RYZEN LOL

RYPOO, NOT EVEN ONCE

>>59239687
>broadwell 3.3ghz = kabylake 4.2ghz

>>59239687
BTFO by based TODD

Why are they even testing things at ultra even at 1080p. Shadow distance kills performance in that game and I thought they didn't want to be GPU bound? Also old benches lol get out Intel shill.

>>59239687
>DirectX 11
2009 has called

>>59239687
>outperformed by multiple dual cores

So this... is the power of Raisin.

>>59239758

Yeah but nobody on g cann afford x99 so it doesn't count.

>>59239795

For once it sort of makes sense - shadows are traditionally rendered by the cpu. I still don't trust the results given the hilarious variance we've had with ryzen due to motherboard BIOS being in various states of maturity (gigabyte has theb est in the here and now).

>>59239758
when you need to increase the clock to get more performance in a NEW product, you're doing it wrong.

>>59239828
the 5775C isn't on x99, its on the same plaform as the haswell 4790k

fallout 4 is a terribly optimized game running on an engine older than a decade

>>59239828
shadows aren't rendered on the cpu, sure shadow maps and the info is batched by the processor just like the rest of the data, but you need access to vertex normals and the depth buffer to actually render the shadows correctly

>>59239687
RYZEN? MORE LIKE... FALLEN

...HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>59239687
>8 fps faster
>40% higher ipc
broken and soon to be deprectated benchmarks general

>>59239807
>reee why are you testing low resolutions where the game is CPU bound and Ryzen shits the bed
>reeeeee why aren't you benchmarking one of the <10 games with good DX 12 implementation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_the_messenger

>>59239687
>no 6900k on list
Also
>benchmarking CPUs with gaymez

>>59239687
>beat by a pentium

AHBAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHAHHA

AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHHAHAHHA
AHAHHAHAHHAAHA
HA

ryzen on its own might be a bit on the weak side but the ryzen + vega combo will be fucking bazinga

>>59239912
Nah, Fallzen

>>59239687
>beat out by a $60 pentium

KEK

>>59239977

>HSA made manifest

At least, thats my theory.

>>59239687
Oh, /v/ is leaking again.

>>59239977
>$500 CPU that performs like an i3 in gaymes
>$500 GPU that delivers GTX 1080 performance a year and half later

The match made in the loo.

File: zen.webm (1MB, 720x1280px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 720x1280px

>>59240043
>The match made in the loo.

Can someone explain to me the

>b-but that game has an old engine!
>its poorly optimized! it'll get better!

memes?

What if I want to play those games right now? What if I don't want to put my faith in things "getting better" and cross my fucking fingers?

I'm using an AMD cpu right now but I am due for an upgrade. Ryzen hasn't impressed me in gaming. Don't give a shit about work station stuff. I'm jumping ship and getting a 7600k because it **already** works.

Fucking shills everywhere.

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

14KB, 400x152px

>>59239687

File: 1487789493624.jpg (156KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 633x758px

>>59240187
>>59240524

>>59240043
R7 1800X isn't a gaming CPU clearly. R7 1700 is though, considering it clocks with better temps and voltages, and will get a Windows patch soon to boost performance, and non-shitty BIOSs will make things even better.

>>59240497
If you want gaming performance right now and don't have any other CPU-heavy use for your machine then yes, go ahead an buy a 7600K or 7700K. If you're not in a huge hurry I'd still suggest you wait for a few months to see if things shape up for Ryzen in terms of Windows patches and firmware updates.

>>59239687
you can tell when a game is shit when non of those cpus will get you past 60 fps

>>59240497
It's just AMDelusion. Games will not get better, by their very nature they must be programmed serially in the majority of situations.

Consoles have had 8 cores for years and this is still how they look.

>>59240571
That's all pure speculation, you should not present it as fact. As it stands right now the 1700 is a worse choice than an Intel CPU strictly for gaming, especially if you're not going to OC it to ~4GHz.

>>59240571
>muh drivers will fix it

What is it with AMD customers and the complete lack of any ability to see recurrent patterns?

File: byrcd6ssrgjy.png (259KB, 680x680px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 680x680px

>>59239687
lol yeah ryzen is like such a failure lol

File: AMD™ Motto.png (24KB, 353x414px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 353x414px

>>59240571
>>59240606
>>59240605

>>59240606

BIOS updates fixed the horrific performance of X99 memory.

>>59240497
because they are idiots and don't know what they are talking about. Yes there is some day 0 fuckups but EVEN with those issues addressed it just means the 1800X approaches the performance of the 7700k, its not going to surpass it for gaming and even the techs at AMD said this talking to the reviewers they sent copies to.

They spent something like 6 years on DX12 and the reality is that shit does not scale past 4 cores. Those are the kind of time frames we are actually dealing with. Ryzen is not going to magically perform better by the fall or the next year or the year after that.

>>59239687
wtf is going on here?

my fx8320 & gtx1060 get about 40-50 fps on all ultra with graphic mods in FO4...

>>59239687
>$65 cpu @ 41fps
or
>$500 cpu @ 40fps

>2017
>intel and nvidia have better bang for buck AND performance
>amd literally has nothing

Is this the end for AMD?

>>59240606
AMD is like a religion for these morons.

They just love to get AMD's shit shoveled into their mouths and pay for it.

File: Command-Buffer-DirectX-121.png (167KB, 959x541px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 959x541px

>>59240678

6 threads is the sweet spot for DX12.

>>59239687
>>>/v/

>>59240680
its a certain section of the game and they have max AA on. Benchmarkers have to use presets typically for their own sake but on your own system you should pretty much never use them.

>>59239687
>Fallout 4
invalid

File: 1449999756930.jpg (49KB, 423x389px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 423x389px

Remember to hide and sage shill threads!

>>59240736
For actual games its effectively 4. It can theoretically scale to 6 decently but on actual games that sort of optimization realization isn't occurring. And keep in mind this is just for the section of your program that is feeding and receiving frames from the GPU.

>>59240630
>Speed test between ferrari and a ford pinto
>Set the ferrari on 30mph cruise control
>Wow, just look at our pinto go! It's as fast as a ferrari in our tests!

You know, with all the fudging AMD has been doing with their benchmarks, they may as well put an fps_max hardcap on their intel tests, it's basically the same thing.

File: 1445902857019.jpg (692KB, 1680x1050px) Image search: [Google]

692KB, 1680x1050px

>>59240807

Perhaps, perhaps not. Right now the only game engine that can into DX12 (and preumably vulkan) is the nitrous engine and that does - for all its flaws - stop at 6 threads for effecient scaling. It can address many, many more but the gains are marginal percentage wise.

It is also worth considering that while DX11 exists for legacy purposes DX12 will be crippled by the need to not entirely break DX11. It is a factor into why the community prefers Vulkan (heralded by Doom) but the reality is vulkan's documentation is far behind DX12. All in all its a complicated situation but when the big players make the jump and tell DX11 and older to GTFO things will leap forward cpu wise.

You can see this in the console space with not-DX12 and sony's custom API leveraging cpu respurces in a way rarely seen in the PC space. People complain about consoles holding PC's back but its untrue - PC's cripple themselvews due to legacy support and the stranglehold MS has.

>LONG LIVE GLIDE

>>59239828
Is x99 expensive now? I've been through 2 different x99 platforms in the last 2 years alone. 5820k is only like 40$ more than an i7 and still has plenty of power to spare.

>>59241174

The good boards are expensive and frankly if you are going to leverage the platform advantages that means shitloads of ram and/or multiple gpus.

>>59241233
Yeah I noticed that the boards were wildly expensive. Average of 180-300 versus 80-170.

But I just did the same layout I always did in the past. Highe4 end CPU like that 5820k at the time. I had a 980SC. 16gb RAM. 480gb SSD and 2tb drives

But I even had SSD, 16GB RAM back on my very first PC back when the 660 just dropped. Overkill with utility sometimes I guess. I'd rather never have to stress about shit loading and processing than having good graphics.

>>59241414

In the here and now (for less dosh) thats what ryzen is. My gut tells me AMD is aiming squarely for those critical voids between Intel's pricing tiers which in practical terms means AMD will offer more for less or less options for less money - effectively neutering Intel's division between overclocked mobile chips and gimped xeons.

>I'd rather never have to stress about shit loading and processing than having good graphics.

Given the slow progression of cpus relative to gpus if one has the budget to allow for it I would rather go balls out on a cpu than gpu this day and age. I'm building a 4k machine off the back of my existing platform and I will be spending considerably more on the cpu front than gpu as I expect to the cpu to last for 4-5 years compared to the 2-3 for the gpu to deliver performance I desire at the settings I want at 4k.

>>59239687
http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/303/Intel_Core_i3_i3-4170_vs_Intel_Pentium_Dual-Core_G4560.html
look at the "Instruction set extensions" section...
my bet is that the game is optimized for intel CPUs *only*

Now have him enable High Performance Mode on Win10 and run it again.
W10 cripples performance to save power, it's a well known "feature"

>>59240807
add more physics and make 4cores suck ass

>>59240680

It's a Memory sensitive game. Ryzen motherboards and Ryzen it's self has memory timing issues so they're super slow times, and it only gets worse the more clockspeed you give RAM.

Fucking /g/ told me there was no improvement from Sky and Kabylake yet my 4690K is falling behind at the same clock.

You fucking cunts spreading desinfo.

>>59239687
>1.8 fps apart from competition
LOL

Yea, it's amazingly funny how shit inlet is at 1k$

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11170/the-amd-zen-and-ryzen-7-review-a-deep-dive-on-1800x-1700x-and-1700/18
I'm in treats right now.Suck it, lard-asses!

>>59241665
A fucking $60 Pentium is beating a $500 Ryzen

>>59241659
Kaby and Sky have higher memory bandwith allowance, put shit memory in them they will perform as your CPU

>>59241687
a fucking 60$ Pentium is beating a 1000$ Intel

>>59241585

>my bet is that the game is optimized for intel CPUs *only*

As far as most software development goes there are only two platforms.

>Intel Mainsteam
>Intel HEDT/server

Ryzen isn't on that list.

>>59241704

Which is why no one here is suggesting people buy the $1000 Intel.
But everyone is shilling the $350-$500 Ryzen 8-cores despite the fact they perform in a very similar way.

>>59241741
Nobody is telling you to buy it if you don't need it.
1700/1800 is filling price gap of 8c/16c, and does so very efficiently.

>>59241735
actually, nevermind, this >>59241704 is a rather good argument

>>59241741
for this specific game...
for real world tasks, if you really need computing power, just go and buy a ryzen cpu

why are these 8 core 16 thread CPU's being compared to quadcores which can obviously reach vastly higher core clocks and thus perform better in single-threaded garbage like most games?

the 8 core cpu's must be compared to the intel workstation line-up such as the 6900K, not the fucking 7700K you retards. of course it won't do as well in single threaded. the 1800X would destroy any intel quadcore in rendering or calculation work (video, 2d, 3d, compiling) which is what it was made for (content creators).

fucking gaymen faggots

>>59241840
These were marketed as gaming and enthusiast chips, they fail horribly at both

>>59241840
>AMD launches a ryzen ad campaign for gaming
>people point out that they still suck shit in gaming
>AMD drones throw a tantrum and defend AMD "they were never meant to be for gaymen even though they lied and advertised it as the case!" "test it on these multithreaded apps that only 5% of /g/ uses instead!"

Every fucking time

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

2MB, 700x5000px

>>59241894

dis

>>59241857
Not exactly true, R7 was marketed as competing with 6900x in workloads and gaming

1700 was shown to compete with 7700k and showed to be competing with it but biggest talking point was that you can stream, play games without any FPS inpact on the game compared to 7700k

>>59239687
There are more of these retarded benchmarks than there are stars in the sky. Doesn't make any of them relevant or useful.

File: a4f.jpg (112KB, 843x959px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 843x959px

>>59241922

File: 1488308037054.jpg (5KB, 154x211px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 154x211px

>>59239687
Pretty sure they installed the wrong ram for this one.
Because every other test is a lot more positive.

>>59241900
You never got my permission for using my shitpost in your image, but I'm giving it to you now.

File: streaming-obs.png (129KB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 1440x1080px

>>59241905
Guess what, it fails at streaming too

>>59239758
5775C has a 4th level cache which is actually 128gb of eDRAM and I'm pretty sure it largely benefits some workloads, but doesn't favor others. I think giving the top end quad core Intel CPUs more cache would actually significantly increase performance in some aspects.

>>59242147
mb* not gb

Cpus are not for gaming anyways. Stop being stupid.

>>59242539
Only Intel CPUs are for gaming.

>>59242015
lmfao

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

408KB, 882x1418px

>>59239687
Nice benchmark. Here's some more

>>59242657
like clockwork >>59241900

File: 1431710431995.png (168KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 1200x1200px

Ryzen is competitive with Broadwell-E on compute performance and power usage. 8C/16T for $500 is not to be underestimated.

For gaming, Zen is generally better than Ivy Bridge but worse than Kaby Lake. A couple of games have shown markedly better frame times and minimum FPS than Intel.

Software has not been optimized with Ryzen in mind, only with Intel because Bulldozer was totally obsolete on arrival. Most software will not be patched for Zen, nor will future software necessarily be tested for performance on platforms other than Intel and consoles.

Basically, AMD is competitive again. They didn't BTFO Intel like Athlon 64 did, but it's good enough all around with enough extra juice for multithreaded work (especially if you're programming your own stuff) to have its place in the market.

>>59242657
You realize that is a fake benchmark that was already redone:

https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/5xcnye/720p_r7_1700_vs_7700k/

The retest shows a 20% performance difference between the 7700k and 1700

>>59242802
>AMD is competitive again

>Costs twice as much
>Has worse performance

How the fuck is that competitive

>>59242817
The R7s are competitive with Intel's heavy multithreaded processors like the 6900K for heavily multithreaded workloads. R5 will probably offer competitive pricing with Intel's quad cores, but will probably be about the same as R7 for games unless they cough up a lot of extra clockspeed.

I hate /v/ so much

>>59242817
It's not. What you're witnessing is an AMD fanboy in the bargaining stage of grief.

I didn't know my 7600k was this swag

>>59242147

With Intel gimping supply of baby broadwell nobody ever really tested it - but it remains (to this day) the king of Intel IPC. The huge slab of L4 helps immensely in both general workloads and igpu usage (the latter is very obviously - its the only way iris pro beats AMD's offerings) but reviewers ofcus on the relatively speed demon kaby lake rather than the more expensive broadwell/broadwell-E which are IPC over clocks.

To wit the likes of the 6900k and 6950x absolutely murder across the board when clocked up but not by massive amounts in vidya and thus are boring to reviewers. When you start testing HEDT/ever workloads (like tom's hardware german arm tends to do so) you see the difference in performance.

With zen generally matching broadwell-E its a sign AMD is playing not for keeps, but to WIN in the HEDT/ server market. The 1700 is especially dangerous given its implications for lower clocked (but higher core count) chips.

Consider this: in the server space the actual cost of the chips is irrelevant- its the power draw that matters and ryzen appears (asper The Stilt's testing) has Intel beat on that front until you leverage AVX2 heavily. Watch this space - Naples is a game changer and Intel knows it.

File: 1484958826567.jpg (9KB, 238x192px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 238x192px

>>59239687
>game is optimized the worst i've fucking ever seen, probably not even optimized at all

>SEE DIS PROOF

>>59243164
ok this particular game is using an outdated engine but really, even with the best game engine, you're not going to get anywhere near the same multi-threaded usage as with a pure video rendering benchmark like cinebench, except maybe for some contrived AOTS-style game

>>59242015
>Broadwell-E beaten by a quad-core
I smell bullshit

>>59242817
>Costs half of Broadwell-E
>Performs on par, if not slightly better
Yes, this is competitive

OP here, it was all in good fun. Ryzen is meh but has a niche, IMO.

The way it's meant to be played™

>>59239687
> on par with a broadwell/i7-5960x and costs a fraction of the price
Everything checks out. What's the problem?

>>59243819

>he didn't get the memo

You can shift the Intel product stack around as you see fit, as long as ryzen loses.

>ryzen beats a 6900k
JUST WAIT FOR ST BENCHMARKS
>ryzen loses to a 5ghz 7700k
AHAHA AMD IS DOOMED

Pirice is literally a non-factor. A 6900k losing to a 7700k is fine, as long as it shows AMD doing worse.

>>59242015

Okay, I just googled the source myself before you posted that
>While I wasn't able to capture the number of dropped frames from the stream, I was able to capture the FPS numbers from Dota 2. All the eight-core CPUs did well, but the 7700K took a significant hit to performance by as much as 18FPS with OBS active. Ryzen did well, only dropping 3FPS while streaming, but was ultimately slower overall than the Intel systems.

The only that part said anything about the OBS setting is
>That's particularly true in the OBS/Dota 2 benchmark, where the game was software-encoded at 3500Kbps and streamed
It doesn't said anything about the preset setting, So I guess they are at default "very fast", even a shitty i5 can do this.
But Very Fast is shit for high pace game like FPS, it will create a lot artifacts, Dota 2 too if the camera moved around too fast.

Its not I'm trying to diss intel here, but I do works as video mixer in live streaming Esport event.
If you want to get better quality you need to changed your preset, but it will used more CPU power for better quality.

So if anyone can find me an OBS benchmark of ryzen running at better preset It would be helpful instead of some random reviewer who known nothing about encoding in streaming.

>>59240571
>and will get a Windows patch soon to boost performance

Oh yeah sure it will, just like when the trash known as bulldozer came out and you amd shills kept saying that a patch would fix it, then microsoft released two hotfixes for windows 7 and it changed jackfuckingshit.

You amd pajeets are fucking hilarious. It's never here or now, it's always "j-j-just wait for this X t-thing in the future that is t-totally gonna make this garbage become gold!"

Just fucking give up already. Jesus christ.

>>59240680

That's because you have god rays turned on. Set it to low and watch as your frames double. I was having sub 40 drops on my i7 3770 gtx 970 at 1080p. Turned godrays to low and just like that I was getting 60fps at 1440p.

>>59244196
The linux kernel had an update that significantly improved SMT performance. It turns out the old bulldozer fix was actually interfering with zen's SMT. Either way this is a software problem, not a hardware problem. Heavily multithreaded applications that pound all threads at the same time actually show an improvement with SMT while gayyymen benchmarks have the task scheduler shit itself because games are a lot more chaotic than rendering a 3d animation.

>>59239687
>3.6ghz chip outclassed by 4.5ghz chip

it's fucking nothing.

>>59241894
>AMD drones throw a tantrum and defend AMD "they were never meant to be for gaymen even though they lied and advertised it as the case!" "test it on these multithreaded apps that only 5% of /g/ uses instead!"

This is my favorite part of the amd marketer delusion. They hype the thing to hell and beyond, then it comes out, everybody sees that it's a piece of fucking shit and then they pull a 180 and start telling everyone how it was always actually meant to be a piece of shit anyway.

All fanboys are fucking obnoxious, but amd drones are the most demented people I have ever seen in my life. I think even massive apple drones can even get this fucking bad. At least they were calling apple out on their bullshit with the headphone jack meme and the donglebook pro fiasco, whereas just a few months ago AMD pajeets were STILL trying to pretend that bulldozer and vishera were anything but bottom of the barrel trash.

>>59244253
MS might have done some sort of update already, a few days ago somebody was reporting a coreinfo dump that was showing that Ryzen had 8MB of L2 and 128 MB of L3 instead of 4MB and 16MB while now others are reporting a proper amount of L2 and L3 with the L3 even being divided into two 8MB chunks.

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/page-8#post-38775681

So fixes might already be on the way and closer than the 30 days out AMD was saying.

>>59244303
>"The R7 series was marketed for gaming"
>hey look at these handbrake and cinebench benchmarks

>>59243929
6900k is a niche cpu, this is not news

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

180KB, 1540x877px

>>59244560
?

File: 1488687861663.png (3MB, 3306x964px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3306x964px

>>59244560
???

>>59244612
>still ignoring all those other production workload benchmarks

>>59244646
>an image that says absolutely nothing

File: 1488687331869.jpg (17KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 480x360px

>>59244649
????

>>59244671
>>59244275
You're probably the same shitposter. If you decide to post the other images, go back to the thread and reread any rebuttal

>>59244649
Execpt it's shit at gaming. It's called false advertising. Some shitheads even throw a tantrum that they never put in against 7700k but only 6900k when price/performance for gaming come as an argument.

>>59244694
t. RedTeam+ damage control

>>59244703
>shit at gaming
it's not. It's more than adequate for gaming but it's a horrible value if you're going for a gaming-only system. Same shit applies to Broadwell-e.
Anyways, if you're going to focus on gaming benchmarks >>>/v/

>>59244712
>no argument
>"S-SHILL! D-D-DAMAGE CONTROL!!!"

>>59244732
You have to shill better RedTeam+
No points today.

>>59244739
>>>/v/

I just want Ryzen 5 to come out already.

>>59242539
Cpus really aren't for a lot of workstation tasks either anymore. Workstation GPUs exist for a reason and anyone actually doing work will use those instead.

>>59244694
Nope that's a different guy
sorry you keep getting BTFO every time you try to make the "workstation" argument

>>59239687
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

File: 1488594197699.jpg (59KB, 858x546px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 858x546px

>>59239687
I N T E L O N S U I C I D E W A T C H

>>59242808
How is it fake? Those are the figures running a game at 1080P on a GTX 1080, one of the most powerful GPUs out there.

>>59244961
>RedTeam+ shill working overtime fucks up and pastes his shit twice in the same thread
>>59244769
>>59244971

really makes you think

File: Capture.png (42KB, 604x280px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 604x280px

>>59239687
>#teamRED

>>59245010
There's no way those figures are true. No matter how good it is, a 1700X wouldn't be beating *dual* octa-core Xeons in multithreaded loads.

why is anyone even playing games in 2017

>>59239687
> quick, my butt is so blasted, run benchmarks on every game at every setting until we find something that makes ryzen look bad, despite its significantly lower price point and the fact that benchmark results from games are far more dependent on gfx card capabilities and their communication with the cpu even though ryzen is running a new architecture
> quick senpai, I need more shekels fast, I'm running out of lotion for my salty ass!

File: intel_j.png (148KB, 763x930px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 763x930px

>>59245041
#Intel

>>59241894

>suck shit at gaming

By having higher minimums with slightly lower averages?

I can deal with a couple frames off the average for the better experience overall.

>>59240571
>just wait
>wait
>wait
>wait
>it'll come we promise
lol

>>59245061
Go RedTeam+!
Score one for the good goys!
https://twitter.com/GamersNexus/status/838221363991166981

>>59245075
>some fans complaining
>anywhere near as bad as the shit Intel themselves did and were sued for

>>59245041
>takes shit on good cpu
>expects people to praise him
Delusional

>>59245021
> implying an intel cpu wouldn't have a natural advantage running alongside an nvidia card compared to an amd cpu.

>>59245075
so this is what the average amd fangirl is like.

christ

>>59245010
>buy premium gaming meme cpu to run obscure programs

>>59245041
((DeathThreats))

>>59245100
>Ryzen is really good for workstation
>Ryzen is not good for gaming

>takes a shit on a good cpu

I don't get it.

>>59245084
>>59245100
Your RedTeam+ accounts have been updated! Check them out for goodies;^)

>>59244961
>Comparing 2014 to 2017

>>59245070
Source for your higher minimums that aren't the For honor benchmarks?

>>59245120
>not good for gaming
It's fine for gaming, just not the best at it currently.

File: IMG_1820.jpg (56KB, 1242x241px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 1242x241px

>>59245075
What's the difference

>>59245179
>it's fine- AMD

>>59245206
>Muh games

>>59245222
>marketed as gaming CPU
>STOP USING GAMES

>>59240524
HAHAHAHAHA FUCKING KEK. Gonna side with jews on this one.

>>59245222
Workstation stuff is not relevant to 95%+ of the people here or in general.

The prior 6 months of people claiming it would destroy Intel in gaming and AMD's on marketing suggest it was marketed for gaming. No matter how much people keep trying to deny it now.

File: lmao.gif (353KB, 500x357px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 500x357px

>>59245228
>Literally YOU'RE USING IT WRONG
AMDrones are the most demented shitheads I've ever known.

File: file.png (472KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

472KB, 640x480px

>>59239687
>BEING BEATEN BY A PENTIUM

What kinda chip is that a dorito?

>>59245289
It's 2017 and It's about the Pentiums baby. Weird Al is a fucking prophet

>>59245246
It wasn't just marketed for gaming retard, it was marketed for high end use which uses more then 4 cores. It does gaming decent in while doing way better in multi-threaded applications, such as rendering and compiling.

>>59245075
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUk5T3AkJYE

this too

>>59245370
?
>>59244612
>>59244646
>>59244671

>gamebryo

wow really valuable benchmark there

>>59245414
I can post marketing images from Intel too!

>>59245479
Then go ahead

>>59245479
7700k is the best gaming cpu currently and intel have entire product line for different markets unlike amd

>>59240524
implying the power of a CPU is given by its gaming performance.

Ryzen has some kinks to iron out in some gaymen area, but you can't contest its performance, it matches the 6900k's performance (in 90% of the benchmarks) for half the price, which is what it's selling point is.

If you want gaymen performance, just get an i5 or something.

>>59239807
dx11 is still the industry standard considering the majority of gamers aren't using windows 10

ohshitnigger
ordered a dell laptop with an amd processor 9 series, am I cucked? I figured it'd be good as an i7 or some shit.
t. normie tier laptop buying, cant even tell you exact processor

>>59245820
>laptop
>AMD
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>59239687
>right next to 5960X

well done AMD you've succeeded this time

File: Intel_inside.jpg (250KB, 1032x774px) Image search: [Google]

250KB, 1032x774px

lol intel

>>59242808
>fake
And I thought Intel shills are not real. How many shekels per hour do you get for this?

>720p low settings benchmarks
lmao

>>59245887
Dude did you even read the link

It's literally the guy who made the first video re-doing his benchmarks because he said he made a mistake

>>59245289
underrated

File: 2017-03-05-090849_841x36_scrot.png (5KB, 841x36px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 841x36px

>>59246125
Keep trying, shill

>>59243146
look at benches, in some of them amd plays with quad 8 core cpu server chips at their low end 8 cores.

the server market is so obviously where the chips were made to go, i understand why they considered the desktop a written off segment.

>>59239954
>>59245717
>>59239807
rather than dx11, fallout 4 in general, sure its a largely played game but it runs like fucking shit on everything it touches because of retarded ways the game is made.

>>59240586
if they set everything to ultra, then everything not hitting 60 is 100% nvidia's fault because of god ray tessellation, an impressive effect, but murders the fuck out of cpus.

>>59243752
no, you likely wont, but you also wont lag that far behind intel either.

Honestly, and this is my two cents, we have not seen games optimized for quad cores yet, not a single game, at most we have seen them optimized for 4 threads, but nearly every single game is made to be played on either 2 cores or 1 core, Its not that games don't scale, it's that none of the fucking devs have really yet to try.

this is likely an issue that will not be solved till either all single or dual core systems are broken, or something happens to engines that just will not support older cpus period.

now on fallout, this is literally the only game that responds to a ram overclock before it will ever respond to a cpu oc, witcher 3 has the same thing, but even that responds to a cpu oc.

>>59243920
retards, the cpu has a known memory issue at the moment and they take a benchmark from a game with known memory bias.

>>59245049
its not only clocked higher, intel hit an integer wall a few generations ago (sandybridge) and has focused more on the fpu, in comes zen which is an integer monster.

so intel is held back by clock speeds for power, and worse integer even if clocked up, while amd is clocked higher (though less power use) and has far more integer power clock.

could be fake, but i doubt it.

>>59239795
Shadows kill everything.

>>59245177
the gta5 one /g/ loves.

how was amd at a 28 minimum but basically equal to 7700 if it also had lower maximum fps?

the answer it stayed closer to 85 without going to much higher or to much lower, meanwhile intel had to spend significant amounts of time lower then 85 to take a 180 max down to what was it 86 or was it 89?

>>59246808
I thought it was mostly shadow distance, I remember on a 8350+970 I had to have it at medium so that it wouldn't get below 50fps in the worst of places (cambridge mostly), now on this 5.2ghz 7600k+480 I can actually set it to ultra with the dips only going to 55fps

>>59247081
the rays are tessellated to an absolutely retarded extent on ultra, as in if you look at wireframes for them they are solid blocks. changeling that to low, or in the console command to 8x, will improve performance drastically, but yea, shadows also fuck it to hell and back, but also memory issues, which ryzen currently has, hell memory can almost double your fps if you go from bad to good, and due to rushed motherboards ryzen is at bad right now.

File: 1484714722254.jpg (13KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 640x640px

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>59239687
Can we get some benchmarks from a non soviet country please?

>>59247098
Yeah I remember being surprised that the 2133@cl9 ddr3 i had with the older setup actually was helping the performance when googling around to see what fps other people had, Can't say too much about the godrays thou because I never encountered any problems.

>>59244717
oh its excellent if you do anything, from watching videos to browsing the web, and dont do a full restart when you want to game, sadly this will never reflect in benchmarks because benchmarks are done in sterile environments.

>>59247081
every computer ive ever had until this one that is built to full class has had problems with shadows

shadows, for whatever reason, suck down most of my gpu in 95% of my computers

>>59247125
Past 1080p/60fps? I haven't really tried to check how taxing it is on gpu (on both cards) but know that it was either the CPU or ram because gpu never went fully saturated since I capped fps (even now with 75hz freesync)

>>59247118
>restarting to get more performance

we've moved on from windows 98 bro

>>59239687
B-b-b-but reddit says Ryzen is more future proof :(

>>59247176
Reddit is retarded

>>59249015

So is /g/.

File: 7CAF3882-A37B-456E-815C-C725F17B68EC-1506-0000017A1BF1554F_tmp.jpg (49KB, 640x843px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 640x843px

>>59246643
>quad 8 cores
>quad
>8
Which one is it

>>59246643
>the server market is so obviously where the chips were made to go
this

we knew this 1-2 years ago

>>59239687
Many hate Intel for being jews but they clearly know what they're doing and is very good at it

>>59250685
4*8

>>59252720
yeah and i think amd has pretty shitty practices with their extreme hype which their products don't live up to

I need strong AVX2 and single thread performance. AMD can't give me that.

>>59246652
>>59239807
yes goy, everyone should play ashes of the poo.

>>59239687
how much is intel paying you for these posts?

>>59252861
what do you do?

>>59253324

The most effecient shitposting ever witnessed on 4chan.

>>59253324
>AVX2 and single thread performance
Sounds like he's trying to emulate pirated video games.

>>59253122
For every 100 I get 10 Intel PowerUp+ Credits. So to put that in perspective I can get the newest i3 for 5000 credits