But Workstations are great on R..

>Due to the lack of multi-threading, AutoCAD is not capable of using more than 50% of the CPU on a dual-core computer, so there is no significant performance gain over a single CPU computer except for the areas noted above.
https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/autocad/troubleshooting/caas/sfdcarticles/sfdcarticles/Support-for-multi-core-processors-with-AutoCAD.html

>>59716536
OP BTFO

So you shouldn't buy a 6900K?

>>59716536
>>59716565
you are literally computer illiterate. Those programs use an enormous amount of multiprocessing. But guess fucking what amdtoddler, they do it via the GPU which is designed a parallel pipeline machine, not a CPU, which is designed for serial performance.

PS. And if you weren't literally blind you'd see the OP pic has a Quadro on top.

>>59716580
Let's see the benchmarks done with an AMD alternative GPU. Especially considering the recent news that the bad benchmarks Ryzen's been getting have been a result of Nvidia's shitty drivers.

cuck

>>59716591
Nobody compares GPUs here child. NVIDIA are a cartel with AMD and literally almost identical at that, with NVIDIA only making bigger chips that are slightly faster and more expensive. I have an AMD GPU.

>Nobody compares GPUs here child.

Hahahah

these trollthreads are shit.

>posting flawed day1 benchmarks
>tomshardware
>clear shilling instead of just using facts and real numbers
>OP being a faggot.


Guy, we get it, you are upset that your 500$ intel cpu is shit now, we understand. but it isnt a new thing, this is how nvidiacucks feel every day.

so enjoy your shitty hardware, my 1700 is doing great and raping my old 6700k. now im just waiting for Vega to fully decimate the competition.

>>59716580
>PS. And if you weren't literally blind you'd see the OP pic has a Quadro on top.
well DUH it doesn't include anything less than quad core and the top is just the CPU with the highest single thread performance by virtue of its clockspeed.

>>59716580
>To fully benefit from multi-core processors, you need to use multi-threaded software; AutoCAD is predominantly a single-threaded application.

You were BTFO by the first fucking reply.

>>59716342
>AutoCAD
No seriously, who gives a shit? Show me rendering benchmarks for 3DSMax, or Unigtaphics NX, or Solidworks, or literally almost anything else but AutoCAD. You don't need any fucking computing power for AutoCAD because it's the biggest joke of a CAD program there is right now.

t. CAD Designer

>>59716748
Is industry moving away from AutoCAD?
I remember that 10 years ago it was the shit.

>>59716536
>>Due to the lack of multi-threading, AutoCAD is not capable of using more than 50% of the CPU on a dual-core computer, so there is no significant performance gain over a single CPU computer

Why is this allowed? Surely this is exactly the sort of professional-grade software that should be multithreaded

>>59716812
>We already know Nvidia deliberately lowers Ryzen performance on their drivers.
>deliberately

paranoia
hopefully they just need some time to fix it

>>59716709
>waiting for Vega

this triggers the nvidia fag

>Ryzen performs better than $500 and $1000 Intel chips
>don't worry we still have le ebin gayming performance :^)

>>59717026
>implying they will

File: 1490355124322.webm (694KB, 944x344px) Image search: [Google]

694KB, 944x344px

>>59716580
>software developer states that AutoCAD doesn't benefit from multiple cores on CPU due to lack of multi-threading in code ran on CPU
>kiddo still claims that AutoCAD surely is heavily multi-threaded so that means ryzen multicore performance is shit
(You)'ve clearly showed them, child ;^)

File: 85866.png (35KB, 650x350px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 650x350px

>>59716342
>muh single thread

File: ryzen-streaming.png (129KB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 1440x1080px

>>59716342
Ryzen is so fucking shit it's hilarious

It even sucks at streaming which is what it was marketed for

>>59716342

>FX 9590 @ 3.8GHz

Why?

>>59717117
Ryzen performs worse than Intel chips that cost $150 less

It fails in both price and performance, a total disaster

>>59717473
IPC comparison
>>59717477
Keep telling yourself that shill

File: Screenshot_20170401-155916(1).jpg (210KB, 720x733px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 720x733px

>>59716536
DELID THIS

File: chrome.png (44KB, 650x350px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 650x350px

>>59716709
>my 1700 is doing great and raping my old 6700k

Wow you actually downgraded

>>59716342
>pls ignore the whole X99 lineup getting BTFO

>>59717486
The truth hurts doesn't it AMD shill

File: x265-2.png (582KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

582KB, 600x600px

>>59717527
The truth hurts doesn't it intel shill

http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700-3dmark-multithreaded-benchmarks-leaked/

File: ryzen-14-game-average.png (72KB, 601x830px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 601x830px

>>59717546
Oh god not another encoding benchmark!

Meanwhile in the real world.

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

395KB, 2400x2000px

>>59717555
:^)

>>59717555
>gaming
>real world
>day one benchmarks

>>59716591
>AMD GPU on a workstation

>>59717555
>day 1 benchmark
>literally 5 fps difference
Intel shills/fanboys can't be this stupid, right? It must be bait

>>59717583
>5 fps difference

You might want to rethink calling other people stupid

File: fallout4-ryzen.png (454KB, 536x1226px) Image search: [Google]

454KB, 536x1226px

>>59717563
:^)

Just lmao when a top of the line Ryzen gets beat by a Pentium

>>59717592
>7 fps difference between 1800x and 7700k
>pretending it was not you who posted that
Kill yourself, retard. You're just waste in the world.

>>59717601
>doesn't specify what ram speeds are being used
>day 1 tests
here is your (You)

>>59716342
DALART DIS

>>59717630
10 points have been added to your AMD Red Team account.

File: 1491162177110.png (55KB, 764x954px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 764x954px

>>59717601

>>59717640
How does it feel to be incredibly stupid?

>>59717466
This is from your own fucking retarded shitty arsetechnica review

"While I wasn't able to capture the number of dropped frames from the stream, I was able to capture the FPS numbers from Dota 2. All the eight-core CPUs did well, but the 7700K took a significant hit to performance by as much as 18FPS with OBS active. Ryzen did well, only dropping 3FPS while streaming, but was ultimately slower overall than the Intel systems."

>>59717501
>Caring about bloated Javashit benchmarks
Nobody's buying a $500 CPU for >muh single core performance, faggot.

>>59717683
Thanks, that really nails it home.

Ryzen did well, but was ultimately slower.

It's a complete disaster when the $500 Ryzen chip is getting beat by a $350 Intel chip at streaming, which is something Ryzen was supposed to excel at.

>>59717601
Fallout 4 is not a good benchmark game because it's poorly optimized trash.

>>59717704
>dropped frames aren't important

oiiiiiii veeeeeeeeeeey

File: hitmandx12-ryzen.png (74KB, 601x830px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 601x830px

>>59717709
I guess all games are poorly optimized trash

File: ryzen-cpu-value.png (26KB, 773x371px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 773x371px

>>59717725
You realize you are getting jewed by AMD hard with Ryzen

Horrible price-performance, they just want your shekels

>>59716580
LITERALLY CORPORATE SITE AND ANSWER HHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH

File: 1491162294224.png (49KB, 754x939px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 754x939px

>>59717721
i guess you're a shill

>>59717721
>>59717731
More garbage day one benchmarks from retards. It's a month later, people have gotten faster RAM working, BIOS have been updated, it's been discovered Nvidia cards are actually gimping Ryzen due to their shit DX 12 performance ..

Just drop the day one benchmarks, shills. You've posted them a hundred times and you aren't convincing anyone anymore.

File: ryzen-16-games-average.png (61KB, 1306x1646px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 1306x1646px

>>59717746
Retard those are professional reviews that have been duplicated 10 times over, here have some more

File: 1491141846918.png (1MB, 1280x653px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x653px

>>59717774
>professional reviews
wew

>>59717601
>Gamebryo engine
>DX11
almost 10 year old API and an over 20 year old engine to test a new processor.

>>59717501

Not even close kid.

I get higher min and average fps. System feels way snappier and more responsive.

Also I can do more Shit in the background without the cpu choking. Face it, Intel is dead. That's why you noobs are posting day one benchmarks by retarded reviewers.

Since you are such a cuck. Find me a benchmark where the 1700 is overclocked and running 3200mhz ram and See if it loses to the puny 7700k.but. Come on nigger. I dare you.

File: lol.png (1MB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1000x1000px

>>59717501

File: excel.png (27KB, 500x450px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 500x450px

>>59717855
AMD shills delusions are off the charts

They actually downgrade their systems and then lie to themselves about it being faster, fucking hilarious desu senpai.

>>59717960
see >>59717546

File: 1446347180769.jpg (574KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

574KB, 1024x768px

>>59717960
>Spreadsheets
wow that sounds very fun and hardware intensive

File: ashes.png (76KB, 601x830px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 601x830px

>>59717989
OK let's post some more fun game benchmarks, lol

>>59718000
sure thing see >>59717660

File: bf1-ryzen.png (120KB, 806x580px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 806x580px

Seriously though did anyone predict how bad Ryzen would be?

I knew it would be bad, but not this bad.

AMD's marketing is so fucking scummy, they always lie.

>>59718041
see >>59717563

File: AHAHAHAHHA.png (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

>>59718041
>5 frames

>>59718041
>6fps lower

>"but not this bad"

Hi shill! I'm sure those dank day one benches are relevant!

>>59718072
see >>59717979 >>59718051

>>59718075
>6 fps
totally worth the extra $700, brb buying a 6900k

File: ma.jpg (26KB, 474x424px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 474x424px

Why are you retards still falling for the same shitty bait a month later? Like, literally the same images, not just the same subject. Do you have brain problems?

>HAHAHAHAHA OP BTFO WE SURE PROVED HER WRONG!!1
>83 replies

>>59716775
Almost everyone uses fully realized 3D, parametric tools now. Even moreso if they have analysis capabilities built in like NX and CATIA. So no, AutoCAD is garbage.

>>59716970
But it's not. You just fucking draw lines. There's nothing graphically or computationally advanced about AutoCAD. It's as simple as it gets.

>>59717660
source

>>59716342
Intel, best at running shit software!

File: 1235.jpg (61KB, 604x499px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 604x499px

Shill keep posting those day one benchmark

>>59717704
>slower
than 6900, which cost is clearly not 350$. Also, something like ~2% difference between 320$ overclocked 1700 and 1800x.
Nice try, buttmad intelfag, good luck with (you)r next shitpost.

>>59718456
r5 comes out next week, gotta work for those bread crumbs

>>59718041
>day 1 benchmarks
>gamernexus
Fucking imbecile.