CPU-Z thread still feels viable

File: CPU-Z.png (58KB, 830x413px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 830x413px

>>60113746
>5820k
Mein bröther.

>>60114978
how much clock?

>>60115034
4.8GHz

File: poo poo pee pee.png (18KB, 403x402px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 403x402px

>Intel in charge of IPC improvements

>>60115144
I'd back off to 4.5 or 4.6ghz and increase your cache and uncore

You'll probably see more performance despite a lower clock speed

>>60115034
The 6800k is at 4.1 Ghz @ 1.3v

>>60115206
Why such high volts? My 5820k is comfortable at 4.4ghz with 1.28v

File: asdf.png (38KB, 806x402px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 806x402px

Can run it higher, but decided to scale back a little bit for the summer while I'm still using the Spire cooler. Feels good familia.

>>60115229
Because its broadwell-e

>>60115229
4.3 GHz @ 1.28V
I might try to get 4.5 going but I'm not sure if more than 1.3V are worth it
Using a H100i cooler
>>60115278
>TFW a midrange 200 € processor performs similar than your highend desktop
>TFW I got my 5820K system for free coming from a 3770K

File: fx.png (25KB, 403x402px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 403x402px

It's like using an AMD Bulldozer CPU with extra threads.

File: ryzen.png (17KB, 403x402px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 403x402px

AMD won

>>60115148
holy shit this is hilarious

File: cpuz-5680-bench.png (16KB, 417x414px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 417x414px

The fuck

>>60115185
>increase your cache
wtf are you smoking nigger

>>60115532
New cpu z changed benchmark I think

>>60115532
What's the problem?

>>60115185
you mean the uncore ( memory tab in cpu-z ) under channel #

>>60115544
That would make sense.

>>60115547
That my xeon from 2011 was getting 3x the single thread as a 6700k

>>60115500
12 Core Sandy Bridge?

Might not be suitable for gaming but probably nice for conversions.

>>60115520
>implying "This Processor" isn't overclocked as fuck

>>60115505
>has his CPU at default clocks if not overclocked
>implies that being just a bit under Intel's best CPU makes it so that "AMD won"
>probably won't accept the reality that a 6950X clocked to the same clocks as his Ryzen CPU would blow it the fuck out of the water

These Ryzen benchmarks make me want to own a Ryzen but I know its worthless so I'll somewhen get a 5960X or just wait for Ryzen 2.

I barely need my 5820K. It converts 4K really fast, but a faster CPU wouldn't help me when I need 1.5 days to upload a 30 minute 4K video.

>>60116707
>I know its worthless
why do you think that?

File: murasame.png (224KB, 806x942px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 806x942px

>>60113746

File: 1489867729241.jpg (48KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 480x480px

>>60116560

>$1700
>$330

File: stock vs stock.jpg (97KB, 816x410px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 816x410px

>dat voltage bug
I hope someone reports it

>>60116735

because he's probably buttmad he bought an expensive 6 core cpu without a use for it

I'd be buttmad with my 5820k too if it wasn't for the fact I got it for £250 nearly 2 years ago now, the ~£300 ish 1700 seems to be a lot better for what I need it for and the £350 ish 1700x is running rings around the 5820k (standard 5820k price is about £320-350, hasn't been under £300 for over a year now)

File: Untitled.png (49KB, 970x509px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 970x509px

>>60116886

every bloody time I post I forget to attach the pic

>>60115148
i was going to buy the 6700k but end up buying the 6700 instead. did i made a good choice?

>>60116896

Yeah judging by this pic, he's mad af

>>60116830

>>60115784
Nope, that's a Haswell-EP. It's nice in 1 regard. It only takes around 80W crunching prime95 with AVX on 24 threads.

>>60116735
I stated why. I don't know a single game that utilizes all my cores and rendering / converting would be a bit faster, but uploading will always take long. 2 Mbit connection...

When is 16 core 32 thread Ryzen coming out for the desktop?

>>60116886
You had the performance for two years already. Same with me. It was a free upgrade from my 3770K so why not.

>>60116941

my particular 5820k seems to be doing pretty shitty in cpu-z benchmarks for some reason, it occasionally seems to clock down to 1.2ghz while doing the benchmark - these are generally more representative of the 5820k performance: >>60113746 >>60114450

I'd say the intel hedt cpus overclock a lot higher which significantly improves the performance (but probably not to the ryzen multi-threading performance) but being someone that mostly runs stock it's a pretty bad time to be on the recent low end intel hedt chips

>>60117042
I don't see a reason to release a 4-core HEDT in 2017 when Ryzen is around.

The Haswell/Broadwell-E still get better single-thread performance if they are overclocked, but I would prefer the Ryzen if I wanted to future proof.

>>60117035

don't get me wrong - at £250 it was an absolute steal, it was cheaper than the 4790k I was considering buying and it was cheaper than the 6700k when that was released, on top of that I was forced into an upgrade so I didn't have the luxury to wait around for ryzen but if I had bought it any more recently than I did I'd be kicking myself for it

File: 14c es.png (17KB, 403x402px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 403x402px

>>60115500
>>60117016
Yo.

>>60117072
>The Haswell/Broadwell-E still get better single-thread performance if they are overclocked, but I would prefer the Ryzen if I wanted to future proof.

pretty much, I think the only thing intel hedt has going for them (not including kaby lake-x) outside of single core performance is cpu lane availability, but given the weaker cpus are gimped to 28 lanes and x99 has next to no lanes as it is you're basically forced into >$500 skylake-x chips on x299 to get a ton of pcie lanes

File: r5 1600 vs 5960x cpuz.png (23KB, 403x403px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 403x403px

>>60116765
whoops, forgot this.

File: 1.webm (3MB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1080x1920px

bump

File: [email protected] (14KB, 406x414px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 406x414px

decade old CPU hahaha

File: 2.webm (2MB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1080x1920px

>>60117289

>>60117222
>faildozer.png
lmao niceme.me

>>60115144
>4.8 niggerhurtz and 200+ watts to beat ryzen
wow what a joke

File: cpu-z.png (58KB, 826x419px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 826x419px

Shit, there's a new one?
outdated cpu
outdated cpu-z
outdated life

File: cpuzspecs.png (54KB, 821x402px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 821x402px

hopefully itll keep up mostly with big vega

File: sw.png (196KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 1366x768px

>>60113746
>tfw 5 years old mobile ivy bridge CPU is almost as fast as recent i7-7600k in stock
>it cost me $50 two week ago
explain this, intel shills.
PS. it's a 12,5" laptop.

>>60117568
that is 38% faster in sc

>>60117403
>>60117289
I can watch her dance all day

File: speccy cpuz.png (91KB, 838x965px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 838x965px

sup

File: 6600k.png (128KB, 971x516px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 971x516px

>>60114450
>>60114978
>>60115148
>>60115505
Why so many fake replies?
>>60117568
Fuck off

>>60117673
>fake replies
what did you mean by this?

>>60117682
Do you really think a 5820k will get @3500 multi?

>>60117673
Are you mentally retarded?
Check which cpu version you're using, you retarded negroid. CPUID changed scoring rules in recent versions.

>>60117703
cpuz*

>>60117699
Look at the benchmark version they're using, you're running an outdated verison, they changed the scoring with the update.

Everything scores way lower now.

>>60117703
Sorry I don't spend all my time keeping up with retarded benchmarks, faggot

>>60117729
yet, you unironically attempt to compete with others.
Go kill yourself now.

File: tsop.gif (730KB, 500x347px) Image search: [Google]

730KB, 500x347px

>>60115520
>>60116531
It's only at 4.6GHz. The 6700K turbos to 4.2 for a single core out of the box, so all Intel have managed in six years is the equivalent of a 400MHz overclock on a 2600K (considering Kaby Meme has zero IPC improvements).

B R A V O
R
A
V
O

File: file.png (43KB, 417x413px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 417x413px

Pretty good

File: Unbenannt3.jpg (44KB, 407x404px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 407x404px

r8 my cock

File: Unbenannt2.jpg (57KB, 407x404px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 407x404px

>>60119053

File: celeron3150.png (37KB, 807x402px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 807x402px

isn't it cute? :3

>>60119187
This thing still reaches half the score of my 120 W Phenom. 10 W TDP?

File: neverobsolete.png (41KB, 805x402px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 805x402px

>>60119187
and desktop

>>60119254
6W actually. It stays cool as fuck too, never goes above ~52C under 100% load on all cores

File: 1820.jpg (45KB, 403x402px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 403x402px

Everything ok with my shitposting machine

File: cpuz from 2017-04-28 18-02-50.png (45KB, 414x418px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 414x418px

>>60113746

>>60119187
>A10-7850k
I was so happy to finally move on from that garbage.

File: cpuz17.png (15KB, 417x414px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 417x414px

>>60115532
This thread is still around?

I ran the newer one.
go away amd.

File: IMG_2123.jpg (91KB, 640x466px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 640x466px

>>60116560
>"This processor worth over $1.6K marginally beats a processor worth $320 at the same clocks!"

File: IMG_2494.jpg (28KB, 976x193px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 976x193px

>>60120760
>Xeon X5680
What the fuck are you even doing with one of those anon?

File: muh_45nm.png (14KB, 403x402px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 403x402px

Send help

>>60121034
He has 2 of them

>>60121117
lel, I once memed myself and bought an X6. Shit was not cash.

https://valid.x86.fr/lx7ije
Did I do good, /g/?

File: 3332.png (25KB, 403x402px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 403x402px

>>60121205
Considering her age and the fact I've got it running at 3.3GHz I don't think she's doing too bad for a meme.

>tfw when forced to use X99 platform for the nodes of a cheap GPU compute cluster because AM4 doesn't have enough lanes.

Is there any AM4 motherboard that just connects the 24 lanes to a pcie switch?

File: file.png (28KB, 402x402px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 402x402px

with smt off

File: file.png (40KB, 397x403px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 397x403px

>>60121318
also same proc

>>60121034
I assume he has them because they are dirt cheap and give good performance. Single core perf is still passable today, only drawback is huge power consumption.

>>60121034
Because they are $100 each on ebay and I have a SR2.

File: 2525252525.jpg (143KB, 885x492px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 885x492px

Ramlets leave

File: 6y856789469.png (16KB, 669x443px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 669x443px

>>60121247
I was using an 1100t for five years up until grabbing
>>60122270
It was easily the longest I've ever had one CPU/mobo, and it ran cool as hell at 3.8Ghz

While it's not a HORRIBLE CPU to hold-up as long as it did, maxing PCSX2, DeSmuME, and Dolphin out with playable framerates was hard given how single-threaded they were. I had absolutely no problem with normal games though, and MGSV was the last major thing I played on it

File: 4690k.png (17KB, 402x401px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 402x401px

>>60113746

>>60121117
The Thubans do unusually poorly in CPU-Z's benchmark. Maybe because they don't support newer instruction sets? In Cinebench and real workloads they're a lot closer to an 8350 in terms of performance once you overclock to 4GHz (plus a 600-800MHz NB overclock, which is just as important). They smoke any 6350 at that speed.

File: poozen.png (17KB, 403x402px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 403x402px

>>60121318
>max overclock
>still slightly worse single-threaded performance than a six year old Intel chip

What the fuck were they doing over there in India all that time?

File: bandicam 2017-04-29 00-41-42-051.jpg (66KB, 399x398px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 399x398px

feels bad mang, really thinking of getting an r7 1700, but I think I have enough low end games and console games to hold me off until Zen+.

File: jewtel inside.png (76KB, 498x496px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 498x496px

>>60123067
more than Intel has done

File: 4jigahurtz.png (93KB, 603x602px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 603x602px

>>60113746
Yup

File: poozen BTFO.png (77KB, 501x498px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 501x498px

POOZEN BLOWN THE FUCK OUT

>>60124239
>slowest 8 core 16 thread with the same clocks as 10 core 20 thread
>OH MY GOD GUYS 10c/20t BEATS 8c/16t AT THE SAME CLOCKS STOP THE PRESSES

>>60124260
I have the 1700 overclocked to 3.9ghz. Still I bought it for $398 AUD and I just checked and PCCG is selling the 6950X for $2339 AUD.

File: cpuz_2017-04-29_01-35-47.png (54KB, 806x402px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 806x402px

I had some stuff going on in the background I don't know how big of a difference this makes.

File: unknown.png (25KB, 403x401px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 403x401px

>>60124431
I was kind of hoping for better single core performance but multi thread is at least really good.

File: cpeeuzee_hehe.png (22KB, 405x399px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 405x399px

I dunno what's worse, that my 4.7 ghz A10-5800k only got a 274, or that it was 75% the performance of a 1700x.

>>60124033

Ahahahaha btfo by an A10-5800k. Get on my level.

>>60124614

File: cpuz2.png (48KB, 824x406px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 824x406px

$70 CPU

Test

File: bench.png (16KB, 403x402px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 403x402px

>>60113746
well, still does its job...

File: file.png (37KB, 417x413px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 417x413px

>>60119187
My cheap $70 cpu beats your shitleron

File: cpuz_x64_2017-04-29_13-44-22.png (47KB, 806x402px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 806x402px

>>60113746
any way to overclock a xeon? not that i need the extra performance, just interested

File: file.png (53KB, 417x413px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 417x413px

>>60125892

File: 2600kk.jpg (47KB, 416x408px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 416x408px

2600k 4.6ghz 1.32V
Mobo is broken and wont go past 1.32V

Not bad I guess. I wonder if I can squeeze another few ghz out of it.

https://valid.x86.fr/8gpchv

File: 860.png (89KB, 603x602px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 603x602px

Who still /nehalem/ here

>>60113746
They lowered the values for what reason

This thread only proves how little progress there has been in CPU's in the last 10 years or so. Ryzen is a breath of fresh air.

File: jews.png (116KB, 830x866px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 830x866px

>>60126211
>for what reason

File: cpuz.png (24KB, 418x413px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 418x413px

>>60113746
>still feels viable

Don't kid yourself, pretty much anything from the last decade still feels viable.

>>60126698

>>60126159
Hello nehalembro.

>>60126595
did Intel buy them?

>>60126783
Their excuse was that the benchmark was optimised for CPUs with 256KB of L2 cache per core, so Ryzen got an unnatural advantage due to having 512KB.

>>60126805
bullshit, the gap is too big. The 6900k isn't on the list anymore.

>>60126698
If you don't care about power draw then you should overclock that shit

File: wewlad.png (53KB, 810x399px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 810x399px

Currently fixing up my dad's old Lenovo. Was curious.

File: Capture.png (58KB, 1165x424px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 1165x424px

5 years stronk

File: Screenshot (4).png (180KB, 1231x606px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 1231x606px

How do I make my cpu less shitty? I'm getting beat by fucking 2nd gen i7s wtf?

>>60127175
What the fuck did you expect?

i7's are 4c/8t
You have an i5 which is just 4c

Why the fuck would you expect it to beat them?

You have a ~20% IPC advantage, but it's not going to negate the fact you have half as many threads.

File: 2017-04-30 01_59_56-CPU-Z.png (159KB, 620x615px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 620x615px

about what I thought, its at 4.6GHz

>>60127201
I knew nothing when I upgraded, literally just bought based on price and name. 7600K sounded fast and I assumed a newer generation with less c/t's would beat an older gen chip. Is it worth it for me to go for a 7700K to get a better score?

>>60127285
If you do a lot of multitasking, or know you have some use cases that will take advantage of the extra threads, sure it would be an okay upgrade.

However, most people who are just doing basic gaming and interneting have no real need for more threads, so it would just be a waste of money.

>>60126805
>Has an 'unfair' advantage
>Let's gimp it

CPU-Z confirmed for Intel shill

>>60126595
Looks like another lawsuit, topkek

Can someone with a ryzen/intek cpu tell me how long it takes to encode this file to 1080p using handbrake?

>>60127609
>forgot link
http://4ksamples.com/4k-chimei-inn-60mbps/

>>60127660
>to 1080p using handbrake
what settings

>>60127823
default

File: Untitled.png (14KB, 403x402px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 403x402px

>>60115148
Damn, what clockspeeds?

>>60127877
Took about 40 seconds on a 5820k at 4.2GHz

>>60127998
can you post the log?

>>60128050
What do you want from it?

It's far too long to post

>>60127175
>>60127285
1800X is not a 2nd gen i7

>>60129318
see
>>60125970