Another intel vs amd shitfest thread.

>>59651007
Is your computer not performing well enough for you?
In what way is the performance lacking?
What do you use your computer for?

>>59651025
Gaming and CAD. I feel like my CPU is sorta maybe starting to show its age.

>>59651053
>starting to show its age
Elaborate what you mean by this. It's not maintaining 60fps anymore? CAD too slow? Your PC lagging unnecessarily at times?

>>59651090
Calling up files seems to be getting slower, both windows and linux. CAD is taking longer to compute designs into G-code then the workstations at my school, which have those xeon processors that are basically my i5 but with ECC support. Games have been unaffected.

>>59651123
Wait for 6 core r5, then decide if you want the 6 core or 8 core since there will be benchmarks for both and the issues with Ryzen should be fixed by then.

>intel moves the goalposts when AMD starts kicking their ass

Intel got fat.

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/03/intel-is-keeping-moores-law-alive-by-making-bigger-improvements-less-often/

>>59652201
My memory may be hazy.
But did Intel not publicly announce "Moores Law is dead" even going so far as to use words not unlike those in a press presentation?

>>59652215

Yeah until their competitor came along with a 10nm part which costs only half and uses only half the power.

>>59652215
Intel wants people to believe they don't have a monopoly and they didn't stagnate because of it.

>>59652313

Intel announces the Pentum 5 which is two i7's in one package overclocked to 5GHz. The benchmarks are staggering!

>>59651007
Get pentium g4560. Save you a lot of money while single thread performance is superb.
Inb4 >two cores in 2k17
You don't need more than two cores, shills.

>>59652435
Okay Grandma

File: 1490732644481.gif (491KB, 500x277px) Image search: [Google]

491KB, 500x277px

>>59652435
>you dont need more than two cores, shills

well meme'd

>>59651007

i have a 4670k clocked at 4.6ghz. but i tried a 1700 that was clocked to 4ghz with ram that was running 3200cl12 and it had way higher fps while using the same graphics card (fury X)

but my reason for waiting is that the motherboards that are out now are first gen, at least wait 6 months til they catch up with bios and stability.

Also i want to point out that the picture you have is in no way an indication of how the cpus perform.

>>59652435

you kind of do., BF1 uses 4cores and runs better when HT is enabled.

expect to see 8core being utilized in the near future.

>>59652879
>just wait
>they will release driver and utilize this!
Is there anything more pathetic than amd wait fags? I think not, maybe those arch weebs are there but that's low even for them.

>>59652879
>expect to see 8core being utilized in the near future.
by literary one title
>gaymer logic

>>59651123
>Calling up files seems to be getting slower
unbloat your OS. your CPU is fine for at least another year.

>>59652956
Consoles all have 8 cores.

It's inevitable.

>>59652920
>>59652956

Dumbest posts of the day award goes to you guys.

say thank you.

>>59653007
>its happening guys
>just wait

>>59652346
And the fire is even more spectacular

>>59651007
CPU mark is fucking retarded

>>59652295
20nm backend 14nm gate size

>>59651007
Pissmark is a garbage benchmark. Don't bother.

>>59652435
>Going from a i5 to a pentium
G O O D G O Y
O
O
D
G
O
Y

>>59652920
nvidia waitfags

>wait for fermi, it will btfo amd for sure
>wait for kepler, it will btfo amd for sure
>wait for maxwell, it will btfo amd for sure
>Just you wait and see, denver will be a x86 cpu NVIDIA WILL BTFO AMD AND INTEL JUST WAIT

>>59651123
>getting slower
Your PC is "getting slower" and you think the problem is the CPU? You think CPUs get slower with age or something? It's clear your OS is unoptimized as hell. Just format.

>>59651123
install a - better - ssd
debloat your OS
use ramdisks if you can

>>59652435
>Downgrading an i5 to a dual core CPU
Stupid pajeet.

>>59652978
>at least another year
kek, 3 or maybe 5 depending on what new memes show up, there isn't much room of improvement for conventional processors

>>59651007
>passmark
is this a troll thread?

>>59651007
>1800x
>1950 single thread
(You)

>>59651007
>>59658741
Pic related, It's my stock clock 1700. You know what's weird? I was randomly getting 2100+ after a BIOS update but was getting a huge reduction in Multi-thread performance. Restarted it and the MT was back to normal and the ST is where you see it now.

Perhaps judging a CPU by a benchmark whose score literally changes from moving the mouse and having a higher refresh rate is a bad move.

File: fucking new fags.png (15KB, 403x402px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 403x402px

>>59658873

asus rog just got a new bios version

even more stable now boys

>>59651123
Things don't just get slow with age, it's not a car. They get slow with more complicated software. Unless you're doing different things with your CAD program, nothing should have changed.

>>59659614
Got a news article I can read on that? Genuinely curious.

>>59661463
best is on http://www.overclock.net/f/11/amd-motherboards

they talk a lot about it

the stability update from the 13th was fantastic and we just got a new one which allows me to sit at 4.0ghz on a 1700X with 3200mhz ram

gonna fuck with block in the future

File: tmp_25035-cpuz85001497.png (107KB, 1230x809px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1230x809px

Intel got competition, that's the most important in my opinion. If amd wouldn't have pushed out such a beast, you guys would be praising pentiums for years. At least amd finally delivered, now we can expect some serious breakthroughs from intel (or not).

Same single core perf as 7700k but more cores? Im ok with it.

>>59661740
Forgot link.

valid.x86.fr/ye2zxq