>>59239166
Games fundamentally run on a single core. They do some multitasking nowadays but the core game code is still running on a single core from an engine made in 2018.

>>59240173

bullshit.

that's only true for some parts of the game simulation

>>59240173
Fake news!

>>59240217

It's not bullshit. The latest hype for multicore support in games has come from more control in API's like Direct3D, which essentially allows for some more mutlicore feeding of the GPU. Actual game logic itself is in no way helped by this.

>>59233191
That's not an Oxford comma

>>59240278

i never said it was. i'm just saying plenty of game logic can be run in parallel. not all, but some

>>59240358
but thats wrong. most game logic cannot run in parallel. 99% of games spawn a whole bunch of threads and yet the main game loop if you will, is still running on that single thread which is the most computationally demanding.

>>59240434
ok then run parallel game loops and simulate 1 frame further ahead on the second one

>>59231095
>Gaymes
Fucking lol. Intel shills working overtime this week.

File: ryzen btfo by $70 cpu.jpg (14KB, 400x152px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 400x152px

>>59240758

>>59240905
>ryzen beat by a pentium

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>59233717
>muh bottleneck maymay

its at 1080p go shill somewhere else

>>59231095
AMD tards BTFO

fuck those energy thieves who wasted my time in those retarded "discussions". i'll say it again, ryzen can be ok for CERTAIN TASKS like video rendering but in tasks such as gaming an overclocked 7700k will generally be the best.

>>59240146
And the $1000+ 6900k is within margain of error of the 7600k, does that make the 6900k a shit CPU or is it a CPU that excels in different workloads?

A tip, compare the cores and threads in the 6900k, Ryzen and 7600k and tell me which looks the most comparable

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

112KB, 722x554px

>>59241002
This, jesus christ I hate AMD shills so fucking much

Ryzen even loses in most work situations too

>>59241134

The 6900k, bang for buck, IS shit for all applications except a very narrow niche.
Which is why I've been saying from the start that AMD pitting Ryzen against it is just clickbait tier behavior: "look, our new CPU beats a $1000 Intel CPU!"
The truth is it beat a $1000 Intel CPU no one really gives a shit about in a specific workload even less people will give a shit about, while lagging behind much cheaper processors in the kind of performance most people were so hyped about.

>>59241324
>The truth is it beat a $1000 Intel CPU no one really gives a shit about in a specific workload even less people will give a shit about, while lagging behind much cheaper processors in the kind of performance most people were so hyped about.
You're aware that AMD are going to release cheaper CPUs that are more suited for gaymen? If you buy an 8 core 16 thread CPU just to play video games on then you deserve to lose your money because you're retarded.

>>59241257
On par with the 6900k

>>59233176
Some of us game, but we aren't fucking retards either.

980X moving to 1800X soon.

>>59241425
>If you buy an 8 core 16 thread CPU just to play video games on then you deserve to lose your money because you're retarded.

This is precisely what many idiots did.

>omg omg preorders open now, this is the perfect thing to replace my Vishera with!
>WTS 6700k, need money for 1800X ASAP
>muh 8 cores for the price of 4, who cares whether I can actually utilize them, it's literally twice the 7700k for the price of one!
>muh gaymen futureproofing, 8 cores is the future, your 4 core will be deprecated within the year

>>59235144
>buying netburst or itanium ever

>>59241516
Lol I actually feel bad for the AMDtards that fell for this crap

File: 1477006856999.jpg (117KB, 1058x705px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 1058x705px

Got my 1700X shipping confirmation
fuck you shills

>>59241555
isn't the 1700x pointless when the 1700 is $70 cheaper?

what's the difference?

>>59231095
>Look mom I posted it again xD

File: 1477008639110.jpg (55KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 640x480px

>>59241568
base clock that 'seems' to be it

I am long overdue for a new processor, but once I get it I am going to be looking at thermals
and from the wall power draw's. I am curious if AMD is binning the X chips higher or just changing
the clock speeds.

And if the chips are binned maybe I can hit 4Ghz more reliably then the 1700
if not I wasted $70 to sate my curiosity.

>>59237455
this. I wont be suprised if ryzen 4c/4t-8t get stomped by the 7600k.

>>59231095
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11170/the-amd-zen-and-ryzen-7-review-a-deep-dive-on-1800x-1700x-and-1700/18
Sayonora, lardo!

>>59241829

Rendering: the CPU. It's shit for literally everything else.
AMD defeated Intel in its worst selling, most expensive, least cost-efficient market segment. What a time to be alive.

>>59242606
this. what were they even thinking, they're supposed to be experts on cpus and they're still falling for the MOAR COREZ meme

>>59242606
It's pretty hilarious desu senpai. I had no idea AMD could even fail this bad.

werent there the rumours that to use the newer intel cpus you need to have win 10?

was that all a russ or what? I'm thinking about upgrading and dont know which to go to

File: jewing intensifies.gif (378KB, 208x200px) Image search: [Google]

378KB, 208x200px

>>59244137
>was that all a russ or what?
Oh yes goy, you need windows 10 :^)
Your computer will literally explode if you try to turn it on without windows 10.
I mean why wouldn't you use windows 10, is better in everyway!

>>59244137
windows 7 received a patch for it and it should work fine just that microsoft isn't officially supporting it

File: 1488687448399.jpg (180KB, 1540x877px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 1540x877px

>g-guys amd never advertised r7 as gaming cpu vs 7700k
really makes you think

>>59240128
because it's a brand new platform not meant for gaming yet people are still comparing it to the best cpu for gaming

wtf lol

>>59244478
?
>>59244462
?

>>59244430
i googled a bit and it seems it works but it might require some tweaking to install win7 on skylake and kaby lake like you need to install from disc and not from usb

>>59241257
anon, the 6900k is losing to the 7700k, even more than the 1800x is

>>59240934
g3258 cost what, 60$? oc's higher than the 4790k/6700k & 7700k (same thing) while achieving the same or better fps in games

lel 350$ intel cpu losing to 60$ intel cpu

>>59240128
top kek

to a tech literate person it should have been obvious that the hype was too much and i even told anons to sell at least a part of their amd stocks to secure some profit

>>59244486
>not meant for gaming
>can still game

stop

>>59244495
>anon, the 6900k is losing to the 7700k, even more than the 1800x is
most people don't give a flying fuck about 6900k, it's a niche cpu, that's why it's so disingenuous to compare ryzen to 6900k when it comes to gaming, the real gaming cpu is 7700k and amd trolls were saying ryzen 1700 would be better than 7700k for the price of 7700k

>>59244528
amdrones should have hopefully realized what a flop bulldozer was and that amd would do the same thing banking on multithreaded processes becoming the norm

amd wasn't trying to compete with the 7700k.
amd was trying to compete with the 6800k/6900k and consequently all of the intel extreme cpus before it

they succeeded in doing that.

/g/tards and reddit idiots didn't know how the cpu would perform. anyone who saw a base clock of 3ghz for the 1700 that wasn't autistic could have told you gaming performance would obviously be lesser than the 5ghz 7700k.

>>59244523
Half their official hype was gamer shit.
>not meant for gaming
stop

>>59244578
because most people who build their own pcs dabble in gaming

are you this retarded or are you just pretending to be

>>59231095
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8557/x99-motherboard-roundup-asus-x99-deluxe-gigabyte-x99-ud7-ud5-asrock-x99-ws-msi-x99s-sli-plus-intel-haswell-e

"Michael at Phoronix had built a system (5960X + MSI X99S SLI Plus) from the ground up and at the point where the machine was first turned on, the chipset failed with a spark and a second issue with the power delivery occurred."

"Both of these X99 failures are nothing compared to the P55 socket burn issue that occurred back in 2009."

"Haswell-E is still young. The processors, X99 and DDR4 were eventually rushed to market due to a release date change which means that manufacturers are still playing around trying to optimize settings. "

"This comes in conjunction with some motherboards reporting issues with the high end kits resulting in BIOS updates coming thick and fast. For those users who want super fast memory, it might make sense to wait a month until this is all sorted out. "

man x99 is a piece of shit. oh its not? it got better after a couple months? Ok then. perhaps we should wait a bit before judging ryzens platform when even intel cant get shit right on release.

Also -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_6rs9cBzvE&feature=youtu.be&t=680

>>59231095
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8557/x99-motherboard-roundup-asus-x99-deluxe-gigabyte-x99-ud7-ud5-asrock-x99-ws-msi-x99s-sli-plus-intel-haswell-e

"Michael at Phoronix had built a system (5960X + MSI X99S SLI Plus) from the ground up and at the point where the machine was first turned on, the chipset failed with a spark and a second issue with the power delivery occurred."

"Both of these X99 failures are nothing compared to the P55 socket burn issue that occurred back in 2009."

"Haswell-E is still young. The processors, X99 and DDR4 were eventually rushed to market due to a release date change which means that manufacturers are still playing around trying to optimize settings. "

"This comes in conjunction with some motherboards reporting issues with the high end kits resulting in BIOS updates coming thick and fast. For those users who want super fast memory, it might make sense to wait a month until this is all sorted out. "

man x99 is a piece of shit. oh its not? it got better after a couple months? Ok then. perhaps we should wait a bit before judging ryzens platform when even intel cant get shit right on release.

Also -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_6rs9cBzvE&feature=youtu.be&t=680

>>59244769
>>59244971
Did you forgot in which thread you already pasted your shill text file?

>>59244769
Intel on suicide watch

>>59231095
>I waited 2 months for amd's new cpu thanks to you and it turned out being just another cPOO which gets destroyed by half core intel chips.

So you're surprised a 4 core CPU clocked higher does better at single threaded applications than an 8 core clocked lower? Are you retarded?

R5 series will be aimed at single threaded applications.

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

247KB, 665x1520px

just wait for the patch™

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

54KB, 450x887px

soon you will be able to download more performance™do not worry™ just wait™

>>59240905
wow, beat by cpu that is useful only in one game and gets stomped down the list to fx6100 in any other

>>59240283
not him, but for my personal enlightenment, would you please explain what an Oxford comma is and how it differs from a standard comma?

>>59241516
Everyone looked at 1700 though, and 1700 looks fine for the money.
I have no idea who would preorder 1800x besides people that need 6900K on cheap.

File: laugh spoky.gif (2MB, 360x270px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 360x270px

>>59233176
Feb 28:
>CHECK OUT ALL THESE GAME BENCHMARKS HAHAHA RYZEN MASTER RACE GLAD I WAITED DUMBFAGS
Mar 5:
>No one here games
>I run cinebench all day every day
>my main workload is in fact cinebench
>yes ok a consumer desktop computer so what??

File: laughingsluts.gif (3MB, 355x201px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 355x201px

>>59245117
>download more performance™do not worry™

File: am i out of touch no it's the children who are wrong.jpg (56KB, 500x534px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 500x534px

>>59234542

>consumer chipsets
>no mobos with ECC feature support
>no dual CPU mobos

>"""server/workstation CPUs"""

>>59244999
>it's okay when intel does it

>>59234945
>So a 12% reductions in performance for a 50% reduction in price. I'll take it.
but the 1800x and the 7700k are the same price?

File: princess.png (958KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

958KB, 1200x1200px

>>59245160
>BIOS updates will fix it
>who needs a dual socket workstation anyway

>>59245167
1700 is same performance for games within 8 %

Then there is BIOS issues(pretty common for launch week)
SMT DOES NOT WORK, at all for windows, it does wonder in benchmarks where it works
L3 cache does not work because of OS and games have no idea that it's not intel CPU, they treat it as 128Mb cache, it's just 20Mb.
Another issues with core parking, still there.
Thing with cache is clusterfuck, because it dumps it into RAM constantly, people say it not easy to fix, but MS knew about it since NOVEMBER.

And still Ryzen manages to keep min-avg gap small and have smooth frametiems graphs, where 7700K jumps all over the place.

Futureproofing works against kaby, just look at what very old xeons at 2.1Ghz can do now in games.

I hate AMD marketing team, they had a winner here and presented it like Intel downplaying it's good features.

File: Screen Shot 2017-03-05 at 1.05.48 AM.png (453KB, 528x1226px) Image search: [Google]

453KB, 528x1226px

>>59245231
>1700 is same performance for games within 8 %
lol nah

>>59233452
So why go out and spend your money on a $400 cpu that runs worse than a pentium?

>>59235927
Dolphin doesn't even use more then 4 cores

>>59233980
Yeah, a processor designed to win at cinebench
Bravo AMD, bravo.

>>59245265
>AMD adds cores
>"well it will help with background system processes"
>benches show the chip sucking anyway
>"w-w-well it's just not optimized for moar corez"
>can you explain on a technical level how we would use more than 4 threads with this software?
>"F-F-FUCK OFF INTEL SHILL...!"

>>59245263
I guess we all should buy pentiums now because look how great it works in fallout, just 3% away from i5! It doesn't matter that's it's absolutely useless anywhere else.

File: wtf am i reading.jpg (36KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 400x400px

>>59245292
>woosh

>>59245290
>>"well it will help with background system processes"
it does help, will you stop sucking max fps cock for a minute and look around?

>>59245292
amazing how you tards backpedal once your lies and exaggerations are called out
>w-well m-moar corez
why not just be honest and tell the truth instead of saying 8%? at least you'd be able to assert a reasonable point without egg all over your face

amdfags are truly the biggest cucks

>>59245263
>cherry picked benchmarks when overall benchmarks exist.

Intel shills are the worst shills.

>>59245307
>i-it's only 8%
>objectively false statement
>S-STOP CHERRY PICKING
>most benches which aren't GPU limited or huge aggregates run at 1440/4k (GPU limited...) show something similar
>SHILLS REEEEEEEEE
Or maybe the product just isn't that great?

>>59245265
>emulators don't use more than 2-3 cores
Shocking that there are loads where you can't shove moar coars. Emulators are and always will require strong single thread and amd is shit.

>>59245306
what truth? that fallout poorly programmed piece of shit that can't handle more than 60 fps without breaking all environments, physics and AI?

>>59236192
>Implying any of the unemployed linux enthusiasts here have remotely the skills required to do what some mentally ill suicide tranny managed to do in between sucking cock.

>>59245328
>muh optimization™
>just wait™
>download more performance™
>in the future™
>moar corez™™™

>>59245324
PC gamer was not run at 1440 or 4k.

Again, shill harder.

>>59245327
>emulator made by a hobbyist on spare time can't handle diverse workloads

call me shocked.

>>59245335
Just look how xeons and E platform progressed for gaming over last 6 years. Use your overlords as example, don't be shy.

>>59245340
If you think all software can be parallelized to use gorillion threads, you must fuck off back to >>>/v/.

>>59245337
>accuse someone of cherry picking
>cite the only example of the many examples which proves your point
look, I honestly don't care. we're just anons on 4chan and I'm only in this for muh toys, same as you.
but looking at this objectively, the benches and available info paint a pretty clear picture here

the only difference is that some of us see it and some of us would rather make excuses

>>59245354
ryzen isn't naples

>>59245385
>cite the only example of the many examples which proves your point

Uhhh, no. The rest were done at 4k, 1440. PC gamer was not.

I'm sorry you cherry pick games anon, I choose aggregate because it's the only objective way to look at the data.

Only a shill cherry picks a data point instead of a data set.

>>59237480
There were plenty of 8350 and 8320 users who got above 5 GHz.

My 8350 I got to 4.5 stable on air, and it was one of the original 8350s not one I just bought 2 months ago so it's had plenty of use on it.

Friend got his 8320 to like 4.7. There's no reason a good chip couldn't get 5.0 or above even.

Not going to argue on actual chip performance, but for raw clock speeds, yeah no, 83XX series could totally do 5 GHz.

>>59245402
core arch is identical, you miss the point E platform was out of reach for 99% of people and still gets amazing results in modern games.

Xeons were never for gaming and you can't bottleneck even Titan on them, they get comparable results at 1440p for 6-7 yo arch it unbelievable, they clock at less than 2.5Ghz.

Did anyone test 6900K without HT? no because it would drop to 1700 levels. SMT doesn't work in windows right now and still Ryzen gets smoother performance.

File: Screen Shot 2017-03-05 at 1.27.59 AM.png (85KB, 436x877px)

85KB, 436x877px

>>59245439
>Only a shill cherry picks a data point instead of a data set.
k but you're cherry picking your set, too
this is turning into a semantic argument because you're too much of a mentally-deficient cuck to simply look at the situation and make an objective assessment

but again i don't give a shit, enjoy being a delusional retard. i'm sure you also believe all races are equal, iq isn't innate, that the world runs on unicorn farts and rainbow dust etc

>>59245447
Okay, you have a point, I agree

>>59245457
how about you post the other one, with only 5% difference?

File: reaction everything will be great.jpg (60KB, 761x563px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 761x563px

>>59245457
>mentally-deficient cuck
> enjoy being a delusional retard
I'm sorry, this was uncalled for. I shamefully rescind my statements and hope you have a wonderful day/evening.

>>59245457
>k but you're cherry picking your set, too

Then you go on to post the only data set showing that amount of dispersion, without bios update/SMT disabling.

Again, pretty typical shill tactics.

>I will now claim I don't care for the 2nd time, while calling you dank memes and bringing /pol/ into the convo in an effort to derail the conversation I'm losing.

You need to buy better shills Intel.

>>59235984
>nobody cares about workstation except 12 autists

>>59245527
>12>10

checkmate.

>>59245526
>Then you go on to post the only data set showing that amount of dispersion
>it's cherry picking when you do it
>when I do it it's just cold, calculated logic. Did I mention how smart and consistent I am?
you're hopeless

lolz, anytime I see people judge CPUs mainly on "muh gamez" - i get a healthy dose of "I'm not as dumb as they nice, nice to know".

>>59234832
Didn't someone said the Ryzen outperformed in single threaded? Looks like you AMD users are sweating with your answers.

>>59246861
Ryzen fails at all software except a few very niche operations.

>>59247253
Data please?

>>59233130
>I'm a pro CS:GO player
>I'm good because I have good reaction times
Lmao
Hand eye coordination ie not under/over flicking and "game sense" ie knowing where your enemy might be in a given situation are so much more important than reaction times it's not even funny and that's just for playing solo.
In a team, communication, roleplaying and strategy are the things that actually matter.
It's like you actually have no idea what you're talking about retard

>>59231095
As opposed to /v/ermin like you? Fuck off back to /v/ and stop contaminating this board with muh gaymen benchmarks and muh shilling.