What went wrong?

>>59254999
>They included DRM
>barely any progress compared to skylake
>muh 14nm

Delete this!

>>59254999
same thing that went wrong with bulldozer: AMD

>>59255295
If you think Ryzen is as much of a failure as Bulldozer...fuck man, I don't even know how to converse with you. You literally live in a different reality.

File: benis.gif (644KB, 512x481px) Image search: [Google]

644KB, 512x481px

>>59254999
need moar gores ! :D :DDDD :D

>>59254999
>>>/v/

>>59254999
>GPU: 30%
What the fug
how can the GPU usage be different by 26%? Is it shit drivers or what

>>59254999
>30% GPU
>56% GPU
Gee I wonder what went wrong. That's totally the processor's fault.

>>59254999
video game developers don't optimise things properly and nothing's really been optimised for ryzen yet

File: 3412462678362.jpg (66KB, 568x612px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 568x612px

>>59254999
>joker rigged his results with an underclocked 7700k @ 4ghz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWarC_Nygew&feature=youtu.be&t=117

>>59256094
>>59256127
it fluctuates and it's all over the place in both cases. The next second the ryzen build uses more gpu then the intel again and so on and so forth.

>>59256153
The idea of optimizing for a specific CPU is exaggerated. They're both x86. They're both multi-core. They both have stepping. From the game's standpoint all it does is send data to the processor to be .... processed... and gets back a result. It doesn't really care what goes on in the time between. If we were talking about different CPU architectures like ARM then it would be a different story.

>>59256334
>implying /v/ retards understand instruction sets

>>59254999
Bulldozer 2.0 happened

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

478KB, 1997x1232px

Just gonna leave this here

>>59256328
they should both be sitting at 98-99% why the fuck would anyone buy $300 CPUs for lowest settings?

>>59256571
Because that scenario tests the cpu. The gpu can push a lot more frames but pajeet made poo in loo cpoo can't feed the gpu data fast enough to process

>>59256507
Doesn't have anything to do with the game.

>>59256600
that testing methodology isn't realistic though, Ryzen is also better in other areas the Intel quadcore can't be better in

>>59254999
Unsurprisingly Ryzen is another bulldozer. Maybe AYYMD will finally go bankrupt now.

File: IMG_2568.png (43KB, 649x354px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 649x354px

>>59256660
Like content creation?

>>59256194
what a fucking AMD cunt unsubbing that scammer

>>59254999
What game is this? I wonder how my 2x X5650 setup would do with this.

>>59256676
yes Mr. shill

>>59254999
The best part about joker's benchmarks is that the 7700k is running at stock speeds despite him telling otherwise.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWarC_Nygew

>>59255618
You're right. Bulldozer at least was cheap. Ryzen...well...

File: frodo.jpg (93KB, 400x399px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 400x399px

>>59254999
>getting a $1k CPU for gaming
Please tell me nobody on /v/ is retarded enough to do this. The only game where having an extremely high CPU clock is relevant is Dwarf Fortress.

>>59255618
Well its the bulldozer of 2017

>>59256094
Because It's displaying less fps.

>>59255618
everyones reality has flipped
the x99 platform was flawless from day 1 in this timeline

>>59256094
>>59256127
Are you 2 retarded or something.
>30% at 114.7 FPS
>56% at 210.7 FPS

>>59256551
past 270 is meaningless
have fun wth your i5

Whats the price comparison?

>>59256127
>processor can´t handle more than 115 fps
>gpu sits at 30% and waits for the slow ass cpu
seems reasonable to me what do you propose?

rerun benchmarks on W7 faggots

>>59257088
>>processor can´t handle more than 115 fps
>literally zero (0) maxed out cores
ok, kid

>>59257702
can´t handle does not equal 100% usage
isn´t it at this point known that their hyper-threading equivalent fucks up the cpus performance?

you should go and look at how hyperthreading and similar technologies work andhow they can in certain cases fuck with performance especially when the company did not manage to get the mb companies to make a proper bios :P

>>59257702
>ok, kid

Not an argument or an explanation.

>>59255618
He probably was too young when Bulldozer released and he just parrots epic /g/ maymays.

JPG compression by the look of it

>>59257826
ok, kid

>>59258111
>xD
kys you inbred nigger

Why does anyone need more than 60 FPS?

>>59254999
Incorrect usage scenario. You need extremely high single core performance to run a game at high frame rate, Ryzen is clearly not designed for that. It's designed to compete with i7s on the X99 platform which sacrifice single thread performance for parallel performance.

There are probably optimization issues involved too since it is a different arch from anything that came before, but fundamentally it was never going to compete with something like an i7 7700K in high FPS gaming. Everyone knew this before the launch when they saw the clock speed of Ryzen. It tops out at like 4GHz, which is way lower than the i7. Even assuming it has Kaby Lake comparable IPC, which it was assumed was not the case (was compared to Broadwell instead), it'd still lose 100% of the time due to lower clock speed. That is not surprising, it is not unexpected and unless you use a 120Hz or above monitor - it is also irrelevant.

I don't know what the general preference for PC gamers is. I know that a lot prefer high frame rate over high resolution, but at the same time everyone I personally know plays at 60Hz.

>>59257783
ok, kid

>>59255618
>If you think Ryzen is as much of a failure as Bulldozer

Where in

>same thing that went wrong with bulldozer: AMD

did he specify a quantifier? Where did you get "as much" from? all he said was that AMD is what was wrong with both, at no point did he say that one was comparable to the other in terms of scope.

85% the performance per core for compared to intel

>>59258453
On gaming

File: 1454176825666.png (42KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 653x726px

B-B-BUT WE JUST HAVE TO WAIT!!!

>>59258237
This. Anything over 60 fps is a meme. Also: frame times are very important.

>>59258781
Wrong, 60 fps is a meme. 20fps is literally all you need for motion.

>>59258814
Lies. 5 frames per second are more than enough to guarantee you are seeing something other than a slow-moving liquid on your screen.

>>59258814
The eyes can't see higher than 12 FPS anyway I camera'd my dog at 12 FPS and compared it to my eyes it was literally the same shit

>>59256806
maybe joker was just extremely unlucky and got worst silicone in the world, probably not, probably he is bullshitting to safe face, but you know...

My 2nd gen raspberry pi is playing TV at 5.4 fps right now. Looks pretty good but then again I'm only watching mindless tv in my kitchen, most of the OTA shit is infomercials anyway

File: a7jWu.png (22KB, 1024x512px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 1024x512px

>>59257702
in multi threaded applications sometimes threads have to synchronize which means that some thread sit without doing anything waiting for other threads to release resources