Ryzen 5 (1 day left)

>>59822833
Yep, 1600. However some madmen will go 1500x.

1600 and overclock with a $90 mobo is the only sane choice.
Or 1700 and overclock with a $90 mobo.

File: 2001468453.jpg (126KB, 620x349px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 620x349px

Skylake-X looks very interesting, excepts.. it's gonna cost around 1k.

>>59822983
It looks less interesting when you know the 12 and 16 core Zen chips are coming out at the same time or maybe even sooner.

>>59822983
OH BOY A NEW SOCKET THANK YOU INTEL YOU TRULY ARE OUR GREATEST ALLY!

>>59822983
>New motherboards
>Again
We've had 1151 how long now? Not even 18 months?

>>59822833

I'm sure most sane people would buy the R5 1600. Why would people buy the 1500x when a mere $30 more gets you 2 more cores and 4 more threads? The R5 1600 really is the best bang for the buck. Too bad the same can't be said for the 4 core, 8 threaded ones.

The 1600 is $130 cheaper than the 7700k and comes with a really good Spire cooler, while the 1400 is only $70 cheaper than the 7600k while only having the potentially mediocre Stealth cooler.

I'm expecting the R3s to be priced around $120 or something. But maybe AMD will notice the G4560 and price the lower end R3s (hoping lowest end is still a true four core) accordingly. Probably not.

>>59823033
this, and the upcoming ddr5.. well have to switch again.

>>59823042
DDR5 isn't going to be commercially available until 2020 nigga.

>>59822833
1400 or 1700, depends on the tests.

>>59822833
If you're primarily buying it for gaming, the 1600x since they'll overclock slightly better than the 1600.

ok serious question, should I wait for skylake-x?
I play one or two games, I just want a pc which lasts long.
I use it for c++

>>59823059
If it's anything like the difference between the 1700 and 1800x, might as well just get the 1600. The differences will be negligible.

>>59823040
R3's are APUs, they only come with 4 cores on the chip total, so R3's are gonna be 2-4 cores.
Hoping for another 3 core bin, they're fun.

>>59823075
>R3's are APUs
Source.

>>59823059
>paying $50 more for 100MHz
If this was a 16 core the 100MHz matters a lot, but not on these low core count chips

>>59823059
The 1600X already has a 4GHz turbo + the extra 100MHz from XFR, you're not getting much more out of it (if at all) from OC'ing

>>59823079
There'd be no profit in 8 core dies at 2 cores, you'd have to have catastrophically bad yields for that or purposely gimp your 4-8 core chips.
But mostly it's because the die is too large for that price point.

And R3's are coming at the same time as the APUs, so it's a given.

>>59822833
I don't know, waiting to see benchmarks, currently on FX 6300.

I could use better processor for Krita. And I guess emulators when developing. Mainly Krita though, definitely need better single core performance there.

>>59823075
If I recall correctly, the R3 processors will be both CPUs and APUs. So, you're half right.

>>59823093
R3's are 4/4.

>>59823089
>on ONE core

Stop looking at numbers and look around you, do you think turbo means anything but single core max frequency?

>>59823104
They're all APUs, the CPUs are just with GPU lasered off.

>>59823059
I don't see the marginal returns of a few 100 MHz being worth the fuss. I'll take more cores for my money.

>>59823093
>And R3's are coming at the same time as the APUs, so it's a given.
Not necessarily.
See FM2+ Athlons, they're not APUs, but priced low, with low core counts. And share a socket with APUs.
I'd like to know if the APUs are going to feature the dual CCX design, or rather be a "true" quadcore design.
Though the latter seems unlikely due to the fact that functional quadcore chips are paired together for the R7 line.

>>59823124
Making a two CCX design for a 4 core APU is pure lunacy, both in performance and die area.
The APUs aren't using the same die as the R7/5.

>>59823124
They're just APUs with the video part sawed off.

>>59823130
>Making a two CCX design for a 4 core APU is pure lunacy
It's going to be hard to say how deep AMD want to go on the dual CCX design.
I'd really like to believe they won't use 2 CCX on the R3 lines, but I'm not too sure.
We'll just have to wait and see.
Considering they dropped R5 details at the R7 launch, I guess we can expect something soon enough on the R3s

>>59822833
waiting for zen2 but prob the non x 6 core

eagerly awaiting consumer chip benches

>>59823149
Zen+ is the Zen Refresh, probably a year or so down the line.
Zen2, probably 2-3 years to go.

>>59822983
It doesn't even look very interesting. The same overpriced configurations once again, with an octa core costing $1000 plus a $250 motherboard. Plus they're going to be the ultimate housefires with Memelake at a 140W TDP.

>>59823065
get something within ur budget and dont wait.

Wait, already?

I thought it was still going to be another month or two until we saw R5.

>>59823147
These chips will go into mobile, going with 2 CCX will just make the die enormous, that's not profitable or sane.

Also purposely making a two core CCX is pointless, when they already have a quad core CCX used everywhere.
2 core chips will be 1 CCX with 2 cores disabled.

>>59823155
Oh, I am waiting for zen+ then. Hopefully motherboards are all sorted and ddr4 has stabilized. Hopefully my house hasn't burnt down yet.

>>59823065
>compiling
R7 1700 it is

>>59823204
you just fall for the waiting meme.

>>59823204
We don't even know what Zen+(2018) is, but AMD said it's a "tock".

And slides have shown it to have some 15% more IPC than Zen, but then again the same slides have said Zen is only 40% faster IPC than the constructor family, ended up some 52%

>>59823255
Would be interesting to see a Retest of those IPC figures now that the BIOS are more stable, and we know about the impact of higher speed DDR4 on Ryzen.
Probably closer to 60% now

I have Core i3 now.
Working with Android Studio and some VMs, cpu is maxed out sometimes. No gaymes.
Deciding between i7 7700 and 1600X.

>>59823373
>Deciding between i7 7700 and 1600X.
They're $100 apart.

>>59822833
Every one of these options is much better in every way than Intel's stuttering housefires.

>>59823065
>I use it for c++
Ryzen since it's infinitely better than Intel.

File: 14559204163251.png (167KB, 318x308px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 318x308px

>>59822983
NEW SOCKET HAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHH

>>59823686
It's a NEW architecture, so ofc new socket is needed

>>59822983
>New socket

Nah, they can't keep doing this, Intel is pathetic.

File: Skylake-E-Skylake-X-Cannonlake-X-Kaby-Lake-X-10-1.jpg (282KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

282KB, 1280x720px

>>59823736
>>59823686
>hurrdurr news coket


NO SHIT RETARDS!??!?!?!

>>59823756
no shit goys

>>59823756
Unless this cunt provides a MASSIVE benefit(it's Intel, it won't, they've done this like three times before already) it's just snake oil.

>>59823793
MUH AVX512

>>59823756
Kek, what a monstrosity

File: gtx970.gif (1MB, 300x169px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x169px

>>59823756
Is that an SLI-connector?

>>59823807
It's some XeonPhi nonsense

I'm getting the 1500X because I value energy efficiency, and don't want my processor pulling 300W at idle because it's overclocked.

>>59823834
nice bait.

I am going for an Intel system unless the 1600 surprises me tomorrow in a positive way.

It's not even about the performance being inferior to the Intel.
It's about

1.mainboard availability, selction and quality

It's non-existing

2. Bugs and problems everywhere still, no matter the mainboard

I am not eager to wait much longer for the PC too boot up compared to an Intel system.


I am not a social justice warrior and not a retarded fan of a brand.
Ib4 waitfags claiming one should wait.

>>59823841
Is not bait. Site me proof that I'm wrong.

>>59823852

Prove that you're not a lying piece of shit.

> Hard Mode: (you) can't.

>>59823852
>no reviews out yet

>make bold claims

To get near Intel performance you have to overclock your Ryzen eventually, all-core ofc.

And regarding idle power consumption, Intel CPUs are still the best.

https://www.computerbase.de/thema/prozessor/rangliste/#diagramm-leistungsaufnahme

1600x because im still holding out hope that zen2 wont have some shitty ccx design so i can upgrade to a proper 8 core next year but im also not fucking poor enough to go lower right now

Still on pre-order?

AMD is must be that fucked.

I want mobile.

>>59822833

I don't need to upgrade for at least a year. Probably can hold out for 2 or even a bit more. I've not really been playing games for a while now, so my FX8350 has plenty of useful life in it.

I'll make decisions based upon what's available per price toward the end of 2018, and possibly be ready to buy during Thanksgiving/Christmas sales 2019.

Won't even need to get rid of my 8350 then ... just repurpose it. Thing's a fucking beast running at 4.4 GHz with 32 GB RAM. Literally runs 3 operating systems simultaneously. Having a hard time imagining what I'd use a Ryzen's power for, especially if I went with a 1700 or better.

File: Screenshot from 02-04-2017 21:00:52.png (39KB, 826x775px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 826x775px

>>59823896
CCX bottleneck is near irrelevant, kill yourself.

>>59822833
if overclocking is as decent as promised then the 1600 will be the best bang for your buck.

>>59822983
>new socket
>$1500 for pricing
>"possibly up to" 10 cores/20 threads (with realistically more like 6core/12 threads)
>140w TDW
>most likely marginal increase to clock speed like the last decade of CPU launches


intel cucks literally on suicide watch

Don't expect major overclocking from Skylake-X as it now has much more private L2 cache.

>>59823971
>8mb l3 cache vs 16

no kill you are self.

>>59823977
welp someone achieved 4.0 ghz stabile on the 1600.

>>59823971

>definitely slower with CCX

>near irrelevant

Not the guy you are quoting but how about you kys?

Retard

>>59823993
Wow, 3% in games and 10% in 2 out of 10.

Who the fuck cares about 5 FPS

>>59823992
got sauce for that?

color me intrigued

>>59823049
>tfw made a rig with a 4790K and a Fury X, 2 years ago
I think I did the right decision on the timing, skipping DDR4 for DDR5, didn't even knew that shit was that close to release, time to research about it.

What's gonna be the big difference between 4 and 5?

Intel 60 missiles 20 hit

AMD "Dude"
are You Intel cucks retarded?, we just want cool new technology to fuck with.

>>59823999
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3zg-LfxkN4

That 1500X looks juicy as fuck.,

>>59824022
>Custom water cooling loop
>on an R5

I never get these people, who the hell is gonna buy an R5 and cool it with a custom wc loop?

File: yehaw.jpg (14KB, 563x563px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 563x563px

>>59824022
>1.43 voltage
>67C temps

i was kinda hoping to see how it fared while idle. Doesn't look too bad under load though.

>>59824053
They do it to maximize Overclocking Results, and there are people with watercooled i3/i5 chips.

>>59824053
i wouldn't go all out with custom water loops, but i was looking into watercooling anyway because i live in South Louisiana, so my temps get pretty spicy this time of year from traditional air cooling.

>>59822833
waiting for $70 athlon version.

File: why would you need 100 fps, the human I can see over 60, consoles use 30 fps, I remember when locked 20 fps was buttery smooth.png (123KB, 240x286px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 240x286px

>>59823998

File: 1489100922662.png (246KB, 882x758px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 882x758px

>>59823977

>>59823880
>idle power consumption, Intel CPUs are still the best.
>Intel 8 core (i7-6900K) 65W
>AMD 8 core (Ryzen R7 1800x) 45W

>Intel
>best
>pick one

File: 1489122339460.png (495KB, 1070x601px) Image search: [Google]

495KB, 1070x601px

>>59824405
Intelfags are clinically retarded, news at 11

For those concerned about CCX, the only reason 4c R5s exist is to sell leftover silicone. AMD has or is working on a single 4c CCX design for their APUs, which I think would end up performing just a bit better in some instances, but maybe less in others due to less cache (hypothetically). Will be interesting to see if the 4c R3 APUS cut into 1400/1500 sales. Anyway this time next year we will see a Ryzen revision just intime for Cannon Lake :^)

>>59824039
You do know both the 1500x and 1600 are two CCX? Why would you not pay $30 more for 50% more cores? 1600 is best bang for buck.

>>59823842

This.

I'm unsure if its a good idea to be a ryzen early adopter especially because of the mobo issues going on right now.

File: enhanced oven technology.jpg (28KB, 550x550px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 550x550px

>>59822983
Only the goodest of goys are going to buy into this searing socket inferno.

>>59823842
>Booting up your system

How often do you turn it off?

>>59823842
>I am not eager to wait much longer for the PC too boot up compared to an Intel system.
First I've heard of this. I searched for ryzen "boot time", couldn't find any results except one guy claiming long boot times on an MSI motherboard. Could be motherboard specific issue requiring a BIOS patch.

>>59823842
>I am not a social justice warrio
the fuck does this have to do with anything?

Daily reminder that most apps are limited by the CPU's single threaded performance, and:

AMD Ryzen 7 1800X -- PassMark score = 1,952 (single thread)

Intel i7-2700K -- PassMark score = 2,010 (single thread)

So AMD has almost caught up to where Intel was in 1Q 2011. Good job, AMD!!

>>59825374
>apps
Well just like you said, apps.
So more cores is better if you want to open more than 4 apps :^)

File: tumblr_o928i7YJes1r539hzo1_1280.jpg (55KB, 620x349px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 620x349px

Still on a ~7 years old i7 930
It's finally time to upgrade both my Mobo and CPU after all this time.

Probably gonna pick a 1600X.

But in thought over how more useful 8 cores would be but the extra stock speed on a 1600x would make up for that.

>>59823756

What the FUCK is this thing? What the FUCK? Ok its huge but WHAT is that thing on the end? A fucking mSATA interface?

>>59825374

>So AMD has almost caught up to where Intel was in 1Q 2011. Good job, AMD!!

2017 Intel has barely progressed from 2011 Intel.

>>59822833
i was planning on getting a 1500x because it fits my budget

>>59825374
>pissmark
>giving a shit about single threaded performance

kys faggot shill

>all the idiots picking the here in Europe overpriced 1600X without a cooler

>claiming it has a better price/perf ratio than Intel when you also need expensive single ranked ram


Go kys
I picked up 16GB 2667Mhz DDR4 Ram for 75€.
Not gonna rebuy.

>>59825514
>when you also need expensive single ranked ram
no you don't
it offers a great performance benefit, but the 1600x is still better price / performance than similarly priced intel cpus

File: 1463305343924.jpg (125KB, 1375x749px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 1375x749px

>>59825495
>muhhh Cinebench multithread bench

Go kys

You retards only have this bench, otherwise other productive software like Photoshop and whatnot is running better on the 7700k than on the way more expensive 1800X.

>>59825374
They are not nigger cuck.

You can easily prove it by making a custom data collector in the performance monitoring tool (in windblows).
But you wont, because you are a fucking under age retard.

Daily reminder that you can go fuck a pillow cover filled with broken glass bottles you fucking spastic mongoloid.

>>59825525
It will cost close to 300€ here.

If it doesn't beat the i7-6700k, it is not good in any ways.
But then again, AMD is happy to have so many shills playing the beta-tester.

>>59825395
>if you want to open more than 4 apps

Well, if you want more than 4 apps that are all simultaneously consuming a significant amount of CPU -- then yes.

But if the apps are just open and sitting there idle, then you could have 50 of them open simultaneously with no problem.

I don't know how fast you guys work, but I would have to work pretty hard and fast to get 5 apps simultaneous continually CPU-bound all the time -- except for obvious special cases like video rendering.

>>59825526

But can 7700k open 8 photoshops without having stutter problem? :^)

>>59822833
1600 or 1400.
the x is a meme.

>>59825495
>>giving a shit about single threaded performance

Single thread performance is literally all I care about. Anytime I'm waiting on the CPU for anything -- it's because the app is only using one of my 8 threads at 100%, and all other 7 threads are sitting there idle.

>>59825592
get better apps

>>59824022
did he apologize to amd?

>>59825592
>I need i7-7700K for all my shitty programs and games that are unoptimized garbage

Yeah, maybe you should just stop using that shit?

>>59825526
You know even the better value 1700 (once you factor in cooler and motherboard) still comes within 25% of the single core performance, right? And gives ~60% better multicore. Doesn't sound like a very good tradeoff. http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-7700K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-1700/3647vs3915

>not using the best CPU for the money, the 7600k

Y'all lame fucks.

>>59825625
>>59825612
>>59825604

Why gullible retard like you people who can't detect a bait still posting in 4chan?

>>59825644
It's not if you actually want to OC it and need to buy a cooler for it.

Also buying a 4 core 4 thread in 2017 is a waste of money, no matter how cheap it is.

>>59825645
>no arguments

I-it's a b-bait, I swear! Team Red4life

>>59825682

here (you)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Njm0MBOwFTM

As a neet, I jelly of the new Ryzen.

>>59825550
it does outperform the i7-6700k, unless you're talking gayming

>>59825678
>Also buying a 4 core 4 thread in 2017 is a waste of money

Not if all you need is gayming. Intel keeps being king of the single thread performance.

>>59825682
Kill yourself.

>>59825714
>Not if all you need is gayming
There are already games that use more cores than 4

File: muhryzen.png (56KB, 806x402px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 806x402px

Already copped this :^)

>>59825714
Let's say you plan on keeping your CPU for 4 years, which is a reasonable amount of time. How well do you think 4c/4t is going to fare 2 years from now? How about 3? You're going to hit a CPU bottleneck very quickly. Same for the "great deal" you get from the G4560. It'll be trash for gaming within a year.

>>59825682
why do baitposters always say this

>>59825739
Unironically this

Building my first not piece of shit PC. My current PC is a Phenom II x6 frankenstein of junked prebuilts.

Going with the Ryzen 1600 and a used GTX 970 for a 1920x1080 60hz monitor.

>>59823033
Different product line. This replaces 2011-v3, which has been out for around 3 years.

>>59822983
Meh, non ECC. Xeons are the only thing worth buying from Intel at this point.

>>59823624
>wat is Xeon

>>59825721
A vocal minority. We are still far from mainstream multithreaded gayming.

>>59825739
No offense, but you seem to be very young. That's a naive reasoning you have there. CPU development has stalled since the Haswell days. You can't expect the good 4C of today getting obsolete. There's people getting reasonably good FPS from 2C processors even today.

I do think jumping to 8 cores will be necessary from around 2020-onwards, since AMD has put actually good 8-Cores in the market. But nobody is going to miss too much buying an i5 today.

G4560 also costs like 70$. Is not like you're doing the most dangerous investment of your life. It also delivers a lot for that ridiculous pricing.

>>59825789
>used 970
Surely you could go for a 980 for a similar price at this point.

>>59825842
I got the 970 for $150 from a friend tired of ebay.

File: 1482109411067.jpg (17KB, 542x540px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 542x540px

Cannot wait for the reviews tomorrow to see the retarded AMD fans making excuses again to why Ryzen is not matching comparable priced Intel CPUs.

>>59825917
But Ryzen did match comparable and much pricier Intel CPU's.

>>59825789
>970

why would you buy a borked card?

>>59825374
lets see that i7-2700k handle 16 different unique programs that are single threaded, lets see how the scheduler on the 2700k handles that

>>59825917
The Ryzen 5 1400 is barely on par with Haswell i5-4460... It's quite disappointing.

The R5 1500X is on par with Skylake i5-6500, which is better. Only for 20$ more.

File: 1490449916731.png (234KB, 882x758px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 882x758px

>>59822896
Same motherboard for all the chips!?
so someone can get a piddly 1400 but go to a 1800 without changing sockets?
There's no way this can be right. A mother board being able to cater to so many CPU's is absurd!

Take your poojeet lies elsewhere shill.

>>59825999
Don't be ridiculous. I could get from Celeron to i7-7700k using the same motherboard.

>>59825999
uh are you pretending to be retarded?

>>59822833
Depending on how things go, I might go for the 1500x later this year.

I currently have a 1090T, so I'd be going down in cores but up in threads, and even without OC my single core performance would nearly double. I also recently purchased a RX470 which I would keep and I don't have any intention of upgrading from that + 1080p for at least a couple years, so considering overall system performance I don't think there's going to be much benefit to going higher than the 1500x.

I've been tempted by Intel in the past couple years for my next upgrade/system but I'm not keen on supporting hardware backdoors, so I'm happy to see that Ryzen is at least competetive.

>>59825999
>what is x299?

>>59826021
>2 core/2 thread to 4 core/8 thread

WOW

File: burger.gif (3MB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x480px

>>59825917
>piecing a build together
>go to /pcbg/
>"DO NO BUY i5 NO EXCEPTIONS. wait for ryzen 5"
>the general is now filled with poo in loos shilling ryzen before its even fucking come out for consumer use

>>59826021
>>59826034
Fair enough. Haven't looked into sockets that much.
Got a list handy?
I tried making sense of it all, but the naming scheme is a bit funky.

>>59825988
when you say such idiocy please add reminder to your posts that you're talking gayming
because all ryzen cpu outperform any similarly priced intel cpu, just not in gayming

>>59822833
What are some worthwhile boards which support 3200mhz ram and if you don´t care about sli/crossfire.

>>59825714
This is going to very quickly stop being the case now that the major consoles have at least 8 threads.

If you're interested in gaming and what you know what the next 5 years of software is going to look like, look at what consoles have just been released. This is the reality of big-budget game development today.

For any new system today looking for some longevity, 8 threads is going to be the sweet spot.

>>59826085
Yeah, they outperform when SMT is taken into account. So you get about 40-50% faster 7-zip compressing and compiling linux with R5 against an i5 http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-7500-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-1500X/3648vs3921

If that's your thing, go for it. For workstation you shouldn't be getting 4C anyways.

>>59826134
No you autist, there's much more advantages to more cores & threads than compiling and compressing. But you wouldn't know because the only executable you run on your computers are games because you're a fucking faggot

>>59826051
>an overall jump of 121% in performance is nothing

Wew lad

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Celeron-G3950-vs-Intel-Core-i7-7700K/m242877vs3647

>>59826143
But why are you looking into 4-Cores then? Are you retarded?

File: 1491612867984.gif (1004KB, 300x169px) Image search: [Google]

1004KB, 300x169px

>>59823807
>not using the correct version

>>59826165
>if you're not only gaming it automatically means you either you only internet browse and need 2 cores at best or are a workstation heavy user and need 6+ cores
that's not how it works you autist
more threads (hyperthreading) already benefits slightly gaming, otherwise i7 wouldn't be that popular at all (you really think just having more cache would justify that performance difference?)
and the moment you run anything ALONGSIDE games, as in the moment you run other than just game executables, then it's the moment where having more threads is also quite much appealing as it an make sure that the one used by your games aren't maxed out by having multiple programs on it

just because you play games doesn't mean you only play games, this is a fucking computer for fuck's sake

>>59823373
>no games

>actually wondering if he should get a 7700 or an 1600x (why the fuck not 1700/1700x?)

Are you some kind of retard?, the only downside the AMD CPU's have at the moment is gaming.

Realistically, what's the difference between the 1600 and 1600X? Is it just a higher OC out of the box? I'm on the fence between the two, generally I'm not much of an OC'er, but paying 30-40€ extra for tweaking a couple options seems like a waste of money.

I guess one would come with the guarantee that it can actually hold the 3.6/4.0 OC, but even then, most Ryzen's I see go up to 3.8 no problem, most go to 4.0.

1600 seems like the way to go, am I wrong here?

>>59826305
If the 1700 is anything to go by, it might be slightly worse at OCing depending on your luck but you also need to take into account that the non X versions come with a stock cooler so it's well worth it in my opinion.

>>59826305
Yes, 1600 is one hell of a killer CPU. I wonder who'd buy and i5 instead of 1600.

>>59826305
AFAIK most reviewers managed to get 3.8 from the 1600 with no extra effort or crazy voltages. Most first batch chips should be that good as they're probably intentionally gimping R7s (and not only using R7 1700 with dead cores) to meet demand.

>>59826305
same as 1700 vs 1800x
temps, power, voltage

I see no point in buying 1600 except for the free cooler, which you can't use to go 4.0Ghz btw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3zg-LfxkN4

>>59826364
probably someone thats been burned (no pun intended) before by AMD's shit processors.

>>59826363
Wait, the 1600X doesn't come with a cooler? That might just be enough to make me settle with 1600 for good, since I still don't know if I'll be able to get AM4 brackets for my current cooler. Plus, those Wraith coolers are pretty baller. Didn't actually realize this, thanks.

>>59826364
I currently have an i5 4570 and I'm starting to think it just isn't enough anymore. Gonna try to get rid of it + mobo and 16GB of RAM, if I get a good price for it, I'll jump on the Ryzen train. 4/4 is just not enough these days if you do anything with VMs.

>>59826412
only people that got burned by amd processors are bulldozer adopters

>>59826426
dude, just use woods screws

>>59825840
>CPU development has stalled since the Intel days

Fixed that for you. Just because Intel sat on their ass for 5 years doesn't mean further improvment is impossible. "Intel didn't do it, so noone can!". Fucking bullshit.

>>59826426
>since I still don't know if I'll be able to get AM4 brackets for my current cooler
feels good to be a noctua owner :^)

>>59825917
Fuck off shill.

File: 1489227380556.jpg (204KB, 960x686px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 960x686px

>>59826064
The shills are spread over the whole internet, it's surprising how such a small fanbase can create so much shit.

The funniest thing is how the claim that YT videos made by obviously red team shills are more reliable than review sites all over the globe.

I tell you, if we take the average IQ of the AMD users, it would be below 100.

>>59826431
There was a time when they were literally the only option if you wanted to encode video or compile on a tight budget without paying Intel's outrageous HEDT/i7-K taxes. A friend of mine is burned a little bit with the fact that his FX-8320 is not as good for gaming but he realises got a much better mileage out of it for such multimedia tasks than he could have got from a similarly priced low-end i5.

File: 1490295551901.gif (2MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x240px

>>59826410
>1.45V to achieve 3.975 Ghz all-core

>muuuh efficiency

Kek'd
it's gonna demand more power than an 1800X non-oc'd.

>>59825874
Well he scammed you, should have bought an rx 480 or at least a 1060.

>>59823075
Nope probably also Summit Ridge (the same chip as Ryzen 5/7).

https://www.cnews.cz/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/ryzen-3-support-list-asrock.png

>>59825425
That is Xeon Phi. Server SKylake-SPs will have the same socket, LGA 3647.

Desktop Skylake-X is different socket, LGA 2066, which will probably look normal.

The dong is a connector for the Omnipath fabric.

>>59826551
it still takes less power than OCed 7700K. You should try to meassure power draw on that one, once.

>>59826515
I mean Intel is all nice and dandy for sure but the new R5 will most-likely lower the prices of the i5s too (hence the wait-meme).
Plus at the end of the day I want a i5-tier CPU with the best performance/durability for its price.
If the R5 delivers that then why not?
And plus competition is not a bad thing, however /g/ says no for some reason.

>>59825604
>>59825612
>It's not AMDs fault!
>It's the fault of the VAST majority of programs out there!
>It's not that the cpu doesn't fit, it's that all the applications don't fit the CPU, thus AMD is not to blame!
I love how you both admit that AMD fails, but try to play it off as "well if only the rest of the world would do things completely differently we wouldn't be so bad, so you see it's not really out fault"

File: [HorribleSubs] Kobayashi-san Chi no Maid Dragon - 10 [720p].mkv_snapshot_03.26_[2017.03.15_14.21.42].png (393KB, 462x497px) Image search: [Google]

393KB, 462x497px

>>59826987
>intel
>lower the prices

>>59827050
Brute forcing with single threaded performance has run out of steam. There's maybe a few extra percent worth of performance you can squeeze out of it, then it's done. No graphene or whatever is going to come save you.

>>59826987
>And plus competition is not a bad thing, however /g/ says no for some reason.
? Mate, have been listening to the shills for to long. Nobody wants ryzen to be shit, if it would blow intel the fuck out it would only be good for customers on both sides.
What I DO find a BIG problem is when the product under performs and then shills do massive damage control trying to claim "it's fine, just wait, blame everything else" and so on.
Do you understand the difference?

Im doing a slim mITX build and am most interested in the 1400 since it'll obviously need next to no cooling. Waiting to see gayman benchmarks, hoping the lack of cores/threads doesn't put it too far down the ladder.

If cores do turn out to matter, 1600 all the way. I don't believe 8c/16t is necessary just yet, and thanks to AMD not being absolute fucking jews I can actually upgrade later.

>>59827077
>we can't push the single cores for lot longer
>the solution is to get lots of shitty cores to fix the problem
Fuck you.
>inb4 t-they aren't that shitty!

>>59826472
>"Intel didn't do it, so noone can!"
A FUCKING 7740K

>>59827156
Oh look, a concern troll.

>>59827232
Yes, it is the solution, Ramesh. Compare GPU vs CPU progress in past five years.

File: 1382663872113.png (497KB, 973x2259px) Image search: [Google]

497KB, 973x2259px

Back in my days shitposting was art.

File: 1453262362660.jpg (477KB, 1462x1462px) Image search: [Google]

477KB, 1462x1462px

>>59826551
Still infinitely better than Intel's housefire abortions.

>>59827239
Please don't tell me you're using that as an example of some kind of success.

>>59826515
I'm #teamred as fuck but this image never fails to crack me the hell up.

File: corelets.png (307KB, 915x678px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 915x678px

>>59827262

>>59827232
Intel's in a losing fight with the laws of physics. Not even fanboy powered shitposts can get them through this one.

>>59822833
>paying more money for less cores/threads

>>59827248
>Compare GPU vs CPU progress in past five years.
Oh you fucking DIP SHIT.
Literally the whole point of GPUS is that they handle parralel loads well and are absolute shit at the opposite.
If we wanted CPUS that do lots of parralel shit, we could just use GPUS in the first place, but that's not what CPUS are used for faggot.

>>59827262
That was hilarious.

>>59823255

Im still impressed at how Ryzen managed to get a slightly higher IPC than BDW-E at half the TDP and roughly the same clocks. Is it AMDs low power process optimization (as opposed to the high clock process optimization of Kaby Lake for example)?

File: 1484353081022.png (402KB, 588x598px) Image search: [Google]

402KB, 588x598px

>>59827310
You're right, Intel is going to create the ultimate HYPERBIPELINE and make a 6 GHz on air turbomonster that'll totally pwn those AMDummies in Battlefield 1

>>59827327
Low power design metodologies + AMD's personal secret sauce. I'd wait for APUs and mobile chips to witness true efficiency of Zen.

>>59827338
Did you see me cheer for intel you fucknut?
I am literally stating what CPUS and GPUS are used for, I know they don't pay retards like you enough to actually look into what computers do and how they work but you are disgusting nonetheless.

File: 1488923970547.png (486KB, 675x482px) Image search: [Google]

486KB, 675x482px

>>59827284
I like this one more.

>>59827327
Well, they did come up with a shitton of power control IP as part of their efforts to get a handle on the Construction Core's heat and power draw. Coupled with their selected process node and a few other odds and ends AMD has really come up with some neat shit to handle power draw, hence Ryzen hitting performance parity with BW-E while using less power.

>>59825374

This was probably run using a 2700k clocked at 4.5ghz while the Ryzen was clocked much lower/stock.

>>59825988
https://youtu.be/DbDpMWo7XTk

>Literally matches an i5 7400 in gaymen
Delusional.

>>59827460
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcdmeGOsnss&t=407s
>muh Nvidia preference
Not him but yeah here's a test that doesn't rely on optimization on the GPU for an advantage.
Or something I don't know.
However, the CPU isn't even utilized to the level of Intel and it still is doing fairly well with only a 3-7 fps difference.

>>59827369
Change the text and it's nVidia driver upgrades.

>>59824536
>Cannon Lake

You mean Wait Lake

>>59825303
He's a /pol/fag

>still no ECC-enabled AM4 boards
Why should I even bother waiting
All I wanted was a 6+core TDP/power configurable CPU to run as a VDI server

>>59827603
You mean Never Lake because Intel's 10nm yields are atrocious.

>>59827310
>>59827361
No, YOU are the retard. GPUs aren't a silver bullet. Also, fuck back to Israel.

>>59827707
All AM4 boards are ECC enabled. They just aren't ECC CERTIFIED.

>>59827803
>All AM4 boards are ECC enabled
ECC functionality doesn't work, even with unbuffered sticks. The RAM still acts as RAM, just like on any other system, but you don't get any of its benefits.

>>59822833
How much of a jump will the 1600 be over a i5-4670k?

My motherboard is getting flaky, instead of replacing it maybe just move on up

>>59822896
this, the 1600 at 3.9-4.2ghz is unstoppable for price:performance

>>59828022
For gaming, much better minimum framerates (so smoother gameplay)
For anything else, it will be like night and day

>>59828022
In games, no.
In anything that will make use of the extra cores. Yes.

>>59828022
much stronger if you have programs running alongside games, or if you have any program that scales decently with threads
other from those two you won't notice much difference

>>59828158
>>59828098
>>59828096
I want to do GPU passthrough, and the 4670k doesnt fucking have vt-d

>>59828230
Passthrough is supported by the CPU, however IOMMU groupings are kinda fucked rightnow, AMD are working on that as last report goes.

>1600 will be the only one worth the money

Shame if it's turns out to be true, needed a processor in the sub $150 range for those budget builds for awhile. I guess the i3 will remain the only decent choice.

>>59828230
In that case, Ryzen is a no-brainer

>>59828287
>yfw ryzen unlocks in future bios

>>59828287
>I guess the i3 will remain the only decent choice.
>i fucking 3 when g4560 exists
The fuck.

>>59828352
I guess I forgot about the new Pentium.

Touche anon, on this day you offered a good response in a ryzen thread, something unheard of.

>>59827460

>4560 bottleneck with 480

Glad I told my friend to buy 1050ti instead of this card, this year He finally listen to Me instead of being a dumb intelfag like couple year ago.
He almost bought a kaby i3.

File: camelchart-locale-usasin-b01glyd7mgpricetypes-amazonforce-1zero-0w-725h-440desired-falselegend-1ilt-1tp-allfo-0lang-en2017-04-1008-44-49.png (33KB, 725x440px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 725x440px

Realistically was there ever a case when manufacturer's dropped their prices due to competition?
Everyone said the 1080 would get cheaper when the 480 drops but that wasn't the case.
Everyone said Broadwell-E and Kaby Lake would get cheaper when Ryzen drops but that wasn't the case.
Now everyone is hoping for Vega to make Pascal cheaper, but will that ever happen? Nvidia only lowered the prices because of their own successor (1080Ti) not because of competition.

>>59828528

Intel doesn't drop their price when Ryzen come out, but they sudoku their own entire i3 line up when Ryzen is out.

>>59828528
>Everyone said Broadwell-E and Kaby Lake would get cheaper when Ryzen drops but that wasn't the case.
Kaby i7's dropped $50-$90 when Ryzen released.

>>59827460

Why is in every Ryzen test the CPU usage is always and always below 70-80 percent?

Intel CPUs sits at 60-80 range throughout the game while Ryzen never goes above 60% in any of the games I have seen it tested.

It seems to me that CPU simply isn't utilized properly. CCX design? Completely new architecture? Why?

>>59828569
no they didn't lol

>>59828711
It's because Ryzen has double the cores and threads of the 7700K. Most games can't use all of its threads so they remain empty. It's actually useful because you can have other things running in the background without hampering the gayming.

>>59828748

Same happens with the quoted video where the video compared 4 core Ryzen vs an 4 core Kaby.

Is it because Ryzen has SMT or whatever their HT version is called while the i5 doesn't?

>>59827291
>4/4 obsolete in a year or two.
I should upgrade
>>59825988
>R5 1500X is on par with Skylake i5-6500
so r5 already obsolete?

>>59828779

>SMT or whatever their HT version is called while the i5 doesn't?

Hyperthreading is Intel's marketing term for their implementation of SMT and yes, that is why. Especially since AMD's SMT gives better scaling than hyperthreading does.

http://zen.looncraz.net/smt_ccx.php

>>59822983
>Another fucking new socket
Come the fuck on

>>59823040
/pcbg/ is saying that i3, i5, and Ryzen 5 aren't worth getting anymore, either get a pentium G or an i7 Kabylake

>>59828906
>so r5 already obsolete?
>when Skylake == Broadwell refresh with a clock bump

0/10

>>59829327
>6/12 for 230 burgers is not worth it anymore
The fuck.

>>59825789
You could get a 480 for comparable results, and better with newer games these days

>>59826064
Now it says "DO NOT BUY i5 OR RYZEN 5 NO EXCEPTIONS. Buy i7 instead" in thiers current thread

>>59829463
Oh I see Ramesh does his job.

Going for a 1600x, already have a cooler.

>>59829327
AMD's currently got nothing on the G4560, but their R5s and R7s kick ass for their given prices. The price difference is immense, but the performance difference is small. Ryzen's doing great.

>>59827576
>those intel CPUs pinned at 99% or 100% usage
W-who needs more cores?

>>59829568

Ryzen's power effeciancy is staggering - it shits all over basically the entire Intel lineup until you get right down to sub 50w and thats just the 8 core models. I'd like to see if the 1600x has the same 65w TDP the 1700 does because of its higher base clocks.

>>59823373
For that price go 1700

>>59829871
I'll check it out. Thanks.

>62 EUR for E5-2680
or
>48 EUR for E5-2670
I feel like paying 14 EUR for an extra 0.2GHz is kind of retarded but on the otherwise, it's a pretty fucking big boost for the singlecore performance.

>>59822833
Will there be something like a Ryzen 3?

>>59830129
Why wouldn't there? AMD has to have some competition against Intel's Celeron/Pentium/i3 processors like what the FM2+ line fails to do.

>>59829568
The G4560 is too good for a budget CPU, even for Intel.
Proves how saturated the prices are in the market.
Or something I don't know.

>>59830167
I'd like for them to rebrand the A(X) series to the Athlon(X) series.

>>59830220
That would seem silly, since they already HAVE Athlon-series.

>>59830212
Really hoping for a strong contender in the R3 lineup. 4 cores for $70 to $90 would be incredible. Not betting on it though. It's just a guess, considering how aggressive the R5 and R7 lineups are in price.

>>59825577
1500x > 1400 for the cache

issue is you might as well fork out the extra £25 for the extra 2c/4t and get the 1600 at that point.

If it's only for web browsing and light gaming is it worth it getting the 1500x or the 1400? I currently have a 1060 but don't plan on upgrading anytime soon

>>59830486
Just get 1600 and forget about upgrades for the next ~4 years.

>>59827787
Learn what hardware does dumbass.
But then again all you can do is spam buzzwords and pretend you even understand what I am talking about.

>>59828069
>1600
>4.2ghz
Enjoy it for those sweet few days before it shits itself from you having to ram 20 bajillion volts through it. The voltage wall is real.

>>59828287
The i3 is not a decent choice tho desu senpai.

>>59828486
>Telling anyone to buy a 1050ti
>Ever
You are not his friend.

>>59830955

460 is shit, 470 is too overpriced in my country and 480/1060 will bottleneck the G4560.
I give him a 256 Samsung SSD instead with the rest of the money, far better than his plan to get a regular HDD.

>>59824004
>My dad is the owner of Nintendo!
Fuck off. No you didn't.

>>59830342
The cheapest R3 should be around $120.

>>59831122
>This killed i3

Oh wait, Intel already do that to them self.

>>59831122
That would land a good hit on the i3s, but the G4560 will still be the king of budget builds for the time being. Wonder if AMD will do anything about it in the next coming months?

>>59831264
Possibly the R3's, but I don't see them going below $90

>>59831264
A dual core SMT Ryzen would be too weak to even compete, even if they priced it lower than the already insanely cheap G4560.

>>59831122
>Twice the price of the G4560
>Relevant
R3 confirmed for dead in the water. If you're skimping that hard on the processor you'd go for an R3 you're sure not doing anything you couldn't do on the Pentium. You should also probably get a fucking job.

>>59831279
Hell, $90 would be pretty competitive against the G4560. It could be like "Wow, for only $27 more, I can have 4 actual cores?!" That would be great; it might render the G4600 pointless to buy as well.

Since AMD was willing to do that with the R5 and R7 processors, I could see them doing that with the R3s.

>>59831359

Before kaby, the most worthy to buy i3 was at $120 range.
AMD just need to fill that gap now because all the current i3 is worthless.

File: intelbtfo.jpg (23KB, 400x268px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 400x268px

Pajeet here. Will trade superfluous, underpowered cores for food.

An OC 8 core ryzen loses to a 7700k,
Why would a 6 core do any better??
Overclocking will be identical to the 8 core chips because it's the same ccx.
Disabling cores doesn't let ryzen OC any better.

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

55KB, 764x954px

>>59831655
>An OC 8 core ryzen loses to a 7700k
[citation needed]

Is Ryzen perfect for music production? I think 12 threads would work pretty good.

File: 1453599965073.gif (216KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 400x400px

>>59822983
>new socket
Good job, Intel.

Got to keep those motherboards moving. You don't want people to stay comfy on their hardware, right?

File: 1488827500355.jpg (461KB, 700x5000px) Image search: [Google]

461KB, 700x5000px

>>59831695
>720p

And back to reality

>>59831774
Oh hi Ramesh. Nice to see you again.

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

1MB, 1280x653px

>>59831774
>720p only counts when it makes intel look good
poojeet pls

I have a R5 1600 on preorder.

Going to install my motherboard tonight so when I pick the CPU up[ after work tomorrow I can plop it in right away.

I'm very interested in seeing how the 1500X stacks up though. I wonder if the extra cache will make a big difference or not compared to the 1400.

>>59831770
Many aspects of music production are heavily threaded, so a 6 core, 12 thread or 8 core, 16 thread Ryzen would be very beneficial in this area. Can't wait to see the 16 core 32 thread Ryzen in the next coming months. I wonder if it will be given the name "Threadripper"? Some goes for the 12 core.

>>59831770
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iq7u-agaxlM

As always, depends on what you do

DDR4 2400 @ $105
or
DDR4 3000 @ $123

>>59832045
Dude there's only an $18 difference. Get the higher clocked one.

>>59832105
Ok

File: ryzen.png (140KB, 741x891px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 741x891px

>>59822833
>1 day left

only if youre dumb.

File: yinglet confused.jpg (50KB, 354x476px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 354x476px

>>59832233
>24GB of RAM

what

>>59832233
wtf? what's wrong with 32gb?

>>59832292
>>59832429
>every time.

maybe i should crop out the 8gb set. its for a different computer.

Is the nda also scheduled until the 11th?

>>59831848
Hub debunked this

1400 vs 1500X, the 1500X has twice the cache but same amount of cores.

I don't really understand why the 1400 exists

>>59832233
Checked
But, why do AMD fans complain about Intel Mobo prices, then go buy $200+ ryzen mobos?

>>59832527
Probably just to fill a gap and nothing more. Pricepoints and shit.

>>59832564
Because /g/ is one person?

If you're planning on upgrading the system(AM4 will last until 2021 apparently)
Then it's a no brainer to get a better mobo.

>>59825832
Thrice the price, at least.

>>59832564
People complain about lack of choice. Wanna OC - buy Z-series, goyim.

>>59832564
>$200 mobo

No one is forcing you to buy the expensive ones.

>>59832564
Because Intel doesn't give as good mobo options. For AM4, cheap boards can still achieve max overclock, while expensive boards have extra bells and whistles. You don't need a high-end board for overclocking. Options are nice.

>>59832628
This, really.
It's silly that some $90 AM4 board has similar power delivery to a $150+ Z270 board

Either vendors are selling AM4 boards at a loss, which I really doubt, or Intel chipset tax is just that huge

>>59832564
i think mobos in general are expensive. got an x370 cause hopefully itll get better support when zen+ inevitably comes out.

>>59832665
Both chipset tax and implementing it.

AM4 chipsets are tiny and need far less traces than Intel ones, most of the AM4 I/O comes directly from the CPU, plus there's the price difference between LGA and PGA, and as Zen is more power efficient it needs less power delivery than Kaby/Broadwell.

It kinda adds up, but it's no secret that Intel licenses their shit higher

>>59832586
>>59832606
Im still not seeing an argument.

AMD fans bitch about Intel prices
Then buys a $400 CPU
$200+ mobos
Expensive ddr4 because of Muh ccx.
>But price to performance
I don't understand that logic.

>>59833015
Not everyone cares about price/perf, are you 12?

>>59831774
Isn't the entire point of low-resolution benchmarks to try and highlight CPU performance instead of GPU performance?

>>59833047
*Only in approved games and applications, if lowres benchmarks are anything more than a pure clockspeed test, they're irrelevant.

File: hothead.jpg (75KB, 700x504px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 700x504px

>>59833015
>projecting this hard
Bait most likely.
Not everybody buys $200 mobos,
and the highest selling Ryzen CPU (I assume) is the r1700 ($319) (comes with stock cooler that is good enough for overclocking unlike Intel).
Here's your (you).

>>59832002
Gonna go for the 1600, and yes, it would suit me. Thanks.

File: Screenshot from 11-04-2017 02:11:36.png (378KB, 565x939px) Image search: [Google]

378KB, 565x939px

Considering how much changes the EFI updates bring, what's the point of current benchmarks?

Here's after the AMD AGESA update.

>>59832233
>paying a premium

>>59833390
Jesus fucking Christ both latency is down on every cache and DRAM while cache bandwidth went UP.
There won't even be need for anything higher than 2933MHz memory after this.

>>59830755
Probably this. Even if you do manage to find a ryzen 5 which overclocks to 4.2 shit will need a lot of juice to keep it going.

>>59833591
The 8 core ones use as much juice at 4.0 as the 7700k at 5.0

So no, probably not all that much assuming you have a decent motheboard with 8 phases.

>>59831264
maybe the "athlon" apu with the igp cut.
>>59831460
this

>>59822833
didnt these thigns allready come out?

File: IMG_6358.jpg (439KB, 3358x2157px) Image search: [Google]

439KB, 3358x2157px

>>59822983
>All these "New Socket" replies

Now I wonder where did intel gets it's inspiration from.

>>59832233
>200$ motherboard
>all those cries about muh intel motherboards cost so much and muh ryzen is a cheap 50-100$
kek

File: Screenshot from 10-04-2017 23:42:55.png (124KB, 1201x831px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 1201x831px

>>59832233
>not getting the Taichi

You literally missed out on the "too perfect" motherboard

>>59833722
>one guy makes a bad pre-purchase decision
>OMG POOZEN BTFO OVERPRICED MOBOS xDDDDDDDDDD

eat shit and die faggot

>>59833627
>one new socket in 15+ years of ipods
I hate Apple just as much as the next Anon, but Apple doesn't really have much to show here next to Intel who changes sockets like the other guy does underwear.

>>59833722
>200$ motherboard
why is this an argument? are you implying i cant get an intel motherboard for $200 as well?

>>59833757
>taichi
>never ever in stock.
my 4670k sucks.

>>59833410
the navy pays me far too much for me to care about paying an extra ~$20-30. although i kinda wish i sprung for the 1600x instead. $254.

>>59834039
>>never ever in stock.
Move to a third world shithole, we have plenty of them here.

>>59834053
>tfw no longer living in malaysia

i miss lowyat.

>>59827369
It started out as the jew one.

Fags stole it and then fucked up the screen tearing on the inferior one

>>59833015
>$400 CPU
>$200 Mobo
>still $600 to spend on ram while having a whole rig instead just a cpu
>he still doesn't understand why people complain about jewtel prices


???

>>59833069
I don't think you know what "projecting" means nignog.
>>59834399
$300 7700k
$150 Mobo
$100 ddr4 because speed doesn't really affect i7s
Spend less, and still have better Gaymen performance.

>>59834510
Now let's actually use real numbers from amazon.

$340 7700k
$180 motherboard because if you're planning on overclocking that 200W housefire on 6 phases enjoy being an arsonist
$60 cooler
$25 delid job (cool warranty bro)
$100 DRAM


Compared to a
$320 1700
$99 mobo
$130 3200MHz DDR4 kit


You should kill yourself now.

>>59834510
>comparing a 4core CPU to a 8core

why?

>>59834673
Not him, but the competitor's 8 core chip is so expensive it's not even competitive and actually ends up slower in a lot of things where cores are put to use so it's basically irrelevant.

>>59834639
>$25 delid job (cool warranty bro)
Lmao, the state of intelcucks

>>59834235
>Fags stole it
>stole a common meme from the meme database
Holy shit Didn't realize 4chan is so hardcore XD