Hey /g/ I'm upgrading from a 2500k. I'm getting either

>>59463856
Fuck off back to /v/, cunt.

1700 is 100 mhz slower for much less $
I would still likely go with Intel tho

>>59463880
It costs less too

>>59463856
7700k

>>59463888
Nice trips

>>59463856
If you're ugrading RIGHT NOW THIS VERY SECOND, I'd get a 6600/6700/7600/7700. Right now I have a Ryzen and I'm getting nothing but headaches.
>Ram compatibility is fickle
>Doesn't recognize most add-on cards in any of its slots
>-X cards have a temp offset, so fans run louder

Not to mention, the performance is supposedly underwhelming, but I haven't even gotten as far as that, nor was it the sole purpose of my build.

Intel; It just wurks

>>59463902
I'm not completely throwing Ryzen under the bus, but right now, so many kinks need to be ironed out, it's not even funny

Also
>Good luck finding decent, compatible coolers

>>59463880
>>59463888
>>59463902
7700k it is then

>>59463856
Ryzen 1700. It hits the sweetspot of being able to simultaneously compete well with both the 7700k and the 6800k/6900k.

>>59463856
7700k but I would wait a year because switching from 2500k to 7700k is not worth the money imo

File: IMG_2649.png (112KB, 806x580px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 806x580px

>>59463947
Not when it loses to an i3

>>59463959
>stock

Buy 7700k sir.
It is a superior product.
Good luck.

>>59463969
Amd can't overclock for shit. The chart shows the maximum potential of a chip

>>59463959
>Loses to a heavily overclock i3 in probably a CPU-bound game.
>What is clock speed, Alex?

Fuck off

File: intel inside.jpg (961KB, 4064x2328px) Image search: [Google]

961KB, 4064x2328px

>>59463959
>>59463980

>>59463856
>buying (((4))) cores

>>59464001
I would when even 2 intel cores demolish amd'd 8 cores>>59463959

>>59463969
>>59463980
>>59463996
A 2 core cpu demolishes a 8 core cpu, there is literally no way you can defend this unless you're a street shitter

>>59464049
It's called shit optimisation from the developer because up until Ryzen no one even had an eight core cpu.

In a couple of years I reckon Ryzen will outperform the 7700k in the then modern games.

>>59464106
yeah this happened to faildozer

Can anyone recommend a cpu and graphics card for vr and gaming @ 1080p? I've been thinking about upgrading from an fx 6300 to the Ryzen 1600x and gtx 750ti to a 480x.

>>59464121
>VR

don't

>>59464106
Are we in 2011?

>>59464049
>8 cores should be better than 2
>What are single- and dual-threaded applications Alex?

Games don't magically start using additional cores. The only way you can can argue is if you had both processors running at the same clock speed, or even at the max relative OC speed, but even to that extent, you can argue about different factors, like temps and energy usage.

The consensus is for people who aren't rabid fans is, yes, per core performance is lacking a bit behind Intel's--it's almost a given at this point, but the fact of the matter is, you're getting 16 logical cores versus 8, unless you drop some heavy money on Intel's equivalent.

Not to mention, the processors are just MADE better--you delid a 6700K and you can shave off up to 20C off of the max temps. They delidded a Ryzen and it dropped 2 degrees.

>>59464119
When Faildozer came out video gamers weren't being developed for eight core console hardware, which what would you know, is also manufactured by AMD.

Even still, there has been a noticeable improvement over time from Bulldozer. That trend will continue, and accelerate with the mass marketization of Ryzen chips and Consoles.

>>59464137
Why not?

>>59464147
mad nerds are typing their temper tantrums at you as we speak, brace for impact

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

478KB, 1997x1232px

>>59464147
>intel is a bit better
>a bit

>>59464184
there has been years where bulldozer and jaguars have been AMDs gaming CPUs at the same time

>>59463959
that 2500k 4.5ghz score

somehow i feel like the systems werent identical, when it came to software, and shit such as ram too.
but what do i know lel

>>59464228
Ikr, intel's 7 year old CPU is on par with amd'd current flaships lmao

File: FatherTed.jpg (40KB, 600x398px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 600x398px

>>59464206
>comparing it to a notoriously unoptimised 19th century shooter played by competitive video gayme autists

>>59464206
>Caring about FPS above your refresh rate
>In a known CPU-bound game, again

Jesus, go back to /v/

>>59464252
>amd loses in every existing program
>waaah UNPOOPTMISIED i shit in the streeeet

>>59464243
not just that, seems according to these reviews, the STOCK 2600k beats a 4500Mhz 2500k in FPS games

LUL.
something fishy going on here.

>>59463856
dude coffee lake is here in a few months. Do yourself a favor to wait for the 8700k.

>>59464258
I bought a 240hz Asus monitor

>>59464276
Wasn't Kaby Lake just released a month or so ago?

>>59464270
Your imaginary poo charts don't count

>>59464270
actually, on their 1700 review, it says at some point a stock 3750k is faster than a 4500mhz 2500k

ok buddy.

>>59464280
>>59464276

Why play in 1080p ffs, also this get coffee lake.

It's the most anticipated lake so far, next good Intel chip after coffee lake will be tiger lake and that's 2019ish optimistically.

>>59464307
wut

File: Screenshot_2017-03-18_11-37-09.png (525KB, 858x479px) Image search: [Google]

525KB, 858x479px

>>59463856
Shill thread?
Shill thread

>>59464333
The i7 still shits on the 1800x, and the pic you posted is the highest performance point for the 1800x

>>59464317
But Coffee Lake is 2018, at best. And for how much $450?

File: Bill_Wilson.jpg (79KB, 716x768px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 716x768px

>>59464333
>those baby lake frame drops

File: 1489847086652.jpg (1MB, 1004x4936px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1004x4936px

>>59464346
>shits on

>>59464280
I'm almost betting that it's not true 240mhz and they're just inserting blank frames to give you that effect.

And even if it is, realistically, you're never going to notice it, not to mention you're using a shitton of energy and your card is gunna run hot as hell.

File: specs.png (194KB, 2201x961px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 2201x961px

im just glad i bought my 6800K, just saying

>>59464206
>most monitors cap at 60Hz
>few high end monitors cap at 144Hz
>literally thousands of dollars expensive top of the line experimental monitors cap at 240Hz
So this is relevant how?

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

43KB, 649x354px

>>59464369
All of your cherrypicked tests are multithreaded focused and you didn't include the 6900k because you knew it would demolish your cpoo

>>59464374
I know, right? AMD dosen't even include a free 32bit on-die cpu that talks to Israel for free.

>>59464389
>$1021+tax

>>59464374
Is the 6800k any good? It had better single threaded performance enough to destroy amdrones in games and also 6 cores to keep up in multi threaded programs.

File: 1482357328761.jpg (223KB, 1944x788px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 1944x788px

>>59464349

More like year-end, also next gen after coffee lake is going to prioritize data center workloads so it's gonna be good, it's supposed to be good it's the final optimization and the answer to Ryzen with a 6 core chip.

https://arstechnica .com/gadgets/2017/02/intel-coffee-lake-14nm-release-date/

>>59464405
He bought the gimped chip with no lanez, 6850 is wat you need, goy

>>59463856
1. you don't need to "upgrade" your 2500k
2. if you are a gaymen faggot, grow up
3. if your monitor has a 60Hz limit, those benchmarks are pointless for you
4. do you use your pc as a shitposting machine? yes? then you don't need to waste money
5. do you use engineering software? then get the 1700

>>59464405
It's good but motherboards are shit expensive

>>59464417
What makes you so confident they won't push it back even further? They already have multiple times. And we are talking about desktop products, moron.

File: unnamed.jpg (98KB, 1299x974px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1299x974px

>>59464405

http://valid.x86.fr/39ngw0

I'm pretty happy with it. I had a 5820K that had died after 7 months. I had ran it kinda hard and rough though. This 6800K seems to be reliable, overclocks ram a little better, but the uncore won't go past 3.6ghz. I'm ok with that, mainly because mine clocks so high. I can do 4.6ghz but that's pushing hard. I have a $600 water cooling loop supporting this all granted.

The ram is pretty cool, it pulses and does stuff.

>>59464417
Just Wait©

>>59464424
I have a 240hz monitor and I'm a programmer

>>59464438

Last 14nm since Intel is pushing 10nm. The Feb 2018 release date could really be advanced because it's meant to compete with zen+, we'll see with cannonlake year end on mobile.

6 core chip, you know 7700K vs Zen results already

>if 7700K had 8 chips
>power draw

>>59464488
It's not 240hz, genius.

>>59464488
wew. you need 240Hz for vim?

>>59464451

This should be the new motto on this board

Just Wait©

>>59464488
So gaming benchmarks won't be relevant since you're such a busy and productive programmer?

>>59464519
the 10nm shrink is Intel's only hope at this point. They already optimized and overclocked their current arch to it's limit, and have run out of ideas. 1% ipc gain won't cut it this time, when Zen+ and the software finally catches up.

>>59463856
A sacrifice in fps vs. quality of life increase and an improvement in multitasking capabilities.

Ryzen isn't bad in games - it is not the best - but you can still have a positive gaming experience on Ryzen.

I'm running a 1700 at 3.8ghz and have had no issues. I upgraded from a 3570k and have noticed an all around improvement in games, general use, and my ability to have multiple programs open at once.

I think if you want to have the "best of the best" fps and cannot live with having anything less then you should get a 7700k. however, a 1700 will grant you a better overall computing experience.

>>59463902
>I have a Ryzen and I'm getting nothing but headaches.

This seems to be the common theme.

>>59464605
Totally not the shitty mobo he bought

>>59463856
7700k

Why would you buy a 1800 when a 2500k is just as good for gayman?

>>59464529
https://youtu.be/r3uDsTZTwgM

>>59463979
there were anon right here on /g/ getting the 1700 to 3.9GHz, stop with the lies

>>59464641
So your setup is capable of running a constant 240 hz? Wow, that sounds impossible.
>LTT
ain't clicking that shit, sweetie

>>59464660
With the 7700k looks like it will

>>59464668
Wow those 20fps difference you will totally notice, goy!

>>59464668
how are you supposed to get a constant 240 fps? Most game engines are capped at 200fps and there are any GPUs that can do a constant 240fps even at 1080p in modern games.

240hrz is a literal meme.

>>59464693
All he does is webdev anyway

File: 1467500973565.jpg (247KB, 740x1410px) Image search: [Google]

247KB, 740x1410px

>>59464577

Right, Skylake-X head to head incoming

OP if you really can't wait for 7700K which is on par with an overclocked 4790K then go for it, the first hexacore coffee lake might be much more worthwhile and future-proof. Gaymes will also still be increasingly CPU intensive

>>59464679
>>59464693
Tell that to sli 1080ti. Well I won't be getting the second card until late april

>>59464723

You shouldn't be gaymen in 1080p on a 1080Ti ffs

>>59464730
You should if you want 240fps

who gives a fuck, wont be able to run windows 7 on anything now :'(

>hurr get LTSB

still a fucking slow as fuck botnet with a horrible UI

>>59464723
$1700 on GPUs to play games? You openly brag about that? And you are buying a $350 chip to run it? LOLOLOLOLOL

Ryzen is wierd.

It's definitely the CPU for non-gaymen.

But sadly it doesn't come with an iGPU so you're forced to buy a eGPU, which will cost money.

Kaby Lake CPU's come iGPU's that are "good enough". Outputting 4k 60fps to monitors and being able to decode 10bit 4k hevc video files. You will need a $50 eGPU to be able to do that with Ryzen.

>>59464738

virt-manager

is a thing, moron

File: 1487463821177.png (2MB, 1440x900px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1440x900px

>>59463856
Best advice is to just get a 1600X since the AM4 motherboard will be supported for 2-3x longer than any Intel socket and chipset.
Then upgrade to the 2nd or 3rd generation Ryzen for an 8 core then as software actually starts being optimized for them. Currently the 1800X gets heavily underutilized and just isn't worth the $500.

>>59463880
No? The 1800X and 1600X are 4.1ghz max stock.
1700 is 3.75ghz max stock.
Sure you can OC it to 3.8-4.0ghz all core, but you are going to make a space heater since it fucks the power saving features and doubles the idle power usage.

>>59463959
>heavily OC'd versus stock.
>has 25% lower minimum frame rates
>i-it's totally winning in this game guys.
>p-please ignore that the developer already announced they're working on a Ryzen optimization patch and that even without that the heavily OC'd 7350K still loses!!!!!
Fucking moron. Only two Intel CPUs on that list get higher minimum frame rates than the STOCK 1700.

>>59464753
Well there's no better cpu for games other than the $350 chip

>>59464769
who the fuck is virt, and what makes him qualified to be a manager??

>>59464049
>25 lower minimum fps on a 5ghz overclock
>"demolishes"

I hope you aren't a europoor that wasted some free university to wind up so retarded. Oh, no, you're probably underage, aren't you?

>>59464738

This news just dropped yesterday right, Microsoft is now blocking Windows 7 and 8.1 updates on Ryzen and Kaby Lake systems.

>>59464772
Pretty sweet setup for literally wasting your life with. You probally just put in on a CC anyway.

>>59463856
if you "only" play game and don't care other shit
just buy 7700

With 7700k you get insignificant performance increase and with 1800x a decrease instead, especially if running 2500k at high clocks.

>>59464802
Most of my programs don't pass 300 lines, I don't care about how a 1800x compiles the code 0.03 seconds faster

>>59464417
Just wait!

We can finally stop buying overpriced 4c/8t CPUs that don't even manage 144FPS minimum on games that came out before the CPUs did.
Just wait!

AMD is a slow and wide CPU architecture. It's slightly slower at one specific task, while being slightly faster in multithreaded applications or multitasking.

Intel offers a narrow but fast CPU architecture. Allowing it to excel in most things, until more than 4 cores are capable of being used.

Buy Intel for the now. AMD for the now and the later.

>>59464793
He's pretty cool manager, he just lets me click around in my GUI for 20 seconds, and lets me run Windows with native performance

>>59464771
>Sure you can OC it to 3.8-4.0ghz all core, but you are going to make a space heater since it fucks the power saving features and doubles the idle power usage.

That's not how it works. The 1700 is exactly the same die. The voltage you put on a 1800x is going to use the same as the voltage you put on a 1700. What differs is how they're binned but even there it isn't anything significant.

>>59464817
How do you even dress yourself if you have to rely on this website to pick a cpu for you?

>>59463887
what do you think
>for much less $
means?

>>59464817
So you shouldn't care if Ryzen is 5% slower in games, then.

File: 1467296306101.png (91KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 653x726px

Guys g-guys, they WILL solve these problems this time!

File: IMG_2648.png (85KB, 806x544px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 806x544px

>>59464851
>5%
Nigga you gay

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

609KB, 854x640px

Absolutely everybody will optimize for cores and CCX layout this time!

>>59464835
No it's not, you stupid piece of shit.
The 1800X has been proven by multiple sources to, by a great average, reach higher clocks on the same given voltage.

Don't post such dumb shit, please. Thanks.

File: Screenshot_2017-03-18_13-25-04.png (174KB, 759x436px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 759x436px

>>59464867
Better than being a nigger faggot

>>59464772
Then just buy an Intel CPU, richfag.
Why bother with price to performance ratio when you got much money for 240hz monitor...

>>59464876
Literally no 1800x was able to go past 4ghz you smelly poojet

>>59464892
We don't know what he has, it's probally some Pajeet on a x2 phenom or something.

>>59463959
https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/total_war_warhammer_pc_performance_review/8

The first core does roughly 80% of the workload. The other cores are secondary and are barely utilized.

File: 1488919452885.jpg (514KB, 960x686px) Image search: [Google]

514KB, 960x686px

The less fps and the more cores the better.
>just wait

>>59464876
>, reach higher clocks on the same given voltage.

That's because they're voltage binned. Are you incapable of reading? And again it isn't anything significant. Here's Silicon Lottery's results.

Ryzen 7 1700
93% reach 3.8GHz @ 1.376V
70% reach 3.9GHz @ 1.408V
20% reach 4.0GHz @ 1.440V

Ryzen 7 1800X
100% reach 3.8GHz (assumed)
97% reach 3.9GHz @ 1.376V
67% reach 4.0GHz @ 1.408V
20% reach 4.1GHz @ 1.440V


So how about you shut your face you dumb cuck.

File: 1318515351098.png (122KB, 336x327px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 336x327px

>>59464890
>AMD
Not even once

File: 1488896527219.png (765KB, 928x681px) Image search: [Google]

765KB, 928x681px

>>59464867
>one game

You know nobody buys shills cherry picking, right?

All you do is make yourself look retarded.

Unless you cherry pick that shows something useful that doesn't have bias, like how underutilized the 1800X is on those games it's not doing great in.

>>59464897
Nice lie.

>>59464892
That's what I'm doing. I make €3500 per month so not exactly a richfag but still

>>59464915
Silicon lottery? The place that stress tests for ONE hour (@1.51v) with the most expensive motherboards and coling solutions? Seems trustworthy.

File: SpD35vh.png (509KB, 626x705px) Image search: [Google]

509KB, 626x705px

>>59464915
That's exactly what I said.

Thanks for backing me up with data that proves exactly my point while calling me a retard.

Just as I said
>The 1800X has been proven by multiple sources to, by a great average, reach higher clocks on the same given voltage.

Oh, and hey, thanks again!

>>59464919
Nigga your cpoo lost even in your cherrypicked benchmark lmao

File: 1488404508616.png (316KB, 882x758px) Image search: [Google]

316KB, 882x758px

>>59464771
>futureproof
>just wait

>>59464852

X99 boards are still blowing up or nah?
5960X still have shit RAM timings or nah?

And finally...

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/mobo-makers-intel,860-29.html

Oh man, if only AMD had the luxury of sitting on a 15 year old architecture to have no issues.

I'm looking forward to when Intel launches their next netburst. It's going to be great revisiting these posts I've been saving.

>>59464954
Because the game is heavily underutilizing it. No core is near 99% like on the 7700k.

>>59464973
Nigga i swear you're retarded. Stop making your poojet excuses or reasonings. Your cpu loses all the time, I don't care why,

>>59464941
You can find similar findings elsewhere if you want. Just check valid.x86.fr. Doesn't change that they're still voltage binned and at the same voltage they're going to use the same wattage.

>>59464949
No, you said it makes it a space heater and uses more power you dumb cuck. That isn't the case at all. It's a 100Mhz loss in performance and that's it.

>>59464986
So what happens when Windows fixes their shit?

>>59464973
it is because the load is spread out over more cores.

>>59464993
Go ahead and run that 14nm part at 1.51 v and see how long that lasts, frog. No stress test for one hour is valid.

>>59465012
It's never going to. Don't live by promises

File: amd.png (1MB, 1228x1502px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1228x1502px

>>59465012
>just wait

>>59464993
I said losing power saving features by setting a fixed voltage, which disables most hardware and software power saving features, makes it a space heater.

Learn to read instead of going on a tangent because you don't understand something, you dumb fuck.

>>59465012
Pajeets will yet again be BTFO when they realise there is no magic fix.

>>59465026
Just wait on Coffee Lake, and the mysterious 10nm?

Intel has literally been selling rebrands for 10 years, and you can't wait to eat more of that shit.

>>59465042
Yet their rebrand destroys amd's innovation lol

>>59465020
I have my 1700 running at 4.0 at 1.4v passed RealBench for 8hours. Thanks. Go ahead and waste $200 for 100mhz.


>>59465033
> disables most hardware and software power saving features,

Except it doesn't. AMD's "cool and quiet" is still enabled. All windows power saving features still work. It still clocks down at idle. Nice try.

>>59465026

https://www.neowin.net/news/new-intel-drivers-give-up-to-30-performance-boost-for-surface-pro-3?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Boohoo.

>>59465039
Why would I buy a product that is constantly shilled by racists?

>>59465042
>Intel has literally been selling rebrands for 10 years
That changed with Kabby and Skylake.

>>59465052

"Destroys"

Hyperbole is the last refuge of an Intel pillow biter.

File: 1464804859737.jpg (52KB, 568x612px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 568x612px

>>59465042
I don't have to.

>>59465052
Because everytime Intel tries to innovate they fail harder than AMD ever dreamed of?

>>59465055
I would buy Ryzen if I didn't have a 6600k already, you stupid shit. Try to figure out who is on your side, moron.

>>59465067
Do you not understand what the core arch is? Are you that much of a inbred nigger?

>>59465089
>playing sides

I don't care about sides you stupid cuck. You say stupid things then I wouldn't even want you on my side even if I did.

>>59465075
Nigga everyone be making fun of your indian piece of shit. Gamers, professionals, tech news reporters, reviewers, even lonely loser on 4chan are beating their dick at you lmao, intel literally destroyed amd again

>>59465107
You dumb faggot, 1.4 is fine, but 1.51v is not fine.
I have no problem with you, or your setup you subhuman monkey, it's SL, and their 1 hour test with crazy voltages. Nice going, I bet you never scored well in reading comprehension tests, did you?

File: 1486810667607.jpg (66KB, 568x612px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 568x612px

>>59465107
>>59465075

>>59465133
The only place I have found that is so dramatic on this issue is this autistic website.

>>59465150
Still going on about SL? I already said you can check valid.x86.fr results you illiterate monkey cuckhold.

>>59465165
Then back to r/amd with ya, fellow RedTeam+ member!

>>59465180
No one should run their chips at those voltages, and expect them to last over a year. You made the claim, with a shitty, shitty source.

>>59465198
Angry your poojet 1800x can't do over 4ghz even at over 1.5 volts?

>>59465196
I own Intel, and never go to /r/reddit

>>59465198
The voltages are posted right there LAMO. How dumb are you? Should I post them again?


Ryzen 7 1700
93% reach 3.8GHz @ 1.376V
70% reach 3.9GHz @ 1.408V
20% reach 4.0GHz @ 1.440V

Ryzen 7 1800X
100% reach 3.8GHz (assumed)
97% reach 3.9GHz @ 1.376V
67% reach 4.0GHz @ 1.408V
20% reach 4.1GHz @ 1.440V

See that what's after that @ sign? Does that look like over 1.5 to you or can you not count as well?

>>59465232
Absolutely.
; ]

File: Screenshot_2017-03-18_13-51-30.png (7KB, 406x38px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 406x38px

>>59465214
>fucking implying

>>59465254
>naming your system reee

Confirmed loser lmao

File: Screenshot_2017-03-18_13-52-54.png (67KB, 737x480px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 737x480px

>>59465243
>fucking implying

>>59465133

Some kiddy faggots crying about shit he made up in his mind when cracked under the pressure of running benchmarks?

When reasonable adults say "wait, we haven't seen what a fully powered ryzen can do just yet"?

Fantastic. Enjoy your 1080 gaymen. I'm looking forward to 10-bit HDR, 4K resolution 60FPS gaymen while I compile faster, encode faster, and do it all at once.

Mozzle tov!

>>59465269
My name is Reece, and it is now confirmed you have no reading comprehension

>>59465279
Enjoy your housefire and poor performance and poo smell coming from your pc case

File: 1483629357673.png (181KB, 293x397px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 293x397px

>>59465275
Don't go out of your way. Without your RedTeam+ "swag" you'd look like a homeless beggar eitherway.

>>59465294
enjoy your hardware backdoors :^)

>>59465291
>Reece
>Raajet

So you are an actual indian lmfao

>>59465055
>at 1.4v
Yeah so you probably have over an 80w idle power draw instead of 40-45w. Exactly.

>>59465304
middle name, and I'm very much white, with a very Scottish last

>>59465307
doesn't affect the idle power draw, just load

>>59465326
Yes it does. rofl. You're fucking delusional.

Ryzen catches up to 7700K on average in games when you set high performance power profile and make sure the high precision event timer is turned off.

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

But really, unless you have a specific use for 8 cores get the 7700K.

>>59464712

Is there seriously a new socket with Skylake-X? Didn't 2011-V3 just come out a few years ago?

>>59465335
proofs

File: 1489536419539-pol.png (294KB, 573x273px) Image search: [Google]

294KB, 573x273px

>>59463856
For gaming get a 7700k but I code and run vm's like mad so the 1800x would be bae.

>>59465326
Ryzen actually idels much, much less than the Intel offering.

>>59465336
>believing Hans
>just wait
Get the 7700K eithetway.

File: AMDRYZEN.png (1MB, 1920x2080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x2080px

Intel shills get out.

>>59465336
Sorry I don't believe arabs

>>59465343
Google "ryzen overclocking benchmarks power"
Tons of results that prove you wrong, with idle power recordings compared to stock.

>>59465307
Nope. Just checked and I'm getting 54w idle on my kill-a-watt and that's with a 480 and a shitty 80+, not even bronze PSU. Keep trying though.

>>59465367
may i ask you to leave
>>>/pol/

Honestly, I'd go AMD. If you have a 7700K already you should just keep it, if buying, get the Ryzen. There are no games on the market built with this chip in mind at all. Once actually utilized it's ruining a lot of very expensive Intel chips. Thing is - it's simply not at the moment. A few programs and multi-tasking can make it shine, but no games. Get a few new titles out, and updates to current titles and AMD will get neck and neck if not ahead of Intel for games, and at the same time, it'll handle multi-tasking so much better. Saw today someone forgot they were rendering with handbreak on Ryzen and loaded up their game. Didn't even notice a drop in FPS while it's encoding in the background on handbreak. Very few Intel chips could do that for anywhere near this money. As an avid multi-tasker, the idea of rendering while gaming is so glorious. Or just generally having a shit load of things open and then games not being effected. I'd prefer 20% reduced frames that stay there no matter what, than a few extra frames with similarly priced intel chips, that would start to tank with a shit load of stuff in the background.

>>59463924
Get the Hero motherboard and you can use AM3, AM2, FM2 etc coolers no problem. Any cooler that usees the clips also work from AM3. It's only a few AIO coolers and massive twin tower jobbies that need special plates for AM4.

File: IMG_0834.jpg (107KB, 1024x568px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1024x568px

>>59465408
Cockroach detected. Kill yourself shitskin cuck

>>59465366
Ryzen is good for rendering, Pajeet. No one said that it wasn't.

For gaming though, it is utter shit.

>>59465408
Only if you come with me and this time with your lovely femboi dress on.

>>59465410
If I didn't buy a skylake last year, I would do the same. It's not even 20% less, that's worst case scenario in a few games that aren't optimized yet. I'm just waiting until Naples or whatever and some actually decent mobos.

>>59465410
Yeah I'm sure poozen will get a 50% single threaded performance boost to match the 7700k's after rajeet updates the BIOS

>>59465434
Hyperbole will not help your argument, it only destroys your credibility.

>>59463959
It didn't lose. It's 2 frames under average, but 15 frames above the i3 minimum. I'd prefer slightly lower but constant frames, than average 2 frames higher which I'd never see by eye, but it';s jumping up and down like a hookers nipples.

File: ae7a4b97e998b91f7ec01a0486202b7d.jpg (22KB, 236x309px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 236x309px

>>59463856
7700k better overall value.

Meets or exceeds 1800x 95% if the time. Only loses out by a small margin in even the best suited 1800x workloads.

Undervolt and overclock, hell of a chip.

>>59465410
>just wait

>>59465462
>undervolt and overclock
nope, rajeesh, dosen't work that way

>>59465434
Mafia 3 shows potential as well as crysis 3 among other games. If Ryzen was flat out shit at gaming it would show in Game. Some thing is not right on the software side and AMD is working with developers to fix that.

File: 120x120px-LS-7cda545d_900x600px-LL-0bb11514_av.png (28KB, 120x120px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 120x120px

>>59465458
Pajeet, I just agreed that Ryzen is good for production. Why can't you accept that it is shit for gaming?

>>59464206
Dammit, AMD can only render it twice the speed of my monitor's refresh rate. It's only worth buying if it can wrap quads around my monitor.

File: IMG_2567.png (179KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 600x450px

>>59465487
And photo and video encoding lol

>>59465487
Because getting 134 vs 156fps in a game is not "shit"

>>59463902
Ryzen seen to be good on paper but it's very unstable.

If you go 7700k you need to delid to unlock it's full potential. Its almost guarantee to reach 5ghz

File: ryzen oc idle.png (32KB, 615x515px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 615x515px

>>59465387
Less than 10 watts. Wowzers.

>>59465408
India, please go back to your containment general /dpg/.

>>59465506
My monitor's refresh rate is 240hz poojet

File: 1470851181273.png (154KB, 505x479px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 505x479px

>>59465509
But it is.

>>59465512
>7700k destroys poozen cpu's while using half the power

Not even surprised

>>59465520
And all you can do is write 300 line scripts?

>>59464389
why compare two affordable cars when a jet engine for a billion dollars will beat it

>>59465509
But an i5 intel CPU at half the price of Ryzen will get you 156 fps. Why would you buy Ryzen for double the price and 134 fps?

I don't usually call people shills, but you are starting to sound like one. Either that or you are in denial.

>>59465438
a degenerate germanhating faggot, who would have thought

>>59465545
>idle
guess what it is loaded?

>>59465545
>half the power

Where is anything there half?

>>59465539
Unless you stare at your fps counter instead of playing the game, you wouldn't notice. Fact.

>>59465555
I have an i5, and I would like to do more than one thing at a time. 4 cores are a joke.

>>59465563
Any grown, straight white man couldn't resist your boipusi Rajeesh.

>>59465512
>6900k
>91W idle
what?

>>59465307
Intel 8 core 16 thread chips are idle at 75W+ anyway, so even if Ryzen goes from 45W to 80W, it's now only matching the rival intel chip...

>>59465599
Just wait until you OC it

>>59463856
Buy Intel if u want satisfaction or amd if u want disappointment

>>59465585
When people say FPS don't matter their whatever given argument goes straight into the trash, just like their old ass.

>>59465599
That's what happens with a huge ass die and more cores. People still don't get how efficient Ryzen is for a 8c chip in terms of raw power/watt.

>>59465624
I buy Intel for the free 32bit cpu they include on the die for free.

>>59465585
>and I would like to do more than one thing at a time. 4 cores are a joke.
I have a 2500k and can do multiple things at once.
Stop talking shit.

>>59465637
What

>>59465585
At one point or another, you will have buyer's remorse with Zen's Moar cores CCX design, friend.

>>59465626
Stop putting words into my mouth, shill. Why do you shill for products you only can dream of owning? You wouldn't be able to notice much of a difference in between the two in a double blind, so what gives? Must be a fanboy.

watching a twitch stream uses 45% of my cpu usage with my 3570K. Fuck 4 cores. Now I would get the 6900K if it was $500. But 1700 is tempting

>>59465555
Because if you want to do anything at the same time as gaming, that half price i5 would fucking shit it's pants and AMD's frames would stay the same.

>>59465657
You can't even stream and game at the same time. Fact.

>>59465668
Only buyers remorse I have ever had was a Intel 4 core.

>>59465695
Same low? Lmao

>>59465406
That's over 10 watts higher than people are getting stock.

>>59465681
>>59465699

>damage control

Brought to you by our lovely neighbouring r/ayymd.

>>59465699
>You can't even stream and game at the same time. Fact.

?

i have a 2600k and routinely stream and game at the same time. 720p/60 and 1080p/60 are not cpu intense to encode at all.

File: 7ae8ef32c12e7072019d6ea3d9d08319.png (131KB, 1449x845px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 1449x845px

Ryzen is fine if you're happy with 60hz regardless of resolution. It's not enough if you're looking for 144hz though. I had to go with highend ddr4 and a [email protected] for that. I do think that Ryzen will deliver 60hz for a very long time due to how much faster it is than aa 7700k but it's 4 core speed is lower and that's what matters right now.

If you want it to last a very long time r7 1700 and good cooling. If you want max possible fps right nnow today then kaby lake.

>>59465512
>not listing voltage
You really are a retard, aren't you?

>>59465682
And what can't yo do whilst watching a twitch stream?

I can run a VM, watch a movie and browse the internet at the same time with my 2500K. What do you need more than 4 cores for?

>>59465728
I never go to /r/reddit, so now what? Only thing these threads have convinced me of is :Never listen to /g/, and Ryzen is bretty gud.

>>59465695
Just stop posting you have no idea what you are on about.

>>59465682
Your shit is fucking broke dude or your lying and on a p3 or some shit

>>59465740
Gaming, faggot. Fps drops to half at the same time.

File: IMG_1090.jpg (19KB, 250x241px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 250x241px

>>59465771
>tfw intel frames dropped by 50% is still more than ryzen

>>59465750
Then you admit to openly shill my RedTeam+ member.

>>59465732
I have a 6600k and your minimums and stutter are much more pronounced than even an i7. Cities:Skyline absolutely maxes out all cores at 99% all the time.

>>59465771

nah man. html5 uses much less CPU usage than flash does and twitch switched from flash a while ago. your CPU is just shit. i can play games fine and watch twitch streams.

>>59465785
What country are you from?

>>59465732
First gen ryzen wont last for shit. If you want a 5 year part get 7700k

>>59465796
Not india unlike you poojet

>>59465796
What?

>>59465808
Engrish is not your first language, is it?

>>59465597
fuckin pakistanis are out their minds

>>59465823
Toilet isn't your best friend, is it?

>>59465786
The point of that picture is that going from 6600k stock/ddr4 2133 to 6600k stock/ddr4 3600 cl16 brought my minimums from ~55 to ~75. Then overclocking to 4.7ghz with ddr4 3600 brought them up further to ~95. I was trying to show that I needed every last bit of performance to get there. The gpu is the same across all of those.

>>59465734
https://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2017/03/08/amd-ryzen-7-1700-review/7
>We're not looking at significantly more overclocking headroom than the Ryzen 7 1800X, but two really great things happened. Firstly, we could overclock a teeny bit higher at 4.05GHz, which lead to some tangible boosts in performance, but also, the lower TDP also saw a lower power draws, while the lower voltage required to get to this frequency than the flagship model needed to get to 4GHz - 1.4125V, resulted in lower power consumption under load too.

All the more reason to get a 1700 over a 1800x. Anyone recommending a 1800x has to be a retard or an intel shill.

File: Screenshot_2017-03-18_14-33-06.png (4KB, 167x71px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 167x71px

>>59465808
>>59465831
Still deflecting? You are some shitskin from some shithole that is probally posting on an Athalon or something

>>59465511
Oh trust me--I have a delidded 6700 that I undervolted and threw into a SFF build--thing barely gets over 55C going full-bore.

>>59465841
Why didn't you just buy an i7 instead of that dram?

>>59465712
Oh no, 10 watts? I reset it to stock just for you bb and guess what? 54w. It's almost like you can't compare idle performance to others because people have different parts. Imagine that.

File: IMG_2029.jpg (60KB, 576x960px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 576x960px

>>59465846
>spic immigrant
>calling others shitskins

BUILD WALL

>>59465854
all that trouble for only a 10 deg difference?

>>59465875
I am very much white in America. Unlike you.

>>59465427
The problem is, and I was hoping they'd fix it with this socket, is the clips always go long-ways, causing the coolers to intake from the graphics card and exhaust into the roof of the case, when I normally exhaust from the back.

I finally got an adapter for my Noctua, but that was after waiting a week for shipping.

It's a damn shame Micro Center sells the 1700X/1800X without coolers--god, I wish I could undo that decision of buying the 1700X.

>>59465890
Sure thing Paco, now get back to building the wall

>>59465890
If you're covered in sperm it doesn't make you any more white than a gorilla in a zoo full of bird crap.

>>59465926
It's a shame you shill for products that exceed your yearly income. Sad!

>>59465938
I know it must be tough for a mexican

>>59465934
Sperm is good for the skin.

>>59465955
You must know. ;)

>>59465861
The ram resulted in a massive FPS increase and the game shows 0 scaling with SMT. The next best upgrade at this point for me is kabylake and a delid tool to try to get to 5.1ish ghz.
I also sold my old ram for exactly what I paid and the new kit was $160 so I got a huge performance uplift for only 60 bucks.

The ram was a god damn 20 fps increase on the lows. 900mhz on the cpu was about the same. Another 400mhz should bring my minimums past 100 maybe.

>>59465952
You are literally a thirld worlder posting on an old shitbox that someone from my country would throw in the trash. All you have is to throw "insults" that aren't even accurate.

>>59465668
i have buyers remorse from ~2008 when i went with the less core/higher rate e8400 when i should have gotten the q6600 quad core

i learned then that more cores in the long run is always better

>>59465986
No I don't want to buy some cheap weed from you

>>59466004
The weed I have you couldn't even afford. White people do everything better.

>>59463924
>>59463902
This is only a problem for people that do everything fucking wrong. You don't buy a 1700x/1800x over a 1700. You FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, do not buy ASUS shit. Gigabyte or MSI B350 boards or AsRock X370 and you won't have any issues with memory or BIOS issues.

Ryzen has actually been a fucking breeze and far easier to OC than any Intel platform I've been on. The 4770k and 5820k builds have been major headaches in comparison.

>>59465993
Not when Ryzen suffers from optimization and architectural issues that can't be simply "fixed".
>just wait

File: Screenshot_2017-03-18_11-43-07.png (325KB, 860x442px) Image search: [Google]

325KB, 860x442px

>>59466034

>>59466027
Except you're not white l

>>59466070
Except I am. You have posted no proof of where you live, or what equipment you are on. My name and time zone are all in this thread, you can figure out if Reece Stephenson sounds Indian, can't you?

File: wojakself.png (293KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 633x758px

>>59466068
Just like what they promised since Bulldozer. Most devs on future titles won't unless Intel jumps on the Moar cores train and even then there are issues with Windows, infinity fabric CCX etc.

>>59466068
At it once more.
>just wait

>>59466139
>using all 8 cores for windows

yeah right.. that windows shit is going to use 4 cores max

>>59466139
but Intel is jumping on the more corez train. Not AMD's fault Windows is shit.

>>59466101
Poo in the loo with your cpoo

>>59466172
4 cores as in I'm going to emulate it and limit the resources

>>59466174
That 6 core Intel chip won't cost less than 400$ Rajeet.

>>59466171
Or we can wait on Intel to deliver more than 1% IPC gain? Or a new arch every 12 years? Intel has sold you the same chip for generations now, you apparently have no issues with that.

>>59466191
Because not only is it superior it just werks.

>>59466191
And yet the 12 year old intel chip beats amd's 2017 chip lmao

>>59466190
Still deflecting the fact that you are a thirld worlder posting on an ancient shitbox, that has no hope of even affording an i3?

>>59466215
I am not that poster cute Rajeet. You're so sweet when you cross-dress.

>>59466214
Every time Intel innovates, they fail miserable. They have nowhere to go but down after Kaby Lake's 1% IPC gain, and that only edges out ryzen because it is essentially a OC'd Skylake. After the "optimization" of 14nm that gave us 1% IPC, Intel is fucked. Zen is a new arch, and will only get better.

>>59465879
Let's put it this way--I'm maxing a CPU with hyperthreading with a tiny little cooler with the fan set so low I can't even hear it, in a SFF case, and it's only getting over 55.

Yes, it was worth it.

>>59466249
>just wait
Never gets old.

>>59466190
and bigger power consumption than 8c ryzen, kek

>>59466256
but you really aren't maxing it if you undervolted it, friend.

>>59463902
early adopter's tax friendo

it's a new architecture in 5 years, it doesn't start working seamlessly out of the box like that

>>59466249
>in 5 years amd will be better than kaby lake

Do you realize Intel will have released another chip by then right?

>>59466266
Yes, just wait on Intel to give us something more than a yearly 1% performance increase. They blew their load with Kaby lake, they won't be able to go much further at all with the core arch. It's a dead horse that has been beat to death. Nowhere but down from here on out.

>>59466276
Maxing it means I'm maxxing the fucking cores.

Unlike most people, I like my computers cool, quiet and efficient--I don't need the extra heat and FPS when it's already well over the refresh rate of my monitor.

Not to mention, that specific computer is a productivity build.

>>59466300
The 14nm technology has been stretched to max you dumb indian. Rajeet can't squeeze more power out of 14nm than intel already has. And by the time amd makes a good 14nm Intel has already moved to 10nm.

>>59466300
Keep telling yourself that and your shit filled ears, Rajeet.

>>59466282
I never said 5 years, those are your words. And will they really? They can't seem to figure 10nm out, now it's tick-tock-tock-tock.

>>59466322
I'm white, so here's a (you) for the collection

>>59466321
14nm will be here for a long time. The cost v benifit on 10nm just isn't worth the trouble, it seems. Just like 20nm was. 7nm is where the forward thinkers are heading for. Much, much better cost:perf:energy than 10nm.

File: Disappointed.jpg (50KB, 330x327px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 330x327px

>practically bump limit
I hate you anons. How are you still shitposting the release?

>>59466513
weekend /g/

File: 7700k.jpg (442KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

442KB, 1920x1080px

>>59466300
6700K only gets to 5.0ghz on water

7700K will do 5.4/5.2 on water

>>59466726
It's basically the same processor tho with slight improvements to help thermal stability.

>>59463856
get a fucking R5 or the 7700k if you don't know what you're doing and are just interesting in gaymen.

1700/1800/1800X are for people who want to run shit tons of different things at once, maybe including gaming, but not focused primarily on it.

File: f2d.png (82KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 625x626px

>>59464147
>Not to mention, the processors are just MADE better--you delid a 6700K and you can shave off up to 20C off of the max temps. They delidded a Ryzen and it dropped 2 degrees.

>>59467804
No bait. It's a bit dangerous if you're new, and depends on the silicon lottery, but you can get rather dramatic cooling with delidding combined with the right TIM.

>>59465337
Welcome to Intel.

>>59467839
You shouldn't have to risk destroying the hardware you just spent hundreds of dollars on because the manufacturer decided to not spend the $0.02 to solder the IHS. Anyone who argues that TIM>Solder is either baiting or retarded.

>>59468128
Anyone who claims a material specifically designed to be electrically conductive and easy to work with will perform better in all or most circumstances than a material designed to transfer heat effectively is either baiting or being retarded.

>>59464369
all these Benchmarks are stupid menial tasks and Intel still wins most of the time

you are just making amd look bad