RYZE from the ashes AMD, your time has come. The r5 series will

>>59527620
Even if the R5 series of chips clock like shit (like their 8c16t brothers), the sheer performance of them at the prices they're offering should be enough to tempt people. I'm completely sold on a 1700/asrock taichi board specifically for setting up a home server for encoding, thin clients, etc. I'm just playing the inevitable waiting game to see if BIOS revisions are up to par.

Was the windows scheduler thing ever fixed? Or is minimum 3200mhz ram still required? I'm cruising on 32GB of ddr4-2400 as is.

>>59527620
I don't mean to brag I don't mean to boast but AMD is like butter on your breakfast toast!

>>59527683
This a million times. My VMs would run so sweet. The chips are so cheap why the fuck not.

>>59527685
upboasted.

I get that they're gonna be competitive, cool. But what about that new HT-enabled i5 that is coming out soon, won't that still be blowing out a Ryzen, or is it still all about that single-threaded performance?

>>59527732
LGA2066

File: 1490121371570-v.png (83KB, 370x301px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 370x301px

>>59527716
Yea that was a huge shock to me at launch. 16 threads? For $329? At 65w tdp? At first I said "typical AMD hype train at it again". Then the benches came out. Not to mention that Microcenter by me has a $30 bundle deal for CPU/Mobo combos. And an additional $15 off per 16GB kit of certain ram brands. Then an additional $20 off certain SSDs.

For fucks sake my current Haswel pentium dual core is rated for 42w tdp. Gimme that sweet sweet R7-1700 so I can lock it down to 2.9ghz and make it a 40w tdp chip.

It's unfortunate I'd have to use windows 10 on the server though unless windows 7 magically works.
>Inb4 Linux

>>59527732
so whats the new i7s gonna get?, double HT?, 1 COAR 4 THREADS

Not with the lack of CCX-infinity fabric optimization.
>just wait
>muh gaimz

>>59527892

IBM does it because unlike Intel IBM can into SMT.

>>59527892
Coffeelake is going to have 6 core mainstream. This was confirmed a year ago and mentioned on /g/ every day, yet some people still don't get it.
Main stream as in: you'll be able to get a 6core for the "Z370" equivalent motherboard chipset, instead of needing an even more expensive X299 board.

I'm pretty sure dual core i3s are going away, and they'll be quad core.

It's likely going to be:
i7-8700k = 6c/12t
i5-8600k = 6c/6t
other i5s = various 4c/8t and 6c/6t but locked
i3s = 4c/4t

Naming may change, and the "8700k" may be more expensive, but that's probably what the SKUs will look like.

>>59527953
too bad they wont run on windows 7 though, else id seriously consider the those, or Zen+/2

>>59527953
Not happening.

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

91KB, 653x726px

>>59527953
Currytech rumour mill.
>Intel will into Moar c-coarz now too so expect full risens optimization

>>59527892
1 core 64 threads is the future, anybody that tells you otherwise is a shill.

>>59527732
>>59527892
Intel has a few paths onwards either they chose to increase caches in both i5s and i7s and increase performance by quite a margin.
Enable HT in i5s
Get rid of the iGPU which takes close to 40% of the die space and release an i7 beast with 8 cores.


They will probably go with cache memory increases and HT enabled in i5s.

>>59527800
Windows 7 will "work", but won't get updates and will lack future improvements to the scheduler.

>>59527953
Return of the housefire meme.

>>59527974
I wouldn't consider Intel ever again.
They were greedy cunts holding back 6 core from mainstream for so long when it should have been introduced 2 years ago.

They made people upgrade motherboards from Broadwell/Haswell for pretty much no reason. The reason should have been for 6 cores on the socket.

But lots of retards were happy to give them $350 for the same 4c/8t CPU over and over, so they got away with it and enjoyed crazy profit margins.

>>59528046
It's been reported all over.
Intel can't compete on only 4 cores for their top gayman CPU. Tons of games max it out 98-100% load on all 8 threads at under 144fps. No one that's not retarded is going to buy an 8th gen 4 core for high end gaming with a 144hz monitor.

>>59528027
Yes it is. The 2 cores will just be Pentiums.

>>59527800
Win7 will work and I never update it. Also thanks for mentioning microcenter, I forgot about them and their bundle deals. Also why not run Windows 2012 Server Edition

>>59528095
Supposedly the 6core Coffeelake are the same TDP as the current 4 cores.
So either they're clocked to a lower, more efficient point, and/or they're made them more efficient somehow.
At least that's the case for high end 45w TDP laptops. Could definitely be different TDP targets for desktops. It might even be 135w TDP 4.5ghz turbo. But that's nothing compared to those old 200w TDP chips they used to put out and claim were lower.

>>59528062
This is how mostly things will go
>>59527953
RedTeam+ at it again.

>>59528108
I should say, id consider both equally, but being forced on windows 10 as it is now, id rather sit on my 2500k @ 4.5Ghz until.. fuck itll never get sorted out.

>>59528152
>RedTeam+
Kill yourself shilltel cuck.

>>59528152
You're a delusional fanboy if you think Intel can compete with 2c/2t and 2c/4t i3s up against true 4 core R3s that are more power efficient as well.

AMD APUs are going in the upcoming Macbooks and Surface tablets after AMD scammed Intel into licensing their GPUs to use in a Macbook deal that's now fallen through.
AMD has signed a contract with Microsoft to provide Naples for Azure servers and is in the process of others.

The whole business world sees almost the entire Intel product stack as being worthless except for their Pentiums, and the company isn't going to survive off retarded fanboys like you if they don't actually move forward on the rest of their SKUs.

>>59528164
You can run Windows7 on Ryzen, you just have to manually download the updates.

And you should be dual booting with Linux or running Windows in VMs, anyway.

File: 1488205393827.jpg (71KB, 552x661px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 552x661px

>>59528207
>>59528178

>>59528220
I was talking Ryzen+/Ryzen2
Same as i was talking about coffe lake there

Neither AMD or Intel will run on windows 7, with the next generation/update

Which sucks because w10 is a peice of shit.

>>59528207
>You're a delusional fanboy
The irony.

>>59528207
You're full of shit. Did you even read back to yourself what you typed apparently not with those delusions.

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

66KB, 653x370px

>>59528287
>>59528257
>>59528224

>dual cores in 2017

File: 55917_05_pentium-g4560-costs-64-fights-core-i5-2500k-230_full[1].jpg (221KB, 1300x866px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 1300x866px

>>59527620

*blocks ur path*

File: Sluuuut.png (23KB, 218x183px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 218x183px

>>59528207
>>59528108
>>59527953
You again?

>>59528287
intel will continue to suck cock as long as they keep charging $200 for dual cores in 2017

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

316KB, 882x758px

>>59528310

File: 1487796664182.jpg (66KB, 600x874px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 600x874px

>>59528456

File: tumblr_o47xjaJsIJ1u7vbh3o1_1280.jpg (165KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 1280x960px

>>59528382
how'd you know I'm a slut, anon?

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

1MB, 1228x1502px

>>59528479

File: Ryzen-Rise-of-the-Tomb-Raider-1080p-Very-High-Preset-1.png (44KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 800x600px

APOLOGIZE

>>59528498
Sorry, meant mental illness.

>>59527620
That 6c/12t r5 and r7 1700 puts the 6800k and 6900x on suicide watch price wise but I'm not so sure I see the value in the other parts. There are relatively inexpensive 4c kaby lake parts and the dirt cheap kaby lake pentium. The whole productivity angles dries up pretty fast assuming less than 6c/12t

>>59528515
Post a link to pic

>>59528526
True.

>>59528550
http://www.eteknix.com/ryzen-vs-intel-gtx-1080-ti-showdown-revisited-more-resolutions-overclocks-games-tested/

File: laugh.jpg (18KB, 248x189px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 248x189px

>>59528515
>>59528564
>eteknix
>posting the fake benchmarks

>>59528515
while thats good, sadly that game will most likely be an outlier

>>59528564
Looks too good to be true desu. Looks 'Joker' kind of fishy. What changed?

File: Ryzen-Doom-1440p-Ultra-Preset-Vulkan-1[1].png (42KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 800x600px

>>59528564

yeah, nah.

these benchmarks make 0 sense at all.

>>59528610
>>59528600
>>59528607
Damn, almost tricked by a poojet there, thanks guys.

>>59528608
Windows 10 update

>>59528498
If you wish to be a skeleton then off yourself.

>>59528645
And a higher paycheck for respected RedTeam.

File: 1475443347420.jpg (22KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 250x250px

>4/8 with 2 CCX

>>59528727
>but it's half the cost of an i7 goy!
And half the performance. Into the bin.

>>59528129
I was thinking of getting windows 2016 essentials. Does 2012 R2 have the same functionality as 2016?

Where would I get an .Iso? I don't mind buying the lowest Windows server license (around $500 for 2016 essentials). But if 2012 R2 is the same price, I won't bother.

>>59528743
Fucking this. The 4C r5s probably won't even get half of the FPS that the 7700k does.

>>59527918
>>59528727
>>59528743
Yeah ppl keep ignoring the ccx infinite fabric issue and there is no apparent fix coming

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

514KB, 960x686px

>>59528777
Because it's an architectural flaw. AMD cheaped out on it and is expecting everyone to optimize for it. Totally happening.

Yeeaaaah the 8 cores are probably gonna perform better desu. Also valve recently made some optimizations to dota2 for ryzen on the beta client, supposedly some dude on phoronix claimed it gave him a 30fps boost. Might be interesting if more games released ryzen optimizations but that is pretty unlikely given how lazy these companies are.

>>59528852
On r/amd most ppl claimed marginal or none FPS gains, minority either worse or alot better with their chips in DotA 2.
>plebit
No bully pls.

>>59528773
Oh shit son. Never mind. I didn't know you could use an evaluation copy for 180 days. I'll just keep rearming it and/or reinstall every 6 months.

>>59528777
It's not an "issue" it's literally how they designed the chip. It's a feature because like Bulldozer, they didn't manage to make real cores like Intel.

File: 1487038167333.png (236KB, 620x649px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 620x649px

>>59528777
"issue"

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

52KB, 568x612px

>>59529147
>>59529118
>"feature"

>>59527620
i think the gpu disabled $70 ryzen apu 4c8t will be the best.

>>59527918
all i do is encode chinese cartoons.
works for me.

>>59529273
lmao it's not going to be $70 unless it has way less cache and shit.

These APUs aren't going to be the same cheap shit considering they'll outperform like a i5-7600k in most games in addition to having a GPU worth $50-$65 as well.

It's likely they'll be roughly the same cost as the r3 and r5s unless they're gimped somehow to be laptop focused, which is very possible.

>>59528936
That evaluation copy will unvalidate itself after a week and can't be updated either way until you activate it

Every AMD CPU i had since Athlon was a letdown.

Every AMD/Radeon card since the 9800PRO was a letdown.

I'm sorry /pol/, but the kikes won this battle. I only want peak performance for games, any cpu can do handle my workstation needs at this point.

AMD isn't even the budget choice, they're still expensive as fuck and you can get a better intel cpu in the low end for the same bux. Especially if you buy used.

I really wanted Ryzen+Vega to be hot shit, but it's just regular old poo. Thanks pajeet.

>>59527800
Any R7 can have a cTDP of 35W, which apparently locks all core boost to 1.9 GHz, and single core boost to 3.3 GHz

>>59530685

I'd take a copper IHS any day of the week.

>>59528936
You can find keys online for $20. No idea how legal they are though.

>>59530294
This desu. Even my "ebin fury" stutters like a motherfucker is most games. On top of that, the price dropped $100 a month after I bought it!

>>59530294
This.

>>59528777
>>59529162
Average latency in core to core communication for Ryzen is 40ns.
Average for intel is 80ns.
Only when crossing CCX does latency increase for Ryzen to 140ns, and this can be decreased substantially by utilizing faster RAM which increases data fabric speed.

There literally is no issue whatsoever. Inter core communication is better in Ryzen than what intel is offering.

>>59531640
How's latency between CCX on 3200Mhz RAM? 120ns? Got a link?

how will Intel ever recover?
>>59531619

>>59527683
Ryzen is not that cheap,at least in Europe.

>>59531696
Can confirm. So is any AMD product compared to its competition. Why's it like this?

>>59531669
PCPerspective didn't show other memory results in their testing, but heres the source
https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/AMD-Ryzen-and-Windows-10-Scheduler-No-Silver-Bullet

They used some bullshit 2400mhz kit for their review, and since its not mentioned anywhere these tests likely have the same RAM installed.

>>59531696
>Europoors can't do math, thus are poor, and don't realize the Ryzen 7 prices are generally exactly what they're supposed to be when you convert them too their worthless currency and add their absurd anti-freedom taxes.

>>59531640
>>59531669
What is this CCX? I've been gone a few months, I had to return some video tapes, don't ask, heh.
And is this why I've been seeing specialized AMD-optimized RAM kits around on newegg?

>>59531717
Would love to know latency on a 3200Mhz RAM kit.

File: tumblr_nu6xskk0Wc1reorefo1_500.gif (285KB, 500x371px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 500x371px

>>59528334
>dual core

>>59531734
core-complex.

The Ryzen 7 is essentially 2 dual quad cores on the same CPU sharing some interfaces and with a bridge between them.

For some applications, this is better, due to lower latency of the cache along the same CCX. For games that aren't optimized for it correctly, it suffers a 10-20% fps hit having a 2+2 core configuration over 4+0.

ait for yzen

>>59530454
To be honest Ryzen's idle performance is a little disappointing, but that might be a BIOS issue.

Would be great if it can clock down to 15/35w and spin down the fans for passive mode. And hopefully be able to do typical browsing/streaming/video workloads without needing to clock up.

>>59531803
Makes sense, Cores > "Cores", or threads?
Not really regretting my 6600k. I haven't even needed to OC it for my gaymen yet. Just bought it because I didn't want to deal with fucking watercooling and everything else. Bulldozer naming convention sucked too.

>>59531836
actual cores. Ryzen has SMT (that's better than Intel's)

I'd regret a 6600k if I were you. You have probably just seen benchmarks that don't record 0.1% minimums and which were GPU limited. The vast majority of games the past 2 years have made good use of HT, especially when it comes to minimum frame rates. It was a bad idea to buy a 4c/4t CPU in 2015 and beyond except if you had a tight budget (at which case a 6400 or 6500 and a chaper motherboard was a better value)

>>59531875
So a 1600+cheap Vega is best value now for a core2duo fag like me? What mobo would you recommend with that?

>>59531875
How much difference would quad channel vs dual channel memory make in gaymen for Intel vs amd like 7600k vs 1600x ? Would it be alot?

File: amd-ryzen-ddr4-scaling-latency.jpg (77KB, 849x531px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 849x531px

>>59531737
Just DRAM latency going from 2400mhz to a middle of the road 3200mhz kit drops latency from 91ns to 76ns. Pretty substantial difference there alone, faster kits have been shown to hit mid 60s.
The data fabric operates at half of the memory speed (2400mhz RAM = 1200mh data fabric) so increasing memory speed doubly increases the fabric bandwidth. Running at a higher frequency decreases delay in signaling and therefore latency as well, we just don't know the total effect of it in over all latency.

Communication between two cores looks something like:
L1D + L2 + BUS + DFI + DF + IMC + DF + DFI + BUS + L2 + L1D

Assuming that there is a specific unit for the data fabric which would incur its own latency hit. The known factors are:
1.3 + 8.5 + 10 + ? + ? + ? + ? + ? + 10 + 8.5 + 1.3 ~= 140

Almost 40ns right there. The unknown factors are the datafabric, and the memory controller. They account for the largest portion of latency in this operation, so it stands to reason that the reduction in latency from utilizing faster memory would tight timings would be substantial.

DDR4-4133 on Ryzen when?

>>59531932
Keep watching reviews and reading bug threads. ASUS is getting in trouble with some of their boards right now and new BIOS' are very frequent.

>>59531996
>2400mhz RAM = 1200mh data fabric) so increasing memory speed doubly increases the fabric bandwidth

>>59531996
Infinity Fabric on Zeppelin is purportedly a 256b crossbar running at half nominal DRAM clock.

I would be surprised if inter-CCX traffic goes through the IMC.

>>59532008
DRAM producers have to start producing significant volumes of chips that hit those frequencies with sane timings first. That probably won't be any time soon, and will likely take a process shrink.
The best DIMMs you can find on the market are 3600mhz with consistent CL15 timings, any higher than that and you start seeing timings loosen up, timings take a huge jump up to C18-19, or you run into an absurd number of dead DIMMs.
For a while even GSkill was having huge numbers of their higher end kits DOA, even as recent as January this year.

>>59531875
>>59532070
So Ryzen is better at thr end for gaymen despite the 10-40 fps loss? What?

>>59531875
I kinda figured since I was a faggot and ended up getting the Fury and 1440p/144Hz memes. Was just gonna do 1080p but I got sick of waiting for the fucking 480's. And I already had the rest of the build by then.

>>59532103
w-w-when is my b350m-a getting updated..

>>59532070
Yeah it has the same clock as the RAM, the RAM just gets to multiply by two because it's DDR?

>>59532159
DDR transfers 2 bit on the data lines per external clock tick (as the name implies), but that shouldn't have jack shit to do with anything between the memory controller and between cores.

The IF bus width/speed was almost certainly chosen to get the desired bandwidth within target power budgets and not needing even more buffering between additional clock domains.

Everyone will see how flexible the crossbar setup is when Naples finally deploys, since each CCX will need to have data shunted to as many as 7 remote CCXs over a variety of on-die, on-MCM, and cross-mobo interconnects.

>>59531932
No idea about Vega yet. Can't extrapolate like the 1600 and 1600X since Vega is totally different from Polaris.

If the Vega flagship ends up being between 1080 and 1080Ti performance and even better than the 1080Ti in some games for $500, then sure, obviously that's the best. But it might be barely above the 1080 in most games and behind it on some. Or it might cost more without beating the 1080Ti enough.

But CPU wise? It seems very clear that the 1600 is by far the best performance/$. It's like the same performance/$ as the g4560 except over 3 times more powerful and on AM4 so waaaay more future-resistant.

>>59531986
Huh? The LGA1151 socket only supports dual channel.
You would get worse performance using 4x4Gb over 2x8Gb.

>>59532102
Are you retarded? Ryzen doesn't get a 10-40 fps loss over the 7600k/6600k in 99% of games. On average, it beats it. It's only a few edge cases that it does bad in, like Doom and Deus Ex.
You're thinking of the 7700k, which with a comparable motherboard and cooler is $200 more expensive than the 1600.

Plenty of benchmarkers have done simulated tests of the 1600X by disabling 2 cores on the 1800X and there's hardly any games that it loses to the 7600k on. In most cases, it has at least a 20% higher minimum framerate than it and that's WITHOUT games actually being optimized better for it.
It's only some games that massively fuck up their scheduling on it by thinking it's Bulldozer or something like Doom which it does poorly in, and even then it's still good for the price.

>>59532103
Fury is the best performance/$ out of GPUs right now. 55% the performance of a 1080Ti for 1/3rd the price.

>>59532260
>shouldn't have jack shit to do with anything between the memory controller and between cores
I thought it has something to do with the Infinity Fabric being sort of a bus that needs to have the same clock frequency as the RAM because it puts stuff that can't fit in the L3 in the RAM instead
It is still early with these chips I just want to understand how they work

>>59532308
too bad my fury was $350. I really almost got a second one when they went for 230~240ish but not sure if my 850W can handle it, and I keep hearing Crossfire is a meme. I guess everything's a meme though. It's doing me well besides the 4GB and coil whine.

>>59532103
I wouldn't listen to that guy he's overhyping some anecdotal bullshit.

Hard to go wrong with anything days but there certainly are some faults in the Zen implementation people seem to want to forget about.

>>59532712
Yeah, might just be another technical thing that's going to be an intel meme forever. I don't get the whole early adopter thing anyways but I guess it's fun for some people.

>>59532703
At $350 it's still roughly even performance/$ as the 1080Ti for something you bought like a year ago.

Getting a second one would have been a bad idea, though. Lots of games don't support dual GPU and that would put out a stupid amount of heat. 850W is enough, though, if it's a good PSU.

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

84KB, 653x726px

>>59528046

>>59532737
early adoption is fun, its nice to get useful software/firmware/microcode updates for a while.

im very happy with my 7700k but im having a really hard time not upgrading my second pc witha 1700x. when i stop seeing people bitch about motherboards or when we see what intels next move is i think im going to go for something >4cores

>>59531696
It s 320€ for a 1700 here...

>>59527953
Intel will nuke AMD if they release a slightly better 7700k that comes with 6 corez

Knowing Intel, it will probably cost more than the 7700k and Skylake-X will cost an arm and a leg

>>59535152
Yeah I'm expecting it to be more like $400+, but I'm fairly certain it's going to be on the next mainstream socket (Z370 or whatever)

I'd think they'll use the 8700k name, though. Otherwise they don't have enough numbers left for the Skylake-X parts unless they go for completely different branding for X299. Which imo they should.

AMD has the same problem. They don't have enough numbers left for 12, 14, 16 core HEDT parts. But they could potentially release a 16 core only I guess.
With my understanding of the Ryzen manufacturing process, they can detect bad cores before they ever go into Naples or Snowy Owl and put them into lower parts instead.

>>59527923
You can't expect these AMDrones to know about Power8/9 CPUs.

Intel does have 4-way SMT with Xeon Phi, but I can't help but wonder if the multithreaded performance scaling is as terrible with it as its 2-way?

AMD's SMT performs on a whole nother level as HT and it makes you wonder how Intel weren't able to better improve it over like 10 fucking generations.

You can't make an excuse that Intel were holding back due to HT not being used much, since it was seeing wide use even in games, and lots more software before that, before Skylake launched. It's likely just down to how many engineers they keep firing.

>>59530294
I don't even care, I'm not a pro gamer, and I'd rather give my money to AMD. I just want my games to be playable and smooth.

File: 1484378704289.png (140KB, 563x609px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 563x609px

>>59535251
There aren't going to be 14 cores.
>1100
>1200X
>1300
>1400X
>1500
>1600X
>1700
>1700X
>1800X

>1900 - 12 core
>1900X - 16 core

bing bam bang done.

>>59535251
8000 series = 8th gen
9000 series = 9th gen
10000 series = 10th gen

They started i7 with 900 series, released an 800 series on tock and they skipped into the 2000 series immediately

They can always change the branding/SKU numbers and retain the numbers (E series eventually became I)

>have 4770k
>want to upgrade to 1800X
>find out that Ryzen is shit
>o--ookay I'll j--just get the 7700k
>find out that X299 is this year and that mainstream Intel hexacores are for 2018

Fuck it, I'll just get a 1080Ti and a new monitor

>>59535251
>>59535418
Forgot to say why no 14 cores.

CCX need to stay even, 16 cores means 4 CCX, disable a core from each and you get 12 core.

Naples will have a similar deal, 32 cores is 8 CCX, disable one from each and 24 cores

They could put out a native 24 core die as well, 6 CCX, then they could make an 18 core.

>>59535441
There's literally no point, Haswell to Kaby is maybe 4% more IPC on a good day, and they'll hit the same clocks if you delid.

Also by the time 2018 rolls around Pinnacle Ridge is gonna be ready, Zen 2 Electric Boogaloo. No word what the tech is on it, but it'll be pin compatible.

>>59535295
t. Intel shill projecting

>>59535418
>>59535456
There's no proof that CCX have to be even, from what I've seen.

But a 1900 and 1900X 12 core, and 1950X 16 core could be the models.

>>59535428
They're had hyperthreading since before the first generation of the current naming scheme, dingus. It was introduced with the Pentium 4 HT. That's about 10 or 11 generations, by my count.

>>59535441
Thanks for jinxing it and getting us Vega that's 50% faster than a 1080Ti for cheaper than a 1080Ti.

If it wasn't for your wasting money instead of waiting, they were going to under-deliver. Now all the stops are going to be pulled.

>>59535512
>There's no proof that CCX have to be even

L3 sizes need to be the same on all CCXs.

>>59535535
I mean, L3 size per core

>>59535535
>>59535549
They they could disable some of the L3 on the 2 CCX with a disabled core. They've apparently shown their architecture makes that possible since the 1400 and 1500X are both 2+2 yet one is 8MB L3 and the other is 16MB.

>>59535441
upgrading from 4770k? You must have brain problems.
Tip though: In 2020 games might utilise 8 cores and 20MB cache, as they presently run at only 60% Ryzen load on 1440p, partially due to under utilisation and partly due to inconsistent support.
You have too much money to be acting like a retard, please stop destroying the planet. Invest some in local communities so you don't live in such a poverty riddled nightmare, hidden away in a cushy, secluded room.

As bad as Intel 4c/4t are becoming for 100-144hz, anyone with an 4c/8t, especially Haswell or later, shouldn't be considering upgrading unless they're a "content creator".

For general desktop use and gaming the 4c/8t are fine for now until the 2nd or 3rd generation Zen comes.

File: Capture2.png (44KB, 852x492px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 852x492px

>>59535674
I'VE BEEN WAITING FOR THIS MOMENT...

So even though amd radeon is fucking garbage and always will be, the 6c/12t r5 1600 looks pretty attractive for what I do. I mean, my 4690k at 4.5ghz is pretty damn good but I think it's time to upgrade (by the end of this year).

Anyway my question is how will the r5 fair with my 1070? I saw a video of a 3570k at 4.5ghz vs a r7 1700 at 4ghz and the 3570k was beating it and at the very least matching it in games. My 4690k should be faster but will the r5 be faster than the 1700 in terms of clocks? I do 80% gaming and 20% premiere pro/after effects in my spare time.

>>59535835
The amd cpu ryzen 6c/12t*

>>59535835
It will do fine with the 1070. Ryzens are beasts for multitasking/productive tasks. Also there's some future-proofing to be had with the AM4 socket staying for another 4 years at least.

>>59535835
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5cqOtWz5sU

here is only place I know that tested with 1070, it will be more than fine, at 4ghz it's same as kaby at 4,8 with a bit better minimum fps as well

So if I were to buy an Asrock AM4 mobo I could potentially put a 4th Gen Ryzen on it down the line without an issue?

File: shills.png (17KB, 878x218px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 878x218px

>>59527620

>price/performance

Why do people care about that when the CPU you buy will be good for at least 5 years?

>>59537673
>Why do people care about that when the CPU you buy will be good for at least 5 years?
>one cpu gives you 200 points of performance for 100$
>the other cpu gives 100 points of performance for 200$
>HURR DURR WHY DO YOU CARE about price performance if you are going to use it for at least 5 years
God you fucking goy.

>>59537673
lol i have yet to see an AMD cpu not breaking down after 3 years of use. You are right though, just pay a little bit extra for a good intel CPU and you are good for years.

>>59537647
yup

>>59535712
You don't need the r5, 4core is more than enough, just wait until coffe lake is out and buy an intel

File: 1489880038374.jpg (18KB, 267x297px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 267x297px

>>59528515
i-it isn't real

>>59528775
Even the FX8350 gets more than half the performance of the 7700k

>>59537714
My AMD CPU is probably around 8 years old. I plan to upgrade it to Ryzen.

>>59537714
>for years
TWO years?
No, thanks.

>>59538414
10 y.o. Athlon 64 X2 4800+ master race reporting in
So far so good

in my whole 23 years i live i only heard of 1 chip being somewhat faulty in terms of temperature measuring but not a single not working amd chip in my life

>>59527620
>>59528743
They're all going to be the same performance as the 1800x in gaming, all the way down to the r3. we're just going to see a huge block of AMD cpus in benchmarks and they're going to shoot themselves in the foot and not sell any r7s to consumers.

>>59527620
>1800X can't even beat an i5-2500K, which was released six years ago

>>59527620
wrong it will be worse than i3 aka piece of shit mostly due awful design of modules 2+2/3+3 so oc is very limited - 4.2ghz on 4cores is the max.

File: 1477931134261.png (112KB, 806x580px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 806x580px

>>59527620
chinese dude who benched r7 before release tested r5 and said r5 is 20-30% worse than r7 1700x aka in trash it goes, it will be literally bulldozer tier if you compare it to intel pentium or hyperthreaded i3 or any i5 for same price. What a disaster for amd.

>>59537714
hello Phenom 955 here

>>59538613
This. The 7350k shits all over most everything Ryzen has to offer, let alone the 7700k.

>>59537714
Athlon XP still working fine

>>59532008
>only 4133
check this out, 4333
http://www.corsair.com/en-eu/vengeance-lpx-8gb-2x4gb-ddr4-dram-4333mhz-c19-memory-kit-red-cmk8gx4m2b4333c19r

>>59534804
How? Cheapest is 333 from the UK
https://geizhals.eu/amd-ryzen-7-1700-yd1700bbaebox-a1582201.html

>>59531803
Do OSes do scheduling really this "low level"? Seems like an oversight to me.

It'd make much more sense if a basic scheduler was integrated into the microcode, i.e. OS switches process between cores/threads but the CPU itself chooses which CPU it should go to, to avoid switching back and forth between CCXes.

You can't trust every developer not to be retarded and optimize their multithreading correctly.

>>59540081
>first link says £287
>clicking the actual store link shows price as £313

nigga did you even bother to check your link?

>>59540217
Thats why I asked the dude, that's the best EU comparison site I know and its more expensive than he said.

>>59537714
>lol i have yet to see an AMD cpu not breaking down after 3 years of use
What kind of crack are you smoking, shilly shillington?
>You are right though, just pay a little bit extra for a good intel CPU and you are good for years.
Yeah, because Intel upgrades are near useless, and they go through sockets faster than your asshole goes through cocks.

>>59527620
Give me 1 (one) good reason as to why I should upgrade from the 4690k that is currently in my shitpost machine.

>>59538629
>Beliving some random chink who claims to have benched both before release
Nobody has official R5 chips, shill. Drink bleach.

File: [Mori] Kiniro Mosaic Pretty Days [720p].mkv_snapshot_12.34_[2017.03.05_14.42.08].jpg (114KB, 717x720px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 717x720px

>>59538742
You have to pay out the ass for an "OC capable" mobo to even take advantage of that, retard. You just love taking it up the ass from Intel, don't you?

>>59537714
>lol i have yet to see an AMD cpu not breaking down after 3 years of use.
Is there some reason you found the need to lie out of your ass like this?

>>59540392
You should downgrade to a G4560 if all you do is shitpost.

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

604KB, 800x523px

>>59540418
Because he's getting paid, most likely.

>>59540387

I did work at a repair shop a couple years back, and had thousands of pc's pass through me, and in my whole life I had 2, yes TWO, cases of faulty cpu's: a 10 year old athlon x2 and a 5-6 year old celeron.

So yeah that guy is a fucking retard.

>>59540428
>sell your used CPU so you can buy a new, shittier version and gain no money
I seriously hope you're not this fucked in the head, my friend.

>>59540122
Newer games should optimize for it, and I think Windows 10 has already recieved a patch (not sure)

>>59528845
>architectural flaw
>doesn't exist on linux

ok.

>>59540452
You should downgrade to a Celeron if all you do is shitpost.

>>59540467
You should downgrade to a Potato if all you do is shitpost.

File: amLN6vo_700b.jpg (66KB, 566x393px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 566x393px

>>59540473
Already on it.

File: intel.png (944KB, 1228x1502px) Image search: [Google]

944KB, 1228x1502px

>>59528501

>>59528515
B-BUT ITS NOT 480P VERY LOW QUALITY SETTINGS

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

FAKE BENCHMARKS

File: poolooem_nuclear_edition.png (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>59541580

File: hooolleeeee_shit.jpg (27KB, 300x369px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 300x369px

>>59541658

>>59535712
I wish I could afford those at the time.

>>59536634
Some others did simulated tests, but this is one of the better ones that does a wide array of games that the "1600X" is both good and bad in.

>>59527620
6950X blows it out of the fucking water though.

>>59538629
Is this supposed to be bad?

You sound like a shill, so presumably.

It has the same minimum framerate as the $1050 6900k.
30% higher minimum frames than the 6600k. 15% higher minimum frames than the 7600k OC'd to 4.7Ghz

How is that bad? Are you just retarded and can't read the graph? Oh, that's it, you're retarded.

>>59538742
>>59540416
Retards like that really show how AMD should have just charged more licensing fee for motherboards and sold chips for cheaper.

They're too stupid to factor in motherboard and cooler costs that differentiate between the CPUs.

A 7350K+ cooler+motherboard is much more expensive than a SIX CORE, TWELVE THREAD, 1600+motherboard.

File: AMD WE ANIMU NAO.jpg (171KB, 1010x568px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 1010x568px

>>59540487
but that's bread.

>>59542935
Get in line to be the first to put a down payment on a CPU, intelcuck.

>>59543030
Even tomshardware, one of the most biased retard sites on the internet, doesn't reccoment the i3-7350K.

>>59543247
>he cant afford things