With Ryzen finally released, how does everyone feel about the

>>59582761
It never was.

Don't waste money on those trash chips in the current year

>>59582761
The most disappointing chips in the 21st century. Close to being the most disappointing since the 90s too.

>>59582761
FX-8350 was a beast for overclocking. Other than that, not worthy a mention.

It was garbage.
The king garbage chip was the 9000 series. Absolute trash.

>>59582761

6300 is still worth mentioning if you want something cheap for your media-center/couch-gaming build.

Although, I would argue that instead of giving 60 for 6300, you could just do alot better by simply buying a locked i5 or Ryzen R3/5s. with cheap Mobo.

I'm a huge AMD fanboy, but the G4560 is a better deal than half of the fx line. The fucker is $60 msrp. Compare that to the fx 4300 for the same price.

I use my FX-8350 as a server after I bought my 1700.

I'll buy more FX-8350s if the price goes down

No hardware botnet

>>59583139
U wot m8

>>59583147
I tend to do a lot of shit on my FX-8350 server, where moar cores matters more, and they're inexpensive. The performance is also good in general.

>>59583147
He's right, 8 weak cores aren't that weak on multithreading, even more when they're dirt cheap

Fx is cheap and does pretty well honestly.

Hell I can play about any damned thing I want with an 8320e at stock speeds.

Of the price drops a bit with ryzen 5 an fx chip would be one Hell of a budget build.

File: Combined-Applications-Performance.png (44KB, 450x2364px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 450x2364px

>>59582761
fx6300 and 8320 were the best value processors until skylake.

I used the fx6300 for a long time and it was fine, as long as you overclocked it super hard. Great for the price, not the best. That's about it. Now I'm using a 7600k though and it's amazing.

>>59582761
They're still useful for some tasks as long as you can get them cheap and power usage isn't a concern.

>>59583139
ECC support, cheap cores, heavy int throughput.
Their shit rep for gaming is exactly what makes them decent for everything else, especially at current price points, used.

a piledriver core at 4ghz matched a first generation i series, nehalem core at 2.6ghz in single threaded performance. a bulldozer core clock for clock was SLOWER than amd's own previous generation, k10 - phenom ii by 10% with piledriver MATCHING the performance of k10 clock for clock. piledriver was only worth it over phenom ii since it was able to clock higher, and came as a eight core variant.

the series was hugely disappointing and resulted in drastic restructuring of amd with most of its leadership fired, including the ceo during bulldozers creation.

With OC you can get the same single threaded performance as a 2500k

The FX-8350 is still a good CPU for the money

>>59582761

I'm using a 8370 @ 4.7ghz with two 1080's.

It doesn't bottleneck in like, Skyrim SE at 2160x1440 + enb+full mod load.

Which is good enough for me.

I probably won't change MB/CPU/RAM until like, Fallout 5/Skyrim SE2 or whatever.

Not until 9590s drop to 100 bucks or so.

>>59583514
why would you buy that housefire when there are other fx's with more sensible tdp?

>>59583536

Yeah 95* is unusable due to the temperatures and power draw.

Get a 8370 and get same clocks as 95* for lower cost, half temp/cooling req and power suck.

>>59583514
FX-9590 is badly configured, just buy a FX-8* and OC it to 5GHz

>>59583536

Because they are the definition of AMDs insanity and how far they are willing to go for enthusiast markets. And I want to crack the 5Ghz barrier.

>>59583554

>Unusable

...For you

And no 8370 will ever get 9590 clock speeds. Ever.

>>59583570

No 8 series chips ever hit much more than 4.5Ghz once the 9590 was launched.

>>59583638
I don't think it's worth the price, even if it gets below $100, because of the amount you will spend on cooling alone, while not getting that much of a performance boost against the 8 series

I am extremly satisfied with Mobile FX 7XXX-9XXX APU's

Low voltage, PERFORMANCE!... Battery life...

I would totally (slightly) overpay for a Rayzen APU in a laptop...

>>59583666

100 bucks for a corsair H105 it has a 240mm radiator, hook the pump and fans up to a fan controller and turn it up to 11.

And it gets shit on performance wise by Haswell i3s in most programs. You're not looking to do anything much more than heating a cold room or trying to make a capacitor puke it's guts out on a 1.55-1.6v Vcore.

Fuck it, I'd even power that bitch with a Diablotek PSU in an athenatech case.

Seriously, if AMD could start competing with: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lenovo-Thinkpad-p70-4K-UHD-Workstation-E3-1505-Xeon-32GB-1TB-SDD-M4000M-/302257449946?hash=item465ff2abda:g:DX4AAOSw4DJYi1T8

I relish an AMD whitebook like this.

>>59583832
Zen is more efficient than Kaby Lake, it will be a beast in laptops if Lenovo and Apple go madman and break with Intel
Though I'm really not expecting such thing to come to fruition before Raven Ridge is out

There's nothing wrong with them considering their overclocking ability.

I dunno where the 'disappointment' comes from considering the price and the fact the fx-8350 still holds its own quite well.

>>59582761
I hope AMD continues the FX series.
Specially with the FX8000 series, at price point of 80-100$.

>>59583959
It's far too big.

They're shit

>>59583965
That's what she said.

File: 1290639404211.jpg (59KB, 626x683px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 626x683px

>>59583967
Yeah, nah. You're a shit cunt.

>>59583965
4u

They aged pretty well.

Remember that back when the FX line first came out most apps and games still only used 1 core.

>>59583212
i got a 6300 when they first came out. Has served me very well. Starting to feel like it's time to upgrade as my needs have increased along with my skills (not talking about gaymen). Eyeing off a 1600x.

>>59582761
It's now safely labelable as budget trash.

Yhe but AMD has no theft protection side CPU bult in

Seriously, We have to go back., Trump: https://www.youtube.c/watch?v=bAs3Xpq9QBs


We have to go back.

>>59583212
Until Intel finally put hyperthreading on pentiums, yeah they were the best performance/$ but still a bit eh.

No. AMD officially drop support like dropped support of pre GCN videocards...

>>59582833
That's anything NetBurst-based.

What kind of Incentive do they have to be good or strive to be better? what will stop them from becoming another Intel?

How long do we have until they become intel #2?

>>59584503
if intel leaves the market the only competition amd will have is ARM, so even if they slow down the progress, it will still keep on going

And if something like that happens to intel, it will be exactly because of that shit they've been doing now for years, amd won't repeat the same mistakes unless they reach silicon limits, but that's decades away

>>59583508
How many monitors do you have in your setup?

File: bibelines.png (973KB, 801x1500px) Image search: [Google]

973KB, 801x1500px

>>59582833
Kids in this board are too young to remember the blunder of the millenium that was Netburst.

>>59584572
>if intel leaves the market
That will never happen in the next 5 years. Their CPU's are way too popular to die immediately, and I'm sure Intel has the capability to stay ahead of the curve for years to come.

100 years ago we had no computer technology. now we are making movies about Artificial intelect.

Hate me for what I am about to say, But I think its best if the world just... let go of Privacy.

Fuck google, they are another greedy corporation.

What if we got rid of Corporations in USA and Oligarchs in Russia?. and Nuke Africa, the world would be peaceful and again creative nuke Africa.

Wouldnt that be nice?

>>59582761
i use an fx 8350 it gets the job done

>>59584572
>they reach silicon limits
I tried reading up on it on Wikipedia, but couldn't understand. Can you please explain it to me? Is it basically CPU's can't become more powerful because transistor's can't become small enough?

>>59584756
>Wouldnt that be nice?
Wrong thread. Delete it.

>>59584572
We've already hit the silicon limit. Intel is going with something not-silicon for 7nm, possibly graphene.

Where shit's going to get really wild is in the sub-1nm world, where we get to see dank uses of the English language like, "We simulate gate-all-around transistors with channels composed of one-dimensional semiconducting nanomaterials, such as silicon nanowires (SiNWs), armchair graphene nanoribbons (aGNRs), and zigzag carbon nanotubes (zCNTs). The band structure of these materials is calculated using local empirical pseudopotentials and the body-size dependence of band gap is shown. Different channel-material transistors with variable body size are simulated using an open-boundary plane-wave full-band quantum transport formalism and the current-voltage (I-V) characteristics are obtained. The I(DS)-V(GS) curves of the transistors with different channel materials are shown. Preliminary results predict that SiNWs may be the best channels among the three materials we simulate in terms of the ON/OFF current ratio and subthreshold swing."

Im sorry, but I am obviously a troll, I pretty much made it obvious, hey man maybe You should become a Jew mod or something.

Welcome to 4Chan or wherever Normal people Run away from You and Muchacho Mexican Jews Follow GET LOST< see?

sorry wrong thread.

>>59583880
Right now, HP is the only manufacturer that puts AMD into high-end business laptops, so I guess they will be shipping Ryzen first.

>>59583832
>http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lenovo-Thinkpad-p70-4K-UHD-Workstation-E3-1505-Xeon-32GB-1TB-SDD-M4000M-/302257449946?hash=item465ff2abda:g:DX4AAOSw4DJYi1T8
hory shit xeon in a laptop

>>59584977
>hory shit xeon in a laptop
have you been living under a rock?
mobile workstations have been around for ages

>>59584985
It's not common where i live, also mobile workstation means FirePro/Quadro videocard more imo

>>59584966
>HP is the only manufacturer that puts AMD into high-end business laptops
Any idea why?

>>59582761
They were complete dog shit from day 1. They weren't even good HPC chips or anything. Why do you think AMD's marketshare in servers and HPC dropped so dramatically after releasing Bulldozer? It burned way more energy than Intel's offerings and were way slower.

There was nothing redeemable about the FX series.

>>59584782
>I tried reading up on it on Wikipedia
Link please, can't find it

>>59585008
I guess there's market for cheap EliteBooks.
The latest 745 G4 with A12-9800B costs around 1k € in my slavshit country.
The 740 G4 with i7 7500 is 500 € more expensive.
Considering businesses rarely need that much processing power in a laptop and that they buy shit in bulk, the savings are significant.
The few workers who need top performance will get a mobile workstation anyway.

>>59585082
Sorry, the Intel one is 840 G4.

File: X5650 vs FX9590.png (41KB, 806x402px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 806x402px

>>59583514
X58 Xeons are already cheaper than that, and faster. This is a pretty conservative OC, too.

>>59585211

But it's used and you have no idea how much longer you can use that chip though.

I think 8370/20/50 are good home server CPUs specially considering that they have ECC support and etc

Any examples of games that actually utilize the MOAR COARZ of the FX series?

The only one I've found is metro ll. When I switched from an fx 4100 @ 4.0ghz to an 8320 @ 4.0ghz i no joke doubled my framerate. In nearly evey other cpu bound situation, however, it only improved minimum framerates at best.

>>59585256
It wasn't the extra cores, it was the upgrade from the bulldozer to the piledriver chip. The 4100 was a REALLY bad processor. you basically upgraded from a 4 core disaster zone to a real processor.

>>59584735
>>59584416
I would call P3-P4 era Celeron that. The Pentium (heat or not) had enough performance.
But the Celeron... maaan... fuck Celeron.

>>59582761
Multithread performance for encoding and the like was fine. It was on par with i7-2600K, i7-3770K in its time.

>>59585378
Not even. The IPC jump from bulldozer to piledriver is like 7-15% at most and beyond that little more than minor microcode updates and bug fixes. In nearly every game I played, crysis 3, witcher 2 & 3, fallout 4, gta 5 to name a few, performance was identical even when I went back through with my R9 fury.

>>59584735
Prescott was mediocre for its price/performance vs athlon64, when they made Pentium D now that's where the fuckup starts going nuclear.

Athlon64 X2 best shitznit. My x2 3800 mobo died but the proc still works.

File: self intoxicated, twisted detonator.png (314KB, 1131x1006px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 1131x1006px

>>59583638

>And no 8370 will ever get 9590 clock speeds. Ever.

Meanwhile, in reality.

>>59583294
Still pretty decent for gaming
On par with a i7 2600k in most modern games, which is plenty

>>59582761
The power saving FX e series are pretty good if you want adecent home sever with moar cores (ex 8320e)

File: 1400x_7700k.jpg (72KB, 399x701px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 399x701px

ryzen is great value

>>59583638
>>>59583536
>Because they are the definition of AMDs insanity and how far they are willing to go for enthusiast markets. And I want to crack the 5Ghz barrier.
>>>59583554
>>Unusable
>...For you
>And no 8370 will ever get 9590 clock speeds. Ever.
>>>59583570
>No 8 series chips ever hit much more than 4.5Ghz once the 9590 was launched.
Umm my 8370e runs at 4.96 GHz at 1.38v... Haven't tried higher yet...

>>59586422
i bet it's not on all cores

>>59582761
Worth buying new? Maybe if it's a firesale. Worth buying used? Probably.

>>59586456
>>>59586422 (You)
>i bet it's not on all cores
Yeah its in all cores. I would never disable cores. In fact its been over clocked like that since just before call of duty ghosts came out. My 1090t couldn't handle it well unless it was at 4.2ghz.

File: 1490402225325.jpg (395KB, 2400x2000px) Image search: [Google]

395KB, 2400x2000px

>>59586458
see >>59586385
and this

ryzen is good.

>>59582761
Ryzen should be priced at FX's price to be relevant

for now it's still overpriced shit

File: 1461484493282.jpg (44KB, 526x603px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 526x603px

>>59586522
>should be priced like FX
>is over 50% faster than FX
>less than 10% slower than 7700k
>costs almost half as much for equivalent 4c8t chip
>RYZEN IS OVERPRICED REEEEEEEEE
1 shekel has been transferred to your account.

FX chips are still good for encoding boxes. Unless you're encoding X265, they're perfectly fine for that purpose.

This is only if you just have one laying around, though. It's not worth it to buy one if you don't have one already. My 8350 sits and encodes videos whenever I need it to, and for that purpose it's great. My main PC doesn't get bogged down at all.

They were fantastic budget cpus, and I'll probably have a soft spot for it because it is the first cpu I ever built/overclocked with.

>>59586153
Not its not
It stutters like a bitch because the core layout is not supported by anything

I still use a phenom 2 and it has no stuttering like the FX series does ontop of the exact same performance.

>>59582761
Seems like a good option if you're fucking retarded.

>>59586385
are these simulated or real leaked?

Reguarding the comment "They were complete dog shit from day 1" Yhe well the IBM and HP laptops are over the top rockstar sellers across the board and No one wants the Dell machines on eBay!. Uh I am a Loyal HP customer and they sent me a New laptop because they could not fix what was wrong with my old one, Yhe... It came in on December 24th! they are REALLY good to loyal customers! and I have No complaints! Customer support is very competent and No one comes close!!!
Competent American's on the other line!!!.

2, seriously if AMD goes for Dell over HP Im going to be a pissed.

I could actually use a workstation right about now and a High end Ryzen 256 gigs SSD 32 gigs RAM MXM17 would guarantee 1 computer sold on the spot (Under 3K would be nice.)

>>59587743
LinusTechTips simulated them by disabling cores and adjusting clocks to match them.

>>59582761
Upgraded from C2D 6300 to FX4300 almost for free. I suppose that if their prices drop well enough, they could take on core 2 quads in the used value hardware segment.

if i upgrade my cpu from 6300 to 8350 or i5 do I have to reinstall windows or just swap em out and boot it up like normal?

>>59589605

You should always reinstall your OS when using a new cpu.

>>59584737
AMD will never ever do this shit intel has been doing (which is what that guy had asked) if intel was still in the market, if they do this they will lose market again

>>59584782
Yes, something like that, cpus can't get infinitely powerful because every material has limits, but we are soon reaching silicon limits, intel is having a hard time at 10nm, because by the looks of it they are getting too low yields (working chips by one silicon wafer) for it to be profitable

>>59584871
It will take some years for 7nm, the hot stuff now is going to be 10nm, and qualcomm is getting ahead of intel on it (I know, different architectures, but still)

If intel executives are not stupid, ryzen started a technology race that will help x86 keep on going for more time, because ARM is catching up (slowly) to x86, see ARM server chips they talked about

>>59582761
Still playing everything at 1440p+60fps

No need to upgrade

>>59582761
>tfw have 6300 and got a 1700/mobo/ram coming tomorrow

>>59591108
I didnt upgrade to Ryzen but I got a full platform ugrade to the 7600k. It'll be like night and day senpai. The 6300 served you well, but it's time to let it rest.

>all this guys with shitty fx's
>even those are miles better than my shitty apu
>ryzen is so much more powerful than anything i've ever used, that I can't even imagine it

sad

File: CPU-Z bench.png (60KB, 409x1208px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 409x1208px

>>59591395

Depends what you are doing. If its just general web browsing and typical office related stuff monster cpus aren't really that much faster than a lot of the slower ones. For this usage case an ssd is a bigger upgrade than a new cpu.

>>59591430
I use virtual machines often, and I can't do much more at the same time because my cpu will get to 100% easily, a single 1080p 60fps youtube video already gets the cpu to 30~40%

>>59591430
just so you can have an idea, ryzen single threaded performance is 70% better than my own, and I have a 4 threaded CMT cpu, which in cinebench gives me 3 times single threaded performance on full load

>>59582761
FX is such shit that they weren't worth buying when they came out.

>>59591547
so two ryzen cores would already shit on my cpu, let alone 8, not even accounting for smt, which in worst case scenario it gives 20~25% increase

>>59591430
>If its just general web browsing
>implying most websites doesn't require a 8 core monster to render in reasonable time
thx js

>>59591638

I need 16 threads to encode 10 second reaction webms to post on /g/.

>>59591430
shitty apu guy here, how much are you getting on cinebench single threaded with that oc?

I've been using a trusty FX-6300 for gaming since January 2014. Has served me very well. Clearly a long way from the best on the market but has kept me playing AAAs at 1080p. I've upgraded my graphics card to RX 480 now, so maybe I should see if I can pick up a cheap FX-8350 for a cheap boost.

>>59591675

Fuck knows as I don't have cinebench to test - but the score should sit a hair above a stock 1700x. I must admit i'm struggling to get my chip to 4ghz as it won't pass a standard IBT run even at obscene voltage so I need to carefully hand tune some of the bios options to see if I can squeeze it out but its not looking hopeful.

>>59591805
how cheap would it be to be considered cheap?

I'm rocking the 6300 too and looking to grab the 8350 as it's slowing down when I run multiple cpu intensive task all at once.

cheap in CAD btw

>>59582792
under rated

a little late, but
/thread

>>59582761
I still want my 12 core steamroller

>>59582792
/thread

I've been using an fx6300 for years and its still a good processor. Its faster than the i7 that came in my newest laptop thats for sure.

In fact I think when the prices drop I might upgrade to the top tier fx chip while I still have an am3+ mobo
what is the best processor available with an am3+ socket?

>>59592645
>comparing desktop cpu with laptop cpu

>>59592708
well its not my fault intel uses the same naming scheme in marketing different products. I actually think its intels biggest mistake, their naming conventions and pricing when it comes to marketing. Its the only reason amd was able to claim to provide twice the performance to cost ratio as one of the processors in Intels lineup

besides, its a reasonable comparison. Most people find the mobile i7 line of cpu's to be more than adequate, if a desktop fx6300 can outperform them, it must also be more than adequate for the same computing demands

>>59592816
It's not the same at all, you can see if it's one or another just by the numbers and letters in the specific model

and laptop i7's that are not the HQ versions are only shitty low power dual cores with hyperthreading, it's not fair to compare them directly with full power 8 threaded desktop cpus

>>59582761
funny story
>be me, 2014
>friend with a guy who is a quite famous youtuber in my country
>he gave me 250$ and tell me to upgrade his main PC which has am2+ ddr2 mobo but stuffed with am3 athlon ii x4 635 where all his vid are processed and uploaded
>he specifically tells me go AMD, its much cheaper
>tell him with 250$ can only get lower end quad core because also need new am3+/fm2 mobo and ddr3 ram
>he insist its enough because there is no way a new PC from 2014 is slower than the one from 2009
>settled with fx-4300e, due to my advise that fm2 socket is a dead end with no upgrade beyond quad core
>get home, moment of truth
>handbrake tests, a sample vid he upload a day earlier took 29 minute to convert mov to mp4 on old athlon PC, is now 31 minute to convert on FX-4300.
>he rages, at first aimed at me, but i already warned him that fx-4300 are get shat on reviews and such
>he ended up spending another 200$ to buy fx-8370 the next week

>>59583207
>Hell I can play about any damned thing I want with an 8320e at stock speeds.
this
i literally have my undervolted and overclocked with the fans turned off
passive cooling while gayming is glorious

>>59583303
AMD got cucked by windows
bulldozer was an improvement over phenom II, but only like a year later did it show after microshaft finally decided to fix its bullshit OS.

>>59582761
6300 and 83xx are decent chips if want a cheap build for gaming and work.
FX8320e $90 at microcenter cant be beat.

fx 8320 was good value. almost bought one a year ago but I managed to wait for zen.

>>59588026
Too bad hes too retarded to realize that the 1400x is an R5 not an R3

>>59593232
They shouldn't be called i7 then.

>>59596001
there are I series cpus for desktops and I series cpus for laptops, is it that hard to understand?

>>59582761
I'm having a hard time with the thought of getting rid of my 6300 for an upgrade. It's been a great little beast that got me through uni.