particularly poor bang for buck

>>59241037
fuck off back to >>>/v/ you child

>>59241037
R7 1700 is bang for buck, 1800x is bang for performance.

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

72KB, 601x830px

>>59241191
>R7 1700 is bang for buck, 1800x is bang for performance.

Both of them are horrible, in price and performance

Literally beat by Intel processors that cost half as much

>>59241037
>An 8 core 16 thread CPU is a bad bang for buck for video games
Holy shit, stop the fucking presses! This is brand new information! Make sure to ignore the fact that Intels CPU that's the most comparable with the Ryzens, the 6900k cost more than a thousand bucks!

>>59241245
>moar cores!
cores ain't shit, nigga.

>>59241258
This might come as a surprise to you but some people use their computers for more things than playing video games on

Intel shill, you've had your day. I'm now buying 3 Zen systems replacing my ageing Intel shit.

>>59241276
^This

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

22KB, 650x200px

>>59241276
Uh Intel wins in work performance too, not only that it's $160 cheaper

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

49KB, 423x389px

Remember to hide and sage shill threads!

>>59241305
Compiler optimized for Intel. Disregarded.

>>59241305
>A single benchmark
>Intel wins
What

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

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11170/the-amd-zen-and-ryzen-7-review-a-deep-dive-on-1800x-1700x-and-1700/20

Ryzen beats every Intel CPU that costs less than 1000 bucks

>>59241215
STOP POSTING THIS FUCKING PICTURE THE TOP 10 ENTRIES ARE WITHIN 10 FPS OF EACH OTHER YOU RETARDED JEW.

>>59241215
>gaming
If that's all you use your pc for then get an i3 7100 you idiot. That's best bang for buck if you're a gamer.

>>59241350
I've decided that he must be an AMD fanboy false flagging. I doubt even Intel's shills are dumb enough to post that one over and over.

>>59241367
The G4560 is the best bang for your buck if you're a gaymer.

>>59241215
don't you get tired of posting this specific benchmark? what a fucking loser

>>59241367
Ryzen isn't even proven its better for work. Its proved its better at some large batch jobs. I want to see it actually used in IDEs, DAWs, image editors, etc and see if its faster.

>>59241350
You are the jew you moron, look at the prices. You are paying $500 for a Ryzen processor that gets beat by a $240 Intel processor.

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

112KB, 722x554px

>>59241419
It's actually definitively worse for the vast majority of work applications.

Ryzen fails at nearly everything

>>59241453
One thing all the benchmarks show though is that Intel's HEDT line is dead. The worst product currently on the market, yet also the most expensive.

>>59241437
See
>>59241276

>>59241215
Do you really even think you're even fooling anyone with this dogshit anymore?

>>59241037
kys, manchild.

>>59241276
Like what

>>59241607
Fooling? It's literally an average of 14 different games from a PC Gamer review. Go ahead and read it yourself and tell me how it's fooling anyone.

>>59241037
>particularly poor bang for buck
Who? Yer mum?

>>59241662
Go back to /v/, this is a technology board

>>59241037
shill post, amd is going to lead the way soon, at least with lincux fags

>>59241037
Doesn't this just verify that AMDs issue lies with SMT code? With hyperthreading and SMT turned off its neck and neck, once you turn them on 7700k takes a huge lead, while AMD barely gains any ground. In other games were seeing AMD lose fps with SMT enabled.

File: 1447201290439.jpg (21KB, 419x419px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 419x419px

>>59241037
>CPU primarily meant for the server market type of workloads isn't going to be great for /v/irgins
No shit, really?

>>59242455
not server market, more like cad, heavy video editors who also game, etc
You can't have everything for $500 when it's competing with a $1000 product. something has to go
>>59242355
yeah i've seen lots of reviews with smt disabled = better performance

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

408KB, 882x1418px

>>59241341
DELET SIR

>>59241037
>AYYMDcucks on SUICIDE WATCH

>>59242355
One would assume that this comes from microsofts end then. I remember seeing something where someone had tested the same setup in win10 and win7, and win7 was easily better.