Ryzen

depends what you use it for

but it's basically more of a server processor and shit for most average joe consumers

>>59545422

Ryzen CPU architecture is slow and wide.
Slightly less IPC than Intel. Much more efficient multithreaded performance and multitasking capability.

Intel CPU architecture is is fast and narrow.
Faster single core performance worse multithreaded performance, and in some cases MUCH worse multitasking.

>>59545422
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-7700K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-1700X/3647vs3915

>>59545422
plannin on an r5 16gb ddr4, aio cooler, cant wait brah

If you do shit that can actually saturate all the cores, it's fantastic. Otherwise it's slightly worse than Intel product with equivalent number of cores, but with much better price/performance.

The only part that sucks about it is that there's apparently next to no OC headroom and it's hard to get much over 4GHz, although I would expect R5s and R3s to be better with regards to that.

>>59545535
>muh synthetic benchmark

>>59545512
>worse multithreaded performance
lmao no.

Core for core Intel multi-threaded loads are faster. If you want to compare 8 core shit with 4 core shit then it may be faster but I wouldn't call that better multithreading, its just got more cores.

>>59545598

You already got schooled in another post, do you really want to open your stupid fucking mouth here?

>>59545598

Intel's SMT is shockingly bad all told. IBM has goddamn 4 way SMT and ryzen's SMT shows higher gains than hyperthreading. Given Intel has spent a decade refining the technology this doesn't bode well.

>>59545598
Choke on a dick and die, tripfaggot.

File: 1482614204374.png (345KB, 487x694px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 487x694px

>>59545422
Other than the lackluster over clocking, it's pretty good.

File: ryzen 4 cores.png (33KB, 592x661px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 592x661px

This is all you need to know to understand why Ryzen will definitely get better for gaming in the future.
In the meantime, great for workstations, inferior for gaming.

>>59545631
>IBM has goddamn 4 way SMT
8 way, actually. But then, they're not trying to use the same architecture to deliver CPUs for everything between low-power laptops and high-end servers.

>>59545598
>its just got more cores
then what is the point of your argument? More cores provide better multi threaded performance. So it is better than intel at multi threaded performance within a given price.

>>59545598
Die in a fire Jordan. You've been fucking up left and right. I think it's high time your site was removed from the sticky. God only knows how much shekels you get from it.

>>59545598

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-6950X-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-1800X/3604vs3916

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-6900K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-1800X/3605vs3916

Disgusting that you defend Intels pricing.

>>59545676
>inferior for gaming.
Specifically 120hz+ gaming.

If you have a high res display OR you have a mid-tier GPU or lower, it's as good as a 7700k for gaming.

>>59545770
this is such a shit excuse because ideally you'd want to use the same CPU for gaming for as long as it's viable

the one that performs better in games also is the one that lasts longer

>>59545789

>core 2 duos are such a meme

Yeah remind how it went for those that didn't get the core 2 duo and instead went with the E-whatever-the-fuck was the other option from Intel at the time?

>>59545856
remember how it went last time?

bulldozer was better in theory because muh cores but intel won in the short and long run

>>59545789
I don't know, the progress might be slow, but games ARE becoming better threaded. Remember that three years ago g3258 was perfectly sufficient for gaming despite being dualcore without SMT. And not long ago that there was no reason to get an i7 over i5 for gaming. In another three years, R7 1700 might actually out-perform i7 7700k in new games. Not saying that's going to happen, but I wouldn't bet against it, either.

Also, both are likely to be sufficient until your motherboard shits itself, and AM4 will most likely be available when 1151 is dead and buried - I believe AMD has actually stated that they'll support AM4 until 2020?

>>59545789
It's already hard enough to tell ~20 FPS difference above 100 FPS. That's about the biggest gap between Ryzen and i7-7700K.

>>59545880

>moving goalposts

That wasn't what I asked and no, bulldozer was never better in theory. Even ignoring the poor implementation of CMT it used CMT inherently trades off pure single thread performance for more cores/threads in a given die space. In CMT only exists because you at any given time have limited die space available.

>>59545931
no one is moving shit

modern intel CPUs will have longer gaming lifespan than modern ryzen CPUs

screencap this

>>59545598
lmao yes.

Some benchmarks they're getting fucked 4 times over compared to Ryzen. Throw games at them side by side and Intel win. Load your computer with AV, skype, TS, music, a few different bits and bobs and THEN run some games and Ryzen will still be hitting that same FPS and Intel will start to choke and stutter.

>>59545926
Pretty much this. I play some games and it drops from 144 to say 95 and unless it actually stutters when doing so, I don't see it. Only down to 80 and below (half I guess) I really notice it obviously, but most games at 80+ FPS is still gorgeous.

File: bench pc gamer.png (466KB, 600x805px) Image search: [Google]

466KB, 600x805px

>>59545422
It's utter fucking shit.

>>59545926
in a few years neither will be pushing 100fps, the intel one will push above 60 longer than ryzen though

>reading comprehension

>>59545422
YES

>>59545789
>the one that performs better in games also is the one that lasts longer
Games have gotten progressively better at threading. Even with the next gen intel CPUs 6 cores will be the standard for midrange CPUs from both intel and amd, while consoles have 8 weak as shit cores, so devs already have to optimize for that.

>>59545962
nope.

But even if optimization for ryzen doesnt get any better, it'll be able to run games at above 60fps for a long time, while a 7700k will run it at 80fps as long as you do nothing else. As soon as you'll multitask that'll drop to under 60fps.

>>59545880
Bulldozer was shit in every way at launch. didnt compete with intels octacores at all.
>and long run
Not really, it did age a bit better than intel. I have 2500k, it does well in games today unless you multitask.....

>>59545962
Both will perform just fine for the foreseeable future thanks to Intel being committed to never experimenting with new core designs and AMD not having sufficient R&D budget to really beat them. The difference is that when your motherboard breaks, if you have Intel CPU you'll have to replace it because there won't be any replacements available(unless you like paying 20% premium for a used motherboard), while with AMD there's at least a chance that you'll be able to get a new one.

>>59546026
Face it, even Intel is going for MOAR CORES next time. CORES are the future.

>>59546022
No matter how many times you post this, it's not going to make it any less embarrasing for you, shill shiteater.

>>59546046
>this desperate

the intel that pushes higher fps than ryzen does will be able to maintain above 60 longer than ryzen

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

71KB, 552x661px

>>59546062

>>59546022
where is th 2500/2600k on this chart?

>>59546080
Only assuming devs wont optimize for more threads, despite having done so more and more since multicores cam out and now that 6 cores soon is the standard.

Again, assuming that, the intel will be average 12fps faster, but be at 99% cpu utilization while the ryzen is at ~50% and can multitask plenty without losing frames.

Speaking of ryzen, how are the stock coolers? Are they still chainsaw soundmakers?

>>59546195
yeah the bulldozer shit will repeat

CPU is not utilized at all and performs like shit

>>59546206
The stock coolers are really nice, way better than Intel's stock coolers in any case. Their new wrath coolers for their older CPUs were already pretty good.

>>59546195
it's hard to make game engines use many cores and just not possible for many things

File: no bro.jpg (68KB, 1280x872px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 1280x872px

>>59546243
>The stock coolers are really nice

>>59546475

They are quiet and cool significantly better than any other stock cooler ever made. Plus they glow.

>>59545598

cpu's are irrelevant for gaming at 60 fps, you can buy 8 year old cpu's that can run alongside any high-end GPU without ever dipping below 60 fps.

for content creation its a different story, you need the extra threads and cores so ryzen is the way to go unless intel pays off enough software companies to make their software run like shit on pajeet processors

>>59546542
>without dipping below 60 fps
yeah, no
not even with the 8350

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

1MB, 1920x2080px

>>59546022
Eat shit shill.

>>59546475
>he hasn't looked up temps

>>59545641
Why would anyone turn these into keychains?

You can't carry that shit in your pocket, the pins will tear holes in your clothes.

What an autistic thing to do

>>59545422
Games are doing odd things at times, like treating all it's threads as if they were real cores. Theres a lot of new tech jitters in it, but I'm typing this from an R7 1800X system and holy crap is this thing fast.

File: gta 5 ultra 1800 king.jpg (687KB, 1914x1077px) Image search: [Google]

687KB, 1914x1077px

Get Ryzen if you're serious about high res gaming, reduced CPU bottleneck at all resolutions and future proofness for multithreaded games with increased vfx (ex. in Witcher 3 1800X with hairworks 8x AA runs the same as 7700K with hairworks off)

>>59545598
why are you so dumb tripfag?
you're the dumbest tripfag here

>>59545676
>get
muh magicc optimizzationz

>>59547299
dubs
>>59547333
TRIPS
>>59547399
SAMEDUBZ

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

>>59546046
Why the hell you game while miltithread work? Actually how you do it even if your brains were miltithread there is just one keyboard

>>59547789
>even if your brains were multithreaded
>brains
>multithreaded brains

>>59547789
>milithread
multi threading has been a thing for years. why do you think multiple cores on a single die exists.

>>59547811
>tfw when too dumb for multithreaded brain

>>59547789
>he doesn't know
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8qgehH3kEQ

File: 55.gif (10KB, 600x317px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 600x317px

>>59547236
It's like you are too stupid to do a 30 second procedure.

>>59546229
When bulldozer launched against the 2500k, it was an eight thread part that got fucking destroyed by a four thread part. At the time, the 2500k was neck and neck with the i7 2600k in the overwhelming majority of games. What we've seen since is a growing preference for more threads in games and entire game engines that fully saturate at least eight threads. The 2600k now outperforms the 2500k in a significant number of games. The difference in performance between the current generation 7600k and 7700k can be plainly seen, as well, which, again, was not the case when Bulldozer launched. In addition to hard numbers in the form of benchmarks, we have other evidence that, for some reason tends to get ignored. I will only make a passing mention of these since it's probably not worth my time to get in deep given you'll not pay them any mind anyway: Vulkan and DX12 have vastly improved multithreading support over OpenGL and DX11. Both the Xbox One and PS4 have AMD multicore parts in them and the new Xbox is very likely to ship with a Zen/Polaris or Zen/Vega based APU.

How do you reconcile all the evidence that shows the growing benefit of greater thread count against your assertion that an octacore will be underutilized in future games?

>>59545574
>/thread

File: 3.gif (2MB, 360x203px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 360x203px

>>59547789
>even if your brains were multithread

File: 5MVzk.gif (959KB, 603x448px) Image search: [Google]

959KB, 603x448px

>>59547299
>future proofness for multithreaded games
>4c/8t
>mentions nothing but old dx11 games

Step away from the shekel, shill.

>>59548682
>DX is basically dead now anyways
All hail your new overlord Vulkan.

>>59545560
>aio cooler
eww
memetua or custom loop is the only way