Can we all just unanimously agree that AMD's Ryzen is a

File: 1487409420375-1.jpg (370KB, 565x860px) Image search: [Google]

370KB, 565x860px

>>59313075
Well, look at it this way.
AMD made a huge jump from their older bulldozer based chips.
Using a Zen chip is now viable
Before, a bulldozer was a bottlenecking POS.
Bulldozer was an awful choice no matter how you looked at it.

Sure it's behind the 7700k in Gaming, but it's not necessarily a bad choice

>2600k user

File: Screenshot_2016-11-17-12-48-10-1.png (1MB, 940x931px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 940x931px

>>59313124
Another happy cat for good measure.

File: Sassy-Cat-Pic-640x607.jpg (94KB, 640x607px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 640x607px

>>59313135
3rd for sassy CIA cat

>>59313075
When they release a viable range of m-itx mobos, else i don't see any reason of getting amd ryzen now.

I have to stuck with intel skylake with their shitty temps for now.

I really don't know what to believe anymore. Shills from both sides seem to spam their cherry picked charts and leave me back confused.

>>59313075
> Can we all just unanimously agree that AMD's Ryzen is a failure?
The only thing we can unanimously agree on is that OP is a fag.

>>59313124
You can either use Windows 7, or wait for Microsoft to pull their heads out of their ass and write a patch for Windows 10's scheduler, and you won't see a difference in single thread performance between Ryzen and 7700K.

>>59313075
well no because its a mixed bag

Its good for some games but terrible for others

Its good at 1440p and 4k resolutions but terrible for high fps 1080p-2k applications

Its great for office work and productivity but also has bios issues and SMT windows 10 sheduler problems.

I reckon give it time, all new AMD hardware has problems but this is a little more extreme.

>>59313164
Expect some more motherboards closer to the R5 and R3 release (guessing). I can only assume AMD wanted the high end boards out first before motherboard makers move to lower end and other form factors

>>59313165

Why can't you make up your mind on your own research? Find out what matters to you in a CPU, and what's most important for your needs and move forward from that.

Listening to shills is how you make decisions like what's "plenty of VRAM" or "do you really need more than two cores?"

What ever you decide, you will have the confidence that you made the best choice for your needs and won't have to justify your purchase.

>>59313216

And they failed at that. I haven't been this disappointed in motherboard choices since FM1 launched.

>>59313165
its a mixed bag between the two parts for sure but the intel parts, particularly the 7700 offer better all around performance and take the lead in some creation software while the ryzen parts can really pull ahead in heavily threaded stuff tho even then the performance gain isn't tremendous.

just go look at stuff you need via the google and you can get your own view on the situation

>>59313216
Same as i thought, i'm eager to see to performance on mid and lower end ryzen, i'm looking for a balance between low power/heat and gaming performance.
The tdp/performance on ryzen 7 is pretty impressive.

>>59313247
>FM1

Fuck, straight into my feelings.
I skipped the whole APU until i tried on the AM1 low power setup, its too under performing even on win7 for heavy media usage.

>>59313075
its a failure as a gaming GPU, i like how the 7700k blows the 6900k out of the water in most games and just gets pass because inlet

ryzen still has 6 and 4 core CPUs coming and if they have good gaming performance you still think is a flop? hell the 6/12 is the same price as a 7600k, and thats the "best gaming gpu anyhing else is overkill" the 4/4 ryzen cost $130 ...

if the 5s and 3s suck at gaming then use id agree it was a failure

>>59313075

t. butthurt 7700K owner with buyer's regret

You can pick

>4 powerful cores
Or
>8 weak cores

>>59313279
if the clock speeds are up to snuff the R5s and R3s will be a force to be reckoned with at there price, in terms of thermals there is nothing stopping a Ryzen quad core from being under 35w tdp if the 8 cores can be under 65w

>>59313075
How can we even know until Ryzen 5 Comes out

>>59313075
No because it succeeds in making the X99 platform obsolete.

>>59313124
>Skipped bulldozer entirely
>Still using a phenom II

It'll be a huge upgrade for me regardless. I'll probably still wait until Vega is released so everyone can fix their fucking bioses

It does make good work of a cinebench test, and some of the features of it are very good.

That being said, I think I may just pick up a 1080ti and not wait for Vegas because it's probably going to be a disappointment like ryzen

File: nipples.jpg (21KB, 678x381px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 678x381px

>>59313312
or 32 cores

>>59313075
Has ryzen forced any intel cpus to drop in price? I've been waiting to get a 7700k

>>59313075
Um no. I would choose ryzen over 6900k and 7700k.

>>59313312
And suddenly, in a moment, Broadwell-E becomes weak.

The power of the intel shill's mind.

>>59313413
intel does not drop prices. They are intel the largest PC chip manufactures. Even if you don't buy their chips at a higher price they are so far ahead at this point they dont care.

>>59313413
I've seen a few sales of 50 bucks off or so, microcenter and whatnot

>>59313413
309.99 via monoprice via ebay

>>59313075

I think Ryzen it is a huge success. I have an i5 and would consider a 1700x in 2017.

Considering it's the first gen of a totally new architecture and the first time 8 core have been pushed into the mainstream, it's actually very successful.

I know /g/ is full of underage /v/tards but let me remind you than back when Intel first introduced 4 cores to the mainstream with Nehalem it was a far bumpier release with lots of issues.

Raw performance wise Nehalem was obviously superior to anything that came before it but there were lots of software issues. And you know what came after that? The 2500k.

>>59313918
>Nehalem
really? i never had any issues with my old i7 920 even at launch.

>>59313165
it's pretty fucking easy. Synthetic benchmarks don't lie, you can see what the CPU is actually capable of. That being said, it is synthetic, so if you want to buy based on actual performance in a given program, you have to look at benchmarks for that program.

Not really that complicated.

>>59313124
bulldozer, till haswell had case uses where it was better than i7's, but in to many day to day uses bulldozer fell to fucking short to be viable outside of dedicated boxes that only did those case uses.

zen on the other hand is right on intel's ass, or surpassing similarly priced cpus and the cases where it falls behind, it doesn't fall to far behind to negate where it excels.

>>59313312
I didn't realize that Ryzen had Intel Phi's cores.

synthetics show ryzen has same or better IPC than intel

this was never the case with bulldozer

now it's all up to software devs to actually use all that power

>>59313075
your agrguement is silly since all you do is game get a 4 core Intel line.

but if your serious about productivity and video editing get the the Ryzen.

Its only logical choice.
F is for F*ck the shills.

T.friendly i7 6700k user

>>59314064
Clock for clock they appear to have better IPC than Intel except in AVX2, and much better performance per watt in AVX workloads.

It's just that Intel has a supreme lead in 14nm tech and fabrication, having been doing it for almost 4 years now, so they have much better layout and design for high clocking parts.

>>59313936
I'm still using my i7 950 and I remember HT was a huge mess for at least 2-3 years. HT lowered performance in all games and I still have it disabled lmao since then.

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

File: amdinanutshell3.jpg (2MB, 700x5000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 700x5000px

R7 is a solid 7/10 for your typical user. Honestly majority of those posts come from Intel fans having a payback on all overhyping AMD shitposters that were making this place a mess for the last month.

File: sid.jpg (26KB, 450x375px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 450x375px

>>59314163
Cannot unsee.

>>59314198
>7/10
On what metric?
what would 10/10 be?

>>59314210
>metric
brand name
>what's a 10
Intel

>>59314210
10/10 would be meeting the terrible hype and fake benches we had going on for months. Being 7700k in gaming and day to day tasks like photoshop or autocad. Ryzen R7 tends to be on par with an i5 in these benchmarks.

You can say it was never designed to be all of this but AMD and shills constantly using word "gaming" didn't help.

I think it's going to be better when R5 and R3 come out, assuming they actually OC better since R7 can't oc for shit even on a single core.

>>59313216
ITX boards are just harder to engineer, because you don't have the space to work with.

>>59313230
the issue is with all the initial benches, the muddies waters because either amd paid to false flag intel or intel false flagged to make everyone question benchmarks, and that many benchmarks you can clearly see contradictory results on....

Its a cluster fuck of massive proportions.

My only thought is this
We know what 8 cores does for games
We know what 8 cores has to offer
Amd is making a similar performing cpu to intel's 6900

that is pretty much it, I know 8 cores will last longer, I will feel the impact less when I do something processor intensive, even if it doesn't use all 8 cores, and its on a 2-3 processor upgrades platform.

>>59313075
We can unanimously agree that you're either shilling for intel or retarded. Please kill yourself.

>>59313075
Can we all just unanimously agree that OP is a failure as a shill?

>>59313075
>never let me down
Intel's errata sheets are huge, they let you down all the time, you probably just don't realize it.

As far as this all goes, I will never buy another Intel product in my life, that's how disgusted I am with their ham-fisted shilling.

POO IN THE FUCKING LOO INTEL JEWS. You'll never get another shekel out of me.

>>59313075
And the 6900k is a failure too because it loses to the 7700k in muh vidya gaems, right? Or does that not count because it's Intel?

>>59314145
huh i never disabled it.

i DO remember issues with HT and having to mod certain games to handle 2-4+ threads

File: 1487942401674.png (314KB, 616x643px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 616x643px

>>59313449

>>59314792
It doesn't count because it's Intel.

>>59313075
Intel buyer's remorse thread?

Intel buyer's remorse thread.

File: r2yzean-cpaau-4valuead.png (26KB, 773x371px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 773x371px

>>59313075
Everyone knows Ryzen is a monumental failure, but AMDtards are in massive denial.

A lot of them also own AMD stock so they literally spend all day shilling for AMD on the internet in order to try to get their stock monies.

I can't fucking wait until AMD is dead in the ground, what a shitshow of a company.

>>59314891
Just a (((coincidence))) that the actual CPU Ryzen 7 competes with, the 6900k, isn't on the chart...

>>59314357
Nigga, Zen is a SoC, the fuck do you need space for?

>>59313075
|
|>
|3
|

>>59313075
Absolutely not
I'm loving all these reviews and stuff coming out
It's shaping up to be a really nice architecture

File: 1374161317768.jpg (58KB, 685x474px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 685x474px

>>59313075
>>59314957
Forgot pic

>>59314891
>0.01 shillings have been added to your account

>>59314912
No-no anon the Intel Core i7™ 6900k is for professionals only, and is designed on Intel's highly refined and advance 14nm process.

Please do not compare it against our competitors CPUs. They are built on a fake Arab/Korean designed 14nm process.

>>59314912
>>59314972
>>59314979
+10 AMD Red Team points have been added to your accounts.

Do people wanna stop with these gaymen benchmarks already

File: 1phsdtoshop-ryen-d.jpg (79KB, 701x479px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 701x479px

>>59314997
How about Photoshop?

>>59314997
>stop with the gaming benchmarks on a gaming subchan ◖|◔◡◉|◗

>>59313075
>Can we all just unanimously agree that AMD's Ryzen is a failure?
no

>>59314891
https://archive.rebeccablacktech.com/g/image/I_9PHYU2KVZ1-qkDbVY7ow

>>59315015
https://archive.rebeccablacktech.com/g/image/_ucpzhX6k3vhwRK6j11TWA

lol

>>59315015
Much more relevant imo

It's a very solid arch already but lacks full support due to it being totally new.

Expect all 6+ core ryzens to run circles around 7700k within a year in new titles and in some older titles too.

>>59315097
That's exactly what AMDtards said about Bulldozer and we all know how that turned out.

>>59313075
Windows 10 is sabotaging gaming performance. Will be fixed soon.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5ybrxn/ryzen_7_is_actually_behaving_like_a_dual_4c8t/

>>59315015
>Stop using poorly optimized software to benchmarks CPUs
>Okay, how about this other poorly optimized software?
Yes, what about Photoshop?

File: ryzesn-autsocad.png (135KB, 711x533px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 711x533px

>>59315111
>all mainstream software is unoptimized

AMDtard delusion off the charts

>>59315130
Correct, you'd know it if you actually had to use these programs as a productive adult and didn't spend all your time playing video games

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-Photoshop-CC-Multi-Core-Performance-625/

>>59315130
Is posting benchmarks where a 7700k beats a 6900k supposed to support your argument, or what?

I'd like to see Adobe Premiere and Vegas Movie Studio performance

>>59314829
kek

File: get.png (491KB, 678x482px) Image search: [Google]

491KB, 678x482px

>>59315130

Gaymen

Ryzen - 40% CPU Usage
Intel - 100% CPU Usage

It doesn't take rocket scientist to predict what will happen in 0.5 + 0.2 year.

File: 1459294769452.jpg (25KB, 604x437px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 604x437px

>>59313075
Ryzen isn't a failure. AMD's marketing and release strategy is, unless you're including that in your reference to Ryzen generally.

They released a massive core count chip in the realm of Intel's enthusiast/HEDT lineup (the X series stuff) yet marketed it as a general purpose chip and gaming (yet they must have known about it's poor performance, surely) as opposed to a workstation/enthusiast one. They didn't release R5 or R3 which should perform much better (at a perf/dollar value) against things like the 7600/7700K, especially in gaymen, and we still don't even know when they will release other than Q2, by which time nobody will care most probably because the massive hype train has already derailed. So all we have to go on is the performance of R7, which is okay in things like compute but terrible in games.

There's also the Windows scheduler issue and the fact that SMT seems to be somewhat unrefined, which makes sense considering that it's AMD's first shot at multi-threading while Intel has had like 8 generations of CPU's to tweak it, and hopefully something they can improve slightly.

How AMD didn't ram their fist up Microsoft's ass to get Windows optimized for Ryzen is beyond me, especially when they had that much hype riding on an defined release date.

The real benchmark I'm waiting for is a 1200X vs a 7600K. It'll probably lose on IPC and have lower clockspeeds, but if it gets even moderately close to the 7600K then the difference between a $149 chip and a $242 chip is substantial. That $100ish difference buys a B350 motherboard.

>>59313124
Even Bulldoser was okay for some uses. Multicore perf is great.
Games run like shit though

>>59315144
Yes surely it is those awful programmers who develop 99% of all software. They are the problem, definitely not the people who designed the Ryzen CPU.

>>59315231
And is it Intels fault that the 6900k performs worse than the 7700k in 99% of benchmarks? The 6900k is just a shit CPU, right?

>>59315255
6900k and Ryzen are both specialized CPUs made for rendering/encoding/server-like tasks only

>>59315015
>Based on our testing, there are three major conclusions we can come to regarding the multi-threading capabilities of Photoshop CC:

>Photoshop does not work well with multiple physical CPUs. Most effects are not impacted, but anything that is highly multi-threaded (like many blurs) will actually take up to 30-50% longer if you have two CPUs versus just one. If you have a system with multiple CPUs, we highly recommend setting the affinity of Photoshop so that it will only ever try to use one of your CPUs.
>Most actions in Photoshop are either single threaded or lightly threaded. This means that you will get the exact same performance whether your system has two CPU cores or twenty CPU cores. For these actions, a CPU with a high operating frequency is key.
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-Photoshop-CC-Multi-Core-Performance-625/#Conclusion

>>59315394
not really. it's a desktop-CPU that puts an emphasis on many threads over high frequency. programs which make use of many threads benefit, programs which don't make use of many threads are disadvantaged by the relatively slow clockspeed.

>>59313075
No. Kill yourself.

>>59313124
>2600k user
same, very tempted to hop back over to AMD, my X2 6400 lasted me as long as this, and I hate intel's lazy upgrade cycles - would rather see some funding go to competition.

>>59313279
>its a failure as a gaming GPU
You're right, it's not a GPU at all. What a shit.

>>59315107
Bulldozer was complete shit though. It had worse single threaded performance that Phenom, worse memory and cache performance and worse multi core scaling. All while having more transistors and using way more power. It came across like it was designed by retards and performed about as well.

Ryzen competes both in absolute performance, but also in performance/W, in pretty much everything but gaming, even then, it still hold up pretty well.

File: shoo.jpg (54KB, 510x499px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 510x499px

>>59313075
Goodbye Intel shills, Ryzen is a great chip

>>59315947
what clockspeed was that taken with?

>TFW you have ADHD and Zen is the only thing that can help you run five games at once.

https://youtu.be/Njm0MBOwFTM

File: ryze2n-power.png (235KB, 602x685px) Image search: [Google]

235KB, 602x685px

>>59315924
>Ryzen competes both in absolute performance

Wrong, it's quite horrible at everything but video encoding.

>also in performance/W

Wrong, the 7700k kills it there. Not only is the 7700k faster, it also uses less power.

>everything but gaming
Let's put this myth to rest, almost all applications behave just like games. The apps that can take advantage of huge numbers of cores are like 1%.

>>59315988

Oh boy, this bull shit chart again.

>>59313075

It's only a failure if you compare it to the quad core kabylakes with gaymen benchmarks. Thisis not an issue because the ryzen cpus released are not for gaymen. You will have to wait if AMD does this.

The currently released ryzen is meant as an alternative to the 8+ cores of Intel. It looks like they are pretty competitive with 80-90% of the performance at half the price.

So:

>Can we all just unanimously agree that AMD's Ryzen is a failure?

No.

>>59315979
stock clocks, 3.4 Ghz with 3.8-9 boost. It's on watercooling.

>>59315988

>Wrong, the 7700k kills it there. Not only is the 7700k faster, it also uses less power.

Lad, this is a cinebench benchmark. Ryzen assrapes the 7700k with cinebench.

File: 1100_-_animated_gif_l33t_h4x_nagato_yuki_suzumiya_haruhi_no_yuuutsu_the_melancholy_of_haruhi_suzumiya.gif (2MB, 450x258px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 450x258px

>>59313325
>>59315197
We likely won't see any chips with clocks over 4.0
>>59315664

>>59315015
>4.5GHz chip faster than 3.8GHz chip

Oh wow, really.

>>59316023
>it's only a failure if you compare it to CPUs that beat it

Really makes you think

>>59316056

I'm perfectly ok with never giving Intel a single cent.

Why do you like to take it in the ass?

>>59316063
AMD are jewing you hard.

You are literally paying twice as much for worse performance.

>>59316056

Well, maybe you should take a moment to think a little. You try to compare a quad core with high clock speed to an octa core with lower clock speed.

This will always lead to a different winner depending on the type of workload. The high speed quad core wins at gaymen (for now) and the low speed octa core wins at cinebench and the like.

If you like gaymen, Ryzen is not for you (atm).

>>59316099

>... worse performance.

depending on application of course. . .

>>59316113
>If you like anything that isn't video encoding, Ryzen is not for you.

Fixed that for you.

>>59316099

Worse performance at what?
>in before sysmark

Because all I'm seeing is a slightly worse performance with twice the cores, and twice the threads with MUCH better power saving.

>>59316143
and I don't game on a Quadro

>>59316063
I don't really care about Intel vs AMD, but prostate stimulation and the feeling of having your ass filled are amazing.

File: moar-cores.jpg (96KB, 608x369px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 608x369px

>>59316152
MOAR CORES!

File: iu[1].png&f=1.png (733KB, 700x666px) Image search: [Google]

733KB, 700x666px

>>59316143

Intel buyer's remorse is a sad thing to see

>>59316166

Are more cores supposedly a bad thing?

>>59316160

There's a difference between forced anal rape, and foreplay though.

>>59316216

I guess so. Who would've thought.

>>59316235

Somebody better tell Intel their customers don't want hyperthreaded i5s and to cancel the 12 core X299 chip.

File: 1478081674234.jpg (7KB, 259x194px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 259x194px

>>59313075
can you just stop? It's not funny

>>59316252

12 core? Why would I want trice the cores if I can just have a quad core with slightly higher clock speed?

>t. kabylake

>>59313075

WHY ARE ALL YOU STUPID FUCKING INTEL SHILLS SUCH NIGGERS THAT YOU FAIL TO SEE THAT
>NO GAME HAS BEEN COMPILED FOR RYZEN YET
>NEW CHIPSET MEANS LOADS OF BUGS
>inb4 "b-but jewtel didn't have this problem"
YES IT FUCKING DID EVERY HEARD OF X99?!

>>59313075
amd was always a failure throughout history

only poorfags or fedora tipping hipsters but their shitty products

>>59316481

Really? If you had to build a workstation right now, would you buy any Intel over a 1800? If yes, then what Intel CPU?

>>59316481
>What is Athlon XP

>>59313245

kek

thanks for this anon

File: greatest_ally.png (288KB, 5184x3456px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 5184x3456px

You have done it /g/. I am sick of all the AMD shills. Even this stupid reverse [psychology shilling, where the AMD tard pretends to be an intel shill to make Intel look bad. Intel is the only company to push computing forward. They are our greatest ally in the quest for technological progression.

>>59316578
If that was the case you would be using a singlecore, 32 bit cpu right now

>>59316578

It seems to me, that those who understand computers, those who enjoy computers, and don't treat their PC like a console box for 1300 dollars, always seem to appreciate AMD more than Intel.

>>59313312
>8 weak cores
still better than the 8 cores in the 6900k

>>59313312

You're not the sharpest knife in the drawer, are you?

>>59316767

Broadwell is not a weak core.

>>59313075
Bait

>>59313247
Same,

I'm one of the few people who's using fm1 to this day, already ordered my ryzen setup but everything is sold out.

>>59313124
glad to see that Blini Cat uses windows

>>59313075
>>59313245
Enjoy your dead socket
>>59313312
THIS fagot again
>>59313346
Finally
>>59313413
Not only they are NOT dropping prices, they be rushin out even MORE expensive cpus with the X299 chipset and the 2066 new socket
>>59313936
>lga1366
>that god forsaken tri-meme chanel gulftown expensive as shit buried and forgotten less than 5 years socket

File: trust_me_you_stupid_intel_hater.gif (10KB, 501x585px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 501x585px

>>59316578
yeah, because who needs forwards compatibility and open standards? the company needlessly introducing a new socket every year and sabotaging competitors is the consumers' greatest ally.

>>59315111
what is optimized then? 7zip? any other example that are relevant?
photoshop is my breadmaker

>>59316752
I like amd but desu Intel's cheaper and offers more rn.
Kabylake Pentium user btw; waiting for the higher ed chips to get even cheaper.

>>59315947
lol, a little bit better than a year old chip

>>59317301

More power to you.

I applaud you for buying what you want and buying what fits your needs.

Nothing I can say or do will change your mind, no amount of shilling, marketing, or flatout selling will convince you otherwise.

File: 56juvIP.jpg (54KB, 547x342px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 547x342px

>was going to buy intel
>all the autistic spamming of "look at intel beat amd in this" has made me bitter
>dont want to be a part of intels autism
im buying a 1700. fuck you idiots, you've actually convinced me to go amd cause of your very consistent spamming, i see the same people in each thread, the same filenames each time, do you not have anything better to do?

File: 148461532164655.gif (2MB, 580x433px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 580x433px

>b-b-b-but muh g-games

>>59317431
i hope you will enjoy lower frames for same price ;)

just don't forget to prepare money in 3 years to buy new Ryzen++ cpu while my i7 7700k will live up to 5 years easily. ;)

>>59317577
yeah thanks are we done here?

>>59317516

Ryzen actually beats 7700 at games now after MSI bios update

www.eteknix.com/nvidia-gtx-1080-ti-cpu-showdown-i7-7700k-vs-ryzen-r7-1800x-vs-i7-5820k/

>>59313075

> Calling Ryzen a "failure" when the full product range hasn't been release yet.....

>Intel shills are going into panic mode when Ryzen R7s completely BTFO current Socket 2011 offerings and they to overplay "mah gaming performance!" of 7700K when the difference is 10% at best.

File: Ryzen puts down housefire.png (11KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 800x600px

>>59317577

>implingi implongo implanga

Ryzen beats 7700k after it's bios updates anon. I wonder how much more performance increase will there be after the Windows patch.

>>59317677
MUH $500 cpu, show me 1700 performance fag also one fucking game from some shaddy website lol

File: Ryzen puts down housefire2.png (11KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 800x600px

>>59317677
>>59317645

I wonder how you will recover from setting yourself, your build and your family on fire AND still getting lower frames than Ryzen users

>>59317694
>only one game
bad news lad

File: Ryzen puts down housefire3.png (11KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 800x600px

>>59317677
>>59317700

>CPU gods blessed me with repeating digits

>>59317694

>inb4 1440p, you need to test it at 8bit graphics!!!!

Doom only shows difference after 1440p as the engine can't produce more than 200fps

File: How to break intel's neck with one swift kick.png (12KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 800x600px

>>59317677
>>59317700

>>59313075

For the #21301251023 time: No.

AMD did beat Intel with $1000 performance for less than $500. If you're a kid and you only care about games, then wait for the lower bracket of AMD processors, then we could talk (and plz go to /v/).

Also, Napples is coming and it looks that it will be better than what Intel offers

File: cECSSxD.png (717KB, 1000x581px) Image search: [Google]

717KB, 1000x581px

>>59317677
>>59317700
>>59317724
>>59317725
The phonecall that saved AMD.

>>59313124
>>Before, a bulldozer was a bottlenecking POS.
>Bulldozer was an awful choice no matter how you looked at it.

It was pretty good at media creation and handling multithread workloads for much cheaper than Intel I7.

>>59317724
doom isn't relevant anyway i get on average 90 fps with a FX 6300 and a RX480

>>59315015
>estimated performance

File: Ryzen puts down housefire4.png (31KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 800x600px

>>59317724
>>59317700
>>59317677


>>59317694

Games through the realm will beg and moan for Ryzen, GPUs will beg for it's BIG HARD 8CORES for more power and scream ''GIVE ME MORE FPS MASTER!!!''

While 7700k will just watch from the window, in the cold, tears from Intel fanboys dripping on it's cores slowly but surely killing it.

File: 1483413065316.jpg (3MB, 8624x3896px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 8624x3896px

>>59317725
>>59317700
>>59317677
"I’ll give you a bit of a tip, high frame rates are great, but they’re not all that. You can run some games as low as 20FPS and it’ll play great, just look at classics like Zelda 64 and Goldeneye, they ran at 20FPS and they felt pretty smooth"

Ok now i know he is an nintoddler idiot and this benchmark is most likely faked. AMD fags need to browse net for most obscure sites just to find AMD fanboys doing biased benchmarks.

HHAHAHAHHAHAHHA

File: Lord of Computing.png (71KB, 904x692px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 904x692px

>>59317677
>>59317799
>>59317700

>dem digits
>dem charts
>dem salty Intel, housefire inside tears

>>59317834
this just confirms my theory, intelfags will never ever recover.

>>59317834

>Disputing the fact that minim frame rates are more important than avarage frame rates after avarage frame rate passes your monitors refresh rate or reaches a point that g-sync or freesynce could smooth out the visiuals...

Are you even trying anon?

>>59317854
where is your proof that this benchmark is not faked? why doesn't he show video where 1800x beats i7 7700k? ofc because it's fake bullshit so amd fags will wank to this for a week

>>59317877
except in most benchmarks both cpus have similar minimum frames, only his faked benchmark and jokers had ryzen leading

If you posted this thread on the first day of release, majority would have agreed, but now, all in all I'd say majority doesn't consider Ryzen a failure.

There was a surprisingly high amount of shit given to AMD on /g/ on the day of release, even for a bad release. Don't mean to add to shill conspiracy theories, but sure does seem like Intel was damage controlling.

>>59313075
ryzen is a YUUUUUGE success, it's WAAAAAAAAY faster than buldozer. it's true

>>59317883

Anon, I think you watched too many youtube ''Hey guiz, bla bla here for your tech news'' reviews.

File: bulldozer fixes patches ryzen will improve XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD.png (14KB, 450x417px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 450x417px

>>59317915
>>59313212
>>59315110
>>59315197
>>59317677
>>59313201
Same shit all over again, vicious amd circle of disappointment.

Ryzen = Bulldozer 2.0. AMD fags and their Wait™.

>>59318030
Kek

history repeats itself

>>59318030

>StarCraft
>WoW

These games has their engine literally preffer ''geniuneintel'' over other CPUs.

>>59318055
stop replying to shills

>>59318030
a patch to improve threading performance probably wouldn't improve performance for starcraft II which is strictly single threaded

>>59318064

Those CPUs are Bulldozer... Ffs... Atleast read before replying to shills.

>>59318063
>everyone is a shill

t. AMD shill

>>59318076
Filename literally mentions bulldozer I didn't think it had to be mentioned.

File: 1460753297204.jpg (222KB, 1600x1920px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 1600x1920px

>>59313075
Nah, while surely they didn't catch Intel's single core performance, they got really close (Haswell/Broadwell levels) and added moar cores, so on a multi-threaded optimized application, a 1700 WILL surpass a 7700K, that's what every benchmark/review is showing.

Also, they managed to surpass Intel on Wattage/Performance, the 1700 is the ultimate proof, a 8-core 3+ GHz 65W chip, Intel can't deliver anything close with their most recent architecture.

Honestly, I don't see a reason for getting the 7700K besides gaming, I think having more cores gives you a better future proofing, but that's my opinion.

Finally, Intel will not get bankrupt or anything, they make great chips. AMD just catched up.

>>59313367
just connect 32 pi zeros lmao

>>59318110
>AMD just catched up.

They didn't though.

>>59313075
OP is a fag

>>59318160
They sort of did in a weird way. R7 1700 looks like a legitimately good CPU, something of a middle of the road between an i5 and an i7. When was the last time they had anything this decent to offer?

>>59318160
see: >>59317047

>>59318160
They're at worst like 10% behind the i7 7700K which overclocks itself higher. And that's in windows with bugged schedulers and BIOSes. Give it a few weeks and we'll see. It's already ahead of the market segment it was intended to compete with

>>59318160
Ryzen 7 smashes Intels 8 core 16 thread offerings for half the price and is within 10% of the performance of Intels best gaming CPU offering with OS and BIOS bugs affecting Ryzen, so yes, I'm pretty sure they have caught up.

>>59318233
Being slightly better than Bulldozer is not an accomplishment.

The 1700 is way overpriced, it gets beat by Intel CPUs that literally cost half as much.

>>59318337
There wasn't anything that could even compare to the best i5s and i7s so yes being at a similar level is an advancement. I'd still favour and Intel chip at the moment but this is much better than Bulldozer's complete and utter irrelevance.

File: Mysterious Merchant.gif (4KB, 452x523px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 452x523px

>>59318337
Oy! Buy intel 4 cores.

>>59318429
OY VEY

SPEND TWICE AS MUCH ON A CPU FOR WORSE PERFORMANCE >>59314891

>>59317725
>SnugSmug.jpeg

Intel shills btfo

>>59317319
and $1200 cheaper

>failure
>it can't game

It wipes the floor with of the "better gaming chip which is not its real competitor" on productivity tasks, it not only trade blows but is capable of even surpassing on some benchmarks against Intel's current i7 flagship that costs more than thrice it's going price, not including x99 mobos that also cost in excess of 900 dollars..., i.e., also more than thrice the AM4 platform,

Now, after the obligatory fud to smear at least some shit on AMD's latest launch trying to figure what would stick, we can watch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L34ZkAF9q9w

and verify that regardless the fact that the platform still has some issues that very reasonably could be ironed out in the near future, that "it can't game fo sheez" fud doesn't really stick whence we test it in scenarios that are closer to the final config which gamers would really use.

>>59318631
I mean, when the gpu becomes the bottleneck at the real final configurations, the scores are normalized within the margin of error, as expected.

It's plain dishonesty to push the argument that in spite of that, the "gaming" scores at 480p undeniably favors intel kaby lake chips.

>>59314891
>cost per FPS

on a cpu.
That's some next level shilling.

>>59318337
Ryzen + (decent) mobo = 700ish (low)
7700k + (decent) mobo = 700ish (mid)

Ryzen + the most expensive current mobo out there with a kinda ridiculous mark up (299) = 798

7700k + the most ridiculously priced z270 you can find = 1070

yeah, kaby is clearly cheaper, if you will use on your night stand to soothe you into glorious dreams of intel raping you once more, just as you like it. Rough and without lube.

>>59317577
>5 years easily
>4 core cpu
lmao

>>59318776
you are an idiot if you think you need z270 with i7 7700k, also for ryzen 1700 you really need better mobo if you want oc at all.

>>59318789
>8 threads

go eat shit pajeet from your 16 weak threaded toilet

>>59313075
>Failure
>Performs better or similiar to 6900k for half the price
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

>>59313189
yes

>>59313075
>they've never let me down
You don't use their integrated graphics I take it.

Generally, main problem with Intel is that they want too much dough for hexacores and better. Also their gimping of cheaper CPUs (no HT on cheap quads, low clocks, AVX2 turned off on Pentiums, etc etc)

>>59313075
The only thing we can unanimously agree on is that you need to kill yourself back to /v/. Anyone who doesn't agree is not from /g/ and needs to fuck off back to /v/ too.

File: 1488175603241.png (394KB, 807x488px) Image search: [Google]

394KB, 807x488px

>>59314829

>>59319649
just a bunch of jidf, nothing to see here

>>59315196

People said the same thing during FX-8150 launch.

>>59313075

I don't think it was a failure. I do think AMD fucked up by promoting it for it's gaming performance full stop, when they should have been touting it as a cpu for those that want decent gaming performance and good content creation performance. Whether you think "content creation" is a meme is moot.

>>59319511
And you're straight out lying if you don't admit that most people upgrading right now won't be focusing on the z270 chipset, besides, the z170 chipset doesn't fall that much behind in terms of pricing -- e.g. rog maximus viii is 499 on sale, and you can easily find plenty of premium z170 boards above 350.

>also for ryzen 1700 you really need better mobo if you want oc at all.

The absolutely best motherboards for AM4 currently available are exactly at that price point, 200, -6 +29, -- Taichi, Aorus 5, k7, and exception in the MSI Titanium going up to 299. But if you want to settle for the entry level, you can go as low as 160 for a very decent Asus Prime x370, which I didn't even bother to mention along the 1700x nor the 1700, since my comparison was aiming for the highest possible prices on both platforms.

Now you could say that it's very likely to find a nice deal for a 7700k good overall combo for around 650, but that should also become true in the not too distant future for the 1800x.

>>59313312
>8 weak cores
So intel's 1000$ processor is considered weak now according to you?

>>59320410
>decent

It's not fucking decent, it's exactly on par when considering the resolutions and options people will really be playing at.

The fact that it clearly loses at 480p against the 7700k is plain out of context shilling in order to smear shit all over day-one reviews. It's true, but it's underhanded and irelevant after all things are considered.

File: 1489077696672.png (1MB, 2484x3052px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2484x3052px

>>59320522

>>59319511
>he mentions the 65w chip needing extra beefy circuitry design while conveniently forgetting that said processor is actually cheaper than the one he's propsing as a value oriented offering.

you're not that smart neither.

File: 98797987987.png (8KB, 363x364px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 363x364px

>>59313075
>>59313245
>>59314198
>>59314891
>>59314989
>>59315015
>>59315107
>>59315130
>>59315988
>>59316099
>>59316143
>>59316166
>>59316481
>>59317577
>>59317834
>>59318030
>>59318096
>>59318160
>>59318337

Can we all just unanimously agree that shills are pathetic fucks who should kill themselves, making the world a better place?

I know you're here because you cannot even pull that shit on /v/ thanks to their rule 2 and 3.

>>59314226
>>59315197
>>59318110
AMD should never have marketed it as a gaming chip. The 1800X is essentially 90% of a 6900k which in turn wasn't a stellar gaming choice in the first place. It straight out invited all the underage /v/-tards to scream Bulldozer because it isn't on the top of their video game benchmark bars, which is all they can grasp from a technological standpoint anyway.

If there's a failure, it's AMD's marketing once again.

>>59319511
the best value would be someone replacing their 6xxx series for a drop in 7xxx while leaving the rest of the system untouched.

Anyway, those folks would clearly be the real retards here.

>>59315988
Holy shit that power consumption
Naples is going to fuck Intel's server market

>>59313124
>AMD made a huge jump from their older bulldozer based chips.
The R7 1800X costs five times as much as the FX-8300 but it's not even twice as fast.

Peformance per dollar wise this was a huge jump downhill.

File: 1477105166094.jpg (201KB, 470x595px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 470x595px

>>59317677
>>59317700
>>59317724
>>59317725
>overclock 7700k to 5.3ghz
>run it with 4200mhz ram
Good try amd fags

>>59321920
now you're just grasping at straws.

>tfw when you learn ryzen isn't even a true 8 core but 2 r3's glued together with a low bandwidth bus inbetween them

LOL

muh """"8"""" cores communicating at a snail's pace

>>59322192
...
>>59322121

are you braisntorming at the office with the other shills now?

File: 1475648861049.gif (3MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 320x240px

>>59322109
>having to overclock to beat the competition
pathetic, enjoy your 6 month long lifespan

>>59313075
$0.05 cents has been deposited in your account

>>59318030
And today 8150 can pull Titan XP better than 2500k, funny how this works, innit

>>59322231
got any of that proof?

File: 1484395749352.png (17KB, 651x641px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 651x641px

>>59318449
>Cost pr. FPS
>>>/v/

Intel shills are fucking morons. Gaming performance doesn't really matter that much anymore in the mainstream market. It is all about power consumption and product availability. It is because portables and small factor PCs is what sells these days not "desktops" and workstations.

Intel has the edge in the mainstream market until AMD comes out with Raven Ridge.

Intel's biggest threat is actually Naples and ARM's chips eating anyway their lucrative HPC and server market. R7 Ryzen placing massive pressure on HEDT market isn't that big of the deal in the grand scheme of things.

So, are there any benchmark out there with Windows 7 to prove that the OS called W10 is the problem for Ryzen?

It would be interesting because I am actually using Windows 7.

>>59319530
>thinks that SMT = real core

Intel shills sure are dumb.

>>59313075
>AMD is now nipping at the heels of competition
>"Can we just all agree it was a failure?"
>"It didn't leap over intel, so its shit. Right goy- I mean, guys!"
>"4 cores is the sweet spot. Why have 8 cores when I can have an iGPU that I don't need?"

It leaps over intel in productivity. Gaymurfajjets btfo. Still buying expensive i7's they probably don't need. Its not a failure. You just got hyped up for a CPU that wasn't right for you.

>>59316823
It is when is buried with 7 of its friends and an iGPU under a TDP of 140W

Just fuck off already. And its Broadwell-E, not Broadwell. GR8 B8.

>>59325812
>>AMD is now nipping at the heels of competition

nipping at the heels of a 4 year old uarch.

>>59314891
Okay then, poorfag. Go buy your cheap and nasty i3-7350K.

>>59325873
>Kabylake is a 4 year old uarch

So... Are you imblying that Cannonlake or Skylake-E will smash Zen+ ?

File: atiqraza.jpg (120KB, 613x794px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 613x794px

>>59325873
This has always been AMD's strategy.

also
>implying IPC gains since Haswell were significant

>>59325936
>>Kabylake is a 4 year old uarch

has/broadwell is. zen isn't competitive with skylake, it gets crushed by skylake.

> Are you imblying that Cannonlake or Skylake-E will smash Zen+ ?

if history is anything to go by zen+ won't even be a tangible improvement over zen. just look at how thuban and vishera turned out.

>>59313075
>it plays games
>it has 8c/16t
>it was less than the 7700k
>it supports competition in the CPU market

I'll be happy with my 1700 once I find a fucking motherboard for it. Anyone too mentally retarded and autistic enough to argue about frames per second at 640x480 isn't seeing the bigger picture and needs to stop nuthugging corporations.

>>59313328
It will literally be the same just with less cores.
It will be great value but still not clock over 4.2 for 24/7 use.

>>59325957
>it gets crushed by skylake.
>a 4.2 GHz CPU (that can overclock to 5 GHz) crushes a 3.6 GHz CPU that only does 4.1 GHz

Are you even trying?

>>59325957
>gets crushed by skylake
I wouldn't call "barely exceeding while consuming a disproportionate amount of power" as crushing, anon. Remember that the i7 you faggots are comparing the r7 to only has 4 cores and is a literal housefire.

>>59326001
>but still not clock over 4.2 for 24/7 use.

It will if they get Samsung to fab it for them.

>>59320627
>its shit for gayming

Oh im laffin

>>59313075
>Can we all just unanimously agree
No. Zen is great.

File: 1470196806294.png (359KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

359KB, 500x500px

>>59314891
Had 8350 at 5.1 Ghz and sold the system cuz it was a meme and I been supporting a shit product for so long

Sold my x99 5820k system for Ryzen since there was so much hype

Fall for another lie from amd.
>tfw amd are the real Jews for lying to me over and over

Intel and Nvidia do the same things, but still I have wasted more money on amd than anything else for nothing. Expecting them to be the best. I am an amdrone yes.... But I'm done... Selling this shit... Should have stuck with my old 5820k

>inb4 Intel shill


Attack me I don't care at this rate.... All I know is I was memed to spend 2000$ so far on amd.... For nothing. Fuck you amd. I wanted to believe. Always making us wait with excuses

File: Disgusted Beta.jpg (116KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1280x720px

Never have I seen so much autistic shitposting over a CPU release.

>>59326182
Its half shills half raging tribal autismos. It's okay.

File: 1464279539592.png (1MB, 796x637px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 796x637px

>>59326180
This... Is the tipping point

>>/g/

It's time to wake up like this lad here

>>59322231
Not everyone runs stock cooler like you Pajeet

>>59326180

God damn I wish this was true. Like, actually someone this stupid with lots of money.

>>59326265
It is true.... I done so 2 systems from amd

Got both products at launch and disappointing results are all I get. I spent 2012.66 to be specific

>>59326180

>>59325856

Broadwell-e is the samething as a broadwell core.

And it's great for whatever workload you can throw at it. Ryzen just so happens to have even more efficient SMT and is faster in multithreaded workloads despite having an ipc deficit to Kaby Lake.

>>59325812

I wonder what they're going to say when yhe R5 stays as close as the R7 in games for 250 dollars.

It's going to be painful.

wait for zen+

File: PEH1tQJ.jpg (226KB, 1242x2208px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 1242x2208px

>>59326415
Always waiting..

File: 1488923970547.png (486KB, 675x482px) Image search: [Google]

486KB, 675x482px

>>59320627
Why is Intel so fucking garbage at pretty much everything?

>>59326415
Wait for BIOS updates and a scheduler patch

File: 1488915545091.jpg (273KB, 1032x774px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 1032x774px

>>59322109
>wanting your house to explode

>>59313075
How long will I last guys - I got a Asus Prime B350M-A and a 1800x.

Brick soon??

>>59326415
No need to. Ryzen won't improve by a significant amount, but it may clock better out of the box.

>>59326630
>Asus
top kek2

>>59326614
LONGER

BIPELINEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>59326649
Its... going to be a good one right?

They aren't all bad :( Right??

>>59326724
- Update the BIOS/UEFI right away
- Don't use the shitty software that comes with the board
- Pray

File: 1442980022547.jpg (11KB, 250x241px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 250x241px

>>59313075
Buyer's remorse is real.

>>59326180
>First demo showed it barely beating a 6900k clock-for-clock
>Sell a system to buy one that is known to barely have any improvements over the previous one
>blame AMD for stupid purchasing decisions

>>59320627
>1 week since launch
>FineWine™ already btfo'ing intel

Based nvidia

>>59314829
10/10

>>59315554
>written in 2015

>>59314829
Lost hard.

If you look at gaming perf yes but that s cause games don t use multi thread , and the 7700k had higher freq . 7700 beats 6950 in games . Multimedia the 1800x trashses everyone and cost 500

>>59313201
>write a patch for Windows 10's scheduler,
>needing this kind of shit to justify bad design choices.

>>59327151
>implying Intel's HT worked without issues when it was introduced

0/10

>>59314829
amazing

>>59325957

>He doesn't know about Kaveri and Carizzo.

>>59327165
of course it didn't but CMT did not simulate cores.

>>59327250
It also barely suffered any performance issues on launch. The main problem as it turned out was with power usage because it wasn't throttling down cores properly.

>>59326180

Yeah thats it blame AMD and not your dumbass for not doing any research

File: you.png (4KB, 159x176px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 159x176px

271 / 49 / 132 / 1
looks like OP likes a bunch of (You)'s

>>59327238
>Chorizo

fixed

File: BabbyLake.png (157KB, 1110x375px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 1110x375px

>>59313075
Enjoy the CIA faggot

>>59327316
>Kaby Lake's development
>implying it's not just a clock-bumped Skylake

>>59327360
All Intel CPUs since the Pentium 2 were made by the Israeli team though, with the exception of Netburst.

>>59327378
>netbust
fixed

>>59327378
The jewish conspiracy paid off for a long time.

AMDfags are the most hilarious deluded people on Earth. Feasting on their tears is one of my favorite hobbies.

File: let-down.png (609KB, 854x640px) Image search: [Google]

609KB, 854x640px

>>59326415

>>59327596

top kek

File: R7 1700 2.png (28KB, 912x199px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 912x199px

>>59313075
Just need motherboards to get in stock already

File: lel.gif (499KB, 480x228px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 480x228px

>>59327875
>there are people actually dumb enough to buy Ryzen

>>59327888
Why would I spend the same amount of money for 4 cores/8 threads that are slightly faster per core?

File: 1daagega65miang.png (72KB, 601x830px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 601x830px

>>59327904
Because an i7-7700k is 20% faster for the same price

>>59313075
it's not a failure though, you are

>>59313189
you've got my vote

File: uEW7PCL.png (27KB, 533x442px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 533x442px

>>59327909
7700K is shit

>>59327909
Okay? The ryzen chip is still over 100fps in just about every AAA game, and the 7700K can't compete in multi-threaded performance

>>59327951
Don't bother with that braindead shill.

>>59327875
got mine yesterday

tfw no motherboard

>>59317645
OY VEY DELETE

File: 1080.png (13KB, 924x94px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 924x94px

lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllol

File: 1488933859408.png (604KB, 800x523px) Image search: [Google]

604KB, 800x523px

>>59328053
SHUT UP GOYIM

File: ryzen-ph4otoshop.png (112KB, 722x554px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 722x554px

>>59327951
It's not just games, 7700k destroys Ryzen in almost everything

http://wccftech.com/amd-naples-server-chip-32-core-64-thread-preview/
Were you where when AMD raped Intel?

>>59328076
Explain why Intel is complete garbage at literally everything then

>>59317645
>>59320627

>>59313075
Ryzen only failure was not being optimized enough for games. Everything else about Rayzen is fine.

File: meia-creation-daryzen.png (22KB, 650x200px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 650x200px

>>59328125
Sadly it's not just games

>>59328146
>83% of the performance of the 6900K
>At the 46% of the price of the 6900K
>using only the 60% of power of the 6900K
That doesn't seem a failure, anon.

>>59328185
Try comparing it to the 7700k

Ryzen is $160 more expensive
Ryzen uses more power
Ryzen is slower

Just a disaster desu senpai

>>59328146
>sysmark
At least fucking try.

>>59328206
>sysmark
>weeb shill
Do you even try intel?

File: Ryzen1.jpg (186KB, 1200x902px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 1200x902px

>>59313075

Yeah, but madshills absolutely deny it.

File: 85898.png (44KB, 650x350px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 650x350px

>>59328146
suicide watch

>>59326239
>implying an aio will save you from the single socket holocaust

>>59328236
>65w almost as good as 140w
intel is literally housefire.

>>59325873
it's actually a seven year architecture, but that's a demerit only if your IQ can't reach the 70's.

>>59325936
I really doubt intel next iterations will deviate much from the core family, and while they very could come up with some more tweaks they've been holding, I don't really think that's expected. Who knows really, but the safest bet is for a bit bigger increments, or maybe price wars. They could very well simply readjust pricing schemes and negate AMD from climbing up on market shares solely on their momentum without bringing anything new or unexpected to the table.

File: 16s-gasme-avderdage.png (61KB, 1306x1646px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 1306x1646px

>>59328236
Oh gosh not x264, that super popular software that everyone uses

Meanwhile in real life...

>>59328280
>gaming benchmarks
Do you even try, little shit?

>>59325957
>if history is anything to go by
the intel will just play dirty, pay the press not holding anything back, collect favors from the oems, blackmail, throw a tantrum....

>>59328146
>un-optomized 4 year old software

rattled. im sure amd is rattled

>>59328297
Yes it's all just a big conspiracy against AMD

Or maybe, you know, AMD just makes inferior products

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

84KB, 653x726px

>>59313075
Y-yeah, ryzen is a f-failure

>>59326180
you have nobody to blame but yourself you fucking autistic /g/ tard

>>59328146
>sysmark
lol

>>59328331
>it's a conspiracy
nope, it's just a cutthroat world and Intel is not tiniest bit shy to steamroll anyone on its way by any means.

>>59328331
>trials against intel are only delusions of AMD fags.

>all these shill threads
Wow Intel must be scared

>>59328067
I've had an RX 480 for months and haven't seen the opt in for the hardware survey

>>59328331
>AMD just makes inferior products
and i'm talking about an era when intel couldn't come even close to the athlons. And you'd buy a magazine to read a 20+ page article of how and why that lackluster performance was actually stellar and how you totally shouldn't buy anything from AMD because reasons.

>>59328403
Did you see the Naples presentation lad?
That was a fucking shame for intel.

>>59328403
Yes Intel is so scared they didn't even lower their prices a cent

>>59328601
>what's holding frame?

>>59328601
Now you're full of shit. They laid off 11% of their entire workforce last year, and did a new round for engineers just recently.

Does Ryzen have a botnet also?

>>59328741
Define Botnet.

>>59328748
Background listening as seen on skylake and later intel CPUs

>>59328784
I think that AMD has something like ME.
But they are hinting that will open source it soon.

>>59317064
>>that god forsaken tri-meme chanel gulftown expensive as shit buried and forgotten less than 5 years socket
Funny you say that because since then intel has made a new socket every 2-3 fucking years
>>59322289
blew him the fuck out