FINALLY A tech reviewer, unlike the so-called ones, that ac

File: firefox_2017-04-02_15-43-15.png (49KB, 754x939px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 754x939px

>>59706650
Much of the same games, but 1080p with a GTX 1080, and the 6900k wins instead.

They tested with "threaded optimization" on/off, but didn't try MSI on.

>>59706650
>Ryzen + Vega

This will be sweet if Nvidia's drivers being shit is true

>>59706770
inb4 everyone tests Vega with a 7700k or some Haslel

>>59706920
It looks like Vega + 1700 is going to slaughter Vega + 7700k, at least in DX12/Vulcan/AZDO, eh?

>>59706979
Nvidia's DX12 support is awful, BF1 runs SLOWER DX12 than DX11.

File: firefox_2017-04-02_15-49-52.png (72KB, 772x854px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 772x854px

These are also using the 1080. Sadly no like RX480 on 720 low comparison or something here so we could get an idea of how it'd be with vega.
Same 3000mhz RAM for all CPUs tested.

7700k with the 1080 wins in 19 games.
1800X wins in 12 games.
The 1700X and 1700 still beat the 1700, stock, in a few.
>1800X is faster in Arma3? I didn't think that'd be the case.

Those are good results, considering how poorly Nvidia drivers are working given this was with the 1080.
Seems like the 1700+Vega may end up almost beating the 7700k across the board.

File: Screenshot from 02-04-2017 22:04:14.png (953KB, 1122x622px) Image search: [Google]

953KB, 1122x622px

>testing any Novideo with DX12

People never learn

>>59706979
Or 1600X+Vega, I should say.
Will probably be faster in 90% of games.

>>59706991
Yeah, but I said Vega + 7700k. So no shitty Nvidia DX12 drivers holding it back there.

7700k+1080 in DX12 would be even worse for them both.

>>59707020
>50% utilization on TitanXP

Great drivers, Nvidia

>>59707020
It really just seems like the """""tech reviewers""" were creating misleading results and shilling on purpose, doesn't it?

>>59707065
No, they're just retarded and clueless on how hardware and software work.

File: Screenshot from 02-04-2017 22:13:37.png (352KB, 1547x945px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 1547x945px

Makes sense.

>>59707157
It's been a month. A big company like Nvidia should fix it faster than Ashes of the Benchmark.

I agree that it's not some conspiracy, though. Just incompetence all around.

>>59706650
https://rbt.asia/g/thread/S59317047#p59317856

Oh look, it's almost like I haven't said it might be a problem some 3 weeks ago?

DX12 is shit. Nvidia is sabotaging microshit and you idiots don't even realize that this is a good thing.

>>59707157

>bitsandchips

clickbait bullshit. nobody believes anything those filthy dagos says.

amd is just incompetent as fuck. they didn't even send asetek am4 bracket dimensions before ryzen even launched. trying to blame nvidia for amd's own problems is hilarious.

>>59707226
but anon, nvidia gets REKT In Vulkan too, which is what we all truly want and need game devs to switch to.


because fuck DirectX, Vulkan is better for end users in all cases.

>>59707198
Lots of us have posts on anandtech and other forums noting the same thing 3-4 weeks ago, yep.

Fucking retarded """""hardware reviewers"""

The conclusion of the review in the OP was:
>Ryzen is a superior CPU, though one can find the worst way to benchmark something to show it’s weaknesses

>>59707263
>which is what we all truly want and need game devs to switch to.
Then why are all the threads about this so far have been nothing but Ryzen fags talking about DX12. This has nothing to do with Vulkan or even DX12 really, just AMD drones trying to cling on to anything to defend their subpar CPU.

>>59707307
Because game devs are making DX11 and DX12 games, which is why it matters.

While its all good and well to hope for Vulkan all the way, it probably wont happen, thus, with nvidia being shit with DX12, specially on ryzen - it is a fair arguement that they should at least get their shit togther when its what game devs use and will use more than they do now.

Being loyal to any brand is fucking retarded though, I hope you know this.

>>59707278
>though one can find the worst way to benchmark something to show it’s weaknesses

Yeah, this is one of the few reviewers who didn't use slower RAM for Ryzen. 3000mhz on them all.
This is one of the few reviewers that didn't do 16x AA and other setting tweaks on games that favored Ryzen to create a GPU bottleneck (like tom's hardware and tech power up) so in games where Ryzen was better it was even with the 7700k, while keeping settings lower on 7700k favored games with Nvidia DX12 so the 7700k would pull far ahead for those and look like the 7700k is even on some, better on others, when really it's better on some and worse on others - and that's mostly just with an Nvidia GPU.

HMM. Go figure when you do a fair and even methodology, you get reasonable results that show it's a good CPU.

>>59707307
Because there aren't enough Vulkan games to test.
There's like 3 or 4? And one of them still uses an OpenGL rendering pipeline so hardly sees benefits.

Mad Max Vulkan beta just came out but most """tech reviewers""" are too ignorant to know it exists. Feral Interactive is making a Vulkan update for all their games 2015 and newer, it seems.
The Mad Max Vulkan beta update increases FPS to 175%-350% versus OpenGL.

>>59706650
Intel+Nvidia is going to get pretty BTFO if someone actually bothers testing a 7500+1060 against a 1500X+RX480 even stock if Nvidia doesn't fix this.

The all AMD complete system is like $80 cheaper, yet going to outperform it so much.

>>59707367
>Being loyal to any brand is fucking retarded though, I hope you know this.
Tell that to this guy >>59707374
I'm not the one who is making a GPU driver issue that has nothing to do with the CPU all about Ryzen

>>59707425
While we do appreciate your shekles here at bintel, fact is, ryzen sales and reviews has been in a very negative light due to Nvidia having piss poor drivers.

While it IS Nvidias fault, AMD are the ones who pays for the idiot reviewers and masses that blindly belives them.

Im sorry that you really want any company you dislike or dont own any parts of, or have no intention of blinds you from seeing such things.

FYI im on an Intel CPU and nVidia GPU.

>>59707462
You're a delusional paranoiac which is why no one takes you seriously. You want people to care about this then try making a thread without obvious pro-AMD bias.

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

2MB, 1440x900px

>>59707425
>calling me bias
>for pointing to a review with actual even methodology in their testing and a wide variety of games, old and new, tested
>not those who shill around reviews where Ryzen has 2400mhz RAM while Intel has 3200Mhz
>those people that you're probably one of

Whao. You're some kind of fucktard, huh.

>>59707489
5 shekles has been deposited into your account

>>59707489
>a review with even testing methodology across the board
>tons of games and applications tested
>OBVIOUS PRO-AMD BIAS REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>59707374
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLRCK7RfbUg

Go get cucked. Even with AMD's drivers Ryzen still performs like shit.

>>59707507
Says the paedophile.

>>59707507
I'm not calling you biased because you linked to a review. I'm calling you biased because of the narrative you're pushing in your posts.

>>59707519
I don't take issue with the review or their methodology. OP is a mentally deranged individual who is working very hard to skew the discussion and make it all about how great Ryzen is, rather than Nvidia's fuck up

>GPU bottleneck to test CPUs
k

There is so much mental retardation being flung around on this thread.

Nvidia is obviously incompetent in DX12. Either by hook or by crook, they do not want DX12 to happen.

AMD is at fault for not having a high end GPU for Ryzen.

These test results show that the tech press are incompetent at best, crooked at worst.

And AMD needs to hire more fucking people.

That's what I have learned this last month about the industry.

>>59707572
>OP is mentally deranged
>for pointing out there's finally another review out there that uses the same speed RAM on all systems
>and for pointing out that the reviewer actually compared various settings
You're the mentally deranged one.
You seem triggered hard by fair testing methodology.
Is that you, Steve?

>amd is shit
>blame nvidia

What am I supposed to with my life if AMD makes good products? I should just kill myself then

>>59707751

>I'm a faggot who doesn't understand computers beyond their use as Xbox consoles

Try and look like a dumb fuck harder.

>>59706650
>1080p+ "realistic use case" results are bad
>use 720p which no one with this setup actually uses

top kek

>>59707674
The Pro Duo exists, but it seems like literally no "tech reviewer" has one.

>>59707751
That isn't the point though.

>>59707783

>Reverse course! Ryzen doesn't suck!

>>59707790

The Produo is an impractical card to test with.

I was planning on a 1700X and a Vega anyway, so good.

I'm happy with my Intel, and I don't need anything else, I certainly don't need AMD, AMD can go fuck itself and rot for all I care.

File: 1490321776893.jpg (106KB, 644x781px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 644x781px

>>59707924

File: firefox_2017-03-11_06-42-21.png (1MB, 1123x634px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1123x634px

>>59707790
It's not because Nvidia told us not to test it!

We'd never do that! Nvidia just makes the best GPUs you can buy!

>>59706650
This is a staged benchmark as much as it can be, the 6900k is a lot faster than a 1800X, it has more cache, no CCX nonsense and higher IPC, it losing to Ryzen is retarded and makes no sense, the price of the product reflects that as well.

File: 1489868749219.png (177KB, 367x321px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 367x321px

>>59707982

>>59707790
>>59707961
every bi GPU are terrible

>>59707982
Shilling and delusion isn't enough to properly articulate this, what do you call this kind of mentality?

>>59707961
Shitposting aside, it's probably mostly just a failure of AMD marketing to not send cards to reviewers.

There aren't enough to send to the thousand+ reviewers that'd want one. It was a high end workstation card and not really geared toward games, especially in the numbers they produced them.

File: 98c.png (136KB, 466x486px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 466x486px

>>59707961
>ayymd need 2 gpu to compete with the 1080 non ti

>>59707507
it's biased
BIASED
fuck!

File: 1484686763369.gif (36KB, 265x200px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 265x200px

>>59708049
>"compete"
>35% faster
>merely "competes"

You shouldn't do this, technical deep dives and curiosity are bad, only do what everyone else does and only test with Qualified Vendor Approved hardware and software.

Or else you'll never get a review kit or support from us again!

File: hitman.png (16KB, 622x581px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 622x581px

>>59708095
Yes, AMD needs two GPU because they can't compete a full Pascal.

File: [Continued laughter].gif (4MB, 273x207px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 273x207px

>>59708049
>those two GPUs combined cost less than a third of what the single Nvidia one does

>>59708010
AMD drone falseflagging. From the consumer perspective, the real Intel cpu Ryzen is competing with is the i7 7700k. Nobody but AMD gives a shit about the 6900k.

File: b14b9d507c9235a05f782ce580ca20a6-1200x900.jpg (136KB, 1200x900px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 1200x900px

>>59708165
Maybe it's because AMD hasn't released their highend GPU yet?

At least not for desktops.

>>59708183
>$800

k

>>59708198
Is that a FP64 or FP16 card?

File: 1117277443.jpg (144KB, 900x675px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 900x675px

>>59706650
fucking this

> 99% of reviewers are comparing the 1800X to the 7700K
> 7700K is a quad-core
> games benefits more from single thread performance
> The 7700K easily hits 5GHz
> 7700k is indeed better for games
> Then the conclusion is that Intel is better

WHY THE FUCK can't those Intel shills compare the 1800X to a 8-core Intel, the damage control is unbelievable.

ALWAYS compare the 1800X to the 6900K.

>>59708198
wait™

>>59708238
It's a machine learning accelerator at 12.5TFLOPs fp32, 25tflops fp16.

FP64 is reserved for Vega 20, which I think is 2018.

>>59708260
Yeah, sucks that AMD prioritized enterprise/datacenter before consumers.

File: ashes_of_the_singularity_explicit_multi_gpu_mode_geforce_radeon_fury_980-100646576-orig.png (12KB, 1099x699px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 1099x699px

>>59706650
HOL UP HOL UP

Wait. I have a conspiracy brewing in my head
wait wait wait
what if, nvidia did this on purpose to gimp amd performance in the CPU world? so amd would lose revenue and be less competitive with GPUs?

But wait! What if it doesn't stop there. maybe because AMD don't have a card to compete with the gtx 1080 nVidia thought they could get away with it?

What IF?!?! What if the exact same thing happened at intel when AMD couldn't compete on the CPU level. Intel could have optimised their architecture to work better with nvidia cards.

It would explain why the 980ti beat the fury x despite having 3 less teraflops of performance. in fact the furyx should beat the 1070 handily but it doesn't. is it all a conspiracy??

All this time amd have been superior to nvidia but we couldn't see it! Because if you bought an intel cpu they would be gimping amd performance, and if you bought an amd cpu you would be gimping the performance of any graphics card. So reviewers would only test gpus with intel cpus and nvidia would get an artificial advantage.

it all makes sense now! why the 8teraflop< furyx lost to the objectively less powerful 980ti. and all the previous generations of nvidia superiority. it was all because amd couldn't compete in the cpu market so they're own products were at the mercy of intel. Now that amd are only competing in the cpu market their products are at the mercy of nvidia!!!!

this has to be true it makes so much sense in my head. this is why we multi gpu support so that manufacturers end up gimping themselves as well if they try to gimp the competitition

tell me why im wrong, i dare you.

>>59708291
>sucks that AMD prioritized enterprise/datacenter before consumers
> enterprise/datacenter aren't consumers
ayy lmao

>>59708239
Because that's the price range AMD decided to stick Ryzen in you idiot. It's only natural that people are looking at Ryzen and comparing it to what else they could get for that money. The difference between 8 and 4 cores is nothing more than another bullet point in a list for most people.

>>59708296
jesus christ you sure drank the kurry aid

File: 1273941621486.jpg (31KB, 363x310px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 363x310px

>>59706650
Nice delusion, bruh

>>59708315
>because it's cheaper it often outperforming this $1000 part for half the price or less doesnt matter

7700k is irrelevant for high end users anyways.

Intel shills just want to compare ryzen to the 7700k in gaming and the 6900/6950 when it fits them.

>>59708291
No, not really? Nvidia released enterprise cards before gamer crap first as well.

>>59708239
The 7700K is only better in some very limited use cases like playing some older titles on a 144 Hz monitor. The 7700K loses badly to Ryzen in much more relevant cases like BF1 multiplayer, where it turns into a stuttering mess while Ryzen's 8 cores deliver perfectly smooth performance.

>>59708399
Oh wow? No shit.
Why do you think that is?
Why do you think Intel is changing its release cadence to servers first?

Because the PC market is stagnating in shipments, while enterprise is growing.
Honestly you fuckers have 0 perception or management abilities.

>>59708315
>Because that's the price range AMD decided to stick Ryzen in you idiot

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

This is probably the most genius bit of shilling I've ever seen.

>Sure, it outperforms our $1000 CPU, but it's half the price so you can't compare them.

>>59707424
It's going to be the 580 in 2 weeks with a 1340mhz boost clock on reference boards for the same price or cheaper than a 480/8. The rog stix 480 is 1330 in OC mode so I'm guessing aftermarket 580 oc cards are going to be in the 1400mhz range

>>59708106

>>59708536
I can't give a shit about Polaris even if it's clocked 15% higher and has GDDR5X

>>59708585
You should, because its competition will be a Pascal refresh 1060 since Volta is now safely Q2 2018 territory.

>>59708005

Not terrible, just under utilized.

>>59708468
Actually I fucked up. It has nothing to do with price ranges. The 7700k is simply the intel cpu the vast majority of people are inclined to purchase because of its great value so Ryzen would have had to compete with it regardless while nobody really gives a fuck about the 6900k. AMD tried to steer the conversation towards the 6900k but it was only marginally effective.

>>59708391
Shills act like they can simutaniously have a 6900k in gaming when the 6900k is better in one game (which is rare, as we can see when Nvidia drivers aren't holding it back), but then have the 7700k in gaming when the 7700k is better in another game.

That's even funnier than people ignoring cost and CPU utilization left over.

since no one posted the vids yet.
This new round of discussions started here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFBKFz9n2hc (AdoredTV "what to trust")

and everybody started to pay a bit more attention here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tfTZjugDeg (AdoredTV "Ryzen of the Tomb Raider)

got some good supporting arguments here, (I'd rec watching only this, above any other)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIoZB-cnjc0&feature=youtu.be (nerdtechGasm "AMD vs NV Drivers: A Brief History and Understanding Scheduling & CPU Overhead")

and as usual, moronic run off the mill youtubers didn't get it and i'm quite sure that this is only the first vid on this subject, since youtubers love this kind of circlej erking.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLRCK7RfbUg (hardware Unboxed "Does Ryzen Work Better With AMD GPUs?")

>>59708696
Anyone with 40~mins to spare, I'd recommend watching Adored's 2nd vid and then Nerd Tech Gasm

>>59708696
I've seen them.

I just believe they're less complete tests and harder to digest than the test in the OP.

None of those test MSI enabled on Nvidia, too.

The nerdtechgasm one is VERY good, though. I would recommend watching that.

>>59706770
It is true, watch this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tfTZjugDeg

>>59708690
>CPU utilization left over.
Very important thing too, those extra cycles can and will be used when multitasksing, preventing frame drops.

>>59708165

first off, what a terrible bench, the 1080 is just ahead of the 980ti.

and the fury x is close to a 980ti.

please kys yourself

>>59708366
>kurry aid

LMAO!

>>59706650
>video games

>>>/v/

we have separate boards for a reason, you fucking faggot.

>>59707197
I disagree.
They're deliberatly misleading, first, shifting the focus for cpu reviews onto gaming in such an extent I've never seen before. Not to say that games never featured on cpu reviews, but I'm an old fag who's never seen cinebench or wprime, intel's favorites up until january 2017, lose the limelight to games like this.
Second, and this is very debatable, the very methodolgy and especially the choices for benchmarking games, somehow always seem to carry one or two outliers that would end up skewing the final averages for green+blue. I say it's debatable because, regarding gaming benchmarks it's unarguable that their choice usually represent very popular titles, but any moron who played with graphs and averages on excel for 10 minutes would know that it's quite easy to paint scenario you desire and still preserve an unbiased façade; "there are lies, goddamned lies and statistics".

File: Jim Keller.png (400KB, 816x1020px) Image search: [Google]

400KB, 816x1020px

>>59706650
You haven't even seen my final form.

This is just the beginning.

File: firefox_2017-04-02_15-27-05.png (23KB, 773x530px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 773x530px

>>59708913
The review covers both.

But we already know that Zen shit stomps for servers and workstations.

>>59706650
Please stop making threads on a failed and outdated CPU that is Ryzen. The piece of shit is a massive flop for AMD and soon will be bought out by INTEL.

>>59708868
Why are you triggered?

>>59708005

Say this for 295x2.

>>59707197
It's definitely AMDs fault here for not allowing Mobo manufacturers and GPU makers to test their CPU.
Although as Level1techs notes, AMD has every right to be paranoid about these companies and keep their shit secret until launch. So frankly, it doesn't matter. I wouldn't recommend buying either Ryzen or Kaby Lake for a couple of months because they are both riddled with a host of problems that will get fixed eventually.

>>59708696
cue in: joker will be the next one to release something that will just prove that he didn't even understand the subject; tech yes city will come next probably counter argumenting his old boyfriend;, Paul and Bitwit will miss the point entirely on their weekly show; Wndell will get invited for another podcast and will talk some sense although briefly; linus will do his weekend show and won't bring anything new after a whole week of reddit freaking out over this topic; and JayZ will release a 3 min vid making a brief commentary on this, because he knows he's a moron but he's quite good at skipping the bandwagon to save face and will bring the abridged and digested version of this debacle, usually a reasonable closing point.

>>59708868
Look at the resolution, you dumb shit.
The Fury, and GCN in general, scales far better with resolution.

That's why the RX480 beats the 1060 on average handedly in 1440p, and the FuryX handedly beats the 980 in 1440p.
So at 4k, yeah, the Fury X can certainly beat the 980Ti in some games.

You have no clue what you're talking about, and this whole GPUs performing differently relative to one another at different resolusions perplexes you, so why the fuck are you commenting?

I don't want to overclcock my rig, I am seriously thinking of sending the cpu and motherboard back and buying an i7 7700k rig. I am not an engineer nor did I pay 1300 Canadian dollars to beta test a platform that AMD rushed out the door before it was ready!

File: cucked.png (120KB, 806x580px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 806x580px

>>59708429
Higher average, higher 1%, and higher 0.1% on the 7700k.

The damage control for poozen is real.

>>59709153
>I don't want to overclcock
>buying an i7 7700k
huh?

>>59706650
I don't see what the point of these comparisons are when nobody is going to buy the i7-6900K at twice the price anyway.

>>59709094
and the next phase will be the obligatory PCper article+podcast defending their intel and nvidia overlords with Steve Burke sidekicking with the power of eleven thousand words of complete bullshit.

>>59708585
You don't have to, it's not an "enthusiast" part for a discerning connoisseur such as yourself. Might I suggest an Asus ROG STRIX 1080ti Poseidon Hybrid with AURA Sync to infinitely outshine the competition.

R5 and 580 is going to give you unlocked 6/12 and 8gb vram, for a comparable price to a locked 4 thread 6gb vram combo in a core market segment.

File: wat.gif (63KB, 502x526px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 502x526px

>>59708429
"The 7700K loses badly to Ryzen in much more relevant cases like BF1 multiplayer, where it turns into a stuttering mess while Ryzen's 8 cores deliver perfectly smooth performance"

>>59709185
that's exactly the reason why games suddenly became the focal point for Ryzen reviews anon. Because old school cpu benchmarks are making intel hedt look bad, single threaded performance had to become the most relevant subject above anything else.

>>59708696
So the nvidia DX12 driver is shit after all.

>>59709264
Less so than their software being shit, their cards are shit at DX12

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

604KB, 800x523px

>>59707307
>>59707489
>>59707572
>>59707546
>>59707751
>>59707783
>>59707924
>>59707982
>>59708049
>>59708165
>>59708315
>>59709020
>>59709153
*chases shekel down the street*

>>59709153
Are you a muh gaymes /v/ 144hz user? if so go and get it.

If not, good choice.

You're retarded to get such a new platform at launch and expecting it to be tried and tested. That said, the launch has been surprisingly pain free.

>>59709264
no, the thing is their workaround for dx11 is awesome and since they can exact some control over the publishers, they aren't as focused on dx12 and vulkan, since this scenario benefits them while hurting AMD.

it's tesselation all over again, the revenge of the API's.

>>59709264

Yes. That's been the point all along.

Whether the platform is Intel or Ryzen, in most scenarios they see an increase using AMD hardware and direct X 12. It just so happens that ryzen benchmarks were ran on an unoptimized Nvidia driver which causes the gaming results to be underwhelming.

So now the topic is figuring out just how close to the 7700k is AMD?

Versus at launch the question was "Why is Ryzen phenomenal in everything but gaming?"

We largely have our answer now. Vega can't get here soon enough for AMD.

>>59709264
nVidia's DX12 driver isn't shit. It's more like a limitation of their hardware. And the fact that AMD drivers are getting gud.

>>59708296
I don't think it's true, because don't the RX480 drivers work fine for Intel CPUs?

AMD drivers, software wise, are actually lower overhead in DX11 than Nvidia's.
Any extra overhead you apparently see comes from GCN's hardware scheduler that wants to be constantly fed commands rather than getting it in big chunks like Nvidia's.
That's the biggest reason why AMD gets a massive increase in async compute and DX12/Vulkan because with multiple threads giving it commands the CPU threads finish at different times.

>>59709343

Why not both?

>>59709368
Because Nvidia's software is pretty good, outside of the cases when it bricks hardware, it's good.

>>59709368
see
>>59709333

>>59709368
That's possible. But no matter how good the software is, if the hardware can't do (or even well) then it's gonna be shit no matter what

>>59709375

Then I suggest you go back to the top and reread this thread again.

Because that's not what people are seeing.

>>59709333
>their workaround for dx11 is awesome
Awesome for them and intel, bad for consumers.

>>59709375
or actual dx12 support

>>59709390

Far too conspiratorial.

Why would Nvidia want to lose customers?

Let's stick with what we know.

>>59709333
from the nerdTechGasm video, it seems that the nvidia DX11 driver is intercepting the draw calls from the main thread and split it to separate ones and schedules them on the cpu before uploading th gpu. Isn't that what DX12 does, expect the whole thing happens outside of the driver in the game code?

>>59709430
Mostly a hardware limitation.
But without seeing the source I can't say how much is it the software or hardware's fault, but considering Nvidia has absolutely no reason to support DX12 currently as their GPUs aren't well equipped for them, it's a combination of both malice and disinterest.

Incompetence it's certainly not.

File: bd6.png (8KB, 546x566px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 546x566px

Yes benchmark with settings that nobody actually uses with that setup and show general consumers theoretical numbers that they will never have any use for.

>>59709392
The point from NerdTechGasm vid is that Nvidia's software based workscheduler was very efficient for Dx11 even after accounting the higher cpu overhead, the benefits surpassed the shortcomings. His main argument is that Dx12 and Vulkan demand a different approach that emphasizes the cons of this cpu overhead, where AMD's hardware based, or nvidia's own gtx480, COULD fare a lot better if developers were to take the effort of optimizing for them.

>>59709084
mobo manufacturers had Ryzen engineering samples for well over a month before launch.
I'm not sure of the exact time, but I know it was over a month.

There's a lot of lies going around trying to shift blame. The reality is that mobo manufacturers didn't expect so many people to be buying an 8c/16t CPU that seemed HEDT focused.

>>59709230
It's true. 64 player multiplayer with lots of buildings being destroyed makes the 7700k stutter heavily, even down well over 16ms frame times, while the 1700 roughly stays above 120fps(below 8.3ms) the whole time.

>>59709490

This is what people have been harping on for ages since Direct X 12 was announced. It's what Stardock was screaming from the rooftops about.

It's why their claims of fully DX12 compliance are a joke.

It's why they are stagnating PC gaming performance by being drug with their heels in the dirt over the finish line.

It's not new information.

>>59709347
but thats even more evidence that intel was purposely gimping performance for amd cards. that's why an i3 with an rx 480 performs so shit compared to an i7. people blames it on AMDs driver overhead when really it was intels kikery

>>59709048
better off getting a fury x tbch

>>59709608

No. Stop. Intel doesn't give a fuck about gimping AMD GPUs.

>>59709442
This only really works out well when doing AZDO DX11/OpenGL.
There is otherwise LOTS that the graphics API does that's single threaded BEFORE it sends the draw calls. Stuff that's interwoven with "game code" in the rendering pipeline.

Was that not explained in the video? I honestly don't know since I didn't watch it closely. I do graphics programming a bit so I already knew what's in it.

>>59709578
>mobo manufacturers had Ryzen engineering samples for well over a month before launch.
and what they did with those samples?
absolutely nothing, since they were too busy ramping up z270 mobos production and preparing the party for the chinese new year. It's quite hard to secure a good caterer during that period.

>>59709638
>HALT YOUR INVESTIGATION
fuck off intel

I certainly do not want to overclcock my rig, I am seriously thinking of sending the cpu and motherboard back and buying an i7 7700k rig. I am not an engineer nor did I pay 1300 Canadian dollars to beta test a platform that AMD rushed out the door before it's ready!

>>59709664

>it's always someone else's fault except amd's!!! reeeeee

fuck off

>>59709432
>Why would Nvidia want to lose customers?
why would they?

>Eurocom launches Dual Processor, Quad GPU 19.1” UltraHD Tornado F9 Mobile Supercomputer Super Laptop supporting dual AMD Ryzen 7 series desktop processors with four desktop GPUs


DUAL SOCKET CONSUMER RYZEN

>>59709783
da fuck?
http://www.eurocom.com/ec/release(372)ec
I thought you were trying some new dank hyperbole.

>>59709783
Only Clevo is crazy enough to do something like this.

>>59709783
>>59709835
> or AMD RX580 graphics cards are supported with 16GB GDDR5X VRAM per card.

this piqued my interest.

>>59709608
I don't think Intel was gimping AMD driver performance at all.
The 1800X just has higher all-core boost clocks than the 6900k and similar IPC. Superior IPC in some tasks that games use heavily, even. That's why the 1800X outperforms the 6900k on average and in more titles with an AMD GPU.
The reason it doesn't with Nvidia GPU is just Nvidia's drivers both for DX11 and DX12 not working right sometimes.


>>59709710
>don't want to overclock
>better get the 7700k!
I think you mean the 7700 or 1600X. Those are the best CPUs for the money for non-overclockers right now.

Where is my embedded sub-45W TDP eight-core Ryzen SoC?
Do I have to swallow Intel's 14nm fermented spunkbaby Xeon-D?

>>59709783
>>59709835
>Apr 01, 2017
>Not listed on home or news page

>>59709887
Nowhere yet because validation takes time.

File: confused-hanayamata.jpg (91KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 1280x720px

>Two Intel Optane memory modules are supported and capable of running in RAID 0 with expansion up to 256 GB.

Storage
>An unprecedented six M.2 NVMe solid-state drives are supported due to the multitude of PCIe lanes brought forward by the new AMD architecture.

isn't optane propietary? and how come they got 6 nvme's there?

>>59709835
>>59709857
April 1st
REEEEE.

>>59709919
You can fit more NVMe with a splitter but.. they run at like 8Gbp/s I think.

File: Screenshot from 03-04-2017 01:37:50.png (866KB, 1822x940px) Image search: [Google]

866KB, 1822x940px

>>59709951
>>59709919
>>59709890
What is the truth? What is a lie?

>>59709951
>splitter
You mean a PCIe switch
And no, you get full PCIE3.0 x4 lanes because who writes to all of their NVMe drives at the same time all the time?

>>59709951
quad gpu's + 6 nvmes. on 24+24 pci lanes.
not to mention that intel optane...

probably
>>59709951
>>59709890

>>59709971
It's like one of those recent April 1st Vega slides, where there's some truth(1600mhz+ clocks) mixed in.

>>59706650
>agrees with me
>must be legit

>>59709971
Any tweets about it from today, April 2nd?

>>59710009
>tfw no 1U dual-socket 16c/32t Zen motherboards yet

>>59710056
>1U dual-socket
>1U
>dual socket

Without a GPU?

>>59710056
Q3 probably.

>>59710065
Horizontally mounted GPUs are ghetto

>>59710065
>needing a GPU for a non-production cloud server

>>59710086
Just buy a i7 and AWS you autist, AMD isn't fit for work because of constant stability issues!

>>59709153
>I don't want to overclcock my rig, I am seriously thinking of sending the cpu and motherboard back and buying an i7 7700k rig.

>>59709710
>I certainly do not want to overclcock my rig, I am seriously thinking of sending the cpu and motherboard back and buying an i7 7700k rig.


Fuk. he is on repeat.

>>59710101
Shilling in my days used to be an art.

File: NItSn.jpg (127KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1280x720px

>>59710009
>tfw all of this would be perfectly reasonable on that rumored x399/x390 platform.

(minus the optane, obviously. or they could hack it into it somehow... but then would have to pay licensing fees... dunno, intel most likely wouldn't allow even if possible)

>>59706650
> 720p
This is just sad. Really sad. It really is.

I used to have a 3x1080 setup, now I have 1080 1440 1080 and I will be updating my side monitors.

Perhaps I can't expect games to run smoothly at 3x1440p but if I'm going to invest thousands of dollars on a brand new CPU / motherboard / RAM / graphics card then I fully expect to be able to play the games with a minimum of one 1440p monitor.

720p, in 2017, seriously.. what kind of sad state of affairs are we in? This really is sad and pathetic.

>>59707263
>because fuck DirectX, Vulkan is better for end users in all cases.
I would very much like Vulkan to win over DirectX, just like it would have been great if OpenGL had won over DirectX.

This, sadly, isn't going to happen. The Microsoft Corporation, which is evil, controls the XBox and this platform has a lot more laymers than Steam and the PC platform. Microsoft is not about to let developers make Vulcan games for XBox which means that developers will keep on making DirectX XBox games which they badly port to the PC platform.

The Sony Praystation could get proper Vulcan support, though, so that could change things.

>>59706650
So I'm kind of new to the whole hardware thing. Seems like people just pick and choose the "test" results they want. Every fucking test seems to yield different results.

>>59710138

And yesterday too,

Anonymous 04/02/17(Sun)23:34:58 No.59709131
I don't want to overclcock my rig, I am seriously thinking of sending the cpu and motherboard back and buying an i7 7700k rig

Jesus, christ.

File: shut-it-down-jew[1].jpg (617KB, 2040x3160px) Image search: [Google]

617KB, 2040x3160px

>>59710138
>>59710181

>>59710177
Tests are done at 720p to avoid bottlenecking the RX480 too much. It's similar to benchmarking a 1080 ti at 1080p. I thought this was common knowledge already?

>>59710239
I don't care what the excuses are, not even a little. It's not 2005 or 2010 so I won't be playing games at 720p. Performance 1440p is the only thing that matters, preferably 3x1440p.

>>59710293
Well there are plenty of 1440p benchmarks out there already and most of them show there's barely any difference between intel and ryzen which is already old news.

>>59710177
>XBox and this platform has a lot more laymers than Steam and the PC platform
Absolutely incorrect, especially with the xbox selling so shit.

>we test at 720p or lower because what would happen if we remove the GPU bottleneck

The problem is that you're NEVER gonna remove the GPU bottleneck! Even at 1440p the 1080ti the GPU is the bottleneck, much less fucking 4k!

This testing methodology should have died with the advent of dual core processors 13 years or so ago, because it was only relevant then when single thread performance was all we had.

>>59710177
Holy shit, you're so retarded. You have no idea what is being tested here and what it shows.

Resolution only affects the GPU, not CPU. Did you really 150+ posts in that you're the first person to drop a knowledge bomb on all these more intelligent people than you that have been discussing this?

>>59709660

Fucking this. Lol

>>59710406
For low end GPUs 720p is a valid testing methodology. I don't bench a CPU with a fucking RX470 on 4k/ultra.

>>59710406
Sigh. Lurk before posting.

They think that by running artificially low settings they can tell what the gaming will be like in the future when the CPU bottleneck starts showing up in real use.

Which also is wrong because they assume CPU multitreading (and optimization for quirks, in ryzens case) will be the same as now, while it acctually has slowly but steadily progressed.

It's also wrong because they ignore the multitasking lots of people do.

>>59710180

What you're seeing is a platform evolving and growing. If Ryzen were a human being we would be slamming a baby for laying in its crib and crying defenseless. Instead of getting out the crib grabbing it's mom's teat and feeding as it prepares to go hunting for bears to clothe it's self.

>>59710406
are you stupid? there are significant differences between CPUs with the same GPU even at 1080p, just look at this fucking thread. In 4 years when these are no longer cutting-edge products, that disparity is going to be even more apparent.

>>59710538
So, you're assuming drivers, software, APIs and engines will continue at a standstill for 4 years?

I'm sorry but you're retarded.
People did the same with Sandybridge and Bulldozer, SB was wrecking it by over 40% in low res tests, but now Bulldozer runs modern games better than it.

>>59709171
>CPU benchmark
>multiplayer
???

File: battlefield-1-cpu-benchmark_2500k[1].png (41KB, 806x580px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 806x580px

>>59710538
>In 4 years when these are no longer cutting-edge products, that disparity is going to be even more apparent.

I have a 2500k, it was my main machine for a looong time. When I ran bf1 by itself it performed much like pic related. But in real use, with a lot of chrome tabs, discord, skype, league etc. running there was bad stuttering and frame drops. I couldnt play a video while playing without it being unplayable.

Kabylake will be the same at the end of it's life.

>>59710631
So disable all that useless crap then? Fucking autist

>>59710677
>stopping your workflow because the CPU can't handle running more than 1 application at time

Buy a console, fucking ape.

>>59710710
>discord, skype, league
>workflow
This isn't your work. It's useless crap that you should never have installed to your PC in the first place

>>59710743
Right, he should disable his NIC too, can't have babylake wasting precious and sparse CPU cycles babysitting it too.

>>59710677
The communication programs are necessary. I want to watch a video while playing, single tasking is really boring when there's death screens and loading screens. Also, I'll watch music videos with friends while playing games.

I could close my remote desktops, tabs, but why should I have to? Like anon said, that's console-tier. PCs are made to multitask.

>>59710743
That's not me, and it's not WORKflow. Those are programs most people use while gaming. We're talking about games because tech reviewrs suddenly decided that's the most important when it comes to CPUs.

But if you're so adamant on work stuff, then surely you agree quadcores are irrelevant?

Because able to watch or shit on my second monitor is one of the biggest reasons I have a PC instead of console.

Why the fuck would I want a weak shit CPU that can only handle one thing at a time?

>>59706650
>>59706678
>no 7700k
Hmmmm, I wonder who could be behind this.

>>59710865
>ignoring the 7700k results to shitpost about how they're not there when they are
hmmmmmm

File: 1400106300300.gif (802KB, 264x264px) Image search: [Google]

802KB, 264x264px

>>59708239
>oy vey buy our server CPU for gaming
>n-no don't compare it to other cheaper products that are meant for gaming

>>59710878
OPs pictures don't have them.

>>59707038
>AMD cpus don't get utlized
>LOOK AT THIS UNUSED POWER, IT WILL ONLY GET BETTER IN THE FUTURE WHEN THEY OPTIMIZE RYZEN
>Nvidias GPU isn't utlized
>LOL look at this shit product, it doesnt even have good drivers to utilize it correctly.

>>59710799
>But if you're so adamant on work stuff, then surely you agree quadcores are irrelevant?
No, not all work is the same. The are many people who do important work on quad cores or even less just like there are many people who waste all their time watching porn and web browsing on their brand new 8 cores.

>>59710963

When is Nvidia going to roll out that Ryzen optimization patch?

>>59710986
Never. Death to AMD finally after years of shitty CPUs soon they will be bought by INTEL

>>59710963
You're comparing a GPU to a CPU, are you retarded? GPUs are easy to peg to 100% in any game at 1080p even, it's their fucking job to output the max amount of frames.
CPUs are not, it would be great if you could 100% them all the time in games, but due to how software works, it's not likely to happen.

>>59710939
Yes they do, and so does the article.

You just linked to 2 and ignored the 3rd because you're a fucktard.

>>59710986
It'd be funny if they don't until after Vega DX12 on Ryzen BTFOs them.

File: dumb amdshills3.png (88KB, 828x806px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 828x806px

>>59710677
>amd shills can close their botnets
>amd shills have any common sense

>>59710986
Maybe when Volta arrives. Maybe when they get a hardware scheduler.

>>59706770
I hope so. Was gonna get a 1080 ti with ryzen but shilltel is making me sick with their buggy drivers, going dual AMD seems like the best thing performance wise these days, something I never thought I'd say

>>59711308
That's stupid, when Vega launches it'll be compared to directly the 1080Ti and I really doubt Nvidia will like seeing the 1080Ti doing notably worse because they've been slacking on CPU support in their drivers.

>>59711471
CF has actually been okay good for a while, though the power usage is high. 2 RX480s is like 360watt+.

CF scales better and doesn't have the microstutter problem that SLI has.

The only problem, which is a big one, is when games don't support CF.

>>59706650
>https://thetechaltar.com/amd-ryzen-1800x-performance/2/
>uses javascript smooth scrolling
Opinion invalidated.

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

687KB, 1914x1077px

>>59710631
This, running 2400 on bf1 with gtx 1070 is smooth enough but still the stutter
Gonna get 1600X or 1700 and OC. I was already gonna get 6+ cores before ryzen because I wanted the max possible minimum fps in games to keep high hz monitors conistent even during explosions/the physics and coding of 10 guys dying/30 guys nearby, and also the ability to record that all without losing frames
So far ryzen is about 5-10% behind a 6900K for minimum frames and only 30% of the price (going by the cheapest possible sites in Australia and 1700 that performs the same OCed as OC 1800X)

>>59711574
Yeah by dual I meant more like CPU and GPU haha, but a dual vega set up would likely destroy nvidia SLI offerings

File: 1456494895486.jpg (58KB, 386x359px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 386x359px

>>59711473
nVidia can just pull a rabbit out of the Geforce2 era and release a surprise Geforce GTX 1080 Ultra instead! That'll show AMD who's boss

>>59711677
Yeah I have an i5-2500k.

My average FPS is fine in anything, but the fucking stutter in some newer games and not being able to watch Twitch or youtube at the same time is annoying.

A 7700k would be a big upgrade, but not enough, especially when there are many games that can 99% utilize its 8 threads and yet it still doesn't get 144fps minimum. So I'm getting a 1600X as well.

>>59711708
Oh right.

>>59711727
I mean.. theoretically they could clock the 1080Ti higher. Isn't it good for about 2050Mhz for the average overclock if your cooling is enough?
It's what, 1480Mhz stock?
I don't see why they couldn't bump it up to 1700-1800 stock.
It actually sounds like they're jewing us over, here, and could be giving more stock.

It still won't match the Ryzen+Vega performance on DX12/Vulkan, though.

>>59711677
yea I got a 1700X and regret not just getting the 1700 but it seems fine too
I'm at 3.8ghz without issues and without even trying to overclock, I just set it there at stock shit and it runs fine
gonna go to 4.0ghz when linux kernel has a fucking temp sensor hopefully.. in 2 months but maybe it'll never have it so rip

it got one for bulldozer right?

>>59711755
1700X is nice if you don't want to overclock. 3.9Ghz boost vs 3.75Ghz.

I do think they're priced too high. Add on a cooler and it's $100 more than the 1700 but not worth that. Should have been $350 for the 1700X and $450 for the 1800X, I think.

1800X sort of justifies a much higher step up in price because they're the absolute best binned ones and people who want the best will pay more.

File: 1395616790718.jpg (31KB, 225x350px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 225x350px

>>59710887
> 1800X and i7 6900K
> server CPU's
the state of /g/

>>59711820
1700X price in my country is like $55 more than a 1700, not $100

So it has some more value.
Still no cooler though, I hope AMD actually starts putting out them with Wraith MAX coolers.

>>59711856
I meant with the cooler being worth $30.
In America you can get the 1700 for $270-$300 and the cooler I'd say is worth $30.
The 1700X you can get for $350. So $80 more.

But the MSRP was $330 and $400 respectively.

> I hope AMD actually starts putting out them with Wraith MAX coolers.
They said they would.
Maybe when sales slow down they'll put them in for the same MSRP or less. That'd suddenly make the 1700X much more worth it.

File: 1460466305594.jpg (107KB, 998x974px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 998x974px

>>59707367
>Being loyal to any brand is fucking retarded though, I hope you know this.
You know I find it hilarious that most people that say this are very loyal to AMD, same with the " do you want a monopoly?" type of niggas.

>>59711727
they would be helping AMD by doing this, I think you missed the point entirely.

I posited this theory WAAAAAAAAAY before the Ryzen launch, that Nvidia's drivers would gimp Ryzen performance. I wish I had screen capped it now.

>>59712186
Lots of us did on hardware forums.

But """""professional hardware reviewers"""" are so fucking incompetent.

We need a 1060/480 comparison on Ryzen.

>>59711910
1600x with wraith max cooler would chop $150 off my build because cpu cooler prices are fucking retarded in canada.

Technical question.
Is there anything AMD can do with its CPU that would make their GPU drivers run better compared to Intel CPUs?

File: balmer.jpg (9KB, 313x235px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 313x235px

>>59709971
I 100% believe this. Eurocom is one of those shit companies that builds a high failure-rate product and has no qualms about putting in high wattage parts.

>>59712247
Other than creating their own instruction set solely used for other AMD products like their graphic stack and accelerating certain critical performance paths or something like a built in FPGA I don't really see how.


Once the infinity fabric and NVRAM comes into play Ryzen can do a lot when it comes to the GPUs though.

>>59712228
We'll get them soon, I bet. The question is:
>Will "respectable" reviewers actually do such tests, or only small youtubers?

R5 1500X + RX480
vs
i5-7500 + 1060

It'd be a slaughter over the average. The problem is that the 1500X is probably going to be left with at least 30% CPU utilization. Need Vega to come to actually 100% utilize the CPU with AMD.

Reviewers really should have tested RX480 CF instead of just the 1080 on both CPUs to begin with.

quick question, is the nh d15 still king among air coolers or has this changed?

testing CPUs on games is the worst meme on /g/

File: fuck this gay earth.jpg (167KB, 600x414px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 600x414px

>>59707374

File: 1487568605660.jpg (56KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 640x640px

>>59712445
It's important to see which handles awful programming best.

Next up: Webapp benchmarks

>>59708696
Nerdgasm dude needs a fucking decongestant! Holy fuck that was hard to listen to.

Nvidia (and to an extent Intel) have the money to bribe developers (and if you don't like the word 'bribe' then having more people out in the field supporting the devs to optimize for their platforms). Who would have thunk it?

>Game devs don't want to kill off the Windows 7 DX11 golden egg.

If everyone moved the fuck off Win7 to Win10 this would not be a problem but...

'muh botnet!'

OK MS have a lot of blame in this matter too.

>furyX loses to 980ti
>It's Nvidias fault

>Zen was slower because of new bios
>Zen is slower because of DDR4
>Zen is slower because Intel coding
>Zen is slower because windows
>Zen is slower because Nvidia

Is it possible AMD just can't optimise to save their life?

All I keep hearing are excuses

>>59712857

New architecture, needs new optimizing. I know it's been a while since you little faggots have had to deal with a new product but could you at least act like you're not so brand fucking new?

>>59712505

Too late, CEMU emulation is the new deciding factor for CPU success.

It can't run PS3 games? What a piece of shit.

>>59712857
If you actually read, you'd see it's clearly NVidia's problem and fault.

>>59712908
Maybe, but how is its a CPUs fault that people making emulators for MULTITHREADED CONSOLES AND GAMES can't make MULTITHREADED EMULATORS?

The PS4 was an 8 core. The emulator should run at least 8 threads.

The emulator programmers obviously suck ass yet make lots of money off their scam anyway.

I can guarantee 99% of review tech sites will test Vega on a 7700K only. You can screencap this.

File: who could be behind this.png (6KB, 356x480px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 356x480px

>>59712845

>If everyone moved the fuck off Win7 to Win10 this would not be a problem but...
GEEE I wonder who could be behind this post.

>>59712964

If they do, people will riot in the streets.

People are already pissed about the way they handled the Ryzen launch. They didn't do ANY testing. Just ran some benchmarks and called it a fucking day, and let that sweet cash roll in.

File: 1374257780288.gif (2MB, 187x155px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 187x155px

>>59712857
>expecting AMD retards to not blame everybody but themselves, ever.

>>59709664
So, what you're saying is that Intel is not responsible for tailoring the best possible experience for their customers?

Sounds like kikery to me.

>>59713122

What did AMD fuck up on with Ryzen?

>>59712845
topkek kiddo, if devs went full Vulkan everyone could use whatever the fuck they wanted.

>>59713172
>What did AMD fuck up on with Ryzen?
game benchmarks!!!!! doesn't beat the 7700k in every game!!!!

>>59713172
N-NOTHING AT ALL! You must be insane to think otherwise, it's literally everybody elses fault! Don't dare to even insist otherwise shlomo.

File: atthisratethegoywillbeterminal.jpg (44KB, 446x422px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 446x422px

>>59713173
But how will we force windows 10 on everybody if DX12 isn't the only way?!

>>59713223
windows 10 can fuck off
Imagine if we could have muh games on linux too, and ..well macs are fucked, but theyre faggots.

File: jewing intensifies.gif (378KB, 208x200px) Image search: [Google]

378KB, 208x200px

>>59713240
I don't think you understand....You must install win 10 goy! You aren't scared of a little botnet are you anon? You aren't a pussy right? Stacey thinks you are a cool guy who isn't afraid of tinfoil conspiracies don't disapoint her by suggesting win 10 has multitude of issues ranging form performance, privacy, control and so on. These are all fabrications after all.

>>59713291
Will win10 make my ding dong bigger?

If not it wont matter to stacy

>>59712845

mass windows10 adoption was never the problem. dx12 is just too time consuming and too big of a hassle to implement compared to dx11.

RX480 is such a weakass card that a Pentium G4560 can fully drive it in pretty much any title, even at 720p. Why the fuck do they even make these GPU-limited tests?

>>59711019
>this fucking troll again
what do you care if AMD is gone? It's not like you bought their products to begin with.

Poor Volta

>>59713447
>rx480
>weak

guess how i know you are a child who has only been following hardware for a year at best

the rx480 is a very capable card

>>59706650
Why are we using videogames to test CPUs? Shouldn't those be used for testing graphics cards?

File: davalos10.gif (4MB, 415x394px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 415x394px

jesus christ, half the posts in this thread are shills and disinformation peddlers. does intel have a department for that shit or something?

or is it just retards?

maybe they should pay people to improve their DX12 drivers instead of paying for SJWs and japanese image board shills?

god damn

>>59713529
>>59713492
Go back.

>>59713204

I'll ask it one more time.

What did AMD fuck up on with Ryzen?

File: 1491111511721.gif (248KB, 374x400px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 374x400px

>>59708165
>>59708049
>>59707961
>AMD haven't even released their Vega GPU and they already perform significantly better than a 1080
YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS SHIT UP

File: Hh02eaV.png (15KB, 1027x208px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 1027x208px

>>59708049
>>59708165

lold

>>59713803
this... is the power... of the Titan

>>59707790
Every reviewer pretends dual GPU AMD cards don't exist to not lose that sweet free shit Nvidia gives them
Back in the Titan Z days they ignored the 295X2 while keeping the Z in comparisons, making it look like Nvidia had the performance crown
>>59708049
>a 2 years old architecture a process node behind beats Nvidia's latest and greatest
No wonder they're using Polaris again, tit's that good
>>59709153
Nice shill, unfortunately everyone fell for it
A nice and short pasta
>>59709887
>Where is my embedded sub-45W TDP eight-core Ryzen SoC?
It's been here since March 2, any R7 has cTDP, one of the values is 35W
It runs at 1.9 Ghz on all threads or 3.3 Ghz on a single thread
The low power server SoC's are rumored to be the Snowy Owl's
>>59711308
Friendly reminder that they had a hardware scheduler in Fermi, and they dropped it to tame their housefire
Daily reminder that Nvidia promised Fermi DX12 drivers and they never arrived
>>59712186
You can look for your post in the archives my senpai
>>59712406
It's still the king
>>59712857
>Is it possible AMD just can't optimise to save their life?
But they do, they had submitted Zen patches to the Linux kernel and GCC starting in 2015
If you werent retarded you would know AMD is the only one who actually optimizes shit
>>59713529
>jesus christ, half the posts in this thread are shills and disinformation peddlers. does intel have a department for that shit or something?
The April Fools merged boards proved that automated shilling is a persistent thing on /pol/
They didn't updated their software to redirect their posts to the new boards, post quality dramatically spiked on /mlpol/, despite the brony NSFW posting

>>59714262
A lot of it is probably a failure of AMD marketing in not sending review samples, desu.

Then again, it seems like lots of reviewers bought their own Titans and Tis, too.

>Daily reminder that Nvidia promised Fermi DX12 drivers and they never arrived
Because then Fermi would have outperformed Kepler and others in DX12 which would look bad.

>If you werent retarded you would know AMD is the only one who actually optimizes shit
Compilers, tho. :/ None of them seem to optimize well for AMD? They don't un-optimize like the Intel compiler did before, but you can't target to have it optimize for 4 instructions per cycle?

>>59712886
So how many years will AMD fuccbois ride this nonsense? It's not like AMD didn't know what current software was built around.

>>59714702
It's like you pretending same thing did not happen with Nehalem. (you).

>>59706650
How is this surprising? I'm pretty sure it won most of the time or came very close in all reviews to the 6900K.

The ones that shit on it were the highly clocked kaby lake things.

>>59714746
It's not surprising. And it was on average performing worse in games against the 6900k with an Nvidia GPU.

It's just annoying how many of us assumed it was something to do with Nvidia drivers and it's only now that """"professional tech reviewers"""" actually test it out a month later.

Also, the same tests show it beats the 7700k in 30% of the many games tested. Which is more than the 6900k beats the 7700k in, which is interesting.
Makes the 1600X look like it's going to be really amazing.

>>59706650
I got in touch with them since they seem to bother to do actual testing, and they said they might try seeing if the Message Signal Interruption setting on Nvidia drivers changes the results significantly as well.

>>59713494
cpus feed the gpu, you cant test a gpu without the cpu feeding it and how good it feeds the gpu is a test of how good the cpu is.

>>59708315
>Because that's the price range AMD decided to stick Ryzen in you idiot.

Congratulation for being too moronic to even understand a little bit of economics.
AMD has produced a comparable product at half the price. It should still be compared to the most similar product, not to the product in the same price range. Otherwise, you could just as simply compare a Hamburger with a light bulb. DUH THEY ARE ROUGHLY THE SAME PRICE RANGE.
Your entire argument falls apart at the slighest glance.

Fucking really, /g/? Why do people that have at most half a brain even got access to the internet?

>>59708631
>4c/8t
>$350
>expensive ass motherboards
>no cooler
>great value goy! you buy!