An i3 A FUCKING i3 Lol amd

>inb4 assblasted street shitters

wtf I hate amd now

This b8 is so obvious everyone who replies here is a faggot, including me.

File: Comb20042017122425.jpg (586KB, 1920x1754px) Image search: [Google]

586KB, 1920x1754px

>>60113061
>>60113068
>>60113079
((((((((((nvidia))))))))))

>i7
>for gaming
western people everybody

>it's ok when amd does it

If mods delete this thread but not this
>>60112447
this place is dead

File: IMG_3369.png (86KB, 603x479px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 603x479px

>>60113092
((((amd))))

>>60113088
Hey qty ;D

>>60113061
>video games
Get a job.

>>60113096
But an i7 7700k is the current best choice for gaming

>>60113126
That was removed within hours. Sorry about your free guaranteed access to Quake Champions beta that you had to delete if you didn't want.

>>60113126
>>60113439
>trusting a website with filled with fake news and unfair reviews

>Gtx 1080ti
>1080p
Mmkay...

...running 800 MHz faster.

>>60113673
No, you get back to /r/_amd you fucking street shitter

>>60113684
Why are you calling me a shill when you're clearly shilling right now? Now go outside and get a real job you stinky Indian.

>>60113126
https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/1003029/official-381-65-nvtelemetry-spying-service-and-api-now-mandatory-install-and-always-running-/
((((((((((((((nvidia))))))))))))))

>>60113758
You're not white

>>60113774
Definitely whiter than you

File: farcryprimal_1920_1080.png (17KB, 500x330px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 500x330px

>>60113061
>day one benchmark
here's (you)

>>60113061
>1080ti
>1080p

File: 1493210545313.jpg (600KB, 2550x1446px) Image search: [Google]

600KB, 2550x1446px

>>60113061
Spot the most garbage game engine.

>>60113850
What's your point? The picture you posted shows a locked i5 beating an 8 core Ryzen.

File: IMG_3360.gif (2MB, 177x150px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 177x150px

>>60113930
>testing cpu performance
>with a gtx 970

>>60113061
Why would anyone legit buy amd in the year 2017? Their gpu's are dogshit. I've been sitting on this 2.1ghz gtx 1070 for like 6 months now and amd still has nothing. This assblasted chink in one of my classes insists the 580 is faster than my 1070 but I've still seen no evidence of it from averages.

>>60114112
>Why does a cheaper GPU not match up to my card after 6 WHOLE MONTHS

What the actual fuck

>>60114154
>cheaper gpu
>350 eur vs 300 eur

Barely

>>60114034
>being a cancerous avatarfag

https://warosu.org/g/image/cwNRD3iDuyDMq9Tpf8l9dw

>>60114265
Not clicking your indian shit

>>60114265
>no arguments
>testing at 4k with 970
>testing with 970

File: Screenshot from 2016-07-14 22-27-20.png (409KB, 621x635px) Image search: [Google]

409KB, 621x635px

>>60114280
>avatarfag
About the same level as attention whoring tripshits, literal sludge.

>>60114265
>oh no he uses a reaction image
lol

>>60114265
Wow, 98% greentext too, that's some dedication.

>>60114226
>Eur
i'm getting 250 vs 400-450 USD

>>60114265
It's easier to filter him like this.

>>60114034
>muh bottleneck
Nice try kiddo.

all 3 people who play far cry primal on 144hz monitors give a shit

File: tmp_28616-AngeryCat-2009433522.jpg (12KB, 269x211px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 269x211px

Intel shills - the thread.
Go back to /v/ you manchilds. No one cares your housefire i7 at 5GHz is getting 5 more FPS on a crappy game using a shitty game engine.

>>60114352
back to >>>/v/ vermin

>>60113092
You're shifting the lion's share of the workload to the gpu there and clearly OP is talking about CPUs here.

Nvidia wins again. (((AMD))) are (((kikes))).

File: 1259250022064.jpg (11KB, 289x319px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 289x319px

>>60114360
>4.1 ghz

File: IMG_3218.png (3KB, 212x149px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 212x149px

>>60114360
You mean 5.72ghz?

File: 1454085989716.png (253KB, 454x430px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 454x430px

>>60114383
>MOAR GIGAHURTZ

>>60114383
Remember when AMD and Intel last time ended up when they went for pure cockspeed instead of smaller pipes?

>>60114440
Intel already has better IPC than AMD. Higher clocks are just a bonus.

>>60114455
Tell that to Agner, and tell that to Intel that's on Skylake v{3,4,5} until 2020

>>60114467
>2020
>JUST WAIT

>>60114467
You meant 2021, right?

>>60114467
WRONG STUPID SHILL!

Kabylake new arch on 14nm+
Coffelake new arch on 14nm++
Cannonlake new arch on 10nm and 10nm++

>>60114488
Die shrink aren't architectures you autist.

>>60114418
Woah woah watch out Shlomo you are gonna blow the house up!

>>60114488
Simplifying that, it's skylake on matured nodes and skylake dieshrinks.

We can expect great IPC increases, from 1% to 1.4% under sysmark

>>60114488
Didn't Intel say that
>10NM
SLOWER THAN 14NM

>>60114510
Yes, specifically the 5watt U series ultrabook chips

>>60114510
Dumb retard AMD shit how can 10nm be slower than 14nm? Kys stupid poo you don't have a fucking clue about processes

>>60114510
Poo in loo idiot poojet

>>60114525
>how can 10nm be slower than 14nm?
Lower clock speeds, less cache, less execution units etc etc.

File: Slide7.png (110KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 640x360px

>>60114525

>>60114522
>>60114525
>>60114545
http://www.infoworld.com/article/3186781/processors/intels-cannonlake-pc-chip-shipments-may-slip-into-next-year.html

>Those 8th Generation Core laptops may be more attractive to customers. The first 10-nm Cannonlake chips will be slower than 14-nm 8th Generation Core processors. Intel acknowledged the speeds during the manufacturing event, with a chart showing 10-nm chips catching up with 14-nm chip performance in one to two years.

>Those 8th Generation Core laptops may be more attractive to customers. The first 10-nm Cannonlake chips will be slower than 14-nm 8th Generation Core processors. Intel acknowledged the speeds during the manufacturing event, with a chart showing 10-nm chips catching up with 14-nm chip performance in one to two years.

>In theory, the 10-nm chips should be faster than the 14-nm chips. But the first low-power Cannonlake chips will have fewer transistors, and won't be comparable to the mature 14-nm chips with more transistors.

>The first 10-nm Cannonlake chips will be slower than 14-nm 8th Generation Core processors. Intel acknowledged the speeds during the manufacturing event,
>chart showing 10-nm chips catching up with 14-nm chip performance in one to two years.

File: hmm.png (239KB, 696x720px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 696x720px

>>60113061
>4-core, 6-core, and 8-core all perform the exact same
Must be a problem with Ryzen...

>>60114418
>power draw: 350W

>>60114566
>10oz ultrabook has cpu optimized to have good battery life

Wooooooowww

>>60113424
kek

>>60114573
stop using logics mayn just buy intel with more bibeline

File: 1493292221665.jpg (2MB, 766x8714px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 766x8714px

>Intel's entire CPU lineup has been reduced to 2 SKUs
>Intelfags are manchildren

What else is new?

>>60114418
you mean your house burned down?

>>60114367
>clearly OP is talking about CPUs here.
Then why is he using an FPS based benchmark?

>>60114510
>SLOWER THAN 14NM
Holy shit why is Intel is so fucking shit

>>60114638
Back to the designated shitting street

File: wut.jpg (7KB, 208x199px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 208x199px

>>60114573

>>60114645
Irrelevant, Cannonlake is expected to have a 15% IPC boost while using 60% less power, it's a far superior CPU

>>60114633
POOTEL STUTTERING HOUSEFIRES

>>60114670
15% from skylake again?


I think you meant """"""""""""""15%"""""""""""""""

>>60113096
>being poor

>>60114670
Intlel confirmed 10nm is slower than 14nm

Stay assblasted pootelfag

>>60114698
Just wait for 7nm and the new architecture in 2021.
Nobody really needs more than Skylake performance

>>60114686
Divide by 10 to get the real percentage.

>>60114573
well, it's the same chip. and since the clockspeed is the same, it makes perfect sense

>>60114702
2021 at the earliest. Could be 2022, 2030 who knows

File: 1488664232472.png (84KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 653x726px

>>60114660
H O U S E F I R E

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

246KB, 882x758px

>>60114725
STOOOOOOOOOOOP

File: 56456415193.jpg (83KB, 331x331px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 331x331px

stop shitposting you autists

File: 1449999756930.jpg (49KB, 423x389px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 423x389px

remember to hide and sage shill threads!

>>60113061
> Whatever Intel CPU beats AMD CPU using any NVIDIA CARD

Yep. It's interesting, isn't it, that any Intel CPU will beat any Ryzen CPU in certain select games in tests with a Nvidia GPU yet the results are completely different and AMD mostly comes out on top in the exact same games when you pair with a AMD GPU.

That's pretty interesting. It's fair to ask if there's some check for a specific CPU in nvidia's drivers or if it's unintentional.

>>60114820
I'm sure Nvidia will be thrilled when Vega hits and it makes the 1080ti looking like ass on Ryzen because they couldn't do a simple topology fix for the uarch in their drivers.

>>60114770
kill yourself
>>>/pol/

File: 1493201208990.jpg (2MB, 3840x1032px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3840x1032px

Stutterlake

File: IMG_3383.jpg (121KB, 1142x986px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 1142x986px

>>60114836
Lul vega will be a failure just like poozen. Everyone on /g/ will make fun of you stinky indians again

>>60114873
>April 28th
>wrong clocks
>wrong revision
>wrong bandwidth
>wrong TDP
This is some pretty bad bait.

>>60114710
pajeet doesn't know about multicore programming

>>60114873
It's out? When is anandtech review??

File: screenfetch-fedora-25.png (11KB, 983x455px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 983x455px

>>60114112
One reason to buy AMD GPU's is that you can actually use them because they have a GNU/Linux development team whereas NVidia refuses to release enough documentation to make a functioning driver for their cards.

It's nice that you're happy with your 1070. Good for you. I don't really need a paperweight and that's all it would be to me so I don't want one.

>>60114947
>loonix
noone cares shitface poo

>>60114890
just like how ur mum takes up to 3 dicks in her orifices, not all programs can use gorillion threads

File: Intel-Xeon-E3-1280-V6-NAMD-Benchmark.jpg (80KB, 854x554px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 854x554px

>>60114952
Besides Intel, Redhat, IBM, Microsoft, AMD, Amazon, Google, realtek and Nvidia when they have something to sell.

>>60114854
(｡>﹏<｡)

/v/eddit pls go and stay go

>>60114112
Better price/TFLOP for GPGPU. Better virtualization support. Better multi monitor support. Better Linux support. Better multi GPU support. Better async compute and low level API support. Better long term driver support. Cheaper adaptive sync solution. Best price/performance in the mid and low end segments.

NVIDIA is king for single monitor single card high end Windows gaming. For everything else they're worthless. (Except for some GPGPU segments where they've won out by pushing a proprietary standard).

>>60115008
0.75 vs 0.90
1800X 3.6 - 4.1 after XFR and 2400 memory
1660 v3 3.0 - 3.5 and 2133 memory and lower ipc
1680 v4 at 3.4 - 4.0 and 2400 memory ~equal ipc

looks like it'll match in that benchmark

>>60115117
You got a 1700 there that's the same clock as 1660 v3, beats it, and uses half the power.

>>60114857
>intel
>gayming
AHAAHHAHHAAHHAHHAHAHAAHHAHAAHAH

>>60114890
i do, but the game is clearly <=4threaded

>>60115143
But a 1800X is also there too at 0.75
1700X is 3.4 - 3.8 ( 3.9 with XFR )

>>60115176
Yeah, and it does significantly better than both.
If you want a pure IPC comparison, the 1700 and the closest Xeon are at the same clocks.

>>60114288
sauce to the doujin?

>>60115176
That's an all core turbo, which is +100MHz over base for AMD's chips.
XFR doesn't even get to do anything when all cores are loaded.

>>60114613
It unironically is

Every day. Every fucking day.

Every fucking day we have this same fucking thread. I bet you think it's real cool, don't you, you attention whore? “How will I get my (you)s today?” you wake up and ask yourself. You little fucking faggot. You little fucking societal worm. I bet your dad is really fucking proud of his faggot son, isn't he?

But here we are. Same thread as yesterday. Same thread as the day before. All so you can cultivate your precious little (you)s. Like out time is just to serve you, huh? You inconsiderate prick.

I bet you had no father to teach you about that, did you? I bet you has no nuclear family. In fact, I'm willing to bet you've never sat around the dinner table at a nice, decent Thanksgiving, like a fucking regular, functioning family, without having to sweat whether old-daddy and new-daddy were going to fight. Or whether your faggot cousin or drunk uncle were going to give you away for being a good little cock sucker. No, I bet you cried your eyes out in the fetal position in the corner of the kitchen while the shadow of your step-dad’s fist interfacing with your mom's mouth fell across your pathetic whimpering body before you snuck off to make shitty EDM beats on your dilapidated, inner-city school hand-me-down laptop. Then I bet you raged into thin air with your weak fists, feeling helpless, with tears in your eyes before sneaking out through the window to escape into the freeing anonymity of the city.

Your dysfunctional family left you, so you left your family, like the societal trash you are. And now, here you are, with your self-built desktop gaming PC, built upon the sad wages of your minimum wage job, trying to blow off some steam and get the attention you could never get at home by whoring yourself out on /g/. Same thread. Every. Fucking. Day.

Clean yourself up, your still crying.

sage

>>60113061
Reminder Intel said they'll launch Graphene 2020.

>>60115192
1700 3.0 - 3.7 with 2400 memory
1660 v3 3.0 - 3.5 with 2133 memory and lower ipc
not too far off

>>60115266
saved

File: Intel-Working-on-7nm-and-5-nm-Manufacturing-Technologies-3.jpg (312KB, 1688x795px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 1688x795px

>>60115277
They'll be lucky enough to get EUV by then.

Remember this gem?

>>60115291
https://www.pugetsystems.com/blog/2015/07/09/Actual-CPU-Speeds---What-You-See-Is-Not-Always-What-You-Get-675/

Posting the max turbo clock in a 16 thread benchmark is pointless.

>>60115296
Both GloFo and Samsung is about to outpace Intel in dieshrinks. What the fuck Intel's going to do without process lead?

>>60115367
More bibeline 6ghz 500W space heater

>>60115380
What a wonderful way to burn datacenters down.

>>60113061
>Implying that games benchmarks are valid

>>60113061
>IMG_XXXX.jpg

File: tombraider.png (54KB, 730x603px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 730x603px

>>60115407
They're only valid when they're cherrypicked or day1, like this one.

>>60115296
Is this legit? When did Intel release this?

If AMD releases 16c 32t for consumers, then I'm never going with Intel again unless they release some 5Ghz 32c 64t CPU with 10nm and low power draw.

>>60115455
>Tomb Raindeer
>not DX12

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>60115468
Feb 2015

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/02/intel-forges-ahead-to-10nm-will-move-away-from-silicon-at-7nm/

>>60115473
>Wanting (((directx 12)))

>>60115473
>using a render with around the board worse performance with both AMD and Intel

What a buggy mess.

>>60115468
>>60115486
No wait, scratch that

I'm seeing the same image from 2014 in the archives, so it was before that.
https://warosu.org/g/thread/45679364

>>60115525
Yup, it was May 2012

http://www.alphr.com/news/374626/intel-reveals-roadmap-to-5nm-process

>>60115357
motherboard feature not enabled?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10337/the-intel-broadwell-e-review-core-i7-6950x-6900k-6850k-and-6800k-tested-up-to-10-cores/2

>>60113126
>IMG_XXXX.jpg

File: power-consumption.png (53KB, 730x603px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 730x603px

>>60115008
I like how Intel has 2-3 years of catching up on perf/watt while AMD is releasing new zen+ and zen++ every year.
7nm probably in early 2019.

What a riot.

>>60115578
>catching up on perf/watt
If only they could. *lake shit is the only thing they've got for the next 4 years.

File: Screenshot_20170428_203126.png (3KB, 646x26px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 646x26px

>>60115291
Aaand found it, both the 1700 turbos all cores to 3.2 while the Xeon turbos all to 3.3GHz, base clocks are so misleading, Intel should really do a better job of showing the all core turobs instead of shitty base clock.

>>60115559
TB 3.0 is a single core boost, irrelevant for the NAMD benchmark, and I don't know about Windows but it's enabled on Linux, which makes sense as Intel wouldn't want their enterprise customers to run the chips with half the turbo working

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Linux-4.10-Scheduler-TBM3

>>60113424
best performance? yes. best performance per dollar? Certainly not.

>>60114702
>intel fags at the beginning of Ryzen launch
>"LOL, AMD BTFO"
>ryzen fags
>"just wait"
>"LOL, WAIT FAG"
>ryzen beats the fuck out of intel
>intel fags
>"just wait..."

You dumb intelcucks get called shills for a reason.

>>60113061
if you where not such a shitskin you would clearly see the game doesn't scale all that well with MOAR THREADS. it appears to top off around ~~4.5-5ish~~. i3 is 4 threads 2 physical, i5 is true physical threads, i7 is 8 threads, with 4 physical. the game is probably not even really using more than 4 threads and the only reason why the i7 is doing better, barely better, than the i5 is because the extra threads are handling windows and the background shit.

overall something is legitimately wrong with the game or that test. i can only assume scheduling issues. i say this because with intel, you see a ~17fps from going from the dual core i3 to the quad i5, and a ~8fps from the i5 to the i7 quad with ht. we should be seeing something similar with ryzen, but we don't. we see a bizarre identical performance with the 4, 6, and 8 cores. could be SMT scheduling issues with the way ryzen is setup or facing cross-quad core scheduling issues that we do know actually exists. its one of the reasons why windows 7 has about a ~10% increase with ryzen over 10 is because of the older architecture of the scheduler in windows back then. since 7's scheduler was designed to handle multiple processor designs thanks to intel back then using an architecture similar to what amd is using now. since nehalem though intel went to using one similar to what amd was using back then. they kinda did a reversal.

File: mentally-challenged-indian.jpg (25KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 250x250px

>>60115818
>if you where not such a shitskin
>you where

File: untitled-5.png (30KB, 686x677px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 686x677px

>>60115818
I'm looking at Far Cry performance from both TPU and guru3d and all I'm seeing is a 10% tops difference, certainly not the shitshow in the OP.

You know something's wrong when a 6900k performs like a i5

>>60115896
>7600k performs better than 6700k
Wut.

File: farcryprimal_1920_1080.png (18KB, 500x330px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 500x330px

>>60115896
Also a 1500X doing better than a 1600X and 1700X even though it has lower clocks than both and twice the CCX traffic.

What a weird bench.

>>60115909
It's weird, the 6700k should be right behind the 7700k.

If there's anything Ryzen launched showed me is that reviewers are fucking idiots.

File: LRM_EXPORT_20170411_145552.jpg (1MB, 1312x1730px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1312x1730px

>>60115847
Kill yourself you perma-BTFO'd tripfaggot

>>60114566
delid

>>60115896
>7600k i5
>same as 7700k

??????

>>60113061
DESTROYED, I WISH I COULD HIT EVERYONE I KNEW THAT OWN AMD

BUT IM WEAK ASFUCC

>>60115940
I'll wait for Agner to deliver some proper Ryzen analysis.

>>60115962
Intel 7700k tied with Intel 7600k! Intel BTFO by Intel! How will Intel EVER recover? Intel buyers on suicide watch!

>>60115967
We still haven't heard anything from Kanter, I hope he does one as well.

>>60115962
It's customary to use bugged as fuck games for CPUs nowadays, FO4 is the best at it, totally different performance on the same hardware in the same area tracing the same steps!

What a fucking engine, I don't think an army of monkeys could ever manage to do this, it's almost like the game engine performance is tied to the fucking hardware clock or something and gets more or less performance at certain time frames.

>>60115989
I mean I want anything besides mouthbreathing youtube or 'tech' websites reviewers.

>>60116023
It's Bethesda. Even monkeys could write a better engine.

>>60114633
I still don't understand how the 1800X is quite a lot better than the 6900k in multithreaded workload with the same amount of cores but worse in gaming?

>>60116116
New topology.

>>60113061
I do video editing gaming doesn't concern me also the extra cores are useful for Linux.

>>60116116
3.6-4.0 ( 4.1 ) vs 3.0-3.7

>>60116116
Obvious culprits are 4 channel memory and lack of CCX aware game fixes(not in all games though)
EFIs are still not finalized

Then there's also the fact the 6900k has more L3 cache but it's a true chip wide L3 cache that all cores can use to increase performance, but comes at the cost of large power consumption, meanwhile Ryzen's design trades that single thread cache boosting performance for better scalability and power consumption.

>>60116154
Quad channel means fucking nothing for games.

>>60116180
It certainly doesn't make it worse, even if it is 1% that's about the same gain from a new Intel arch.

>>60113096
>unable to afford an i7
pajeets everybody

File: Screenshot_20170428_212630.png (20KB, 696x140px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 696x140px

>>60116151
Nobody with basic knowledge of TDP will tell you to blindly believe the base clocks, it's pure marketing drivel.

>intel has fast single thread
what's new, the Pentium anniversary edition was destroying i5s and i7s a few years ago

>>60113061
wtf i hate ubisoft now

File: Screenshot_20170428_213053.png (68KB, 1095x793px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 1095x793px

>>60116268
Interestingly enough Intel bases their TDP on BASE clocks, not turbo ones.

>>60113126
It was literally one shortcut, while nvidia has services and processes running with 100% uptime for their telemetry

Fuck the mods of this board by the way, literal shilling going 24/7 and nothing is done about these shit posts

File: 1c347159-fbda-499b-925e-3b99a2969e9f.png (119KB, 1269x628px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1269x628px

You just now figured out a lot of those high TDP Xeons have equal to similar single thread performance as the consumer high clocked one because their Turbo range is insane.

>>60116351
16 core for gaming here I come!

Also can you imagine if AMD leaves overclocking open on their 16 core chips? Imagine 4.0-4.2GHz on 16 cores?

>>60116419
1.45V going to 16 cores will be interesting for heat ouput

>>60116419
>Imagine 4.0-4.2GHz on 16 cores?

I can imagine the stupid amount of cooling or VRM I'll need.

>>60116436
If they're cherrypicked dies then I imagine it'll be lower voltage, also these chips are gonna be a B2 stepping, so lower voltage for the same clock.

>>60116459
I can't imagine the voltage to be that much lower, the Zeppelin die is designed for lower clockspeeds and 2.1GHz - 3.3GHz are its sweetspots for efficiency.

File: intel_haswell1.jpg (147KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 640x640px

>>60116351
Why is base clock so shit? The CPUs don't even run at base clock ever unless you fill up your case with feathers!

>>60116469
Going from B0 to B1 on Ryzen gained AMD some 200MHz on the same TDP, B2 should be similar.

>>60116479
>Why is base clock so shit?
Because as pointed out by >>60116313 and >>60116351 it allows Intel to claim lower TDP numbers.

File: RYZEN-1600X-1500X-46.jpg (132KB, 614x520px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 614x520px

>>60116493
These HEDT 16 cores just sound better and better.

I know 100% core scaling is not a thing but imagine nearly doubling the score in this? Handbrake seems to scale rather well.

File: 1-1080.1792621465.png (56KB, 1790x766px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 1790x766px

>>60116479
Oh yeah, forgot about it but there's a separate chart for AVX clocks, which Intel is keeping hidden for whatever non-technical reason.

>>60116550
>Intel turbo technology not supported
>$1000 Xeons

Fuck this company, what's next, locking L3 cache behind a software update?

>>60116568
What are you, poor? :^)

File: 9-18-10-intel600.jpg (73KB, 600x392px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 600x392px

>>60116568
>Inb4 a repeat of pic related

>>60114418
>5.72 GHz
>babylake
>discount CERN

File: housefire inside.png (126KB, 357x330px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 357x330px

>Thread literally started by IMG_xxxx.jpg benchmark spammer

Well, at least he's not shitting up someone else's thread this time. Everyone who replied is still a retard, though. Including me.

>>60116550
AVX uses such godly amount of power a 2.4GHz base Xeon would drop to 1.9GHz in a 256 bit vector load , though I haven't seen any detailed testing on Zen to know if they throttle clocks back in AVX

>>60116351
>3600mhz is the max on any of those chips.
It will have about the same same sc as an i5-7400.

>>60117368
The cache doesn't sit there looking pretty, that's an enormous amount of L3 and it does help a lot.

>>60113424
Lel

>>60113424
Current best at slideshowing at least.

Heads up, apparently AMD is preparing a "NPU" line together with their traditional "APU" line.

It's unknown what NPU is.

>>60118195
apu means accelerated processing unit

npu could mean neural processing unit

File: 202-3.jpg (131KB, 725x407px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 725x407px

>Vega is just around the corner

>>60118262
That would imply NPU has a GPU that's good at fp16, which the Vega APUs already have.

It's probably something else

>>60118306
i can't think of something else desu

neural is AMD's hype word of the year

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

234KB, 882x758px

>>60114731
>not using the superior version

>>60113061
>game designed for 8 core consoles can't use 8 cores
How are these developers so shit?

>>60113061
and thats on hardware unboxed video and his test are shit making cpus look way to equal

but aside that far cry primal is shitty benchmark and shitty game in general

>>60119510
This one is great.

>>60114383
>>60114419
Faggots I like AMD and I still laughed my ass off.

>>60118298
Edward Nigger Hands

>>60113061
Why is there a grey line between the AMD and intel numbers?

>>60113061
>shitty unoptimized ubisoft game
>good benchmark
animegirlwithquestionmarks.jpg

>>60113061
>A FUCKING i3
why do people act like it matters what it's called, they all run on the same cores, that's what matters. you guys talk like an i3 is significantly different from an i7 outside of artificial jewery

>>60113061
>some particular game and not a real benchmark
LOL

File: 1475152473165.png (255KB, 973x688px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 973x688px

>>60113061
Back to /v/ faggot

>>60114034
i know right, in addition to that, why aren't they testing at 640x480 lowest settings?

>>60113061
4.8Ghz > 4.0Ghz

hmmm.

>>60124963
>Encryption
>Video encoding
>Content creation
>Game streaming
Who cares about these things enough to justify buying a CPU inferior at the one thing performance of which they actually care about?

>>60125018
Having a $1200 pc just to run game executables and literally nothing else is kinda stupid anon

>>60124963
did poojeets start using jrpg stats graphs
hilarious

>>60125018
All it shows is that Intel CPU is inferior to Ryzen in everything, and 8% increase in gaming is not fucking worth it.

>>60124963

>amd took a gook graph and used it themselves

first the adware, now this. god amd is just embarrassing.

>>60124963
This is a official chart from an OEM, lmao

>>60124963
8% at max fps sure
intel still stutter like shit

>>60124963
>>60125173
https://mobile.twitter.com/iBUYPOWER/status/857741376770850818

>>60125134
Maybe, but this is that 90% of the customers do, so they have no reason to by ryzen.
>>60125166
It's clearly inferior at the only thing 90% of the customers care about and it totally worth it considering 1700X costs more than 7700K.

>>60125192
no, you autistic piece of shit, the majority of pc gamers do not just run the game executable alongside their games
bowen place

File: tidus.jpg (30KB, 475x343px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 475x343px

>>60125189
>Interested in Ryzen? Here's a few usage models Learn more about our Ryzen PCs!

CAN'T MAKE THIS SHIT UP

>>60125192
Nice console.

>>60125199
How do you know tho? And even if they do occasionally use encrypted discs and video editing software, they don't do that nearly as often as straightforward gaming. So the question stands, why buy a CPU good at the things you only do 10% of the time but not as good at the one thing you spend the most of your time on? This makes no sense, unless you're a professional content creator.

>>60124985
>not 320x240
Now that I think of it, maybe 160x120 would be better.

>>60125269
40:30 at 2bpp is more realistic

>>60125180
>intel still stutter like shit
>intlel
>proper gayming
lol

>>60125192
>90% of people who buy computers are gamers
Nice bubble you live in my friend

File: JUST krzanich.png (1MB, 1002x1480px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1002x1480px

>>60114633

>>60125312
Well I wasn't talking about you grandma, bud. Let me rephrase: 60% of the customers buy computer for internet/office stuff so they don't care about CPU at all, 35% buy computers for games and they're better off with Intel and 5% buy computer for professional stuff and they may consider buying Ryzen.

>>60114226
Gigabyte AORUS Radeon RX 580 8GB $400AUD
Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1070 G1 Gaming 8GB $600AUD
(after tax)

at least here 1070 are way more expensive than 580

>>60125374
>buying a overclocked 480 for 30% more

>>60125351
>souce: my ass
Again, nice bubble that you live in

>>60125391
Oh. I agree its silly. but 480 are even cheaper (just a little and they are running out of stock)

hence even bigger difference in prices.

>>60125428
It's the same anecdotal source you have tho.

>>60125391
Wasn't 580 MSRP lower than 480?

Can't really help if vendors jack up prices

>>60125465
Stores are just getting rid of their 480 stock. One they run out the prices are going to drop.

>>60125266
>you need ecryption or video editing to use more cores
my man, you should post less and lurk more. You have your game, it uses 4 cores or slightly more
But where do the other programs runs on? Well, if you have an i5, on the same 4 cores that are being used. Multitasking with an i5? Out of question, the thing is already near it's limit when playing modern AAA game, so better make sure you close everything you have open before starting a game, otherwise you're in for a stutter fest or at times, big fps drops

Compare that to the 6 cores intel and ryzens and they both have a big headroom left while handling gaming extremely well still. That's why i5s aren't recommended over Ryzen cpus anymore.

>>60113061
AMD POO'D THE FUCK OUT

>>60125351
>>>60125312
>Well I wasn't talking about you grandma, bud. Let me rephrase: 60% of the customers buy computer for internet/office stuff so they don't care about CPU at all, 35% buy computers for games and they're better off with Intel and 5% buy computer for professional stuff and they may consider buying Ryzen.
[Citation Needed]

>>60125018
>Source: My ass

>>60125192
[Citation Needed]

>>60114710

it doesnt tho. thats a software bottleneck. the 8core has more overhead on a 4core application because windows and background stuff consuming cpu.

its just a flawed bench. no idea what causes it tho.

>>60113131
t-thank y-y-you >////<

Cherry picked benchmarks are my favourite!

>>60126608
you're my favourite

>>60114488
WRONG STUPID SHILL!

Kabylake P6 arch on 14nm+
Coffeelake P6 arch on 14nm++
Cannonlake P6 arch on 10nm
Future Intel CPUs P6 arch on 10nm++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I just bought a r5 1600, have I been memed?

>>60113424
Yeah, I fucking love getting stutters when I game

>>60127405yes amd is just shot buy intel

File: 1487249963716.jpg (38KB, 249x399px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 249x399px

>>60127405
Why do you go through purchases while still having doubt?
No, you didn't get memed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBKHsMar1Jo
Look at the FPS counter for more than 20 seconds. Also, take a peek at the CPU usage of both.

>>60127455
I was joking, I'm hype af

>>60116116
Literally just software optimizations, on both ends.

Software is optimized for the intel architectures, and intel's had more time to optimize microcode on their architecture.

Don't forget the intel compiler STILL intentionally cripples software performance on AMD cpu's.

File: 1488254150041.jpg (23KB, 248x363px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 248x363px

>>60127472
well fuck you anon

>>60114836

Nvidia uses the Intel compiler. If they used another one, problem solved.

>>60124963
>only 8% and 2% on gaymes
What a massacre. I will sure be missing that 8% in gaymes, when I'm getting enough fps and higher mins than that stuttering mess.

Would be quite the bet to buy a Z270 board now hoping it would support a 6-core Coffeelake.

>>60113061
>each one has a minimum framerate over 60
wow it's fucking nothing.png

The only reason to buy newer and stronger processors is if you're programming or otherwise doing actual computer work. They're unnecessary for video games at this point, anything you buy today will be good enough.

File: 14934901690621.png (334KB, 1212x960px) Image search: [Google]

334KB, 1212x960px

Ryzen power

File: 14934901690580.png (159KB, 602x477px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 602x477px

>>60130466

>>60129752
>intel
wew what a nice joke anon

>>60130480
quite impressive it manage half the latency for the cores on the same ccx
i want to see this graph but with different ddr4 speeds

>>60118298
What's the hype behind Vega?

Just that it's catching up to NVIDIA's mid-range card in terms of performance years after the release of the 390X?

>>60124963
Why is this graph comparing an eight-core processor to a four-core processor?

Wasn't the Ryzen 7 series supposed to compete against Intel's 5960X and 6900K? This is actually very misleading and deceptive advertising.

>>60113096
>being poor

>>60130583
it's amd hyping all the new technological features of the card which looks promising, the same way it happened with ryzen
but it's all about will it deliver or not

>>60130812
I've never owned an AMD GPU, but I never planned on buying any of the ones available because I know for a fact that none of them can handle 3440x1440 gaming.

If Vega can handle 3440x1440 at 100+ FPS, then I'll just sell my GTX 1080 Ti and go for Vega instead.

>>60114488
>new arch
Intel have been using the same one for 11 years

>>60130617
yes, only reason they are comparing it to a housefire is to spread their (((lies)))

>>60130867
Thats not quite accurate. As far as "architecture" is concerned there is only x86-32 followed by x86-64 in recent times.

>>60130843
>sidegradeing
retard

>>60130914
You know I mean μarch

>>60113061
Man, Ryzen was kinda disappointing.

If (read: when) Vega flops I'm going to switch to the hyperjews. I really wish there was a third party.

>>60130928
Not him but I'm in the same boat, NVIDIA drivers are garbage and I want to use Freesync.

>>60130944
>Man, Ryzen was kinda disappointing.
how so?

>>60130944
>Man, Ryzen was kinda disappointing.
(you)

>>60130971
Because it isn't a housefire

>>60130957
kinda pointless if you already have a 1080ti, you can hold off for navi

>>60130894
I only got a 6700K in 2015 because it was the best processor at the time and AMD had nothing even remotely similar to offer.

I think it's actually fucking retarded how people on /g/ are trying to compare the Ryzen 7 series to the 7700K when they aren't even remotely similar in terms of structure. It's actually unfair to the 7700K because it doesn't have 8C16T like Ryzen does.

I remember when AMD was advertising Ryzen as a gaming CPU, but when it underperformed, they changed its advertising at the last couple of months so as to not make themselves look bad. Whenever you mention this to the AMDrones on /g/, however, they go all-out in calling you a retard and saying that such a thing didn't happen despite being shown images of said advertising.

This whole 7700K vs Ryzen 7 and 7600K vs Ryzen 5 comparison is straight retarded. I don't see why people aren't doing a 6900K vs Ryzen 7 and 6800K vs Ryzen 5 comparison. It's incredibly misleading and unethical.

>>60130928
The 1080 Ti can only handle a few games at a constant 100+ FPS at 3440x1440 resolution. You know this and I know this. If Vega can handle all games at 100+ FPS on ultra settings at this resolution or even 4K, then it's clearly a better option than the 1080 Ti. That also wouldn't make it a sidegrade, retard.

>>60131009
I'd really rather not, besides NVIDIA's domination over the market means it will be easy as fuck to sell it at not too big a loss.

Not to mention EVGA are being idiots with the Hybrid kit for the FE so I'm stuck with this blower until they either get more stock which will happen god knows when or if I get Vega it will already be AIO and more than likely have a much better design like the Fury X does.

>>60131029
>I remember when AMD was advertising Ryzen as a gaming CPU
i don't, the ryzen r7 were advertised at multi purpose content creation gaming streaming cpus
The fist demos of ryzen started with handbrake, blender, zbrush and keyshot (new horizon), then they moved on to streaming
you're just autistic anon, and you try to call people "amdrones" when you can't even recall properly what happened. you ARE a retard.
You're obviously not an intel shill but you're very retarded and i'm fairly sure you'd say anything as long as it's negative towards amd

>>60131029
>I remember when AMD was advertising Ryzen as a gaming CPU
The only thing they advertised was that it was better in streaming while gaming. (GPU hardware encoded streaming is a meme, it looks like shit)

>>60131029
It's ok to compare them when they are priced similarly, at least with the 1700. Even then, the advantage the 7700k offers in gaymes is not even huge, less than 10% is practically nothing when the 7700k offers incredible performance. The same cannot be said of the 7700k of multi core workloads, so it's a no-brainer for me if I were to buy a CPU in that price point. It isn't even the best Ryzen CPU since the 1600 is an amazing value for $100 less with similar multi core performance and higher chance to OC due to less heat from all cores.

>>60131029
>I think it's actually fucking retarded how people on /g/ are trying to compare the Ryzen 7 series to the 7700K when they aren't even remotely similar in terms of structure.
It's not just on /g/, AMD spent all this time comparing it to Intel's 8c/16t CPU and reviewers, being the retards they are, just startted comparing it to the 7700K from the getgo, and more or less tested nothing but gaming.

I don't remember a video comparing the 6900K to the 7700K and seeing the outcry when a $1000 CPU was being squashed by a $400 one.

>>60131165
Gamers are cancerous fanboy retards, not any big surprises here.

File: AMD-RYZEN-ZEN-CPU_Enthusiast-Gaming-Performance.jpg (445KB, 3999x2250px) Image search: [Google]

445KB, 3999x2250px

>>60131070
>extreme performance for gamers
>pic related
Retard.

>>60131137
Pic related. They definitely advertised it as a gaming CPU. There were so many more images but I can't find them on Google--AMD probably went and had most of them deleted after it had 6900K-tier performance (which isn't a bad thing).

>>60131165
It really pissed me off when I started to see this. How is the comparison even remotely fair or viable? Just deceptive and underhanded tactics all-around.

I'm really disappointed by Intel since they didn't have something waiting in store as a response to Ryzen. So bad.

>>60131192
Honestly even if they did that comparison they would just blow it off as Kaby Lake being newer and better than Broadwell-E so of course it would be faster and they can't wait for Kaby Lake HEDT CPUs so they can gobble up that garbage too.

>>60131215
>for gamers and creators
so just like i said then, multipurpose cpu
you're making a fool of yourself man.

>>60131215
Why wouldn't people compare 2 products that cost similarly?

>>60131258
You're retarded. They stopped advertising it as a gaming CPU after it underperformed when compared to the 7700K.

>>60131261
Because they have different functions. If you want the best in gaming, you should get a 6700K/7700K (though I'd avoid the 7700K because of the whole TIM fiasco).

Using your logic, it wouldn't make sense for people to compare the Ryzen 7 lineup to Intel's 8-core lineup since they're not similarly priced.

i-series is overclocked and using a game that doesn't effectively use more than one core. Of course the ones with better clock speeds would "win" that one.

>>60131293
gamers and creators doesn't mean gamers, i'm not really sure why this can't go through your head
If you start advertisting saying "hey, my shit is good at gaming AND content creation", that's not equal to saying "heh, my shit is great at gamign" at all. If you can't understand that, then please post less and lurk more.

>>60131215
You're just being pedantic and autistic at this point. Give it up. The advertisement leading up to launch was like 3 months ago now.

>>60131339
You're retarded. You clearly don't understand the English language if that's what your interpretation of the statement is.

It doesn't say gamers or content creators. You're exactly right.

Why don't you think about it a little more until you understand what the word and means? You should go back to reading kindergarten-level books and build up from there since your autism clearly interferes with your daily life.

>>60131261
>Why wouldn't people compare 2 products that cost similarly?
Because one of those products is just heavily undercutting competition that exists at double the price.

AMD's biggest mistake was not pricing the Ryzen 7 series at ~$750-$800 so comparisons would be done with Broadwell-E as they should have been.

>>60131222
Well, there are some Genuine Intel Retards(tm) that believe the 15% horseshit.

>>60131378
My man
If you go in /pcbg/ and ask "hey, i do streaming & video editing, but also gaming at the same time, what cpu should i buy?", guess which cpu will you be fucking told to buy?
just make a wild guess

>>60131389
There are people who will unironically buy the 7740K

>>60131381
>AMD's biggest mistake was not being jewish
?

>>60131402
It might be the last full retard single core focused CPU they ever release.

>>60131409
They undercut Intel so heavily they screwed themselves because retards started comparing their 3.0-3.6GHz 8 core CPUs to 5GHz 4 core CPUs in gaming and the fact that the general public are retarded and will just see one bar is bigger so it's better will hurt sales.

>>60131293
>>60131381
But I was never going to buy a 6900K because it costs over $1000. My options were either the 1700 or the 7700K. It made sense for me to compare the 1700 and 7700K.

>>60131409
He's not wrong. It would have made much more money from all the fanboys, but it clearly doesn't cost that much to make a good CPU and AMD knows it, which is why it priced the Ryzen 7 series around $400.

File: 1486952117708.jpg (37KB, 368x250px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 368x250px

>>60131440
that actually sounds very believable
if the r7 were priced $100 higher and r5 at identical price, ryzen would've had a much better launch

>>60131449
But if you wanted a 6900K and you were shit out of luck because you couldn't afford it then the 1700 would be a no brainer, right?

Or are you saying you would unironically consider a 6900K purely for gaming.

>>60131478
I never considered the 6900K for anything because I couldn't afford it. Even if the 6900K was 1000 times better a 1700, I still wouldn't buy it because I can't afford it.

File: 1700X 7700K 1080p crysis 3.jpg (423KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

423KB, 1920x1080px

quadcore meme never gets less funny

>>60114288
>>60115212
seconded

>>60131558
nice frametimes

>>60131557
And that's how Intel's pricing works. Nobody would ever compare those CPUs and expose the HEDT platforms weakness in gaming relative to high clocked core processors.

If the 6900K costed $500 would you still consider it if the 7700K beat it in gaming?

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

687KB, 1914x1077px

>thread still acting like 7700K is better than ryzen 7
>multiple post-update benches that prove otherwise, particularly in newer games and at higher resolutions
>???
>intel profit from ignorance

>>60131587
>If the 6900K costed $500 would you still consider it if the 7700K beat it in gaming?
No because X99 mobos prices are insane.

>>60131607
also every reviewer attesting to smoother gayman and generally proving it from min frames and frametime data

Is this an Intel or AMD shill thread?

>>60131621
Do you now see how Intel have structured everything in a way that your purchase decision is already made for you?

>>60131621
his decision is once cucked again by the jew market
this shill will still blindly continue to believe quad cores are better in 2017
oh well

>>60131559
[Fan no Hitori] Uprising Zenpen

>>60131665
Intel fanboys are inflicted with some form of stockholm syndrome.

>>60131215
There were a bunch of images on their website along with that showing other things than gaming. It is highly misleading just to post that one image.

>>60131607
>Gay Mans Next Ass
discarded

>>60131558
What is this 3200mhz 14cl ram? I have never seen it. I only saw 3200mhz 16cl like corsair, g.skill, etc. Is there any difference performance wise?

>>60131607
>4k bench
I mean, I am buying ryzen myself but comparing them in 4k is useless. Less then 1% of steam users have 4k and 80+% have 1080p. Let's make gaming comparisons in conditions that people actually use.

>>60131215
Uhh, all their tests have been against the 6900k, even the earliest blender IPC comparisons.
There was one chart with a 1700 vs a 7700k though, for whatever reason.

Can someone explain to me what level of knowledge Intel and AMD have with regards to each other products perfomance? Like when industry insiders knew the actual perfomance of Ryzen? Vega? etc.

>>60131851
Why would you want that? 1080ti on 1080 low settings is a realistic benchmark, using something mid range with normal settings? HAHAHAA THATS NOT REAL TESTING BRO

>>60131851
And what percentage of Steam users have any of the GPUs in that benchmark?

>>60131851
According to you all benchmarks should be done at 1080p and a 970 because they're the most popular.

File: perfrel_1920_1080.png (17KB, 500x330px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 500x330px

>>60131851

>>60131894
That sounds like a very realistic use case, if I'm buying a 1080ti I'm not gonna be looking at 1080p benches, if I'm buying a 1060 I'm not gonna be looking at fucking $400 CPUs but $200 CPUs at best, if I'm buying a 480/580 I want 1440p/1080p benches.

>>60131381
>Because one of those products is just heavily undercutting competition that exists at double the price.
On the bright side, more accessible 6/8 core CPUs in the market means game developers might actually begin to optimize games and they will start using more than 4 threads

>>60131922
>what is 240Hz

>>60131851
95% of people won't buy a 1080ti, but you can bet a lot will have close to 4K monitors
Exampling that quad cores (even with 5Ghz) fail to maintain high resolution frames is as much an indicator of CPU video (and future) performance as anything
Also about a third of monitor sales lately are trending toward ultrawide, another good chunk towards 4K. Just because you don't have the best doesn't mean people don't use it

>>60131941
A joke, I don't care about twitch shooters, I'd like actual resolution because it's good for everything, both in game and out game.

Take your safe bubble sterile gaymer running a single application use case out of here, underage.

>>60131941
If you're actually playing with this meme refresh rate you're more than likely playing the game at 800x600 on the lowest settings for maximum visiblity. Even my old 270X could achieve 800 FPS at those settings.

>>60131999
this. what my bro used to do lel

>>60131999
>>60131979
You don't understand.. I'm a PROFESSIONAL CS;GO player, soon anyway, just wait

>>60131959
>Just because you don't have the best doesn't mean people don't use it
Once again, 1% of steam users vs 80+%. I am not saying don't make benchmarks in 4k - sure we need all of them. But emphasizing them over 1080p benches is wrong when it is a very niche segment.

>>60132017
>I'm a PROFESSIONAL CS;GO player
You think they don't do this at LANs/Tournaments? Who in their right mind would play with high graphical settings when all they do is obscure the enemy more?

>>60131896
>1%
>for almost $50 more'
wew you convinced me

>>60132030
I think he's joking about the situation how everyone is suddenly a professional esports gamer making $20000 per match when it comes to the 7700k

>>60132041
Just like everyone is a professional renderer when it comes to Ryzen

>>60132041
Yeah I know but that is typically designated to retards who buy 120Hz+ TN panels and surround sound gaming headsets, or ask for headphones with the best 'soundstage' for positional accuracy.

The lengths people will go to make themselves 'better' at the game without actually getting better.

>>60132065
Wow, that's your best response? What about crunching, hosting, virtualization, editing/montage, encryption, de/compression, simulation, analysis?

What's a bigger market? Those 50 guys who plays at 600fps over 490fps on 800x600 or everything a Xeon is good at?

>>60132112
Just like everyone is a professional cruncher, hoster, virtualizer, editor, encryptor, compressor, simulator, analyst when it comes to justifyuing buying Ryzen instead of i7.

>>60132112
Xeons are a niche market

>>60132145
(You)

>>60132145
>seven billion USD quarterly revenue
>niche market

Keep it up

>>60131558

>testing CPUs with a GPU bottleneck

>>60132659
>testing CPUs in unrealistic situations

>>60132659
Oh my god it's almost like there's actual CPU benchmarks out there and it terrifies you guys.

>>60132659
Oh so the 7700k loses in both productivity and in real life GPU bottlenecked situations, which is approximately 99% of games, but wins at clockspeed tests at 800x600

Gee I wonder what I'll get.

>>60133074
>800x600
You know what percentage of Steam Survey users are playing on this resolution? That's way too high a resolution, unfair benchmark.

144p is the only true CPU test. If we isolate the GPU from the test even further, it's the Intel iGPU vs Ryzen's non-existant iGPU. Intel wins by default, Ryzen is trash.

>>60133103
>implying Ryzen can't software render faster than Intel's iGPU can draw frames

Lmao

>>60133118
>software rendering vs hardware rendering
Now you're not comparing apples to apples, Intel wins again silly AMD shill

>>60133139
SHIT!

>>60133139
So the jews win again