Why did AMD decide to market Ryzen 7 towards the fucking gaming

Cause the gaming market is bigger.

Because it's better to test your virgin silicon on a bunch of losers and not companies that can fuck you over with an army of lawyers

>>59232521
Because AMD are scam artists

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7UBHjtCXhU&feature=youtu.be&t=1264

So if one were to build a Workstation - a Ryzen would be better than the i7?

No Gayming will be performed. Will probably just throw a cheap Amd 4xx or Nvidia 10xx card in it.

>>59232521
>Why did AMD decide to market Ryzen 7 towards the fucking gaming market
it didn't though. have you missed all the blender benchmark presentations? it's your fault if you only read the gaymin press reviews.

File: 1446638324755.jpg (53KB, 800x676px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 800x676px

>>59232598
/thread

>>59232521
Wait a few years and everyone will be using Ryzen

>>59232521
Because like it or not, gaming is huge market.

>>59232611
the ryzen is likely to be a better option. you should also consider waiting for the Ryzen+Vega APUs.

>>59232521

Gaming market = Younger audience = Easier to influence

You'd be surprised at how little you need to spend to market products towards gamers, comparatively to businesses. Even at the small scale store I worked at it was like that, let alone for a large manufacturer.

>>59232636
Good suggestion.

How long a wait are we talking here?

>>59232611
Only if you are literally only doing encoding & rendering.

The i7 is better at everything else, the adobe suite, microsoft apps, financial software, etc.

>>59232623
AMDelusion off the charts

I was thinking about building a new system with Ryzen because all those cores really pay off when compiling, but guess I'll wait for their APU offerings. Really don't want to buy a dedicated GPU anymore.

>>59232667
Nope, no encoding or rendering.

Just Office, Internet Browsing and Financial Stuff.

And probably Youtube/Pornhub.

>>59232686
>Just Office, Internet Browsing and Financial Stuff.
You can do that with an i3.

After Ryzenpill, she looks as artificial as its performance.

>best Ryzon has single thread performance of $75 Pentium

>>59232663

pretty long, several months at least

>>59232552

It isn't, not even in the slightest. You just don't notice the business marketing, because it's mostly done backstage, in the form of personalized presentations to customers, and supply and support contracts.

>>59232686
Then definitely get an Intel

i7 is probably over kill, i5 would be nice, i5-7600 is good

>>59232686
get a pentium or an apu

Majority of system builders are gamers.
Workstation builders don't buy fucking boxed AMD cpus.

>>59232686

Even an i3, hell even a Pentium will do that effectively.

>>59232521
Same reason Intel's X99 chips are marketed at gaming, even though they're basically E5 1600 Xeons sans ECC and virtual passthrough.
Same reason Nvidia's Titans are in the GTX gayman line, even though the target audience are prosumers.

People who know they need that kind of performance will buy it anyway, but like this at least they also have a shot at people with more money than sense.
Enterprise and prosumers typically have a much longer upgrade cycle as they want to amortize their expenses, so they're not a consistent source of income, just a lump sum every 5+ years as all the servers get replaced wholesale.

>>59232521
gamers are illiterate retards who literaly buy whatever any given company tells them too, amd just figured they could easily take their cut of manchildren disposable income without too much effort

>>59232692
>>59232723
>>59232757
>>59232769
>>59232763

Has a Pentium now. Wants an i7.

Its not up for discussion, as much as an i7 is way overkill - its what is required.

>>59232795
Fuck off then. Go be retarded elsewhere.

>>59232795
If you want it, go for it, the i7 7700k is a beast, you won't find anything faster

>>59232667
>>The i7 is better at everything else, the adobe suite, microsoft apps, financial software, etc.

Isn't Ryzen a beast at multi thread applications?

>>59232805
Ryzen or i7?

>>59232811
Intel then. Ill go for it.

Thanks

>>59232521
Because they're the only people you need to advertise to. People who actually have a brain and need a CPU for work purposes will do their own research. It's only retarded gaymers who have to be spoonfed information.

File: intel btfo.png (3MB, 1702x1196px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1702x1196px

:^)

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

112KB, 722x554px

>>59232820
>Isn't Ryzen a beast at multi thread applications?

It's only good at very specific applications that do very specific things like rendering/encoding

Everything else is better with an i7

>>59232795
>overkill...is required
If it's required, it's not overkill. If you want it because you like the idea of it and the marketing around it then say so. Don't fool yourself into thinking it's logical, it's very clearly an emotional decision.

There's nothing wrong with that. Anyone who has a core 2 or better probably doesn't need an upgrade but a lot of us choose to upgrade because we feel like it. I bought a 7850k because I liked the idea of a single chip breaking one terraflop with a bit of overclocking.

>>59232837

2 things there:

- photoshop has never been multithread heavy, has been relying on ST performance, and I doubt it will change any time soon.

- what does it mean with "pcmark8 workload"? Honestly anything with pcmark puts me on full alert, for me they're high suspects. IIRC it was pcmark that was used when a few years ago someone faked a VIA Nano cpuid to pass as an Intel, and the performance result almost doubled.

>>59232893
>Not watching 4k porn and being able to count the hairs around the models anus
Pleb.

>>59232871
"Overkill" is not required. But an i7 is required.. So, yeah lets play word games.

The workload is i3 worthy, maybe on a busy busy once a year day i5 worthy.

But it still needs to have an i7 because thats what i was told. I said it foesnt need an i7, they say it does.

Im not getting paid to argue. Just to build.

>>59232837
Yes, 8/16 is made for specific applications, it still works in all of them just worse, just liek fucking 6900 that you can see in same chart being on same level.

>>59232893
I have an i3 4350 and its good. Only ARMA 3 struggles. But it still has to have an i7.

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

22KB, 650x200px

>>59232898
It's a benchmark, here's another one, there's tons of others showing basically any office or media app that isn't encoding/rendering does very bad on Ryzen

>>59232936
But it doesn't do very bad, it does 6% worse than competition, that's pretty darn good.

>>59232913
>So, yeah lets play word games.
Let's boil your statements down to the bare minimum.
i7 = overkill
i7 = required
Therefore i7 = overkill = required, or at least that's what your statement comes across as. If you disagree, please say so and say why. Regardless, this really does come across as an emotional decision influenced by marketing. It really doesn't look like anything anon can say will change your mind so why ask in the first place unless you want validation?

>>59232960
Two full aytch dee videos are nothing close to 4k. A colleague of mine recently got a new PC because his core 2 quad could easily handle two 1080 videos but wouldn't even look at playing the 4k videos his new DJI phantom 4 was spitting out. A shame because his clients aren't interested in 4k, so he ends up re encoding the video to 1080p regardless but not being able to play them was a killer.

>>59232686
i3 is perfect for your use.

>>59232936

I know it is, it's the reference of Pcmark that worries me. And honestly, Sysmark has also been under fire for years on suspicions of favoring Intel.
Ok, I do want to have actual discussions on the real performance, and I can dismiss isolated bias accusations as fake. But when one was actually shown to favor a specific brand, and the other has its entire history filled with suspicions, I'm not ready to jump into the results right in yet.

>>59232936
>very bad
>5.76% gap
>half the price
>not a 140W housefire

AMD btfo!

File: INTEL.jpg (596KB, 1846x1923px) Image search: [Google]

596KB, 1846x1923px

720p low quality benchmarks.jpg

Someone edit this.

Ryzen 1700 is faster than 7700K, given that you don't play in 720p on low details.

>>59233015
>>6900k outperformed by 7700k
This is a single threaded benchmark. No shit it's going to perform relatively bad when compared to a low core-count high clockspeed part

>>59232936
>bad a powerpoint
oh no

>>59232936
>6% worse
>50% less price
>IT DOES BAD RYZEN IS SHIT!@!!!!!#!@#!
Typical Intel shill.

>>59232795
>>59232923
It's like you buy a dumpster to carry your folder of documents. Not only unnecessary, but shows your lack of planning.

>>59232957
Cause its just a bit too autistic. I know, im here on 4chan but you dont have to be so autistic. It doesnt have to be the BEST i7.. It just needs an i7.

An i7 is required. So by your autistic logic Overkill is required.. Whil im not disagreein with you, i just think its autsistic as fuck to get so worked up over semantics instead of just reading "it needs an i7, which is overkill for many things" and then saying to yourself "im not autistic, it needs an i7, and while that may be overkill for some things, it still needs an i7".

I asked if i should get an i7 or a Ryzen you autsimo maximo.. That was my question.. Workstation use: intel or amd. Then i specified what that use wasm then i said it needs an i7 or a ryzen..

>>59232997
Causr they do. I suggested something cheaper, but they eant an i7. At the end of the day, i dont care. Its not my money or my pc. I just want to know if i should get them the intel or the amd. I think they just want all them cores..

>>59233014
A Pentium is perfect, but they still want an i7. But i can sway them to a Ryzen.

>>59233043
Not my pc. I dont even care. I7 or ryzen..

>>59233104
You're still not clear about what type of i7, though. There's the mainstream i7 (4c/8t) and there's the HEDT i7 (6c/12t, 8c/16t, 10c/20t).

Because CPUs won't be a bottleneck for games for at least the next 10 years.

>>59233121
It doesnt really matter.

I would pick a cheap i7 with good price/performance. I wouldnt get him a beast Overkill OC K model.

Say, for arguments sake, the cheapest 8 core i7 vs the cheapest 8 core Ryzen.

>>59233149
Cheapest 8 core Ryzen is literally half the price of the cheapest 8 core Intel

>>59233142
kek

>>59233149

>Cheapest vs. cheapest

In that case I'd go for Ryzen probably, altough it would help to know exactly what financing software they use.

>>59233149
>>59233169

Oh my bad, read "cheapest i7 vs. cheapest 8 core Ryzen".
If it's 8core vs. 8core, Ryzen by a large margin.

>>59232653
this. see: razor

>>59233159
>>59233169
>>59233184

Excel is the "finance software" but at a guess, it might be MYOB.

As has been said before over and over - the i7 is 100% overkill, but the client wants what the client wants.

I know its stupid and its retarded, but what can i do? Doesnt care. Just wants the i7 (marketing meme worked on them). Hell might not even matter about the cores either.

>>59233205
Either way, the software is going to perform pretty much the same. Excel can only do so much with all those cores and gigahertz. You can convince him to get a Ryzen 1700 if you want; roughly the price of the 7700k but has 8 cores instead of 4.

>>59233205

I don't know, believe it or not I've seen a few cpu taxing Excel works. At the factory I do IT at, we use mitcalc for instance, and the heavier material calculations can take some time on the supervisor's laptop i5-6200u.

>>59232552
This. Fuck everyone else.

>>59233247
The work the client needs is just from a single table and doesnt connect to any external datasources. Its just text and some +/- calculations.

>>59233238
The other thing someone else mentioned is with AMD and no onboard then i still need to get a gfx card.

Retarded clients are retarded

>>59232745
businesses buy server chips, not $300 consumer shit

>>59232521
people who are care for hard numbers are going to look for what suits them best by themselves
gamer fags are fine with shiny 3D bar graphs with missing labels

>>59233279

I know, I was just replying to him saying the gaming market is larger, when it isn't. In fact it's smaller than most people believe, it's just that gamers are a very vocal group, e.g. look at how many Ryzen Fanboyism/Hate threads were here on its release, and how its content always revolved around gaming.

>>59233042
Holy fuck you are retarded

The Intel is $340 and the Ryzen is $500

You are literally paying more for worse perfomance

>>59233269
i7-7700 or 6700 it is, then. It has an iGPU and he's not gonna know the difference between a bottom-of-the-barrel h110 motherboard and a modest quality h270 board.

File: dopefish.gif (9KB, 523x486px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 523x486px

http://www.strawpoll.me/12412168/r

>>59233342
in the consumer market where these CPUs are being sold the gaming segment is by far the largest

>>59232745
I didn't mean larger revenue-wise. I meant larger as in there are more gamers than datacenters. They're trying to build hype around ryzen. Backstage presentations to enterprise customers don't generate social media hype and exposure.

That being said, it seems r7 is a chip for enterprise use. r5 will probably be for gaming.

>>59233497
again, no. these CPUs are not for enterprise use, that will be the naples chips coming out later and competing with xeon

File: 0b0e677f1a4a2ebc090b97879fc17e76.png (252KB, 800x1130px) Image search: [Google]

252KB, 800x1130px

>>59233394
Try harder

>>59233104
>get so worked up
Heh, I'm not worked up but it's interesting that you think that. I also asked for you to state why you think what you do, clearly stating that emotional reasons are fully acceptable. That makes it absolutely hilarious that you see the need to lash out and call me autistic. I'll say this again, I'm not worked up, I'm more than a little amused.

I'm going to ignore the rest of your post because it mostly consists of angry name calling and typos, you've made up your mind so I'll tell you the one thing you want to hear; an i7 is an excellent choice, you'll be very happy with it.

>>59233546
She doesn't look happy

>>59232521
Gamers are hyperconsumers, they buy a lot of expensive shit on a whim.

>>59233546
Wake up

File: 1477770781196.gif (3MB, 500x700px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 500x700px

>>59232745
Business professionals don't care about advertising, they just check the specs and Benchmarks on their own, advertising at them would be pointless which is why they spend their entire advertising budget on vidya Autists.
Makes perfect sense to me.

File: 1476222168260.png (98KB, 612x491px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 612x491px

>>59232598
>Gamers Nexus

>>59232955
while being 1.5x the price
>very good

File: amdinanutshell3.jpg (2MB, 700x5000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 700x5000px

>>59233656
>Before release of Ryzen
>Gamers Nexus is the only reviewer you can trust guys, don't post anything else.
>After the release of Ryzen
>WTF why do you post this garbage in here? look at those fat soon to be deported Latino benchmarks where ryzen goes even with 7700k
>Turns out Beaner was an illiterate /v/ermin that run benchmarks with GPU hitting limits before CPU did
>Reruns them on low settings and it turns out that Ryzen is 20% behind 7700k
>???

>>59232521
Because the business market doesn't upgrade until their 3 year warranties expire.

>>59233655

I didn't mean marketing in the form of advertisements per se. More in line of securing supply deals with customers, and with sufficiently large customers, you're the one actively looking to do business with them. For instance, at my job we currently have a 10-year supply contract with a local HP supplier for PC parts, and Ricoh for printers, as they were the ones that offered us the best conditions/price ratio (except in this case, as a smaller, medium-sized company, we were the ones looking for the business partner instead). It includes both parts and maintenence contracts.

>>59232936
Your average Excel jockey isn't going to notice any difference. Most people in those environments are running i3s or mobile i5s.

Workstation workloads are a different matter, as most people in that world use ECC memory, which the Core series doesn't support, except for the extremes. All of the benchmarkers comparing it against the Core i7 for those workloads are fucking up. They need to compare against Xeon.

The problem is, the Skylake Xeons are apparently going to be really damn good, so I'm not sure if Ryzen will be able to compete on performance. Price barely matters in that market, either.

>>59233869
Which category does Broadwell-E fall into?

>>59233394
>The Intel is $340 and the Ryzen is $500

The 6950X costs $340 now? Where can I buy one?

>>59232521
Because workstation and content creation is done on GPUcompute now, for most pro rendering or encoding you would be better to buy a mid range i5 and spend what you save over a 1700 or 1800 on upgrading the GPU one step.

>>59233894
High-end consumer desktop. A weird variant of Broadwell E3 Xeons that support overclocking, but don't support ECC. Not sure who actually buys them.

>>59233755
>720p low quality benchmarks are a good way to measure gaming performance

lmao are you hearing yourself?

So what's better for compiling c++ software under linux,
A 7th gen i5 or a ryzen cpu ?

>>59234090
Yes, that's actually the best way to test a CPU,
You could also test it at 1080p with High details, if you have a Titan XP, but the results would still be scaling the same.
I know that I'm talking to an AMD drone here but you do realize that resolution is bound to GPU performance and lowering is the way to take the GPU out of equation ?

>>59234176
Hold on, hold on, you play on 720p low quality settings?

>>59234176
Nah, if we want to take out GPU out of the equation, let's run some CPU mark. Full CPU, 0% GPU calculation.

How about that? Oh, I forgot, Ryzen just broke world record with that. Whoops. That won't work with your narrative, with it, Intel shill? You're fucking retarded of accusing me of being an AMD drone when I didn't even one yet, ever. It's just that I am not a deficient COD-playing 13 year old.

>>59232521

AFAIK, AMD marketed these CPUs as alternatives to the 8 cores from Intel. Not for gaymen PCs.

>>59232521
>real strength is in workstation/content creation workloads?

Funny thing is that they don't come with an iGPU, so you need an external GPU, not a gaymer one, but you still need one, people don't want to buy a EGPU just for werk.


wtf amd

>>59234323
>implying Broadwell-e has an iGPU

>>59232620
Streaming video game and bragging about encoding
And play battlefield 1.

>>59232711
My Pentium G3450 has more or less the same single threaded performance as my i5 4690. Why even buy anything greater than a dual core.

>>59234198
I play at 1080p low settings since I don't like fucking bloom and lens flare...
Its supposed to be a benchmark, would you prefer 4K testing ? You can find that at linus shill tips and every CPU tested has the same result there.
>>59234238
They market it as a Gaming/Enthusiast CPU while it sucks at that, why are you still acting like they are the good guys. If you really think this is about brand loyalty than you're probably underage or severely autistic.

>>59234397
>They market it as Gaming CPU
>"Hey guys, look at all these cinebench and handbrake benchmarks"

>>59233554
That damage control.

>>59234509

If you wanted gaymers (i.e. impressionable kids) to buy your shit, would you rather show them impressive graphs where it beats a $1000 Intel CPU by a landslide, or actual gaming benchmarks where it ties/loses to a 2013 Intel 4-core?
They did, among other things, market the R7 series to gaymers since the beginning. Saying otherwise is simple denial.

Obviously the 4-core and possibly 6-core Ryzens will make much more sense for gaymen at a much better price and any AMD fags with half a brain will wait for these, but if you were AMD and could sell a bunch of the $330-500 units to a bunch of impatient hyped up kids who can't wait to blindly preorder, why wouldn't you?

>>59233755
>caring about muh games

This /g/, kiddo. We loved the FX line when it came out because we used them for work

>>59232598
look mommy i posted it again

>>59234397
Okay if it's a gaming CPU then let's play like a normal human.

1440p high details.

Not fucking 720p low quality.

Decide yourself. You keep shifting goalposts like crazy.

>>59234397
Also, go back to /v/. You are in the wrong place.

>>59235413
Let's also stick in a 4 year old 1gb graphics card to make sure the CPU isn't the limiting factor.

>>59235413
It's a brilliant gaymen CPU if your game requires you to look at the skybox all the time.

>>59232521
>Why did AMD decide to market Ryzen 7 towards the fucking gaming market when its real strength is in workstation/content creation workloads?


Are you fucking retarded? They did the exact opposite of what you've said.

>>59234198
It's a benchmark, and also a prediction of future performance. The 1800X is an inferior CPU in gaming performance to both the 7700k and even the 1900k in the vast majority of games. This is a FACT. Just because right now you only notice it at 720p and 1080p doesn't make it not true. You can say "b-but 4k!" but that doesn't make the CPU less inherently inferior, you're just hiding it behind a GPU bottleneck. The thing you people whining about resolution don't understand, is that what happens when GPU ceases to become a bottleneck at 4k? or you want a high refresh rate monitor? Then the differences in CPU performance will become apparent once again. It's not about 480p or 720p. It's about how R7 is NOT as good for gaming as Intel. If you're buying a CPU mostly for gaming, why would you buy an inferior product? We don't know when games will use 8 cores and benefit massively from this.

>>59235657
>We don't know when games will use 8 cores and benefit massively from this.
I do. About the time it took 2 cores to get used when people mainly used 1. And about the time it took it to use 4 cores instead of 2.

8 years ago when I was buying a PC people told me 4 cores is too much and no game/program will ever use them! Guess what happens now. No new game uses less than 4. If you are foolish enough to believe what you do, continue to do so. I will be here enjoying my superior compilation times. meanwhile my CPU will continue to only grow in power, not lose it.

For now, you may rejoice with your shitty stutter freezes and 8% better performance.

>>59236139
>8 years ago
And anyone who bought a desktop CPU 8 years ago has probably upgraded by now unless they don't use their computer for super intensive tasks. The question is, will Ryzen be good at gaming in 5 years? Maybe, but the FX series wasn't. You're asking people to take a gamble, and I can understand why people would be reluctant. And of course if 8 coresIS the norm in 5 years, then I can just buy a new CPU then, while the first gen Ryzens will be aging.

>>59232702
>she

>>59232611
Although the benchmarks made on phoronix don't include the kernel fixes for optimizing cache handling, the Ryzen totally demolishes anything Intel in many cases. Especially compiling software is a strong suit for the Ryzen. Now I'm curious about the extra performance to be gained from the 4.10.whatever it was kernel update.

File: 98c.jpg (74KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 600x800px

>>59236139
>1st gen Ryzen will be relevant in 8 years

>>59232521
Fact is AMD doesnt have resources to run 2 production architectures like intel.

So they made only one ryzen architecture, cut things to drive prices lower like less PCIe lanes, worse memory controller, no quad channel memory, and they ended with a single 8 core chip, that can be binned down until the a single 2 core product from same waffer.

From a production perspective, its the best AMD could made, and its a worth product, having the raw strength of almost a big intel, and almost the strength of a 4 core cpu.

AMD certainly must had done a market research to see if this strategy would have buyers, because it doesnt fulfill either roles of big or small intel cpus completely, while lacking some high performance features.

Depending of the performance of the R5 and R3 lines and lower price point, it could well eat a lot of i5 / i3 markets. If they manage to make cheaper 4 cores mobile chips, intel will also lose more market. Remember, all i5 mobile cpus basically are just 2 cores with HT.

>>59232521
>when its real strength is in workstation/content creation workloads?
Because they already know they're superior and ahead and therefore need no marketing whatsoever

It's the gameing performance that's neck to neck with intel