Smart move?

File: 1485972721769.jpg (81KB, 631x590px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 631x590px

Guess I'm clear to click order

File: 1485910808744.png (149KB, 417x405px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 417x405px

Great, ordered!

>>59245559
>Vengeance
>When Flare X is coming out

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

72KB, 601x830px

>>59245559
>ryzen

You fucking idiot

>>59245559
better at everything vs 3750K and 3770K so I assume same for 2500K

>>59245559
I'm replacing my 2600 stock with 1700x.

I will keep parroting it but look at what happened to E platform over last 6 years in games, and that's when nobody used them for games.

File: 1480355914421.png (228KB, 504x404px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 504x404px

>>59246027

is it that much of an improvement?

>>59245559
Should be fine. Just be prepared for some growing pains for the next couple of weeks as AMD, mobo manufacturers, and devs catch up with the new architecture.

>>59245559
> No issues with this ram/mobo combo?
I heard there are issues with BIOS, but that will be fixed w/BIOS updates.
> 2x 8GB
I don't get why people buy less than 16GB modules.

My 4690k is still going to be good for some years right ?

That's a sidegrade at best for >muh gaymes. No point upgrading unless you desperately need the extra cores.

if you're just a gaymer, spend that money on a 1060 6gb and an nh-d14 so you can overclock the shit out of your 2500K

>>59246570
>>59246574
you now there is 60% difference between min-avg frames?

sandy stutters like hell now days even at 4.4Ghz, not to mention power draw in ~200W range for 4c part but it's minor complaint

>>59245559
I'm in the same boat. My 2500kk @ 4.6Ghz just isn't cutting it anymore. I also want some of the newer motherboard features.

What's the best Ryzen motherboard for OC'ing? Asus or Gigabyte?

>>59246691
it's in infancy for now, nobody knows for now it's msi and gigabyte
but hard to tell who will make better BIOS in time

>>59246056
>>>/v/

>>59246718
Thought as much. I'll give it a week or two, just sick of waiting.

Honestly wait until q2, when they release the 5 series most of the motherboard issues should be ironed out

>>59246756

not even the dude posting, but OP is talking about gaming?

what is it with this overplayed meme anyways? go jerk off over cinebench.

@OP, wait two weeks to a month for more benchmarks. As of now, no. 7700k is more powerful, though as benchmarks have shown once you have a 1080 and don't play at 1080 resolution, your processor might as well be a potato.

>>59246759

why no 7700k btw? or now cheaper 6700k?

>>59246780
>OP is talking about gaming
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
>>>/v/

>>59246718
I dint know why /g/ is usually so anti MSI, I guess it's my personal experience but I've never had issues wth them, yet they suck off Asus who've I've always had problems with

>>59246787
I'm all for the new architecture, 8 cores, more effiency, etc.
Not really interested in Intel anymore.

>>59245559
Looks similar to my choice. 1800X, Gaming K7 and 2x16 Vengeance LPX. You'll be good. Especially since Ryzen will gain some performance purely through software updates.

>>59246807
fuck yeah i like to infect myself with aids just so i can experience the latest in medical tech

Get the 1700. Go for the Gigabyte mobo, avoid the ASUS one like the plague. The RAM is ok.

>>59246843
Fuck off shill.

>>59246843
Ryzen has been confirmed to play games better, has far more consistent frame times. It's only going to get better with age too.

>>59246803
well, msi is known for making cheap shit, especially in the gpu market, hell I have an rma with my gpu with them right now, meanwhile asus on the motherboard front usually has the most bang for buck, but more recently got outdone by asrock on that end

basicly, anyone by biostar is decent if they have a name,

>>59246056
1. nobody games at 1080p anymore
2. 112 vs 96 fps difference is not noticeable
3. how much does intel pay you for this?

>>59245559
Save $100 and go with B350 board, the early oc results on even the cheapest 4 phase boards suggest that the cpu is the one that always buckles first

>>59245559
Anything is a good update from a 2500
Why didnt you got 2600k?

File: t3_5pim7h.jpg (39KB, 806x749px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 806x749px

>>59246056
Only 100 frames per second?! I can't play shit that's that slow!!! I need 110 frames!

>>59247364
>1. nobody games at 1080p anymore
Except for almost everyone, then yes, nobody does. The fuck is wrong with you.

>>59247544
Nobody games at 1080p low settings with dual titan x and a $500 processor

>>59245559
there are tons of issues with ram/mobo

>>59245559
do not buy asus..

you either get the gigabyte or the taichi asus has some massive problems with their bios

>>59247562
This. And nobody turns all settings to the highest anyways. Ultra settings are a meme. Any decent GPU and CPU can run games. If you are an enthusiast and play in 4k you'll probably have a GPU bottleneck first unless you have like 2 or more high end GPU-s.

>>59247581
1 rupee has been added to your account.

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

>>59246056
The skus out now aren't even targeting that market

>>59246056
>graph shows AMD BTFO by single digit percentage frames
>checks price
>holyshit Intel BTFO by double digit percentage in price

This is coming from someone who uses both brands depending on pricing and situation.

>>59245559
Sounds like a dump move unless you actually need Ryzen for ... something.

I am a GNU/Linux user. My current desktop setup is a AMD A8-7600 APU with a Radeon 7850 GPU. I've had it for years. Back in the day I paid about $100 for the CPU and $100 for the motherboard.

These Ryzen chips are priced at $400-500 and the motherboard. They are supposedly equal to some expensive Intel CPU that nobody's going to buy anyway.

Intel's i5-7600K is about half the price of a Ryzen chip. I'd buy that or something like that if you actually want and need a new system now. Go for the Ryzen if you actually need that many cores for something - my guess is you don't.

I'm personally waiting to see what other Ryzen based chips are coming the new few months. A 6 core 12 thread chip at $200 or something like that could peak my interest.

I just don't see the point in paying $500 for a CPU, ever. I don't care if it's better than some $1000 CPU, a $200 or just a $100 CPU is good enough.

>>59245559
>Vengeance LPX 16GB DDR4 3200MHz Kit
>Latency: 16-18-18-36
Why do you hate your CPU?

Aim for a true latency under 9ns.

>>59247686
2 cents have been deposited to you e-account Pajeet

>>59246803
Currently running a MSI motherboard with the CPU cooler on System Fan 1 because the PWM just stopped working on the CPU fan header after about a year. The CPU cooler (or any other PWM cooler) will be stuck running at full speed.

MSI makes alright motherboards but they do have some strange issues that usually show up after some random amount of time.

>>59245559
Windows scheduler has a problem too, wait for the fix, than choose.
I will go for the 1700

>>59247830
>6 core 12 thread chip at $200

No one will ever need that many cores ever. Doesn't matter if it costs $100 or $50. Intel has the perfect price/core balance. Buy Intel, son.

>>59245559
>gayming motherboard
why? are you 12?

>>59245559
Ryzen is good. However, it's a whole new arch, Windows (10, not 7) has problems with SMT, some motherboard manufacturers have problem with memory speed and performance (gigabyte doesn't)
It's an upgrade, and your shit isn't going to catch fire or anything, but you might have to scratch your head quite a few times in the following weeks, like any adopter of early new technologies.

>>59247364
>112 vs 96 fps difference is not noticeable
I hate people like you so very fucking much.
While it's true, when you go over 80-90 fps, the difference of 6 fps wont be completely obvious to the eye, it's still performance.
And better performance maters when you are comparing products.
ADD TO THAT THE FACT THAT 7700k is cheaper by 200 bucks and you have to be fucking retarded to claim "but muh performance doesn't matter", when you pay more, for less.

>b-but it's decent for gaming
You act like the 7700k is ONLY good at gaming.

>>59248305
7700k is only good for gaymen.

>>59248314
4K netflix too stupid!!!!!

>>59248314
7700k is BEST for gaymen and it's decent at everything else.
But you act like 7700k can ONLY run videogames good and fails at everything else.

>>59248305
>when you pay more, for less.
Double the core isn't "less" you autist
Also the performance difference between the 1800x and 1700 isn't that big at all.

>>59248360
>Double the core isn't "less" you autist
IT could have 100 cores for ALL I CARE.
If the performance is WORSE, it doesn't matter how many cores, or how many GHZ or other bullshit there are.
Do you understand?
Don't be a retarded stat monkey that look at marketing and buys into hype.

>>59248386
>If the performance is WORSE
stopped reading right here
More core at close IPC performs better. The performance aren't worse, they're objectively better.

>>59246056

looks like any CPU hits 60fps so doesn't matter which one, bruh.

>>59248402
>The performance aren't worse, they're objectively better.
There a shit ton of threads showing that ryzen is getting beat by intels shit. If all you can do is go in denial and reject all proof then you really shouldn't be posting.

>>59245559
Niggers

>>59246564
good for 2 years at least

>>59248423
It doesn't really matter what you think and what other people are posting
The R7 1700 pack objectively more performance than the 7700k. It's all about whether your usage of your PC is gonna take advantage of it or not.

>>59248059

64mb is all you ever need.

>>59248449
>It doesn't really matter what you think and what other people are posting
>Proof doesn't matter, I can be in denial and believe what ever I want
You sure can buddy, now fuck off.

>>59246056
>I need more than 100fps
Stay in /v/

at multithread level, ryzen 7 is not that bad considering they're cheap processors with 16 threads but the singlethread scores are a little underwhelming compared to midrange sky/kaby lake processors

>>59246780
>not even the dude posting, but OP is talking about gaming?

You're an illiterate piece of shit and you need to kill yourself. Nowhere in the OP is gaming mentioned or even alluded to.

File: i93^pimgpsh_mobile_save_distr.jpg (149KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1920x1200px

>>59248305
>While it's true, when you go over 80-90 fps, the difference of 6 fps wont be completely obvious to the eye, it's still performance.

You fucking half brained piece of shit.
1 Ryzen does handle gaming, in fact it overkills it by smaller margin than Intel does right now, but more than enough.
2 Ryzen rapes Intel in every possible productive scenario, whether you're using Photoshop, Finite elements models, running simulations, whatever.
3 Ryzen will be cutting it when 4 core CPUs will become obsolete (which is soon)

Today Ryzen offers you all you need to play games, AND better performance in serious application, AND gaming in 3 years from now.
Righ now Ryzen perfectly handles gaming good enough.
In 5 years it stil is going to unlike 7700K

File: forhonor4CPU.png (104KB, 582x1048px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 582x1048px

>>59248470

Its okay, I know you prefer framedrops.

File: 1488683118598.jpg (114KB, 882x1418px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 882x1418px

>>59246056
Nice try

>>59248485

>2 Ryzen rapes Intel in every possible productive scenario

Not if it uses AVX2 - there is no way zen can compete with that.

https://youtu.be/TBf0lwikXyU?t=17m08s

Please open your eyes.

>>59248485
That's not a video game is it!!!!!!!

File: 1488573884766.png (91KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 653x726px

>>59245559
>This is a pasta another user who went from 2500k to a 1700x

You read the reply, right? Games that use single or or at max two threads (and games that I actually play).

Worst case scenario for cpu: 1024x768, stock clocks on both:
SHOC:
-2500k: 95fps avg, 63 min, over 800 max (looking at ceiling with low amount of shaders, non-vsync'd main menu)
-1700x: 93fps avg, 55 min, same max
--Avg and min frames are obviously cpu bottleneck

Call of Pripyat:
-2500k: 89fps avg, 55 min, same max as shoc
-1700x: 80fps avg, 52 min, same max

Lost alpha:
-2500K: 68fps avg, 38 min, same max (but not in main menu, which is vsynced in dx10 mode)
-1700x: 67fps avg, 35 min, same max

Armed Assault:
-2500k: 105fps avg, 34 min, over 300 max (no option for vsync, so if not forcibly disabling it, max being refresh rate)
-1700x: 92fps avg, 36 min (inte_rasting), same max

ARMA2
-2500k: 90fps avg, 39 min, over 300 max (vsync disabled, game version 1.62)
-1700x: 88fps avg, 39 min (hmm), same max

These are on winny 7, sp1, same hotfixes on both systems (up to October 2016 or so: don't worry, no WAN connection on these boxes).
Asus P8P67 Deluxe, 2500k@stock (3.3GHz, 'turbo' disabled), 4x4GB Crucial Ballistix Sport CL9 1600 and
Asus Prime X370-PRO, 1700x@stock (3.4GHz, turbo disabled), 2x8GB G.Skill RipJaws V CL16 3200.
Both use WD10EZEX HDD's of same vintage (produced same month, exact same partitioning).

Like I wrote, Server 2008 gives couple more frames, but nothing significant.

What does the X370 mini have that a B350 does not ?

Does expensive memory translate to better performance? Check for compatibility it's an issue right now.

>>59248503
Too bad no one uses AVX2 while GPUs still exist.

>>59248520
No fuck you man You are telling me I am stuck on 2500k


This bulldozer all over again where shit is gimped cause it is new.
>inba windows updates for ryzen
>inba engine updates for ryzen

Do some more research and learn about GPU bottlenecks and re-check the reviews.

Don't rush into buying AMD. Bulldozer burned us and it feels like buldzoer all over again.

>>59246056
>Keeps spamming the same image where a 6900k is within margain of error of a 7700k as some sort of end all be all for CPU performance
Do you have Downs syndrome? If the only thing you care about is video games then buy a Core i5

>>59248536

It also doesn't help that Intel keeps restricting AVX2 on its chips so its not worth coding for outside of very specific workloads.

quad-core is a meme

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

259KB, 680x680px

>>59248550
>NO! DONT LISTEN TO INTEL SHILL LOOK AT THIS CHART!!!!

>>59248550
OId, optimized title with really, really outdated APi and CPU optimization.
You can throw in 6950x into it and you'll get about the same benchmark clock per clock.

That that anon copy paste with a truckload of salt.

>>59248567
Fuck your chart
>>59248570


It the wait for optimization for amd cpu meme again,

Why does this not happen with intel? Why is it that when amd releases a new architecture windows takes a year or two to final get it to work properly instead of gimped

>>59248536
Emulators use AVX2.

>>59248485
>1 Ryzen does handle gaming, in fact it overkills it by smaller margin than Intel does right now
>in fact it overkills it
Console peasants really need to fuck off. It's really tiring to have to explain 30 fps isn't the human perception limit, neither is 60, neither is 100, neither is 120 or 144.
But noooooo look it runs over 60 frames, I-ITS OVERKILL, How are you not satisfied with this gaming performance.
Fucking casual.

>Today Ryzen offers you all you need to play games,
> AND gaming in 3 years from now.
>A-a--aaaaand Good performance in games
You it doesn't become any more true, the more you repeat yourself.

>Righ now Ryzen perfectly handles gaming good enough.
Except it costs more, delivers less. It's only upside is the promise of "well in the future......things will be better"

>In 5 years it stil is going to unlike 7700K
I am using a CPU that is over 6 years old and its still performing decently for all of my tasks.
Back then there was also the meme of MORE CORES. I saw that 4 cores is the optimal thing and anything over that is a FUCKING MEME, because it will take a very long time for applications to catch up and utilize more cores. By that time, my cpu will be old anyway and it will be time to upgrade.

SAME shit applies here, why buy a more expensive cpu now, for the "future" that will take YEARS to arrive, rather than getting something good now, and then many years later if there is actually a need to get more cores upgrade to that when there is PROOF it gives a benefit.

But like a sucker you are sold the dream of the "future"

>>59248603
Dolphin? Wow.

>>59248600
It did happen with X99 and Sandy Bridge you retard, Intel have just rehashed the same CPU since Sandy Bridge

>>59245559
stick with 2500k unless you upgrade to 4K

>>59248637
It also happened with Nehalem. It's just this board is full of /v/ crossboarders.

>>59248600
>Why does this not happen with intel? Why is it that when amd releases a new architecture windows takes a year or two to final get it to work properly instead of gimped
a)Intel has much more resources, so they can make sure everything works right by the time of release. AMD doesn't have the same luxury.
b)It DOES happen with Intel when they actually release new architectures(albeit not quite to the same degree) instead of just doing the same architecture over and over again minor changes. Even with Sandy Bridge, the 2600k would perform worse than 2500k at the same clocks when it couldn't take advantage of the extra threads.

>>59248609
>either is 120 or 144.
IPS matrix doesnt perform at that refresh rate, TN matrix is shit you have to be a retard to deal with that color and viewing angle for MUH FPS.

>>59248609
Get real though.
The game of 2017 is Nier Automata that Ryzen will take to 120 fps at ultra, everyting else is shit unvorthy of spending time on. Well also a DLC for DS3

>>59247364
1. everyone plays at 1080p
2. i will buy worse product so i will cry after 3 years that i can't hit 60fps but i guess it's good because i don't gave money to greedy jews XDDDD
3. how much does amd pay you for this you fucking braindead retard?

>>59248567

Z E N
E
N


but really they fucked up and went overboard with lowering the power consumption

they should have built the cpus more for pure performance
nobody is mentioning that the cpus consume less power than intel's solutions lol

>>59248684
Zeppelin is server part first and foremost. Their consumer line is just a byproduct, and a decent one at that.

>>59248667
>Get real though.
>The game of 2017 is Nier Automata that Ryzen will take to 120 fps at ultra, everyting else is shit unvorthy of spending time on.

>all that matters is ONE games performance, out of THOUSANDS of games

I don't know how you overcome the shame to post something so retarded.

>>59248684
Actually the good question is whether or not a 1800x beats 7700K with 4 cores disabled and balls to the wall OC on other cores.

File: Intel 1.png (186KB, 1920x974px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 1920x974px

ITT Intel Edge members tell us how bad ryzen is and how amazing kaby lake is goy.

>>59248696
Any measure of FPS above 60 is literally irrelevant so comparing 4 year old games is just stupid as they will run fine to begin with.

>>59248696
You'll get it when you grow up and start valuing your time.

File: ahahaha.gif (3MB, 700x285px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 700x285px

>>59248721
>Any measure of FPS above 60 is literally irrelevant
Get a monitor that can display 120-144 fps and it wont be.
Naturally if you are the kind of console type faggot who thinks 60fps is all the eye can see and that a monitor beyond that is a waste then there is no way to convince you of your delusions.

>>59248724
>You'll get it when you grow up and start valuing your time.
>shitposts on a mongolian basket waving forum
>I am an adult who values my own time
mfw

>>59248613
It's needed for Xenia (the only Xbox 360 emulator).

>>59248755
>Naturally if you are the kind of console type faggot who thinks 60fps is all the eye can see and that a monitor beyond that is a waste then there is no way to convince you of your delusions.

It is a waste to buy a 144hz monitor when you're an adult who doesn't spend all his free time playing video games.

>>59248755
>Get a monitor that can display 120-144 fps and it wont be.
>Get TN
>Over IPS
Full retard.
How is that vertical viewing angle doing fo you ?
Do you enjoy having bottom of the screen being brighter than the top?
Enjoy shitfuck ruined gamut?

>>59248788
>halo the console
I guess it has RDR and AC6.

File: 1488664232472.png (84KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 653x726px

>>59246056

>>59246056
Did they fix the SMT issue? 5-12% less fps is basically nothing just give them time to release the 4 and 6 cores.

>>59248520
>implying any CPU will have any other numbers

two worst CPU optimized games of it's generation do not take kindly to new archs, call me surprised

File: 1488420066835.jpg (42KB, 898x886px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 898x886px

>>59248667
The game of 2017 is Nier Automata that Ryzen will take to 120 fps at ultra, everyting else is shit unvorthy of spending time on.

>>59248799
>It is a waste to buy a 144hz monitor when you're an adult who doesn't spend all his free time playing video games.
If you play videogames having a monitor that can display over 100 fps is not a waste.
How ever if all you do is browse facebook and shitpost on forums, then I can see it being a waste for somebody like you.

>>59248807
Anybody that plays games regularly, has hardware that can output high fps consistently (80-144) should have a high refresh monitor.
>How is that vertical viewing angle doing fo you ?
Nothing
>Do you enjoy having bottom of the screen being brighter than the top?
Don't have that issue

You know what I do have? A smoother experience every second I am playing something and that is far more important than you make it out to be.

>>59248882
>brrrrrrrrrap the game is GOTY
That's the wrong way to spell Ace Combat 7.

File: 64u26ly.jpg (14KB, 500x338px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 500x338px

Anyone did benchmark with min FPS in games
or frame times?

I always read about i7 being better than i5 mostly in sense of FPS drops

so want to check that out, how ryzen compares with i5

>>59248755
>Get a monitor that can display 120-144 fps and it wont be.
it would be 1440p and would ahve exactly smae scaling as 5Ghz 7700K even in 5 years because you know 8>4
historical evidence suggests that xeons and even sandy bridge E can't bottleneck GPU in any possible scenario
meanwhile sandy 2500K/2600K stutters even at 4,5Ghz

>>59248894
>Anybody that plays games regularly, has hardware that can output high fps consistently (80-144) should have a high refresh monitor.

Nah.
Anybody with half a brain should have a 4k IPS monitor for more accurate color displaying in their work, sharper fonts and greater detail in their games when they are taking a break from whatever of value they were doing.

>>59248609

I add to your argument that i don't trust at all any component that requires optimization to be competitive with another. That's a thing the market constantly fails to deliver.

File: 1465439691686.png (41KB, 630x424px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 630x424px

>>59248913
to i5 significantly better, i7 just better
but there is not enough framtime data, only the ones that we've seen have great graphs

>>59248943
why do you sue intel then?
it took 15 years for HT to be significant part of performance, with SMT it just needs a fix in windows that's all because they work very similary

>>59248942
>Anybody with half a brain should have a 4k IPS monitor
Anybody who doesn't play games, sure.
Anybody who plays games often should have high refresh monitor though.

Also
>sharper fonts
Oh yes, totally worth buying a 4k monitor for that.

File: 1465895828839.png (353KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 600x450px

>>59248981

File: 1481352132054.png (44KB, 630x424px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 630x424px

>>59249021

>>59248929
>it would be 1440p and would ahve exactly smae scaling as 5Ghz 7700K even in 5 years because you know 8>4
>historical evidence suggests that xeons and even sandy bridge E can't bottleneck GPU in any possible scenario
>meanwhile sandy 2500K/2600K stutters even at 4,5Ghz
What does this have to do with high refresh monitors?

>>59249039
because the only argument against ryzen is longevity because at 1440p it has exact same scaling/sometimes better with GPUs as 7700K

>>59249021
I can't read that shit.

>>59249098
I save it and apply contrast filter. Ryzen has smoothest line fyi.

>>59248998

I am not interested in your juvenile fanwar. I scrapped a Ryzen build after the reviews because i don't need something that can be great IF programmers actively optimize their work on it. That never happens in the market, if anything they are going for the brute force approach using the next line of octa core chips. Those chips are for early adopters and enthusiasts with multiple builds, not for someone that need a high end chip to be covered for 4/5 years.

File: 1352831027211.png (17KB, 250x204px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 250x204px

>>59248550
>>59248520
REEE JUST WAIT 6 MONTHS FOR NEW DRIVERS FFS FUCKING INTELDRONES

>>59249162
it is high end chip right now, will get even better, you didn't read enough reviews to broaden your view on it

get a 7700k

u will not regret it

t. upgraded from a 2500k last week

>>59249693
>u
Opinion instantly discarded.

>>59248613
PCSX2 also uses avx2
Don't know about rpcs3 but it's still generally unusable except for PS3 VNs.

1700 is a good upgrade if you plan on doing things in the background

either that or wait for the 1600x

>>59247859
DDR4 is usually 16, even 14 is rare and a premium price.

Better timings on DDR3

>>59245559
you don't have to upgrade. there. i saved you 600.

>>59248536
x265

LOL.

This is exactly the same staff I'm going to buy coming from a i5 2500K. Thing is though, I'll get that on octomber. So I guess I'll get one of the more mature Ryzen chips and most of the teething issues of Ryzen will have been fixed by then.

Never going back to JEWntel.

File: 2n1s2di.png (19KB, 619x245px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 619x245px

>>59251371

>>59248071
"Gaymen" mobos usually more high end you sperglordo

>>59252197

Clearly the i5 is all you ever need.

just get a 1700 for $329 and oc to 4ghz. they all end up at the same speed. also, smt will be fixed soon most likely and move it to the top of the heap.

Honestly is there any *noticeable* benefit to upgrading from 2500k? I know you might get a few extra fps but if you're doing 60+ it doesn't make any practical difference...and we're gpu restricted anyway.

IMO cpus have attained no improvement at all since 2500k was released when it comes to gaming and for productivity very minor improvement.

>>59245559
If you're gonna get such a high end mother board I'd go for the 1700x for a better binned chip, but if you're not gonna do that get a b350 board and use the extra money on a better graphics card

Also a 2500k fag here. Looking at the price of Ryzen I don't see it worth it desu, I know I keep saying, "wait until next generation," but I might just wait 2 years instead.

I am buying AMD with work money for myself just so you faggots can get triggered hard.

suck my cock hard intel shill.

>>59248550
nehalems was gimped for 8 months till ms fixed the mapping..
skylakes was worse cause they were floating around because the microcode was a mess

but when amd release a cpu that needs mapping and supporting from the engines is bad...

/g/

>>59253003
less fps drops
significantly higher mins

>tfw 1700 is 25000 wooden tugriks
>1700x 30 000 wooden tugriks

I'd lose those 5k on inflation and currency rates in 4 months anyway, going into 4 year plan its cheaper to get 1700x.

File: hot shota.jpg (3MB, 1420x2000px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1420x2000px

>my 2500K meme cpu is still perfect for 1080
>i wont be upgrading until a new meme is born for 4K
>mfw

>>59248654

GTFO

I am just looking at the amount of comments reguarding Ryzen and its highly popular.

By buying Ryzen You help keep the prices down is my personal opinion, the performance give and take beats and loses to Intel by small margins.

Final thoughts, Ryzen is not a Massive game changer but performance wise overall it is no less and no more to Intel's lineup at 1/3rd 1/2 the price.

Go for it, it wont hurt.

File: 16.jpg (578KB, 1894x1008px) Image search: [Google]

578KB, 1894x1008px

>>59245559
>16Gib
Best upgrade ever, anon, you genius.

>>59248531
Crossfire/SLI.

>>59249017
Did that, totally worth it. The wait for anything higher DPI than 1200p on 24" was long indeed.

>>59248487
the smaller one is average / minimum right? jesus its consistent as fuck

>>59255156

The smaller number is the mionimum and the larger the average. Thus in that chart the ryzxen chips have a significantly higher minimum framerate than the other cpus tested despite their lower average (which means the ryzen chips provded a smoother performance).

>>59248520
>1024x768
What? Not even my thinkpad plays games at that resolution.

^This guy must be a hacker of some sort.

Obviously a hack reguarding most of our resulutions.

>"budget" processor
>costs as much as a fucking 6700k
What the fuck AMD

Yet another 2500k fag here, don't see a reason to upgrade unless you need moar cores. The difference in single thread performance is not big enough to warrant an upgrade, and nice features like ECC or IOMMU can wait until the platform becomes more mature.

>>59246056
How much you get payed to shill?

>>59255624

it's a budget prosumer chip.

6 core 6800k prosumer chip starts at 750 USD idiot.
This competes with the $1000 8c/16t 6900k.

For budget i7/i5 mainstream wait for Ryzen 5 1600x next month.

>>59255926
By the time r3's and r5's come out. Intel will already have released their new 15% faster cpus and prices will fall on old stock. Its a straight downgrade. Not to mention the Asus board for Ryzen is literally bricking itself for no known reason, so have fun with that.

>>59256026
>Intel will already have released their new 15% faster cpus and prices will fall on old stock.


AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Look at how delusional intel fanboys are.

Intel on suicide watch.

They have Horible die manufacture rates on what was the next evolution.

a Total disaster, they had something lined up but it was an unlucky failure.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/02/06/cisco_intel_decline_to_link_product_warning_to_faulty_chip/

The dies closer to the center will fair no better.

I predict another Intel Pentium 4 all over again.

File: wut.png (105KB, 781x722px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 781x722px

>>59256017
>6 core 6800k prosumer chip starts at 750 USD idiot.

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_sop=15&LH_ItemCondition=3&_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=120hz+TV&rt=nc&LH_BIN=1

Not exactly what You want, But this simple search Should get You Started.

Sorry, wrong thread^ sorry sorry.