I'm a complete shitter when it comes to CPUs, /g/. Can someone

Don't listen to /g/
Read some Ryzen reviews on tech review websites.

File: 1434836693619.png (184KB, 1038x1000px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 1038x1000px

It is good. Just not for your average normie.

If you're a typical normie for whom 95% of time spent on the PC is browsing the web or playing games then buying any CPU over $200 is pure retardation.

The entry level i5 is the absolute maximum any normie should spend on a CPU.

As for games the GPU will always be far more important. Hell if you really wanted to you could get away with a cheap ass FX processor for sub $100 and it would still be fine for all 1080p gaming and day to day use.

This should be in the fucking sticky so people stop wasting their money on overkill CPUs

>>59263197
More cores does not mean better performance in vidya.

>>59263301
this

the backlash is AMD fans (and intel haters) were hoping that it would be a more decisive comeback. Also I get the impression the 1800x isn't as impressive as the price suggests. The processors *are* decent.

It's good for my use case (multiple vms) and I will buy a 1700 but if I was still a gamer 7600k would be way more cost efficient.

>>59263322
What about for non-vidya performance? I will use mine for gaming, but also audio editing/heavy DAW use with some video editing on the side.

>>59263495
Possibly better, but only if it supports multi-core threading.

>>59263495
For any sort of productivity the 1700 is 100% the one to get. You get comparable performance to Intel's top offerings for less than half the price.

1700x and 1800x are not worth the extra money. You can easily OC the 1700 to stock 1800x performance.

>>59263495
It should be faster on encodes especially if they are large files. The in program performance will be worse though.

File: ryzen-cpu-value.png (26KB, 773x371px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 773x371px

>>59263197
You can buy Intel CPUs for half as much as the Ryzen ones that perform better

Basically Ryzen is a really bad deal, they're only good for servers

>>59263806
>they're only good for servers
no driver testing, actually bad for servers

File: a.jpg (91KB, 700x875px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 700x875px

Cheap: Pentium G4560
Decent: i5 7400
Highend: i7 7700K

All you need to know about CPUs.

>>59263197
ryzen is new and windows scheduler don't now how to handle the cores and caches.

Ryzen is better if you like to game plus watch a video and got multiple tabs on your browser plus discord and shit

>>59263806
That is not completely true.
The ryzen 1800X ($500) performs better than the 6900K ($1000) for any workstation programs, it only falls behind when u start gaming on it.

Ryzen is a better option for OP if they are not gaming

>>59263396

>Also I get the impression the 1800x isn't as impressive as the price suggests.
>can trade punches with a CPU that costs twice as much

otherwise i agree. i still dont know if i should wait for the 1600X or get the 1700.

>>59263806
>Intel procs on chart are 4-core max
>AMD procs are all 8-core
really spins those cogs in the noggin

>>59263322
Dubs of truth.
It quite literally means worse performance in vidya because it's harder to run a high clockspeed on a CPU with more cores, resulting in worse per-core performance and vidya are made with a specific number of cores in mind.