Zen

File: muh $1700.png (54KB, 448x836px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 448x836px

Productivity encompasses a lot more than just video and audio editing.

Else high core xeons or 10 core Broadwell-E's wouldn't exist.

File: 1486664306278.jpg (66KB, 653x370px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 653x370px

>>59428191
Oy vey goy, you don't need that silly 8 core, buy a quad core for the same price

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

22KB, 650x200px

>>59428191
The truth is that Ryzen is garbage at 99% of workloads

It's basically a server architecture, only good at highly threaded long sustained tasks like encoding/rendering

Horrible desktop CPU

>>59428254
>sysmark
At least post some proper benches, Ramesh.

>>59428254
t. shill

>>59428220
it's interesting that the 10 core in single threaded applications has such huge fucking differences vs the 8 core depending on the program

File: firefox_2017-03-16_12-12-00.png (96KB, 720x1020px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 720x1020px

>>59428254
There you are, I'm looking for a new job, is the pay any good at Intel?

File: 1488727961494.png (1005KB, 734x5000px) Image search: [Google]

1005KB, 734x5000px

>>59428191
People are right about one thing, it's a server core first and foremost.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/74814-amd-ryzen-7-1800x-performance-review-9.html
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/74814-amd-ryzen-7-1800x-performance-review-10.html
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/74814-amd-ryzen-7-1800x-performance-review-11.html
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/74814-amd-ryzen-7-1800x-performance-review-12.html
^
Same site with productivity benches

And a more serious enterprise aimed workload with XeonPh and dual Xeon tests.
https://www.servethehome.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700x-linux-benchmarks/
https://www.servethehome.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700-linux-benchmarks-zen-buy/


Of course if you're looking for gaming shit then there are cheaper alternatives.

File: ryzen-photoshop.jpg (79KB, 701x479px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 701x479px

>>59428342
>Of course if you're looking for gaming shit then there are cheaper alternatives.

True but it's not just gaming shit. It's anything that can't be run highly parallel, which means 99% of programs out there.

>>59428366
>99%
Nice try Ramesh.

>>59428366
The post you quoted literally proves you wrong with a plethora of benchmarks you dumb illiterate fuckstick.

Also you posted a benchmark where the 7700k does better than a 6900k, are you a fucking genius?

File: Screenshot from 24-04-2016 14:04:40.png (291KB, 701x600px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 701x600px

>>59428342
>that compute perf

My Niples have Rysen thinking about Naples

>>59428191
Ryzen isn't the culprit, but in certain way, AMD is the one to blame. Programs like the mentioned by you are constantly optimized only for Intel because for years they released only shit processors.
Zen will be shit today for some single core uses, but will age like the wine, specially considering that is obliterating Intel at server side. That reputation will help the desktop side too.

>>59428408
>because for years AMD released only shit processors.
My fucking spic grammar.

BUT WHAT AOBUT MY GAMES

GAMES
GAMES
GAMES

>>59428191
> normal human level i7
Wut

>>59428451

chips that don't cost a million gold coins

Anyone have a link to that new German bench with the games n shit?

>>59428515
But i7 do cost big moneys, it's hard to justify blowing a half of a montly wage on one of them.

>>59428527
https://www.computerbase.de/2017-03/ryzen-windows-7-benchmark-core-parking/

>>59428625
danke mein voklischneger

Holy shit AMD just say if 4c will be a only a single CCX, not 2 CCX with deactivated cores.

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

44KB, 650x350px

>>59428386
You seem to be very confused. The reason why the 7700k beats the 6900k is the same reason why Ryzen is so bad at nearly everything.

>>59428654
There's a 4c with 8MB and 16MB of cache, the 8MB one is cheaper, one will be with CCX disabled the other one will be 2+2

>>59428654
Why would you even think it would be a disabled CCX? That doesn't make any fucking sense.

>>59428657
>still better than the $999 5960X, almost on par with $6900K
wanna show us some more single-threaded benchmarks, t. kike?

>>59428674
Isn't CCX design for modularity?

File: 1467678117281.png (16KB, 703x74px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 703x74px

Oh well. Here goes my hopes...

>>59428366
(((((Estimated performance)))))

>>59428707
hm, so everything is a failed 1800X. wonder how the latency between CCXs works out in 2+2.

>>59428769
>wonder how the latency between CCXs works out in 2+2.
Data fabric link will still be a bottleneck at 22Gbps. I had hope it would be single CCX so it doesn't suffer this design flow but hey, it's AMD, and we can't have nice things.

>>59428242
muh cores

>>59428191
Why is this still a thing? These NEET-s need to BTFO already. Actually spend more time arguing over hardware than using it productively, no wonder you get nowhere in life. When you are such a fuckup it doesn't matter which hardware you use if you are incompetent anyways.

>>59428824
assblasted AMDrone detected

>>59428849
But i own a i7-4790k ?

>>59428862
>buying a chip later than sandy cunt

>>59428874
So why should i buy outdated hardware on a outdated platform? Not sure if trolling or your really are autistic.

>poorfags still go with G4560
>everyone else still goes with 7700K
damn, I really thought AMD was onto something here

File: happydoggo.jpg (352KB, 1200x900px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 1200x900px

tfw unreal engine compiles in less than 30 mins on ryzen rather than almost 3 hours on my old 3570k

>>59428366
Kill yourself, shilltel cuck.

>>59428707
Source on that? From the looks of the L3 cache, the R5 1400 doesn't have two CCX.

>>59432380
I think one of the amd enginners confirmed that on his twitter

File: aRPw3xM_700b.jpg (76KB, 700x875px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 700x875px

>>59428242

>>59432403
How does it only have 8 MB L3 but still two CCX?

>>59432421
IT HAS TWO CCX OKAY!? DON'T QUESTION IT

>>59428788
They are binning the garbage so they will take sell chips with dual ccx semi failed cores.

>>59432534
Don't taze me bro.

File: 5a81bae85b11e263f86f03db5c896a85.jpg (8KB, 236x205px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 236x205px

>>59432659
will this be another core unlock generation?

>>59428254
sysmark.. a bench created by intel

FUCKING HELL

>>59428366
post updated benchmarks, kike