'''Intel i9'''

>>60368141
>at least the IPC will be better?
Nope.
>>60368141
>because I want my gayming!
Better cling to those 4 cores like your life depends on it, then.

Also, those userbenchmarks results are basically bullshit, if you compare them to actually released CPUs and see how they should stand up.

>>60368141
Intels new 600W Prescott 2.0.

Intel, we are contributing to global warming, are you?

>>60368182
but in the two bench, only 1 of 8 DDR4 @ 2133 MHz slots was used. Probably engineer sample

>>60368182
>Also, those userbenchmarks results are basically bullshit
Why?

File: cirnocore9.jpg (171KB, 620x720px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 620x720px

day one buy

>>60369354
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Skylake-X-12-Core-HEDT-12C-vs-Intel-Core-i7-7700K/m278103vs3647

The numbers here make no sense. 3 GHz turbo has same single core as an i7-7700K? Yeah, no.

>>60369354
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Skylake-X-10-Core-HEDT-10C-vs-Intel-Core-i7-7700K/m233971vs3647

And then you look at the results for the 10 core and they're completely different.

>>60368141
>intel releases new 3000$ Cpu

Wow! How can AMDoomed even compete? Literally on suicidie watch!

File: here you go.jpg (50KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 1000x1000px

>>60369395

>>60368141
>anything above c4 is EXTREME
>most likely $500 minimum (excluding motherboard)
>obviously no upgrade path

>ryzen, slightly worse performance
>Upgrade path available
>Decent chip+motherboard goes for 300-400 depending on choice

A pity Ryzen are gimped on nvidia chips, has that mystery been solved by the way?

>>60368141
Who fucking cares it's just a name, are you a child

>>60369657
>want a volkswagen
>get a porsche
>fuck yeah! Who fucking cares it's just a name

>>60369657
(You)

Nice to see processors finally getting more I/O performance and PCIe lanes.

>>60368141
Intel's biggest problem here is going to be that AMD is going to be able to sell a 16c/32t 3.6ghz base 4.0ghz turbo CPU for less than what Intel is going to want to charge for the 7900k, and the 7900k and 7920k will simply get eaten alive by it in every respect except pure single core performance (but then why wouldn't you buy a 7740k if that's all you cared about?)

>>60369629
IIRC it has something to do with threading implementation in nVidia drivers. Something with threads being switched around between the core complexes and the resulting latencies gimping FPS.
Of course, that is to be expected with nVidia's "just duct tape it together somehow" approach to everything.

>>60370126
>PCIe lanes
AMD's HEDT platform will have more, 52+ PCIe lanes
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-16-core-threadripper-whitehaven-4094-socket/
>>60370194
Nobody buys HEDT for single core.
>>60370236
Has any more testing been done with Ryzen CPU/NVidia GPU on one CCX?

>>60370236
What do you think of the results in this video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLRCK7RfbUg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmOglA32uRU

>>60369629
Mostly. Nvidia's drivers simply don't split then work into enough threads, you can see this if you find any 1080 or 1080ti SLI tests on Ryzen CPUs where the additional threads from the second card give a huge boost to FPS in several titles.

Do the tests after programs have new AVX code paths like X265 encoding.

Clock to 5ghz *12 cores vs 4ghz *16 cores

>>60370405
>>60370236
A pity I built my pc about 6 months before Ryzen came out (I moved and needed to get myself setup) or I'd have jumped to them, even just the r7 line on the 1700 literally only reason I went intel this time round.

Also, yet to be seen is how much of a penalty the 7900x and 7920x will take from the reduced L3 cache compared to Broadwell-E.

>>60370236
>Of course, that is to be expected with nVidia's "just duct tape it together somehow" approach to everything.
As opposed to AMD's "oh hey it doesn't work, who gives a fuck lets just push new hardware where it still doesn't work!" approach with their DX11 drivers and OpenGL.

>>60370320
It fits the hypothesis. nVidia consistently performs worse with Ryzen when using DX12 where multi-threading actually matters.
They should fix their driver because DX12 and Vulkan are already here and they're not going away.

File: 5646490+_73f70ea3b3872072acb2017da0e8df51.jpg (57KB, 530x600px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 530x600px

>$3000 12 core CPU
>$1500 10 core CPU
>$1000 8 core CPU
>$500 6 core CPU
>baby lake reloaded v2.0
>i7 without HT

>>60370405
Sadly SLI on Ryzen is a bad idea due to the limited PCIe bandwidth, it can't provide 16 lanes for 2 cards and unless I'm mistaken there are no Ryzen mobos with a PLX switch (which would do the job for inter-GPU communication). At 2160p where SLI is actually useful it can really choke on PCIe bandwidth and scale like shit or even perform worse than single-GPU. Not all games do this of course, but some are really picky. I just tried Quake Champions and I've seen like 60% PCIe bus load on x16, that's more than x8 can provide and the slower transfers will impact performance even if the game doesn't constantly hit the bandwidth cap.

File: u28ZhDPMdhIggnhMYMlvQRnbYxyAM76jk5_8KrNzqqI.jpg (148KB, 768x504px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 768x504px

>>60371398
Curious, as this benchmark seems to indicate that the better saturation of Ryzen's cores appears to overcome any PCIe bandwidth limitations.

>>60368141
ARE YOU READY FOR THE HOUSEFIRES?

>>60371508
That's too low res to get fucked. 1440p SLI is generally fine on x8/x8. Maybe some super-exceptions which don't work too well anyway would get hit, like DOOM which scales poorly even on x16/x16.

>>60368141
>No mention of anything TDP
Nice controlled (((leaks)))

>>60371614
Ah, I see what you mean. I'm only concerned with SLI at the moment as it's very useful for showing how much Nvidia's poorly threaded drivers may be holding Ryzen back, and bookends the argument made using AMD GPUs

>>60371083
>They should fix their driver because DX12 and Vulkan are already here and they're not going away.
There's another good reason for them to fix that shit, and that's Intel's upcoming Coffee Lake-S 6 cores.

File: intel hedt.png (53KB, 948x602px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 948x602px

>>60371722
Here's the TDPs. 160w 12 core. AMD's 16 core is 180w.

>>60368141
"i7" doesn't mean top performance.
It means top quality.

Power consumption (and thus less heat and better battery life) also plays a role in the naming scheme.

>>60369707
That didn't make alot of sense now did it?

Why doesn't nvidia make their own multicore processor to compete against AMD?

>>60372149
>T-T-T-TEGRA

>>60372149
Because they would also be competing against Intel

>>60372149
>>60372179
>>60372190

Not allowed to use the x86 license, that's why they focus on CUDA

>>60372205
For how long will that license/patent hold?

It sounds like its keeping alot of progress back from happening

The joke is that it's going to be worse for games than Ryzen.
And cost twice as much.

>>60371823
Yeah, the PCIe bandwidth constraints don't have anything to do with Ryzen in particular. Ryzen is just in the unfortunate spot where the CPU itself doesn't have sufficient lanes and there are also no mobos with PLX PCIe switches for Ryzen (AFAIK).

Intel's own 16 lane chips suffer from the same problem, but there are PLX mobos which solve it for SLI, because the cards need to talk to each other and not the CPU, as such the chip gets them full 16 lanes of inter-GPU bandwidth even if there aren't 32 lanes to the CPU. This would work fine on Ryzen too I imagine, if only somebody actually built a mobo like this.

>>60372224
4 ever I think

>>60372226
Yeah...no

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

1MB, 1002x1480px

>>60372250

>>60372226
>it's going to be worse for games than Ryzen
Nobody buys any HEDT platform for muh vidya gaymes.
>And cost twice as much.
This part is probably true.

>>60372226
>The joke is that it's going to be worse for games than Ryzen.
Yeah with 4.5 ghz out of the box and higher IPC than Ryzen I'm sure that's the case

Why is AMD including Ryzen so fucking bad at Wii U and PS2 emulation?

>>60368141
So, given that Kaby Lake is about 5-15% better per core clock-per-clock than Ryzen is and about 10% better at multithreaded workloads (i7-7700K and Ryzen 5 1500X at 4.0GHz), how is this a bad thing again?

The i9-7920X will be over 200% better than the Ryzen 7 1800X at the same clock speed, so it's worth twice as much
The i9-7900X will be 170% than the Ryzen 7 1800X
The i9-7820X will be 125% better than the Ryzen 7 1800X and overclock better (Skylake's clock jump compared to Broadwell is massive)
The i9-7800X will be about the same as the 1800X and 125% better than the 1600X
The i7-7740K will be better than all of the Ryzen series in any game, current or older.

What's the issue here again?

>>60372449
The issue is
>buuhuu it costs alot

Do gaymens blame jewtel for having even more cores than Ryzen now?

>>60369629
Yeah

Nvidia's drivers are shit and/or nvidia is intentionally fucking with AMD performance using their drivers

Nvidia has a bad habit of not actually rendering shit in a scene. This is always brushed off as a 'mistake', but it keeps happening over and over again. Nvidia's color palette is duller, Nvidia's driver stops rendering shadows, or it has awful texture pop-in or permanent low-res textures that people blame the developer for.

I'm at the point where I don't buy this bullshit being mistakes anymore. This shit looks intentional. They are intentionally gimping what they render for the sake of an FPS boost while hoping the average customer won't notice the loss in quality (they don't). They are intentionally gimping their hardware when it works with AMD CPU's. They use gameworks not to promote new technology, but to lock AMD out and force worse performance on AMD cards. They even tried to lock-in customers with an nvidia-tax on monitors so idiots are looking at double the price to move out of the nvidia 'ecosystem' - having to buy an entirely new monitor if they go AMD, their GPU drivers literally spy on their customers and sell the data to advertisers, and they even introduced a fucking paid-subscription model for driver features that I'm 100% positive they were going to lock shadowplay behind until AMD finally got off their ass and introduced ReLive.

Oh but wait OH MY GOD AMD PUT A THINGY ON MY DESKTOP JESUS CHRIST HOW CAN THEY DO THIS WHAT AN AWFUL COMPANY

I hate the tech reviewer shills that turn a blind eye, I hate the shill marketers who keep pushing nvidia's bullshit, and I hate nvidia itself for being an underhanded company that would rob their customers blind given a moment's chance.

tl;dr fuck nvidia

>>60372507
>meme the post

>>60372422
>4.5ghz
That's single core turbo. We already know the 1800x can hit 4.0ghz on all cores, while having significantly more L3 cache.

>Higher IPC
No. Ryzen has higher IPC, Intel's single core performance advantage is purely due to clock rates, not IPC.

>>60372422
Pay attention. Ryzen has pretty much the same/slightly higher IPC than intels' processors. It's just they can't get over 4Ghz, while Intel's go to like 4.6 GHz and beat it by a decent enough margin in single core applications.

If it's 4.5GHz out of the box, it's not going to cost twice as much, it's going to cost roughly cores/4 times as much.

Notice how the base clocks get lower as the number of cores get higher.
This isn't the case with Ryzen.

>>60372487
But it will be priced accordingly
The i9-7920X is easily worth over twice as much as the 1800X. $1200 is a fair price for an HEDT CPU that can do the workload of two 1800X combined. The i9-7900X is worth at least $1000 with the same metrics. The i9-7820X should be $200 more than the Ryzen 1800X because it's $200 more capable. The Ryzen 1800X can only really be compared to the lowly i9-7800X in terms of performance and price.

>>60372533
>No. Ryzen has higher IPC
Eeuh no? Ryzen has broadwell IPC

>Just bought a 7700K
It's not fucking fair!

>>60372551
From the calculation:
Ryzen performs like x at 4Ghz, i7-7700k performs x*1.1 at x*1.2 clockspeed.

>>60372593
Eeuh..no

>>60372449
>So, given that Kaby Lake is about 5-15% better per core clock-per-clock than Ryzen is
That's wrong. Go read Agner.

>and about 10% better at multithreaded workloads (i7-7700K and Ryzen 5 1500X at 4.0GHz), how is this a bad thing again?
That's also wrong. As a result the rest of your post can be safely discarded.

File: hipster-barista-art-degree[1].jpg (25KB, 305x440px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 305x440px

>>60372600
>euuh
hey I found a pic of you

>>60372549
>But it will be priced accordingly
>The i9-7920X is easily worth over twice as much as the 1800X. $1200 is a fair price for an HEDT CPU that can do the workload of two 1800X combined.

>Source: My shekelchasing fantasies.

>>60370421
>5ghz *12 cores
at 666W maybe

>>60372551
No, Ryzen has just under Haswell IPC for nearly all workloads except for AES encryption and SSE workloads.
>>60372603
>Go read Agner.
Wrong. He's using very specific benchmarks that takes advantage of Ryzen's strengths, not benchmarks that sees the whole picture. Ryzen is at best a Haswell equivalent.
>That's also wrong
It is not. Most multithreaded benchmarks show that the i7-7700K at stock is about 15% faster than a Ryzen 5 1500X at 4.0GHz. Since the 7700K is clocked faster, but has less than half the L3$, it's safe to assume that it's about 10% faster when all things are considered.

Try again, AMDrone

File: 1469845137381.jpg (1MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3840x2160px

>>60372664
>Source: My ass and my shekelchasing fantasies.

>>60372738
Go through Agner's report on Ryzen's performance with a fine toothed comb. And while you're at it, learn how to shit on a toilet.

>>60372429
CEmu is alpha quality.

>>60368141
wait stop,
>i7-7640k
>4t/4c

What and why?

>>60372773
Go look up what IPC means, moron.

>>60372885
I think you're the one who needs to look what IPC actually means, idiot. IPC varies wildly based on what instruction set you're using/not using. If you have a CPU that offloads some of the workload onto a dedicated built-in ASIC, then the IPC will be significantly higher than if the CPU had to perform the same workload using brute strength.

>>60372449
Even if all of this bullshit is true (It isn't) AMD is coming out with their own HEDT platform with more cores, more performance and more PCIe lanes at a lower price.

The fact you're even trying to compare Intel's insanely overpriced HEDT CPUs to AMD's consumer CPUs shows just how fucked Intel is.

File: tmp_31229-Peek1412592048.png (80KB, 272x199px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 272x199px

>>60372116
>"i7" doesn't mean top performance.
It means top quality.
Is that so. Then why did every i7 since ivy Bridge use jizz as Tim?

Heh, please delet this

>>60372634
Yeah..no

>>60372116
>top quality
>have to delid not to burn your house down

>>60372231
You're the guy who was mentioning 2160p doom choking on sli from before? Think you mentioned another game as well.

But if you're saying that not even 2x16lanes sort it out there must be something wrong going on in software for the kind of extra bandwidth to not alliviate it. There have been a few sli benchmarks floating around which are showing some pretty good gains for 2160p, I'm just curious why there are only a couple running into this problem. It could be the other wa where is 60x saturation on single card is being split, then it might be a lack of bandwidth to and from the cpu and gpu not only inter-gpu.

Is there any evidence of this happening on crossfire setups as well?

>>60369629
Upgrade path is the biggest meme in hardware. At most people might upgrade from an i5 to an i7 when they get a higher budget, or buy some shitty Pentium machine and pop something stronger in there. How many people actually care about how long a socket lasts? If you keep the same CPU for 4 years or so then by the time you need a new one you'll probably get a new mobo anyway for better PCI-e or DDR supports. Not to mention chipsets are sometimes incompatible anyway. Sockets only matter to people who upgrade CPU's every year or every two years, and those people are retarded anyway since the performance difference between CPU's of different years is so small, at least compared to GPU's.

>>60372429
Everyone and their mum was running Intel so that's what was "optimized" for.
I used quotes because those emulators aren't really optimized.

>>60373739
>You're the guy who was mentioning 2160p doom choking on sli from before? Think you mentioned another game as well.
Yeah. I also mentioned Quake Champions which I tried out today for the first time.

>there must be something wrong going on in software for the kind of extra bandwidth to not alliviate it
The core of the problem seems to come from modern temporal techniques combined with AFR. If GPU2 needs data from the previous frame, it doesn't actually have it since GPU1 rendered that frame. That means the data needs to be pulled from GPU1, this can only happen over the SLI bridge or PCIe. But the bridge is slow (like 3GB/s on a HB bridge IIRC) so most of it goes over PCIe (probably). The severity of the bottleneck I guess depends on how much data the game needs to pull from the previous frame and I assume how fast it can get it.

I know temporal AA is a cause of b/w bottlenecks, but I don't know what else causes them. The more you increase the resolution the larger the buffers that GPUs have to throw around grow too, at 2160p and above this sometimes becomes a problem.

I don't think excessive b/w to the CPU is needed - because it should show up in single-GPU as well then, but it's never a problem there beyond some very, very tiny drops in FPS. I don't mean to say this is the only reason SLI ever scales poorly, but it's a contributing factor. DOOM probably scales poorly for multiple other reasons too, but it uses temporal AA and does respond to faster PCIe.

>Is there any evidence of this happening on crossfire setups as well?
I don't think I've seen benchmarks, but I had 290X CF x8/x8 up until like a year ago. I didn't know about the b/w constraint, but now that I think about it I remember the AMD driver for Witcher 3 recommending to turn off AA - which is known to hurt scaling due to PCIe bandwidth in SLI, so I imagine it must be the same thing. The AA in TW3 is temporal AA too.

>>60370285
>Has any more testing been done with Ryzen CPU/NVidia GPU on one CCX?
What THE FUCK?
Do you seriously expect any reviewer to actually review and test something?!
ARE YOU INSANE?!

>>60372664
>benchmarks with ICC that has always gimped anything not Intel
wew lad nice try to not look like a shill
Agnes isn't testing with benchmarks, he's testing latencies for each single instruction the CPU can execute, nice way to look like an idiot though
Also, there's no compiler currently producing good executables for Zen, GCC's zenver1 it's basically a copy of bdver3 with a few patches on top, march=haswell it's producing faster executables, that's how bad it is
MSVC hasn't done significant updates either

>>60374233
Not that anon, but what do you think about two GPUs on a single card connected with a fast proprietary bus? Wouldn't it solve the memory copy problem?

File: radeonproduobared_straighton_4c_5inch-100657871-orig.jpg (3MB, 2248x1500px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2248x1500px

>>60374490
It would hypothetically help tremendously at least, the "ideal" solution would be for both GPUs to be able to access each other's memory at full speed (at least for reading) probably. But that doesn't exist, dual-GPU cards use a PCIe switch, which can also be found on your mobo if you're using 2 discrete cards.

Pic related, a Radeon Pro Duo with its on-board PLX PEX8747 PCIe switch. So those 2 GPUs still talk over PCIe, it's just on-card instead of going through the mobo.

File: enemy_is_weak_to_physical_attacks.gif (1MB, 499x654px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 499x654px

>>60374674
>MFW Navi will literally be able to do this

>>60374963
NVIDIA has NVLink too, but I wonder if we're ever going to see anything like that on desktop parts anytime soon. AMD dropped the CF bridge entirely, I'd be somewhat surprised to see them come up with a super high-speed version of it now.

>>60375149
Isn't nvlink just some kind of well clocked pcie thing? But I think it was only gp100, gp102 didn't even have/use it.

Infinity fabric on zen and navi is probably using same kind of idea, but either it's using pcie or is just compatible. But there was hyper transport3+ mentioned in some of the slides though, was that just on die or was it interdie as well?

>>60375149
Navi is going to use MCM, as far as I'm aware.

>>60369629
explain what?
They get to hurt amd's performance without looking like the bad guys, push come to shove they can call amd shit because of the way they made their cores.

what reason would nvidia ever have, outside of a lawsuit, to make their shit work better on amd?

>>60368141
Does this imply 4 core ultrabooks or something? If yes I'm going to have to put off buying a new ultrabook for another year.

>>60370548
from my understanding

amd has a hardware scheduler, which is far more efficient than nvidia's and lower overhead, when used, beats out nvidia on equally performing cards, however, game devs are shit and can't be fucking asked to multithread.
Nvidia's solution to game devs are shit, is force multithreading though the driver as they use a software scheduler that is more flexible.

As for opengl, its cobbled together shit and amd's implementation of it is perfect.
Nvidia on the other hand hacked together the shit in such a way its barely opengl at this point, but it preforms better.

both of these issues are more outside issues are fucking amd rather than amd being shit.

>>60372449

there is no issue. AMD poorfags will avoid anything above 400$+ and enthusiast who want performance are going to buy i9 8 core and higher. Intel has higher clock speeds, higher IPC, better single and multithreaded performance compared to Ryzen with this.

16C from AMD is out of question since its 180W+, I don't even want to know what this shit needs during load.

>>60375558
So people who own ryzen computers are more likely to buy nvidia graphics cards over radeon. if the consumer is informed enough (which is more likely if they even considered ryzen let alone bought one) they can find that nvidia takes a performance hit on their system.

If this performance hit is actualy true and gains meida attention, it'll be a bad pr hit and nvidia will fix it before the pin drops. I'm suspicious about how little furor there is about it yet.

>>60375689
nvidia is near monopoly in the consumer space as even when amd is better people still buy nvidia, all that would happen here is 'oh, nvidia preforms worse on ryzen, looks like im getting intel'

>>60375298
>Isn't nvlink just some kind of well clocked pcie thing?
I'm not sure on the details or if it's any similar to PCIe on the protocol/interface level, but it's supposed to be much faster anyway and designed for GPU to CPU and GPU to GPU communication in HPC shit.

The thing is consumer graphics card will have to keep using PCIe since it's not going anywhere, so I doubt NVIDIA or AMD will do something as drastic as changing the card connection, especially when mGPU is so very niche and there are no b/w constraints otherwise. PCIe 4 is also coming.

>>60375328
Yeah I've read about it too, but I'm not sure how exactly AMD is going to use that for graphics cards or how it's going to work, or if they're doing it at all in the end.

>>60372507
if you have a 1600 or a 1700, why even use the shadowplay/relive? you get better quality out of obs.

>>60375685
>higher clock speeds, higher IPC, better single and multithreaded performance compared to Ryzen with this
Why would you lie all around?
They have lower clockspeeds, look at the base compared to Threadripper/Whitehaven
They have lower IPC according to Agner Fog
Single thread performance will be higher only on pure single threaded loads with Turbo Boost 3.0 enabled (which will make it even more of a housefire)
They will have lower MT performance thanks to the ring buses, and they don't even match Threadripper/Whitehaven in core count, this isn't even taking into account that the insane IPC performance in Zen gives huge gains with SMT
>16C from AMD is out of question since its 180W+, I don't even want to know what this shit needs during load.
There's AMD's 12c too, and this Intel chips will draw more power than AMD, the 7700K draws more under load than a 1800X in every scenario

File: s.png (26KB, 711x533px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 711x533px

>>60375685
Really makes you think, huh?

>>60375721
Which is why I bought up the "if the consumer is informed". My case is I need extra cores, but not that much memory or pcie lanes. Ergo ryzen is a great deal for me over intel's 6cores and more expensive x99 platform. Now gpus I look at are going to shift towards amd until nvidia fixes this particular shit. This is going on the lines that gpu upgrades are done more frequently than cpu upgrades usually.

I'm well aware there's a huge mindshare for nvidia in the majority's case, but they're already an owned market.

>>60373873
pci-e hasn't mattered almost since it was introduced as the most demanding thing I do is barely hit whether it be in a first gen pcie or a third.

ram, well I was on ddr2 downclocked because that was the best I could do without overvolting, but lets be honest at that point i was on a a damn near 15 year old standard.

With rysen, I'm fully anticipating upgrading the cpu in a year or two, depending on if the 4th version also comes on the same socket, maybe that too. with every other cpu, I was either at the pinnacle of the potential upgrade path, or there was no upgrade path at all,

>>60368141
I'll believe it when I see it. The rumormill was convinced the i7 980X would be an i9 way back in 2009. If they were ever going to do it, it should have been then.

>4c/4t i7
Intel can't be this stupid, right?

>>60375685
>>>60372449
> Intel has higher clock speeds
No. They have higher single core turbo. All thrb6+ core Skylake-X skus have base clocks if 3.6ghz or less.

>higher IPC
No. Ryzen has higher IPC.

>better single and multithreaded performance compared to Ryzen with this.
No. Intel's single core advantage is purely from clock speed and thus mostly won't exist on the 6+ core CPUs which have lower base clocks and can only single core turbo up to 500mhz faster.

The Skylake-X also have less L3, and the 6900k and 6950k (which have more L3 than Ryzen) already lose to Ryzen in multi-threaded workloads. There is no reason to expect Skylake-X to improve multi-threaded performance much, if at all, as the higher clocks vs lower L3 may be a wash.

>>60376036
Fucking phone. "All the 6+ core Skylake-X SKUs.

>>60375747
It was just another anon I remember saying nvlink was similar to an overclocked pci3. Not certain of it myself either.

>>60375956
Upgrade paths these days are quite locked down. It's more powerful cpu and extra ram normally. Anything else has to come from add in. I was also on an old system untill last month. nehelam with ddr3,usb2,pci2 and sata2. Intel dropped that socket like a motherfucker though and all I could do to really get anything new was a usb3 pcie card.

If say ryzen3/4 comes along with sata4 and pcie4, my current motherboard isn't going to be albel to do shit with that.

>>60375747
I would expect it would allow dual Navi GPUs where the GPUs are directly connected to.esch other via MCM, and then only use PCIe to communicate with the CPU.

File: pixeljew.png (7KB, 300x360px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 300x360px

>>60368141
so they are renaming i5 to i7 and i7 to i9?

>>60376191
And Pentium is the new i3?

>>60372000
Not looking good for Intel

>>60376130
Sure, if they want to do that. The thing is that dual-GPU is hard and devs aren't too keen on special dual-GPU support usually, since it's only viable as a high-end niche and as such few people use it.

If AMD is going to use MCM with Vega they'll either have to make it a high-end dual-GPU card as a halo product basically, since the precarious support for mGPU from devs makes it a nonviable option at any performance level where single-GPU cards still exist. Either that or they'll have to pull some real magic and make the multiple GPUs appear as a single one, with perfect compatibility with every piece of software which expects to use a single GPU. If they did the latter it could potentially provide absolutely amazing performance and scalability in their design, but both SLI and CF have shown how hard it is to get mGPU working well, I'm not really expecting any seamless mGPU anytime soon.

Also what I remember reading in regards to MCM and Navi was that they were going to do CPU + GPU MCM, not that they were going for multiple GPUs. Maybe I don't remember well.

>>60376074
>It was just another anon I remember saying nvlink was similar to an overclocked pci3. Not certain of it myself either.
Could be, but in any case I don't think PCIe is going away as a main consumer interconnect. NVLink might have a place as a super-fast replacement for the SLI bridge (I doubt it, would probably be too expensive to include the hardware on every card when few would use it) or perhaps as an interconnect between GPUs on the same card.

>>60376372
There's rumours of intel bring their own mcm cpu + NB/GPU combo this year. It does make sense in this case so the same cpu dies can serve multiple market segments without bundling all that gpu shit on the same die. Instead a laptop can have it's nb/gpu combo with different IO and shader cores to a desktop and different again to an embedded server computer.

>>60376535
Yeah, it does make sense for CPU + GPU combos

>>60376191
I bet this is to fuck with AMDs R,R5,R7 marketing.

>>60376535
This would skyrocket GPU costs, or kill performance
Intel uses L3 as cache for the GPU, without it they would either need to replace it with eDRAM on the GPU die or have an interconnect fabric that lets the GPU use the L3 on the CPU, which they don't have otherwise they wouldn't need more bing busses
It would be great for their enthusiast desktop market and Xeon's, but it would devastate their laptop/ultrabook/office segments

I was under the impression that AMD has been working on a Vulkan multi-GPU implementation that featured much better scaling than SLI or Crossfire, and I just assumed they would use the MCM capability of Navi to take full advantage of that ability with Vulkan.

For all I know, you may be right and CPU+GPU MCM might be the actual goal.

>>60376695
The thing is it's not a one size fits all scenario probably and probably allows for greater flexibility through SKUs withouts multiple expensive seperate cpu dies. Think a general 4core cpu die, attached to a northbridge with a small gpu and fewer IO for laptops. Same 4core attached to NB with amoderate gpu and multiple sata/usb for business desktop use. 4core with a bigger chip for iris graphics with real cache. Then lastly a NB with no gpu but tonnes of IO for 7700k and i7e tier machines that will have a discrete card.

The sepecifics of what memory or cache attaches where aren't set in stone and the rumours also stated potential HBM and even an unlikely AMD gpu itself instead of intel HD.

>>60375864
>>60376036

None of this shill talk will help Ryzen vs Skylake X or Kaby Lake X. Intel has better IPC, better clock speeds, better performance overall, better OCability. It was like this with i5, i7 and will be like this with the i9.

The 1800X is the only thing that is barely noteworthy, already losing in benchmarks to Skylake X. Everything else and under in the Ryzen setup is absolute utter shit tier garbage.
Threadripper/Whiteraven have a completely new platform same as Intel basicly abandoning their entire R7 lineup to even stand a chance vs Skylake X in the HEDT segment, not that they where worth buying if you had already a 5960X or similar in the first place.

Basicly Intel doing everything right, AMD once again trying to fit in and compete vs old ass Chips from Intel but fails hard at it since no one is going to buy their X399 if they already got X370 with a waste of any R7.

File: 1494632230032.png (60KB, 1305x1434px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 1305x1434px

>>60375868

really makes you think indeed

>>60372429
Shit single core performance.

>>60377056
>6900K uses more power than 5960X
>max clocks lower
>requires very high voltage for anything over 4GHz
why is 14nm such a shit node and why did Intel even bother releasing 6900K?

>>60377146

why is your 1800X eating my electricity bill with close to 280 watts in single test ?

>>60369499
>>60369539
Are you retarded?

File: 1467020848216.png (992KB, 801x1500px) Image search: [Google]

992KB, 801x1500px

>>60376955
Repeating a lie won't make your post true
There's literally zero Skylake-X benchmarks, nice try at shilling though
5960X isn't anywhere close to i9's and Threadripper/Whitehaven dumb faggot, how the fuck do you expect 6 cores to compete with 12?
X370 isn't anywhere close to X399, X399 has more than twice the PCIe lanes, twice the memory bandwidth, and twice the cores, what the fuck even trying to imply here dumb shill?
And Basin Falls isn't close to X399 either, AMD has more PCIe lanes, more cores, higher power efficiency, higher clocks (except on pure ST loads), higher MT (16c vs 12c on Intel's, no ring bus penalty, and about 1.5x performance from SMT ie. you will get the performance of 24 cores in the best scenario), and IPC wise Zen beats KL this has been confirmed by Agner Fog
>>60377146
They had to release something, 14nm being shit it's mostly Krznich shitting everything with retarded management
>>60377166
You know that Tom's the only site with decent power measurements, right? Also, that's full system load dumb Pajeet

>>60377166
>your 1800X
I'm running a 5960X you dick sucking faggot
at what point did it appear to you that I implied that I'm running an AMD CPU you cunt nigger ass cheek?

>>60377202

I bet you do nigger. But you are still lost for words about the 1800X or are you unironically defending this?

>>60376955

>Intel has better IPC
Prove it.

>better clock speeds
Not on Broadwell-E and not on the base clocks on Skylake-X

>better performance overall
Prove it.

>better OCability
Prove it.

>The 1800X is the only thing that is barely noteworthy, already losing in benchmarks to Skylake X.
Oh, Skylake-X has already been released? Where? Where are these benchmarks of an unreleased CPU?

>Everything else and under in the Ryzen setup is absolute utter shit tier garbage.
Prove it.

>Threadripper/Whiteraven have a completely new platform same as Intel basicly abandoning their entire R7 lineup to even stand a chance vs Skylake X in the HEDT segment, not that they where worth buying if you had already a 5960X or similar in the first place.
Prove it.

>Basicly Intel doing everything right, AMD once again trying to fit in and compete vs old ass Chips from Intel but fails hard at it since no one is going to buy their X399 if they already got X370 with a waste of any R7.
Prove it.

Note that AMD's HEDT platform is already known to be 16c/32t at 3.6ghz base and 4.0ghz turbo, with more L3 cache and more PCIe lanes.

>>60377186
>that test doesn't count
>he doesn't know how to measure it

my fucking sides

+0.2 cents for this month added to your account

File: intel_housefire.png (1MB, 1110x5110px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1110x5110px

>>60377056
Really activates those almonds.

>>60377246
>But you are still lost for words about the 1800X or are you unironically defending this?
defending what?
when did I say anything about 1800X?
I said 6900K is worse than 5960X.
6900K and 5960X are not 1800X.

Intel got rekt the moment I started to embrace it

>tfw I have no face

>>60377275
>he didn't even try to attack the arguments at all
Yes Pajeet, one day you will understand the difference between full system load and processor load

>>60377300
explain.

t. pajeet

>>60368141
>i9 meme to make fun of intel
>intel make i9 real

what a based timeline

File: intel ceo JUST.jpg (119KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1000x1000px

>>60376955
>Intel is better because I said so - The post.

File: Intel-Core-i9-7920X-Vs-Ryzen-7-1800X_1-1140x854.png (220KB, 1140x854px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 1140x854px

>>60377266
>prove it

Skylake X 2.9ghz vs 4.1 1800X
read the numbers carefully Rajeet.
You know what happens to your Ryzen if someone is going to OC it?

You know what happens to your Ryzen if someone tests with a 7800, 7820, 7900, 7920 with optimized drivers and bios?

Counter it. With anything right now.

>>60376955
>>60377056
>>60377166
>>60377167
>>60377202
>>60377246
>>60377275
>>60377371

How does one buttmad Intel fag manage to spew this much bullshit into a thread in such a short period of time?

>>60377282
nothing but XFR models..
how does the 1700 compare?

>>60377371
>using cpu boss

So you cannot prove shit,and use a shitty site gg

>>60368141
Lol now do I call muh 4930K Core i9? Kekz

>>60377310
>system load=motherboard+ram+cpu+gpu+ssd/hdd+psu+whatever the fuck is on that system
Measured from the wall, ie. from the cable that feeds the PSU
>processor load=cpu
This is measured in somewhat complex way, the only site currently able to do it is Tom's, they use a somewhat expensive (150k USD) hi-res oscilloscope for this
Their approach has been criticized for various reasons, but so far it's the only one that actually measures just the CPU power consumption
>>60377371
That doesn't answer OC'ing at all, and that's a 12c against a 8c
Skylake-X it's competing against Threadripper/Whitehaven
>>60377382
Self hating Pajeets get pretty mad and spazz out
>>60377395
1700 does better since it lacks XFR

>>60377382
(You)

Wasn't this suppose to be April fools joke?
>INCLUDES:
>Intel i9-8900x 400 core CPU

File: yuri.jpg (22KB, 402x338px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 402x338px

>>60377382
>>60377395
>>60377420

>it doesn't count
>using cpu boss
>not even OC'd
>not even optimized

LMFAO

suicidal fucking AMDrones got upset about the reality. Go clean up the streets and let the big boys talk.

File: 1409091148937.jpg (180KB, 806x719px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 806x719px

AMD pajeets are out of control today

>>60377468
>a 12c will OC just like a 4c trust me!
>reddit spacing
Is Intel so desperate they have to bring their Reddit team in here?

>>60377485

Where is your counter argument I just placed my dick inside your mouth.

File: my sides.png (173KB, 640x400px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 640x400px

>>60377371
>he actually believes this benchmark isn't bullshit

>>60377420
Alright, that makes a lot of sense.
Thanks

>>60377501
>12c against 8c
Yes senpai, you totally did

>>60377502
>has to be fake

my fucking sides
every time

>>60377523

I actually did. The 8 core results will come soon enough, senpai. In June to be precise.

>>60377468
>>60377477
>>60377501
>>60377540
>>60377553

lol buttdevastated intelfags can't come up with anything but fake benchmarks and housefires

>>60377477

this is the reality of /g/

I wonder why there are so many Rajeets in here. Those mudslimes can't afford a 20$ second hand laptop but try to argue with the best of Intels line up.

>>60377553
You realize if that benchmark is legit, it completely trashes every other Intel CPU as well, right?

>>60369499
>>60369539

>tfw you will never connect both an Intel and an AMD CPU together on the same mobo and have them work in tandem

>>60377056
toplol 2500k wrecking 7700ks shit

>>60377553
You didn't
userbenchmarks has always been a shit benchmark at best, almost as shit as passmark
That's an ES that's not even reporting correct clocks
We already know the performance of Kaby Lake, which is faster than Skylake and quite faster than Skylake-X, if those results were true Skylake-X would be a new arch that would outperform Kaby Lake on everything
Stop shilling, you aren't getting paid dumb self hating Pajeet

>>60370320
In pretty much every instance there the RX480 on Ryzen ran like shit compared to the GTX 1060 on a 7700K at the same clocks with a few DX12 outliers. So either AMD's drivers are ggimped somehow or the games are gimped heavily towards Intel+Nvidia.

>>60377371
Nice fake benchmark for an unreleased CPU, faggot.

Also you'd better hope to Yahweh that the 12c Skylake-X is more than 23% faster than the 8c 1800x, otherwise its going to be an absolute SLAUGHTER when the 16c/32t 3.6ghz base, 4.0ghz turbo Threadripper gets released for cheaper, with way more L3 cache and way more PCIe lanes.

>>60377468
>LIterally posting an entirely unverified fake benchmark for an unreleased CPU
Get back to me when you have a real benchmark, shekelchaser.

>>60377617
>>60377637
see
>>60377468

you better find your God now you seem very upset.

>>60377672
>redirecting to a shitpost

Is this next level shilling?

>>60377606

The absolute madman.

>>60377695

I redirect you to reality.

File: 1494714592109.png (2MB, 769x8779px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 769x8779px

Will Intel shills defend this?

>>60377672
Why would I be upset? You are resorting to posting fake, wholly unverified benchmarks of an unreleased CPU.

Also, since the 16c/32t Zen HEDT CPU will likely be cheaper than the 12c Skylake-X, it will be that CPU that the Skylake-X 12c will have to beat.

File: 1494462880472.png (2MB, 973x6115px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 973x6115px

>>60377728
Or how about this?

Looks like I'm gonna have to wait until next January to complete my build but the future looks interesting with offerings from both companies.

>>60377753
>Also, since the 16c/32t Zen HEDT CPU will likely be cheaper than the 12c Skylake-X, it will be that CPU that the Skylake-X 12c will have to beat.
Taking into account that the 16c will beat SKL-X on literally everything but burst ST loads, I doubt that it will be cheaper
Also, it's a B2 revision, it might clock higher, then it would be quite more expensive than SKL-X

File: 1494476499423.png (36KB, 633x613px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 633x613px

>>60377791
Video games need not apply.

>>60377753
Oy just wait AMD will allow us to finally MEGATASK ignore all the lightly threaded work and productivity software actually in use just imagine transcoding that sweet 4K anime while jacking off to TrapSim VR Tight Boipucci Edtion!

>>60377753
>it doesn't count
You can check even more verified results, raping your entity and Ryzen cpus in June. I wonder what reverse shifting you make up then.

>>60377822
The one that came up with MEGATASK was Intel dumb shill

>>60377830
>yeah this chip on an older arch at lower clocks somehow beats Intel's best at almost twice the clocks
Totally legit guise

>>60377836
Oy it's good shit! THREADRIPPER is here now calm yourself and ready your body

>>60377852
>older arch
>twice the clocks
the fuck are you talking about Rajeet

>>60377874
>shill breaks down after getting BTFO
wew, does Intel provide therapy for this PTSD of yours self hating poojet?

File: WP_20170513_17_07_09_Pro.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>60377822
tfw u bout to MEGATASK

File: 1494633310640.jpg (545KB, 2000x1333px) Image search: [Google]

545KB, 2000x1333px

>4C/4T i7
>112W TDP

OH VEY!

>>60377909
Yeah, try to pretend that SKL-X at 2.9 Ghz beats KL at 4.5 Ghz

>>60377912
I can't hear u over all these threads!

>>60377930

I'm not pretending anything, all I see is irrelevant Ryzen CPUs getting demolished.

>>60377949
Kek. In what?

>>60377949
>completely ignoring the post
You aren't getting paid Rasheet
>>60377944
I can't hear you either over the performance of 24c that Whitehaven provides

>>60377967

scroll up you will find out in what

>>60377929
Cuz cpus are pinned at max load 24/7 by normies mining buttcoins or something so that matters ina world with melinated minds undervolt

>>60377975
>You aren't getting paid Rasheet
You seem like you are, since after getting a new anus torn you are still in here trying to convince me otherwise of something.

>>60377979
>>60377728
?
>>60377791
>>60377813

>>60378004
>if I pretend it will be true
You got demolished senpai, stop posting, see >>60378006

>>60377606
How about a Ryzen computer with a Xeon Phi PCI-E card?

File: WP_20170513_17_13_09_Pro.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

Did someone say MEGATASK?

File: 1494627888896.png (1MB, 745x4227px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 745x4227px

>>60378006
>>60378016
Oh shit, nigger! What are you doing!?

>>60378016

What am I suppose to see here. Your personal charry picked collection of benchmarks?

>>60378028
>These benchmarks don't fit my agenda, so they're cherry picked now
What the fuck?

>>60378028
>look my sole benchmark that doesn't make any sense it's legit!
>what? what's with this dozens of benchmarks, all of this it's cherrypicked
How can Pajeets work with this cognitive dissonance? Is this why they shit on the streets?

>>60378028
>Anon can't fathom the truth
Psst kid, scroll up a bit; there's an extra benchmark I missed.

itll be nice to have some real performance for the future. ryzen is nice but its too hobbled together to last more than a year or two or unless your a gaymen streamer of course

File: 1465949252203.jpg (54KB, 524x541px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 524x541px

>>60378046
>>60378046
>>60378056

Uhh, we an entire entourage of Rajeets shilling on /g/. Jesus.

>my agenda
>more like your personal autism about Ryzen

You spending your free time collecting cherry picked drystone benchmarks on linux doesn't change my opinion of you being a smelly Rajeets in any way. While Skylake X demolishing Ryzen and making it irrelevant is inevitable and the upcoming future. How that anus? Still bleeding?

File: Itanic-640x353.jpg (68KB, 640x353px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 640x353px

>>60378107
>This deflection
Kek. Cya later, silly anon.

On another note, Itanium 2.0 when?

File: single socket holocaust.jpg (28KB, 550x550px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 550x550px

>>60378107
>a 666W Skylake-X housefire will demolish 180W Threadripper
Sure self hating Pajeet, are you done with ranting about how much you hate yourself?

File: 1494496323498.png (49KB, 2000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 2000x1000px

>>60378107
At least you tried :^)

>>60378094
Ryzen doesn't suffer from bing bus penalties and has a higher IPC than Kaby Lake
It will work much better in the future when GCC gets their shit together instead of just pretending reusing Bulldozer optimizations it's good enough
>>60378122
Soon my senpai :^)
By then RISC-V will be mature enough to be a monster, if Agner's hobby ISA becomes popular we will see pure Vector/FPGA extensions on RISC-V, destroying anything AMD and Intel could come up with

>>60378107
Don't worry anon; all you need to do is wait.

>>60378122
>>60378131
>>60378160

Definitely still severe bleeding on the rectum right here.
I really enjoy myself here, but somehow still disappointed that I deal with only niggers on this board.

File: intel.png (179KB, 1002x935px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 1002x935px

good to have choices that aren't unrefined trash. of course it will outperform that has never been a question in a decade.

>>60378182
>totally butttblasted XD XD XD
Please Pajeet, if you start improving yourself everything will be better, start by pooing in the loo

>>60368141
>Why this is allowed
Because it's Intel's product...?

Let me rephrase what I think you're asking,
>Why are they doing this shit?
To get people buying more expensive CPUs, a lot of people bought any old i& thinking 'its just an i7' now i7 is only middle class, not top of the range - so those idiots instead of buying a 7700k will end up buying a 12c/24t monster, which won't play their game well at all.

>>60378182
>>60378190
Kek! The 1% gains are almost there, anon. All you need to do it wait!

>>60378197
Reply again when you found that argument against Skylake X, Rajeeta. Until then close your fucking gap.

>>60378229
Yeah, nothing will stand against 666W, we finally got the true king back

>>60378229
>Being this ass-blasted
Gee wiz, Pajeeta, you sure are red today!

File: megatasking_intensifies.jpg (77KB, 493x493px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 493x493px

>>60377874
Threadripper is just the codename for their HEDT platform. It's not in any official marketing material. You can stop spazzing out now, autismqueen.

File: freelunch.jpg (45KB, 670x373px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 670x373px

cheap is good goys

and good enough is cheap!

team red all the way, im a savvvy consumer

File: maxresdefault[1].jpg (153KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 1280x720px

lmao the AMD shills are in disbelief at the speeds these chips produce and can't come up with anything. Intel won, once again, as usual.

>>60377371

holy shit AMD on suicide watch

>>60378291
No! no! no! Team blue all the way! Have you seen their cost-cutting techniques, dear Pajeet?

File: amd.jpg (36KB, 730x339px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 730x339px

>>60378284
CODENAME: THREADRIPPER

OPERATION: TO MEGATASK

LOCATION: WALMART ELECTRONICS

SUCCESS: GUARUNTEED

>>60378229
>Reply again when you find an argument against Skylake X, Rajeeta. Until then shut your whore mouth.
ftfy my dear sir, please sir learn english please
thank you have good day

File: 1494704824963.png (289KB, 596x628px) Image search: [Google]

289KB, 596x628px

>>60378307
>>60378316
>>60378334
>Being so desperate you have to shill and shitpost an unreleased product
Oh vey! Just wait, good goy!

>>60377727
>>60377830
>>60377909
>>60377949
>>60377979
>>60378004
>>60378107
>>60378182
>>60378190
>>60378229
>>60378307
>>60378316
I have never seen this much autism over a fake benchmark before.

>>60378370
you not being to accept reality is your problem not mine

>>60378360
wait? why? i got my shiny babby lake and it works a treat. its just fun watching team red show off their thrift tier spit and tape cpus like its hot shit

>>60378378
I think you might've had an aneurysm trying to type that out, buddy. Want to reword it in English?

>>60378378
J U S T W A I T
U
S
T
W
A
I
T

>>60378360

>the released product somehow will be worse instead of even curb stomping AMD even more
keked hard
Rajeets are clearly on suicide watch.

>>60378390
>t. corelet
No stutter here, broseph; feels great.

>>60378390
Kek. The only hot thing here are the flames, anon. :^)
>>60378026

File: AMD_LEADERSHIP.gif (178KB, 911x594px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 911x594px

I for one am SICK and TIRED of these Intel shillposts. Where my Ayymd Bros out? Post those numbers, lets shut these hoes down.

>When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, they will naturally want to side with the strong horse.

>>60378408
I've never noticed "stutter" in Photoshop or Lightroom. What exactly are you doing with your personal computer that would result in "stutter"?

>>60378425
>Pajeet goes desperate since he's absolutely not getting paid
Before shitposting, learn english and stop spazzing out

File: amd_vs_intel.jpg (55KB, 498x342px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 498x342px

>>60378434
exactly AMD is like a stuck mule while Intel is a wild stallion that can't be tamed.

>>60378425
>AMD shill calling out his AMD Rajeets
holy fuck HAHAHAHA

there no more proof needed

>>60378434
>t. muslim propaganda

>>60378436
>Rajeesh uses his corelet CPU for non-gaming related tasks
Kek!
>>60377728

>>60378441
Sorry it's hard to respond to posts like yours when I have all this computational resource at my muster. How is that Intel HyperThreading working for you hoe.

File: 1482391725120.jpg (12KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 480x640px

amd shills be all like "thank you sir I enjoy getting served a whooped ass every cpu cycle"

THANK YOU BASED INTEL

WE MEGATASKING NOW

HOW CAN THREADRIPOFF EVEN COMPETE?

This is the only benchmark comparison that makes sense, because the newer Intel 10 core CPU sucks compared to the older one. Intel only knows how to go backwards.

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Skylake-X-10-Core-HEDT-10C-vs-Intel-Core-i7-6950X/m233971vs3604

>>60378482
>tfw AMD has surpassed Intel's IPC
Feels good, bros.

File: INTELINSIDE.gif (2MB, 2560x1600px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2560x1600px

>>60378453
Agreed.

>>60378454
>>60378464
>>60378482
It's obvious you're samefagging, learn english, you will never get paid like this
By the time you learn english you will be able to land a job that pays a few rupees per hour instead of a few per day

>>60378509
>Intel somehow got worse
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

>>60378513
Quick post some Cinebench scores!

>>60378519
beautiful just beautiful

>>60378529
>CUT MY LIFE INTO PIECES

>>60378524
Already got my H1B, good enough is good enough.

File: DSC_0986_1024x1024.jpg (140KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 1024x1024px

>>60378537
>No benchmarks to counter

>>60378509
Kek! How will Intel even recover!?

Pic related

>>60378434
>>60378453
>>60378519
>>60378538
Intelfags literally jerking eachother off to beastiality. Amazing.

>>60378509
>Intel vs Intel
are you okay Rajeet?

>>60378561
But you know Trump's coming for you

>>60378572
Your microcore is showing. Seems to make you feel inadequate.

>>60378509
Holy shit! Where were you when Intel somehow went back in time?

>>60378578
Team Red has my back. Loyalty is rewarded where I come from.

>>60378563
>>60378572
Sure are making a strong argument that Intel has been spinning their wheels and this latest i9 business is just more of the same overpriced bullshit they've been shoveling for years.

>>60378572
>intel literally offers a worse newer processor
>"b-but muh brand new processor"

There is nothing to defend. Intel peaked at Sandy/Ivy Bridge.

File: ss.png (230KB, 1449x852px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 1449x852px

>>60378509
Oh shit, nigger! I'm fucking laughing!

>>60378599
Oh no a cheaper 10 core that is within margin of error of performance diff compared to a gaggillion dollar CPU no one has.

File: 1321195037904.jpg (205KB, 648x878px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 648x878px

Intel is Shiva destroyer of AMD

>>60378614
>userbenchmark.com
stopped reading there

File: 1475105389625.jpg (76KB, 709x520px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 709x520px

>>60378601
Yeah, keep pretending you aren't working for Intel
Guess who cried about muh HB1's a few weeks into the presidency? Guess who didn't gave a single fuck?

>>60378618
A FUCKING 160W TDP! THE GOT WORSE!

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!

>>60368141
> i9

Great. More $1000 chips. Just what we need.

>>60378592
>>60378602
>>60378613


I feel very good compared to the abominations you trying to defend AMD here by comparing Intel CPUs with each other, Rajeet. Skylake X priced accordingly I have no problems with the 6950X still being a very good CPU.
How does it make you feel exactly ? You can't touch none of those which make you literally worthless.
Hmm.

needs more bingbus

>>60378645
>It doesn't count when Intlel's losing!

Kek.

>>60378674
It has at least two bing busses, it might have 3 of them if they're entirely composed of the worst Xeon rejects

>>60378651
it looks pretty good from here considering ill have a THREADRIPPERSTOMPER

but u keep waiting for your APUs and MEGA VEGA

>>60378674
>>60378702
The more bingbus, the better!

>>60378602
>I can't afford it so it's shit
damn you Intel, I need it for free or poo prices just like AMD

>>60378702
3 bingbuses means 6 memory channels so no.

File: bangbin.png (2MB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1200x800px

>>60378674

File: Intel-10nm-Process-Node.jpg (242KB, 1110x730px) Image search: [Google]

242KB, 1110x730px

>>60378710
Oh boy, anon. How can Intel literally get worse? What happened to all those 1% IPC gains?

File: didyousayMEGATASKING.jpg (21KB, 460x276px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 460x276px

lol just wait goys

ive been MEGATASKING for weeks already

File: E5_v4_HCC.png (155KB, 1321x768px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 1321x768px

>>60378702
>24 cores on intel's HCC 3-bingbus abomination
>offering with largest number of cores only has 22 enabled

Bintel yields, everyone.

>>60378744
Elegance in motion.

>>60378744
That's old shit, only 2 bingbuses, nowhere near enough bingbus.

File: intel-core-i7-extreme-edition-01.jpg (88KB, 900x470px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 900x470px

>>60378741
Cock goes where?

AMD can't even beat G4560 or anything Intel in the top

hard reality

AMDrones on suicide watch since for ever

File: news010613_2.png (26KB, 600x275px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 600x275px

This is now a nostalgia thread. Post images that makes you all nostalgic.

I'll start.

File: SCPUINTI72600K_l.jpg (105KB, 475x480px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 475x480px

>>60378800
RIP soldered dies.

File: badge-itanium.png (419KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

419KB, 1080x1080px

>>60378800
:(

>>60378800
>3 more years of "Optimization" until Intel's new Itanic arch after 2020
>inb4 Intel is still releasing Bepis Lake on 10nm++++++ years later

>AMD

not once

File: netburst.jpg (25KB, 545x397px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 545x397px

>>60378800
Man, where has time gone?

>>60378307
>Speed these chips produce
Another illiterate shekelchaser. Skylake-X has lower or equal base clocks and only has a small single core turbo advantage. Given the TDP ratings, it's also unlikely they will be able to match Ryzen's all core overclock.

Also, AMD's 16c/32t HEDT CPU will be capable of the exact same 3.6ghz base and 4.0ghz turbo the 1800x is, giving it a significant base clock advantage over the 12c Skylake-X.

>>60375685
>enthusiast who want performance

I'm running a Skylake i5, and have more than enough performance, even for gaming. Meh, Ryzen seems ever better at the price point my i5 was at when I bought it.

>>60378905
>intel literally trying to push 10GHz
>50+ stage pipelines

Honestly, what the fuck were they thinking?

>>60378350
You mean like Intel's 15% IPC gains from their refreshes? That kind of lie.

File: mark.jpg (1MB, 1505x4363px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1505x4363px

>>60378425

File: AMDRyzen1800XIntel6950X1_0.png (29KB, 617x837px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 617x837px

>>60378509
Wait, you mean Skylake-X is slower than the 6950x that the 1800x already ties? So it's ALREADY confirmed BTFO??

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAA

>>60378934
They were not thinking, simple as that.

File: apprentice and second firing door in foreground.jpg (331KB, 1067x1600px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 1067x1600px

>>60378618
>Cheaper
[Citation Needed]

Oh and don't forget, you kiketel shekelchasers scum, that Zen's 16c/32t CPU is going to eat that 12c Skylake-X alive. The second shoah has begun. GET IN THE OVEN.

>>60368141
>Core i7-7740K - 4.3GHz
I bet it costs more 35% than the i7-7700k - 4.2GHz

Fuck intel for being jews and fuck AMD for being Pajeets and not being capable of giving them proper competition

10c/20t @ 4.5Ghz, will that be possible without any house fires? Considering the shitshow that are the 7700k temps I'm not very optimistic. Kudos to intel if they can pull it off, since 8c/16t R7s can't even reach 4.1Ghz consistently

>>60379082
>People not understanding the difference between single core turbo and all core overclocks

>>>/v/eddit

>>60379082
No, it's not possible without it outputting 666w of heat and summoning Satan and his friend NetBurst from hell.

>>60379082
It'll burn down before it even reaches that. All Intel has now are clock speeds; their IPC advantage is now gone.

>>60379082

Watch Rajeet kill themselves in the coming weeks one after another.
They also think the 5960X can't reach 4.5ghz.

>>60372000
And Intel measures their TDP in a way to downplay it. The 12 core's probably going to be more like 180 watts in actual practice.

>>60379082
Ryzen 1800X at 4.1 runs at 3992mhz won't go higher, because it's simply shit.

>>60368141
>all cpus oc plateauing at around 4.5ghz
>turbo clock 3.0
>having to pay the jew extra to unlock an OCable processor

File: Untitled.png (21KB, 914x242px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 914x242px

>>60379220
>Intel defined
Heh.

>>60379244
>Clocks are everything now

>>60379276
>more electricity = more power

File: Comb10042017094551.jpg (552KB, 1032x2865px) Image search: [Google]

552KB, 1032x2865px

>>60379244
>MUH NIGGAHURTZ!

>>60379348
>>60379276

If I wanted a CPU with 1.8ghz I probably use my phone.
But of course a Rajeet with always find a way to express his autism.

File: WP_20170513_17_16_34_Pro.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

tfw u team red and u can't stop winning

>>60377637
>Threadripper

what an absolutely badass name

>>60379436
They should've called it the thread mongler

>>60379388
>CPU clock speed is now more important than IPC
My nigga!

>>60379388
Then go buy a 7740k and fuck off. We are.talkimg about HEDT CPUs here you absolute mong.

>>60379468

>Being this fucking B U T T B L A S T E D
Intel offers both tho.
I thought you mentioned something about clockspeed doesn't matter 5 seconds ago.

File: 1492687703349.png (346KB, 550x550px) Image search: [Google]

346KB, 550x550px

>>60379388

>>60379534
>intel designed final solution

>>60379528
>Being autistic enough to believe CPU clock speed is more important than IPC
My nigga!

>>60379534
?

>>60379558
You can get a Celeron 352 at 7 Ghz, why don't you buy that if you want BLAZING FAST clockspeeds?

>>60379558
>Being this underaged

>>60379551
who are you quoting

>>60379577
Fucking mongoloid
>>60379388

>>60379570

but I need lots of cores and blazing fast clock speed (which AMD has zero of)

>>60379589
I didn't mention IPC once nigger. Who are quoting.

>>60379593
Oh vey! Why not just use an FX-series CPU, good goy?

>>60379607

Intel offers better variants.

File: shitwrecker.jpg (430KB, 1209x1050px) Image search: [Google]

430KB, 1209x1050px

>>60368141
Bump limit reached. Average of 5 posts per IP. Thanks to all samefags for playing.

>>60379604
>Unironically preferring clock speeds over IPC
>>60379244
>Being this autistic
Sorry anon, AMD is the IPC king now.

>>60379619
>Not wanting 5ghz octa-core CPU
Could you repeat that again, anon? I'd like to see your clocklet/corelet variant.

File: 1489594665605.jpg (273KB, 1032x774px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 1032x774px

>>60368141

>>60379633
what..
Now I get what this dirty Rajeet trying to imply.
>AMD is IPC king and doesn't need any high clock speeds
but you are wrong about both things read thread carefully

>>60379619
It doesn't, wheres their 5 Ghz octa core?

>>60379665
>Being this absolutely autistic
Kek. But feel free to prove me wrong. :^)

>>60377728
>>60377791
>>60377813
>>60378026