What the FUCK happened here? How was this so fucking bad, then

>>60719182
implying ryzen is good

>>60719182

Semiconductor design is very fucking hard.

>>60719203
Werks great for me :^)

File: unrelated_pretty_picture.png (613KB, 840x680px) Image search: [Google]

613KB, 840x680px

>>60719182
AMD used up all their Jim Keller mana, so they brought him back to refill it.

No multithreading had a huge impact, it meant cheaper intel cpus with less cores could beat it in pretty much any benchmark.

>>60719275
also bulldozer cores were set up in a way that made them have shit ipc.

slow individual cores, plus shit multicore performance made them suffer horribly at anything besides very niche tasks. Overall a huge dumpster fire of an arch

>>60719182
They changed the chip design from how it was with phenom II (to technical to really go into atm) so you could go from phenom II x4 955 3.20 ghz to a FX 8300 3.30 (double core count and 100mhz speed increase) and the older phenom would give you better performance in games esp older single thread titles. Now FX would give better performance if you did only non gaming tasks but since I used my desktop for a bit of everything i refused to accept any performance hits. No compromising. So back to my trusty Phenom II. the FX is currently in service as my server cpu (a task it is very good for).

>>60719313
funny i did the 'upgrade' from x4 955 to a fx 8320. seemed better, but i don't really demand much from my hardware.
did the upgrade to ryzen and now using the phenom for a small homeserver that is probably drawing too much power to really justify.

File: piledriver-b.jpg (764KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

764KB, 1280x1024px

>>60719182
They went from the traditional multi-core design to modules with each module split into two cores.

This ended up confusing programs which meant that the performance from the old Phenom chips to the FX chips dropped noticeably.

Programs would often time not fully utilize all the cores or utilize them poorly.

I remember tons of people on /g/ damage controlling the shit out of them, defending them as being worth it or calling anyone who said they were unoptimized, shills.
However, that was just the truth of it. I still recommended the FX 8350 to someone when the price went down to $150 and they had a $1000 budget.
But... Overall the CPU was architecture was shit.

In the end with Ryzen, they changed back to a much better system which rival's Intel and I can say with confidence is in many cases a lot more worth your money.

>>60719242
Callie and Marie can use up all my mana, if you know what I mean

>>60719289
Their multicore performance was good back when they first came out

>>60719377
It doesn't just rival Intels, Intel literally can't compete. The only reason they can even attempt to is their marketshare and how much money they have to throw at it, but Intel are still using 11 year old CPUs and can't shove more cores in there without yield issues. Ryzen introduces a new interconnect and CCX system that allows their yields to be fantastic and for them to create a lineup of chips purely based around binned versions of the 'flagship', whether it be clockspeed binning or cores not being functional.

>>60719340
8320 was piledriver. piledriver increased single threaded performance by 10%, which made it match phenom clock for clock. first release bulldozer, 81xx series, was at release, 20% slower than phenom clock for clock. it became 10% once microsoft patched windows scheduler for faildozer.

so:
>bulldozer (8150, extra)
10% SLOWER than phenom ii
>piledriver (8350, extra)
clock for clock equal

since you switched from a 955 to a 8320, the 8320 was technically faster since it was clocked an extra 300mhz and had a boost to 4ghz. it also had MOAR CORREESSS so extra threads made multi-tasking and overall system snappiness better.

by the time piledriver came out all it had over phenom ii was higher clocks and MOAR CORES.

>>60719377
Got my FX-6300 for ~$100. Well worth and currently on it.

File: sandy-bridge-die-map.jpg (538KB, 1280x640px) Image search: [Google]

538KB, 1280x640px

>>60719502
Completely correct. Intel is now forced to actually change. They can't keep milking the same shit.
>>60719557
I wasn't kidding when I said I still recommended it to people. Also that CPU is still considered one of the best price to performance CPUs (last time I checked) in Passmark.

So I'll give credit where credit is due.

File: Pepe KEK.png (606KB, 358x432px) Image search: [Google]

606KB, 358x432px

>>60719182

Considering how decent the current Ryzen chips are, is there any estimate as to how much or how little AMD might be able to improve over the next supposed 4 years of its' lifespan?

>>60719553
guess i fell for the moar coar meme. is it really a non-meme now with ryzen? you seem to know something and aren't just parroting

File: Pepe KEK.png (606KB, 358x432px) Image search: [Google]

606KB, 358x432px

>>60719608

File: 599.png (38KB, 200x223px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 200x223px

>>60719636
nice try

>>60719553
Piledriver is slower than Phenom clock for clock, they didn't increase IPC to beat Phenom until Excavator, Steamroller came damn close though.

File: AMDZenRoadmap_678x452.jpg (24KB, 678x381px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 678x381px

>>60719612
its my honest opinion that ryzen currently is actually process limited. i base this off of two things.

first:
>polaris
with the release of the rx 500 series, amd admitted they did nearly zero tweaks to polaris. the only difference was some tweaks to the DRIVERS, updating hdmi standard, and MORE MATURE 14nm process. that more mature process allowed them to increase clock speeds by up to 250mhz with the same voltage. the only reason why they increased the power limit was to allow for higher builds. but either way, prior with the orginal 14nm process on the 400 series, increased power limit still didn't allow the orginal to hit into the 1400 and 1500mhz range easily like it does now with the 500 series. 1300 range was average. i own a sapphire 580 limited edition myself and it hits 1450mhz at around 180 - 190 watts. compared to my buddies asus strix 480 that uses around 200 watts for 1305mhz.

this clearly shows that polaris was process limited on globalfoundries first 14nm batch. and that leads into.

two
>ryzen tops off at around 4.1-4.2ghz.
regardless with how much voltage you pump into it, its hard to hit 4.1ghz. 4.2ghz is pretty unheard of. i can count how many i've seen successfully run 4.2ghz with both my hands. this wall appears to be awfully similar to first release polaris and makes me feel like why amd waited until march 2017 to release ryzen rather than releasing it in late 2016 which nearly everyone suspected.

if you look at their first roadmap they released, as pic related, in 2015, you can see they at least where hinting at a 2016 release.

right now ryzen is in a really good spot. its single thread performance in virtually equivalent to broadwell from intel. there is some give, and take, but averages to around broadwell. gaming it hovers in the middle between haswell and broadwell for its average. again, some give, and take, but around middle due to its use of ccx design. which compared to the cmt design of faildozer, is 100% better.

>>60719720
>regardless with how much voltage you pump into it, its hard to hit 4.1ghz. 4.2ghz is pretty unheard of.
Well that isn't true, you just can't sufficiently cool the chip enough for the crazy voltages it desires to push past those clockspeeds. Just look at der8aur's records for the 1800X and 1600X, 5.8 and 5.9GHz respectively, better than Broadwell-E.

File: 900x900px-LL-4e6b5fd2_Cinebenchsingle.png (26KB, 900x315px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 900x315px

>>60719620
ryzen is non meme. i'm >>60719720
>>60719687
eh if you nit pick then you can say that. but really it came close. and piledriver ultimately came with much higher clocks over bulldozer that it became a mute point to go with phenom unless you could grab one that was cheaper. since piledriver hit such high clocks it always came out faster. there was, at least, maybe a 200mhz deficit between the two in the end.

anyways, cont'd

>>60719745
you act like thats common. 4.1ghz and above ISN'T common. that behavior makes people think they can go out there and pick up a 1800x and clock it to 4.1 or 4.2ghz and set it and forget it. thats not the case. thats not the case at all. i remember silicon lottery stating their own testing saw around 30% of 1800x able to run stable at 1.45v for 4ghz, with 20% for 4.1ghz on overclock.net. and when you look at overclocking results on overclock.net most people top off around 3.8 to 4ghz with ryzen. few will hit 4.1ghz or above.

ryzen does have a wall, very similar to polaris when it first launched. yes some people did get lucky with their polaris and hit 1.5ghz, but it was rare, and it was TYPICALLY under circumstances that most people wouldn't go as far to achieve.

like der8aur's 5ghz+ results. most people won't be running ln2.

>>60719838
>like der8aur's 5ghz+ results. most people won't be running ln2.
The point was that the chips are capable of it, just not with air/watercooling voltages.

Leaks show Intel's boost supposedly pushing the 7900X to 1.75V to hit the 4.5GHz boost they're advertising.

>>60719838
Out of curiosity, does overclock.net have some chart or anything with verified numbers for overclocks? Or would I have to search through results to find them?

>>60719856
well yes they are, if you cool it with ln2 and shove insanely high volts into it. just like polaris. but seeing polaris able to now run 1.4 to 1.5ghz with a simple more MATURE 14nm process, and seeing ryzen currently behaving the same as polaris did when it first launched on the eariler 14nm GF process, really makes me believe that at the moment, ryzen is HELD back by current GF 14nm process.

it will be interesting to see how high they can take ryzen with GF 7nm with zen2. as zen2 will just be a refinment of zen on 7nm with a few tweaks left out of inital zen.

>>60719838
The other thing is that at 1.45v you are degrading your chip if you're running for extended periods of time. So it's generally not worth it for most people to run that kind vcore.

>>60719871
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Dbt_7FiD8hTo2uuOIKBE3ATCDRqVRpAHFsKnieEncv0/edit#gid=87938175

and
http://www.overclock.net/t/1624139/official-ryzen-7-1800x-1700x-1700-owners-club-4ghz-club

>>60719203
1 shekel has been deposited to your Intel® Advertising© Center© Account. Keep up the good work Shlomo!

>>60719944
makes me wonder that early zen engineering samples where limited to 3ghz and below was because of early globalfoundries 14nm. we see intel "leaking" es samples of their processors at speeds very close to what they launch as, but ryzens early es samples where clocked very low. with most around the 2.8ghz mark.
its like at the last minute is when we saw 3ghz and above clocks leak. that be around the time global foundries was probably releasing a more mature 14nm. ryzen was the first to use it, with polaris coming a month later on it.
its actually refreshing to see ryzen being more so limited on process rather than architecture. as bulldozer was heavily limited because of its architecture.

>>60719182
they intentionally made bulldozer complete shit so that their next flop (ryzen) would look okay in comparison

>>60720249
Still better than Intel.

File: 1496328708889.png (745KB, 1260x673px) Image search: [Google]

745KB, 1260x673px

>>60720249
Caution. Image may cause הִתאַבְּדוּת

>>60720294
holy fuck that voltage hurts to just look at, please tell me it's fake

>>60720324
don't overclock!

>>60720324
HOLY FUCK I didn't see that before.

File: Aqh1ETYCIAI3GOl.jpg large.jpg (40KB, 909x585px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 909x585px

>>60719182
Several things.
The architecture was layed out mostly by hand as the tools for virtualizing a cpu design where in there infancy. They could only simulate components. Lots of misses that couldn't be counted for until it tapped out. Once a new CPU architecture tapes out you are stuck with it for several years at least.
The CPU was designed to be a speed demon but Global Foundries screwed up big time. 5ghz was the target clock speed. If AMD had Intel's fabs they could have reached this clock goal. They also betted heavily on heavily parallel dumb math becoming the norm in the server space but GPGPU completely took over that market.
Also severe mismanagement in general.

>>60720324
It was from computex.

>>60720249
unless you are buying a sub $100 processor you are retarded for buying an Intel chip right now. You would be better just buying a 1600x for like 240 for general purpose gaming and computing.

>>60719182
>Ryzen
>good
>needs expensive Samsung ram
>can't overclock ram
>motherboard issues
>still slower single core performance than intel cpus
>can't overclock for shit

>>60720386
None of that really has anything to do with Ryzen, Blame Mobo manufactureres.

As for the single core, its fast enough unless you do nothing but play games like a faggot all the time.

Intel can't compete for render hardware.

>>60719313
>>60719553
Don't forget that the Phenom II X6 Black Editions existed too and could turbo all the way up to 3.7ghz stock. If you have one of those you've basically had no need to upgrade for 7 whole years until just now where un-optimized games like RE7 are starting to give them of problems

>>60720424
As for Intel multi-core, it's fast enough for general purpose multitasking unless you do nothing but stream games like a PewDiePie faggot all day
: ^ )

File: 1332983603582.png (117KB, 800x900px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 800x900px

FX failed because the silicon did not scale power down as much as they had hoped going to the smaller fab node

It was meant to run at 5+ ghz but with decent power consumption but leakage prevented this. Their design looked great on paper but physics prevented great execution.

>>60719720
4.1 at 1.44v for the 1800X/Crosshair VI Hero
4.2 at 1.39v for the 1998/Zenith Extreme
Better vrm will bring the voltage down and clock higher.

>>60720480
Actually, its better for a media server, which is exactly where intel is getting btfo.

Nice try though.

>>60719182

They made a gamble on future software design and lost due to a combination of faulty engineering and shitty software like microshit windaids.

It was still not even close a fuckup as netburst or epic, but without a stranglehold on OEMs to forcefeed the fuckups like intel did with P4/pentiumD, AMD just had to live with it.

AMD also had to eat a ton of shit due to offloading fabs and taking on ATI, but now it looks like that is starting to pay off. APU bought them through the dark times, a nice new GPU and CPU design. It may be soon enough we see the true payoff with unified core APUs which will leave intel and nvidia eating shit.

>>60720386
5-7% slower IPC ain't shit, and multicore performance more than makes up for it. And none of that other shit has anything to do with Ryzen itself, just process tech and motherboard manufacturers.

>>60720492
Speed demon bipelines have never succeeded and never will. Some kind of amnesia keeps pushing manufacturers into this corner until they get bitten, again.

>>60720529
No, Ryzen has higher IPC than intel's processors. IPC means instructions per clock.
Notice that intel's processors typically run at higher clockspeeds- the outperforming 7700k outperforms at 4.8Ghz compared to ryzen's 4GHz.

>>60720555
It has higher IPC than Broadwell e.g. 6900k, but not kabylake. Lisa Su said this herself when they were talking about gaming performance reviews not being too hot

File: pic_disp.php.jpg (76KB, 701x479px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 701x479px

>>60720497
>needing 16 cores to stream vlc
Heh, Intel cores are perfectly fine for home use and Photoshop. Try again

>>60720609
Yea, but I'm not paying a thousand dollars just to have 16 threads, go suck a dick shill.

>>60720623
I'm not paying 500 dollars just to have moar coarz. Go back to telemarketing pajeet

File: 1496436785598.png (107KB, 2250x2324px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 2250x2324px

>>60720658
>More cores is bad
>That's why intel charges so much to have more cores
corelets btfo

http://semiaccurate.com/2011/10/17/why-did-bulldozer-underwhelm/

>>60720682
>why intel charges so much to have more cores
Intel charges more for moar coarz and features in Xeons and such because businesses can fall for memes too
Enjoy your overpriced Chinese cartoon watcher because you fell for the moar coarz meme I guess

File: 1496230778398.png (495KB, 1070x601px) Image search: [Google]

495KB, 1070x601px

>>60720723
>2017
>falling for the ringbus meme
lmao pleb

File: ayyylmao.jpg (79KB, 775x664px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 775x664px

>>60720741
Enjoy your Infinity Fabric

>>60719182

Because it takes 4+ years to design a high perf cpu. AMD had to guess at the start of the design process what transistors would be like when the design would be ready for tape out.

They guessed wrong. Had bulldozer been able to clock at the speeds they originally designed for, they would have had a great cpu with bulldozer.

File: 1496232289897.jpg (510KB, 1315x794px) Image search: [Google]

510KB, 1315x794px

>>60720767
>He enjoys having toothpaste for TIM
>He pays a tax to overclock his chips
>He likes having a TDP over 150W
>I would hope he's at least getting paid to have these opinions

File: 1466614826157.jpg (68KB, 691x646px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 691x646px

>>60720723
>day in the life of an Intelcuck.

>>60720779

If you own Intel stock, you would be being paid, in dividends and stock appreciation. They actually make money, unlike AMD.

>>60720767
wow ryzen's l1 and l2 cache kick intel's ass.

File: 1496341159603.jpg (79KB, 1280x719px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 1280x719px

>>60720798
>He thinks it is acceptable to have literal RFID tags on his chips
>He's probably doing it for free

File: meme.png (531KB, 718x480px) Image search: [Google]

531KB, 718x480px

Jim "i'll bend her colon like uri geller" keller

>>60720767
>Intel shills are grasping literal fucking NANOseconds

>>60720814

I actually own intel stock. (But I do that because I like the company and product).

I owned AMD after the K7 came out, but ended up selling it too late (I lost money). I owned several Athlon MP systems. Still might buy a dual socket threadripper.

That being said, what is the worry with the RFID chip? I don't think it can be read through a case and with the CPU under the heat sink. Afraid they will start refusing a warranty exchange because the chip reports overclocking on a RFID check?

>>60720908
>I actually own intel stock
You are literally a fucking shill lmao Jesus Christ you are pathetic.

>>60720923

nopers. I own the stock because I kind of understand the market and products. I own more Apple than Intel, but don't own any Apple stuff. I don't buy a stock that I don't know anything about.

File: 1488077878926.png (168KB, 495x491px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 495x491px

>>60720908
>i do own intel stock but you should still absolutely listen to what i say

>>60720386
Still better than Intel delidded corelet dead stutterfires.

>>60720972

this board needs ID's. You are confus.

File: 1429468569898s.jpg (15KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 250x250px

>>60720964
>I own more Apple than Intel
>When the enemy gets so retarded they start throwing ammo at you

>>60720908
>but ended up selling it too late (I lost money)
OY VEY!

>>60719182
>so fucking bad

FX 8320 here. All my games run fine. Stop this meme.

>>60720990

Jokes on you. I purchased a shit ton of Apple just before the 1st iPhone came out.

>>60720779
If you have to straight up lie to defend your fanboy preferences then it's not even worth pointing out why your wrong
>>60720821
>somebody in the thread shit posted about ringbus, literally the person I replied to
>pointing out why it's a negligible difference versus I.F. makes me "grasping"
Sounds like you guys are the ones grasping for use cases that don't exist for the average desktop user

>>60720908
>what is the worry with the RFID chip?
See >>60720814
Those are not ransom resistors. The RFID is reading from the CPU. Storing your keys. So that they can be recovered wirelessly.

>>60721020

Hey man, the 1st rule of investing is don't loose money. Fail.

File: 1487382430919.jpg (43KB, 604x604px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 604x604px

>>60720986
what it really needs is gold stars for intel shareholders

>>60721059
>> Storing your keys.

Storing which key from where?

>>60720549
>But this time it will work, guys! I'm sure!
>Just imagine this speed demon!
This is just a human nature.

>>60721053
>If you have to straight up lie to defend your fanboy preferences
Ahem

>Housefire TDP
https://ark.intel.com/products/123613/Intel-Core-i9-7900X-Processor-13_75M-Cache-up-to-4_30-GHz

>More Jizz TIM
https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cpu_mainboard/intel_s_skylake-x_and_kaby_lake-x_cpus_will_not_be_soldered/1

>Botnet INDSIDE™
http://www.gamersnexus.net/news-pc/2936-intel-i9-7900x-delidding-cpu-package-thermal-paste

>All starting at the low low price of a THOUSAND FUCKING DOLLARS
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/intel-reveals-core-i9-and-x-series-cpus-includes-2/1100-6450414/


Any questions?

Probably not the right place to ask this but anyway, Is there any difference between the ryzen die and epyc/threadripper?

I recall reading somewhere that epyc had some improvements over regular consumer grade ryzen but I can't seem to find anyone backing that up.

>>60721111
Encryption, from ring 3.

>>60721137
I'm pretty sure someone said that they are basically like a few R7 1800x's stuck together since they scale so well.

May be wrong but I think that's about right.

>>60719182
I was planning on getting an used FX-6300, ASRock 970 Pro 3, an Alpenföhn Cooler and 8GB of Noname DDR3 Ram, all for 45€.

Is it a good deal although Bulldozer is shit?

>>60721189
Just get ryzen dude, it's alot nicer.

Love my 1700 so far.

>>60721172

So regular ryzen but in multiples? No more cache or anything more "professional" such as that?

>>60721137
its a newer stepping and supports more i/o and ecc memory but it's otherwise architecturally identical

>>60721196
Well I'm sure it does, I think it's got a lot more PCI lanes and such, but the CPU cores themselves I think are basically the same or at least very similar.

>>60721189
that might be a respectable build if you are homeless or otherwise destitute

>>60721134
Why would you compare Ryzen to a CPU that's not even out and for which benchmarks don't even exist yet? Ryzen is a good budget server, we get it, but Intel desktop parts are still cheaper with better TDP and are adequate for general purpose use. Why not have an HTPC with a Pentium or I3k in every room instead of spending FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS just for the CPU before you even add anything else? That's just silly for shit posting , VLC, and PhotoShop type stuff.

>>60721134
>>Housefire TDP
>https://ark.intel.com/products/123613/Intel-Core-i9-7900X-Processor-13_75M-Cache-up-to-4_30-GHz


That's a funny bit of specs to get upset about. Supporting 128GB of ram but no ECC?! Not sure how upset I am about the 128GB limit either.

140W pfff that's nothing. Threadripper should be way up there at least, and IIRC Intel's TDP is more of an over estimate than the number AMD uses. As long as both cpus can throttle way back, (which they can) it will just be a race between efficiency, cost, and joules/opp.

If anything I want threadrippers TDP to be higher. It has a huge package intended for 4 dies. It will be super easy to get lots of heat out. (big advantage AMD) Who cares how many watts you are using, as long as you are efficient in joules/opp. That better thermal overhead will let AMD clock things up a notch.

>>60721254
>FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS
Where is this number coming from? the R7's start at like 300 bucks on Amazon right now.

>>60721265
>start at
>implying prices scale up from there and it's not the flagship model
You just answered your own question

File: adfsf.png (246KB, 1030x466px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 1030x466px

>>60721279
Next your gonna say
>It's close enough! It's basically 500 dollars!

>>60721264
The problem you're missing is that that is the 10 core version.
Ryzen has an 8c/16t that is literally 65w TDP, intel can't even get close to that on their bottom of the barrel i9 that only has 10 cores, the 18 core is like 4 skus up from there and is literally going to be a housefire.

File: strstrs.png (597KB, 850x860px) Image search: [Google]

597KB, 850x860px

>>60721264
>I want threadrippers TDP to be higher.
Is 180W is high enough?


[1] http://www.pcgameshardware.de/AMD-Zen-Codename-261795/News/Ryzen-Threadripper-Release-Termin-TDP-1229301/

>>60721254
>Intel desktop parts are still cheaper with better TDP and are adequate for general purpose use
Not in reality.

>>60721323

I did not want to say that number, but yes. That is fantastic. 2x Ryzen dies running tightly coupled but without any thermal limits compared to a desktop.

Epyc won't be the same. It's going to be thermally limited.

>>60721315
You're missing the point here. You shouldn't be using an i9, Ryzen, Threadripper, Epyc, or whatever expensive high core count server oriented CPU for a general purpose desktop PC anyways. Again, Ryzen is a good budget server, for small businesses and stuff, we get it, but I'm not seeing the HTPC argument. Why would you spend so much money for an 1800x, decent ram, decent cooling, etc. when you can get away with basic shit posting, video streaming, Overwatch, etc. with a fucking pentium for less than 100 dollars, 51watt TDP, and no meme ram or tinkering required?
>>60721332
Seek mental help

>>60721315
>The problem you're missing is that that is the 10 core version.
>Ryzen has an 8c/16t that is literally 65w TDP, intel can't even get close to that on their bottom of the barrel i9 that only has 10 cores, the 18 core is like 4 skus up from there and is literally going to be a housefire.

I see your point, but as you bump up voltages and clock speeds power dissipation is very non-linear.

To take your example the 65w chip tops out at 3.75GHz. To get the extra 350MHz to match the 1800x (which is probably a higher binned chip too) requires an extra 30W or 46% more.

We won't really know which is 'better' until we see the benchmarks for sure.

>>60721473
>for a general purpose desktop PC anyways
I'm not faggot, some of use have servers you dumb nigger, where do you think you are?

Go back to /v/ you useless gamer trash.

>>60721494
I do understand that but that isn't the only problem here, the biggest problem is literally the $999 price tag on top of the toothpaste TIM and RFID tags. Intel can get fucked by a cactus.

I had AMD tech since Athlon. Had an Althon X3. Unlocked the 4th core (luckily was fully functional) and overclocked the CPU to 3.4ghz.

Then had the Phenom 2 x4-965 overclocked to 4.1ghz

Then an FX-4100 @ 5.1ghz
Then an FX-6300 @ 5.0ghz
Then an FX-9590 @ 5.4ghz (popped a VRM on my Asus 990FX sabertooth)

Then became a traitor and went with an i7-6700k

Then Ryzen released and I now have a 1700X.

I'm so sorry AMD. I harbored doubt like a german defector held his jewish neighbors during WW2. Please forgive me Amada.

>>60721473
Nice projection, but I only accept real facts.

>>60721512
>Toothpaste TIM and RFID tags.

I know Intel has been using garbage TIM, but what's this about RFID? Are these in their new 10+ Thread CPU's? Is their garbage TIM going to also include this shit TIM?

>>60721554
see
>>60721134
and
>>60720814

>>60721512
> Intel can get fucked by a cactus.

I don't feel the same hate, but I sure as shit am going to enjoy a two horse race again.

>>60721568
I draw a hard ass line when it comes to botnet shit like RFID tags.

Absolutely unacceptable.

>>60721512
You don't need Ryzen for a personal mail server, NAS, or whatever home server stuff you might be doing. If you're hosting an Android app or game or something you shitted out so you can make money you should be using more than just a Ryzen PC in the basement on your cable internet. Big league chews like Amazon and Google use their own stuff.
>>60721550
>>60721554
I only accept real use cases. So far the only one I've seen anywhere is streaming and gaming on the same PC at the same time.
See
>>566500
>What is SIMFIRE
>What is OPMA
It's not as if the rest of your hardware (hard drives, nics, etc.) weren't already compromised from the factory anyways. Do you Xray every motherboard you buy to make sure the Ethernet isn't compromised? If not then RFID shouldn't mean anything to you either.

>>60721560
holy FUCK. Literal RFID chips on the CPU. Really? I know Intel has sunk low, but THIS low? What's next? DNA based palm print scans to turn the PC on?

Lemme get this straight because ever since I bought my Ryzen 1700X, I haven't paid any attention the CPU market.

Intel sees Ryzen is a hit and actually competitive and is bringing many cores/threads to the masses for cheap and with low tdp. And their response is to also release a high core/thread count CPU! For an absurd amount of money. With double+ the tdp. Is their marketing team imploding?

>>60721636
You can't even quote right. Go away schlomo.

>>60721636
>he does it for free
>It's OK goym, it's only an RFID tag! Your other hardware was already compromised from the factory! Just buy out Intel i9's goy!

>>60721636
>You don't need Ryzen for a personal mail server, NAS, or whatever home server stuff you might be doing
I can do what I want faggot, you have no idea what I even do, I run Nintendo so you can fuck off tosser.

If I want a good processor I will have one, I will not deprive myself just so Intel can remain competitive, fuck yourself.

File: 2017-06-03 04_18_32-_3_ - Will AMDs upcoming 16 core CPU be a big step up fo - 3DCG - 4chan - Waterf.png (38KB, 1699x288px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 1699x288px

>>60721645
You're the goy here wanting people to pay more for use cases that don't exist. Go back to your Blender and streaming benchmarks while also calling people gamer faggots for wanting more FPS
Ryzen posting should be disabled on /g/ for at least 30 days.
>>60721679
I'm not telling you what to do but I'm sparing other people from your bad purchasing decisions.
>>60721637
>>60721678
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_ANT_catalog
You're not safe from the NSA just because you're using AMD you freetards

>>60721637
>Is their marketing team imploding?
No, they just literally have no way to compete right now, they have no good way to scale up their current memebus design to compete with AMD, they wont for at least another year.
So instead they shit out an i9 as a "mee too" gesture, you can be sure that no one will buy it for obvious reasons.

>>60719313
I've been using the Phenom II as server as well, and it's a good idea to underclock and undervolt it. I could do 2.2GHz with it and it was practically silent most of the time.

>>60721687
>I'm sparing other people from your bad purchasing decisions.
You are doing the opposite you stupid nigger
>Buy Intel!
>You don't need a good CPU, a Pentium is enough!
>In a time where the core race is literally taking off like a rocket a dual core piece of shit is surely all you will ever need!

Fucking kill yourself.

>>60721637
>Intel sees Ryzen is a hit and actually competitive and is bringing many cores/threads to the masses for cheap and with low tdp
>cheap
>low tdp
LOL this is Netburst 2.0 son.

>>60721701
Intel is releasing 8 cores for $800 but don't know if that counts

>>60721695
>buy moar useless coarz!
>trust me, somebody will get around to optimizing for them by the time silicon is replaced!
Keep ignoring your lack of use cases faggit, see the pic from my earlier reply

>>60721714
>You either use all of them or none of them
Seriously, leave.

No one is buying your shill bullshit.

You are literally advocating that people buy Pentiums just so your stock wont take a hit.
You are literally only saying this because you know that Intel cannot compete for value in literally any other part of the market.

Fuck Off.

File: 1492139297054.jpg (282KB, 752x548px) Image search: [Google]

282KB, 752x548px

>>60721687
>Ryzen posting should be disabled on /g/ for at least 30 days

>>60721687
This braindead shill deserves to be rangebanned.

ITT:
People unironically thinking there's no merit to a lower core count higher ipc and frequency cpu that also overclocks better and has better memory speed support

Based on this logic you mind as well tape two snapdragon octo core processors together and call it a server

>>60719182
Their CEO didn't want to invest in R&D too much, so they pushed a cheap universal arch in the half-assed state.

>>60721743

>>60720908
ITT: One extremely desperate shill

>>60721743

>People unironically thinking there's no merit to a lower core count higher ipc and frequency cpu

Here is the thing, with ryzen you DON'T need to make that tradeoff - you get the cores and the clocks together.

>>60721755
He's a really sad individual desu

>>60721757
4.1ghz at best on a cherry picked cpu without ln2 cooling lmao @ ur lief

>>60721757
yeah but according to Intel fan boys, their 7700k can clock to 5.0ghz and Ryzen only does up to 4.0ghz! And since GHZ scales linearly across completely different architectures, ryzen is undoubtedly inferior.

File: 1495216284158.png (535KB, 1070x601px) Image search: [Google]

535KB, 1070x601px

>>60721757
He's not going to listen, he doesn't care.

His only concern is that his checkbook is taking a hit because Intel took a huge shit.

File: 1435056614581.jpg (33KB, 400x388px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 400x388px

>>60720457
>tfw upgraded from a X6 1100T to a 1700 last month

I really hope we see a return to the old days of the Athon 64 where AMD was actually a viable as fuck chip at a damn decent price. I miss being able to pick up CPU for under 200 bucks that would smoke anything in Intel's lineup save their most expensive chips. The CPU market needs some real competition again.

>>60721773
7700k is the PENTIUM 4 EXTREME EDITION of 2017

File: Ebin.png (1MB, 601x2250px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 601x2250px

>>60721795

>>60721780
Demanding that a use case be provided where Ryzen does something better than an lga1151 makes me a shill, got it. I'm not even a fanboy and I could defend Ryzen better than you guys.
>>60721824
See >>60720767
There's almost no difference, it's not netburst 2.0
You guys are literally arguing in circles in the same thread

File: 1379081192989.jpg (31KB, 251x290px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 251x290px

>>60721848
>Buy Intel Goys!
>Ignore all these silly AMD posters, they don't know what it's like to have my dic- I mean Intel™ Inside™!

File: 1484072400281.jpg (66KB, 568x612px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 568x612px

>>60721866
>we only made a 2% market share increase with Ryzen!
>better increase the viral marketing for 4chan and YouTube!

File: 1494269396244.png (178KB, 956x842px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 956x842px

>>60721879
>I'm legit you stupid goy
>I AM IN CONTROL HERE!!!

>>60721893
Nobody asked for the Yelp of CPU reviews

>>60721918
And nobody asked for Intel to use an inferior thermal interface material, but here we are.

File: 1383177499961.jpg (35KB, 185x202px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 185x202px

Wait a minute, guys.
Let's talk about >>60720767 for a moment.

Isn't it actually better to have lower latency on small block sizes?
You would not swap 6mb of asm instructions a lot of times.
But you could very well swap a lot of smaller pieces.
Am i wrong?

>1 cent has been deposited on your account
>nice work Pajeet
>buy intel goy
Holy shit, just stop that crap already.

>>60721781
How does it feel frog-o

File: 1485227768597.png (268KB, 900x516px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 900x516px

>>60722006
Nice try

>>60720767
Wow, so Ryzen L1, L2 and L3 flat out beat Intel?
Nice.

The RAM problems are mostly fixed now, too, including the latency.
Also, what does this have to do with Infinity Fabric?

>>60721189
For 45€, yes.
Faildozer is still shit though

File: 1442792610374.gif (1MB, 209x180px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 209x180px

>mfw buying sandy bridge instead of waiting for bulldozer

>>60722182
the IF in Ryzen is clocked at half the speed of the ram, and going from 1 L3 cache cluster to the other imposes a not insignificant latency penalty.

Threadripper and Epyc wont have this issue as they'll have a newer stepping, with one of the bigger things being changed on the newer stepping is that IF speed is doubled to match ram speed.

>>60719592
I hate the 6300 only because for some reason, it makes people forget to look at the far superior deal that the 8300 is. 2 extra cores, but for $10 less, at least on Newegg right now.

>>60721543
>Then an FX-4100 @ 5.1ghz
>Then an FX-6300 @ 5.0ghz
>Then an FX-9590 @ 5.4ghz (popped a VRM on my Asus 990FX sabertooth)
But why. Bulldozer was objectively fucking terrible.

>>60721996
You are correct. Which is why Ryzen absolutely annihilates Intel with workloads that fit into on chip cache.

>>60719182
Bulldozer was good idea on paper, shit on practice, required software to be written for Bulldozer to work efficiently, even tho it's x86

>>60722304

Its why skylake-x is bumping up their L1 and L2 but gimping L3 (lol intel going victim cache again).

>>60722246
>IF speed is doubled to match ram speed.
Is there a source on this?
I know early engineering samples ran at 1:1 clocks, but I haven't heard about Threadripper and Epyc doing so.
It will certainly help their inter chip communication.

>>60722316
It's more for the fuckhueg AVX512 workloads, but this should be a nice side effect.

>>60719182
>>60719182
bulldozer wasnt "that" bad, it had a high tdp but was a good 8c8t cpu. Was niche for what it was good in and still performs well today because of the amount of cores, albeit the module design

>>60720798
>AMD stock went from $1.85 to near $15 in just one year

>>60719203
You have no idea, mate. =)

>>60722336

That is exactly the point - increasing the low level caches so those huge jobs fit so it doesn't have to crawl over to the L3.

>>60721712
It counts for nothing when AMD is bringing 16 cores for $850

>>60722356

AMD confirmed bankrupt this year!

- /g/ since 2012

>>60720809
>>60721996
>>60722304
Are you people blind? Ryzen is only having better latency in a very specific block size window according to the chart. The point is that "netburst 2.0" isn't actually significantly higher latency than I.F.

>>60722406
From 1.5x to 3x higher latency where it's actually matters it's not significantly?

>>60722401
Is AMD even allowed to go under? If they did that would give Intel a monopoly on all x86 processors.

>>60722406
>wow you're cherrypicking data posted by a literal shill, an actual unironic shill using cherrypicked data to convince other people to bump his share price for him

boohoo cry me a river. shouldnt speculate on a retarded company that rests on its laurels technologically and has done everything it possibly can to monopolize and manipulate the market at the expense of the consumer and progress.

>>60722472
Intel would supposedly be forced to be broken up into competitors. But most likely they'd claim the Russian CPU's are a competitor and nothing will happen.

>>60720571
Agner Fog disagreed, he said Ryzen has higher IPC than any other Intel processors excluding avx256.

>>60722491
That sounds like it would be a massive legal battle to try and claim that, especially here in the states where AMD and Intel are your only choice. It would probably just be easier for them to bail out AMD if things got that bad.

>>60722024
It feels amazing, I'm really feeling the boost in single thread performance and the power efficiency is crazy

>>60722481
>block size > 1MB
>cache latency
Yeah, that's not happening in real-life applications. You're looking at kilobytes at a time.

>>60720767
>that latency increase on fuckhuge slices of L3
SANKYUU MISTER BINGBUS

>>60722553
>4kb block size is default on every Windows machine
>4kb latency negligible
Yeah, it is happening, get over it
Inb4 somebody justifies Ryzen because of their special snowflake open suse zfs file system with custom block sizes so they can get 1ns better latency lol

>>60721034
ex-8320 owner here. You don't know how bad that thing is.

File: 1467668274366.jpg (69KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 600x800px

>>60722631
Eh?
He is saying
>block size > 1MB is not happening
You saying
>4kb block size is every Windows machine
>it is happening

What?

>>60721034
same

everything works

>>60719182
Amd tried to copy sparc cmt design, where sparc has 8 integer thread inside 1 core, but shared fpu.. and failed miserably

>>60719182
Windows 7+ got an update which fixed scheduling on these CPUs.

Other than that, what do you mean by saying "pretty good"? They are cheap and can be used as room heaters, that's why.

File: jM7e9sVniheVuktT6R2LvT_l3JgngfV7dTujF0SPdXQ.png (536KB, 1024x315px) Image search: [Google]

536KB, 1024x315px

>>60720767
all good and shit but call me when your intel cpu can do this

oh wait you wont cause its going to create a china syndrome

>>60722841
Think for yourself my friend. He's saying that Intel latency parity isn't happening because of specific deficiencies. I'm saying that Intel parity latency is happening because at common block sizes there's zero difference.

File: Linus.jpg (96KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1080x1080px

>>60723035
No FPS listed and also this picture for ants is clearly not an original screenshot
Who tf folds at home or renders and does ULTRAWIDE GAYMING at the same time? That sounds like a great YouTube click-bait title, just add a funny face thumbnail. Are you Linus?

>>60723039
>He's saying that Intel latency parity isn't happening because of specific deficiencies.
This is not what he is saying.
He is saying real-life applications don't use block size bigger than 1MB.

>>60723093
Windows is a real life application
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=nfts+default+block+size

File: 1408130914306.jpg (30KB, 500x359px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 500x359px

>>60723110
4KB is not bigger than 1MB.
Are you fucking trolling me?

>>60723132
4kb has no noticeable difference in latency

>>60723160
Yes.
This is why i don't understand why the fuck did you start talking about 4kb in the first place, you fucking retard.

>>60723193
People itt were saying that Ryzen has better latency in common scenarios, which we've now established is wrong. Now we can also conclude that adding DMI and more bridges and such makes a negligible difference compared to Ryzen since Kaby Lake has these, so the "Netburst 2.0 muh high latency is bad buy Ryzen instead trust me" meme is officially debunked

>>60723228
>"Netburst 2.0 muh high latency is bad buy Ryzen instead trust me"
Who said that? Original picture was posted by intel fanboy.
He implied that infinity fabric is shit because on block sizes bigger than 8mb latency is worse than intel.
Other people said that it doesn't matter, because real-life application do not use block size bigger than 8mb anyway.

>>60723304
I never implied that. I implied that latency is a non-issue when you compare "Netburst 2.0" to I.F.
And here are the posts where people shilled for Ryzen in a scenario where it has no benefit
>>60720809
>>60721996
>>60722304

File: lisa_su_smug.png (123KB, 240x286px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 240x286px

>>60720386

>>60720609
(You)

File: 1491875849697.png (84KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 653x726px

>>60720767
>YFW you realize that Threadripper has 2:1 Infinity Fabric speeds and will significantly reduced L3 cache latency

>>60721712
That's more expensive than AMD's current CPUs and it's likely that they'll have worse thermals.

File: 1494767421045.jpg (43KB, 630x630px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 630x630px

>>60721254
>Intel, can you give me 16 high performance cores?
>12 cores? Why do you need 10 cores?
>Help! This goy is trying to kill me for 8 cores!
>You'll be hearing from my lawyer about those 6 cores you still owe me
L M A O
M
A
O

>>60721473
>Stop caring about powerful general purpose computers!
>You need Facebook machines and glorified consoles!
>You don't need computers good at any other computationally intensive workload!
|
|>
|
|3
|

File: wGzegMV.png (252KB, 723x890px) Image search: [Google]

252KB, 723x890px

>>60721687
>Ryzen posting should be disabled on /g/ for at least 30 days.
This is how low the anti-AMD trolls have sunk.

>>60723468
>muh cores

>>60719182
The ryzen thing is retarded, people like it because of multi-tasking. Yet it was the point of phenoms and bulldozers but people said it was shit.

I just don't get it, why NOW people want less FPS in gayms but more multi-tasking ?

File: 555-come-on-now-realdonaldtrump-9681213.png (91KB, 500x383px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 500x383px

>>60723468
>high performance
I'm laffin
>>60723489
General performance is where Ryzen flops though, because things like professional 3d suites, PhotoShop, games, basically anything that isn't perfectly optimized for multi-core is going to perform better on a higher clock and higher IPC system with the same RAM, ignoring the fact that Ryzen doesn't support fast memory. Am I really a Jew for wanting people to spend less money to get better performance?
>>60723531
>people want less FPS in gayms but more multi-tasking
Most people don't, the market share hasn't significantly shifted. Ignore these trolls for the sake of your own sanity

File: ryzen-r7-1800x-blender-benchmark.png (101KB, 806x546px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 806x546px

>>60723557
>3D suites
L M A O
M
A
O

File: amd_ryzen_7_1800x_3dsmax.png (66KB, 580x550px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 580x550px

>>60723557
>>60723824
>3D Suites
This is why Intel shills should be banned. They are just knowingly and deliberately lying.

File: 85875.png (47KB, 650x350px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 650x350px

>>60723557
>>60723852
>3D Suites

>>60723824
>>60723852
>>60723873
But those aren't Unity and Unreal samefag

File: chart.png (244KB, 1200x2218px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 1200x2218px

>>60723557
>>60723873
>Photoshop

>>60719182
hector ruinz.
engineers left.
intel fires pentium 4 housefire team.
guess who hired them?
behold muh long bibeline amd.

>>60723824
Unless you're running Blender Benchmarks all day as your primary use case this is a non issue

File: Screenshot_from_03052017_194832.png (56KB, 531x819px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 531x819px

>>60723557
>>60723896
>Photoshop

>>60723896
>>60723904
You do realize that lower is better right? lol

File: 1481744513695.png (349KB, 716x2588px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 716x2588px

>>60723912
Yes, and? The 6900k is more than twice the price of the 1800x. It's also not faster in every scenario.

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

395KB, 2400x2000px

>>60723557
>Games
The overwhelming majority of games are played with a GPU bottleneck, either with a cheap GPU at 1080p or with a powerful GPU at 1440p or above

>>60719203
ibliying is no

>>60723940
You can cherry pick the 6900 and i9 price tag all day or you can face the music that is the 7700k
These are the most retarded benchmarks I've ever seen too. Most of this is legacy stuff which is a complete non issue and nobody is having problems running Microsoft Office why is it even on there? JFC we get it you want a server but can't afford a 6900k but guess what Ryzen isn't the best price/perforemance for everything.
>no HEVC 4k support
LOL enjoy 720p netflix streams

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

600KB, 2550x1446px

>>60723557
>>60723974
Giving up large performance advantage in most non-gaming workloads for better gaming performance only makes sense for you who only game with their PC at 1080p or less at 120hz or more in old DX11 games.

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

1MB, 1505x4363px

>>60723992
>7700k

File: Screenshot_from_03052017_154841.png (84KB, 884x863px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 884x863px

>>60723992
>>60723998
>7700k

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

36KB, 633x613px

>>60723992
>>60724008
>7700k

>>60723974
Ok so if that's the case then you don't need to spend extra money on an 1800x and 3600 speed ram for no benefit

>>60723992
>iGPU with DRMshit
Lmao.

File: desktop phenom logo update copy.jpg (169KB, 894x588px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 894x588px

At the end of it all, I'll just stick with my phenom II. The only demanding tasks that really push all cores is when I do the occasional video encoding. My games are all single core titles (99-04). So while the FX 8300 was a nice experiment and failure as a desktop chip I've found that as my server chip it works very well. Server has to handle video transcoding on the fly when it does streaming media duties in my home or over the net so in the FX those cores help a lot. (old chip from 2004 was an opteron 170)

>>60724024
>The only computationally intensive task I do with a PC is muh gaymes
>>>/v/

>>60723993
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/
1080p isn't going anywhere anytime soon
>>60724046
There's literally nothing wrong with this. Recommending Ryzen as a shit posting, photoshop, vlc, non streaming gaming, and chinese cartoon machine is cost prohibitive. Go back to running blender benchmarks all day.

>>60724089
>hwsurvey
>representative
"no"
I haven't gotten one since my Q6600/8800GT rig

>>60724008
>>60724008
>>60724017
Enjoy your crashes under heavy load, downloading, and negating all of these cherry picked binned benchmarks
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Ryzen-Compiler-Issues
>buying a cpu that's only good for x264 streaming in muh gayems or else it crashes
Real enthusiasts buy Intel
>>60724135
>What people are surveyed as using isn't actually what they're using
Ok

>>60724166
downclocking***

>>60724166
So you're just going to run around shitposting this FUD in every AMD thread now? Fuck off.

>>60723557
lol you just got btfo'd

>>60724185
>>60724196
Low IPC/Clock speed isn't fud or getting btfod
Stop meming moar coarz for tasks that most people who own a computer will never do

>>60724215
Keep telling yourself that

File: cinebench-r15-740x371.png (35KB, 740x371px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 740x371px

>>60724215
Their IPC is dead even in most cases.

http://www.zolkorn.com/en/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-vs-intel-core-i7-7700k-mhz-by-mhz-core-by-core-en/view-all/

>>60724166
(You)

>>60724215
>Stop meming moar coarz for tasks that most people who own a computer will never do
Everywhere outside of x86 "muh clocks" meme land, more cores has been the standard for awhile. ARM CPUs have been on 8 cores for years.

>>60724231
The only good Intel CPU is the poorfag Pentium simply because it's extremely cheap.

>>60724244
Single core is all you need. Dual core is overkill

>>60719182
Well, ryzen is today what bulldozer was when it released

@60724266 (You)

>>60724231
CinebenchR15 isn't most cases lol
>>60724244
>just slap two snap dragons together
>being able to load multiple things slowly is better than loading a few things really fast!
lmao amd logic

>>60724266
And intel is releasing Netburst 2.0 now

>>60724303
see
>>60723228

>>60720344
>unless you are buying a sub $100 processor
What Intel is better than FX-6300?
Not saying that it's good but it's very good performance for money.

>>60724298
You could just look at the link, but of course you won't because you're a shitposting shill. Or you'll come back and post that one benchmark that's clearly skewed in favor of Intel and start screaming about how AMD sucks. Fuck off.

>>60724320
So basically Netburst 2.0 is a good thing for you.

>>60719182
it wasn't that bad, it was just terrible in single threaded and overall IPC

and it was terrible because everything is compiled with intel compiler and loses 20% performance when it's not an intel chip. Spoofing GenuineIntel for your vendor ID brought major gains to bulldozer. But it still wasn't amazing.

Ryzen is much better than every intel chip in every category.. so even when garbage programs are compiled to special snowflake intel standards... ryzen is able to keep up.

>>60724321
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Pentium-G4620-vs-AMD-FX-6350-Six-Core/3895vsm713

>>60724298
Keep blubbering about "muh clocks" shithead, ARM is already eating Intel's lunch and it isn't slowing down. Intel is making a desperation effort to add more cores to their mainstream lineup, but it's too little too late.

>>60724385
MOAR GIGAHURTZ
MOAR COARS
MOAR BINGBUS

This is the power of Intel.

>>60724372
>>60724385
>>60724405
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html
ARM is going to take over the desktop market share by 2020 just as much as the India space program is

>>60720324
don't have a fire extinguisher handy m8?

>>60724414
>pissmark

lol >>60724231

>>60724414
>passmark
wew lad

also I support ARM

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-7700K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-1700/3647vs3917
BULLDOZER 2.0

>>60724449
Intel is better only if you play dwarf fortress.

>>60724414
>pissmark

Also

https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/31/15711334/microsoft-windows-10-arm-qualcomm-pcs-asus-hp-lenovo

Intel totally failed getting into mobile spaces, Microsoft and OEMs are giving up on them.

>>60724449
>half the power usage
>61% faster

damn intel is a gonner

File: muhsinglecore.png (454KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

454KB, 1920x1200px

>>60724449
Just some perspective on how little that single core advantage is, lol.

>>60724414
>desktop market share
Increasingly irrelevant desu. ARM doesn't really need to take over the desktop, just needs to surround everything else around it. Then Intel is reduced to their little desktop niche. ARM's even butting into the server room recently.

>>60724504
I'm actually looking forward to what a Ryzen mobile APU can do
I don't want to have to have a literal full sized 1060 in my laptop just to have decent performance lol
>>60724538
That's fine, competition is good
>>60724517
Call me when that translates into higher real game fps

>>60724517
>$1000 CPU
>155
>$200 CPU
>150

wew lad, where's the 6950X?????????????????? even ryzen's worst cores beat intels best HAHAHAH

>>60724517
Holy shit Intel is fucking finished. No wonder it stutters like a piece of shit.

>>60724550
>real game fps
Back to >>>/v/ man child.

>>60724580
That's your GPU m8
It runs modern games just fine provided you have a decent enough card
Nobody is having issues even on 4th gen i-series cores in games like bf1 and re7

>>60724550
>I use my PC as a glorified games console and literally nothing else
You are the cancer killing x86.

>>60724622
Yes, I run actual games instead of game benchmarks and /agdg/ tier software, so what?

>>60724622
>killing x86
good for him then, x86 sucks

>>60724637
It gets better min fps in most games and you shouldn't care about max unless you need to compensate for something else.
Anyway what are you doing on /g/ if you're only interested in gayyming?
>>>/v/

>>60724621
No thanks I don't want my CPU to stutter like shit because of flawed and obsolete architecture.

>>60724621
Intel user here, the chip microstutters constantly. It's only noticeable when you've used Ryzen and have a reference to actual smoothness. It might be because of raw core count but also maybe not.

>>60724704
It's a good thing that's something you don't have to worry about then
>>60724685
Why am I on /g/ if I'm only interested in technology? Because I'm not an AMD exclusive fanboy
It's /g/ not /amd/

>>60724736
It is if you buy Intel, sadly.

>>60724741
>>60724726
I have Intel too and it just works on my machine

>>60724726
Yeah Ryzen is overall much better and smoother in gaming, this is a well-established fact.

>>60724761
Well established by average FPS that aren't anything special
Reddit concensus yelp reviews aren't in game fps

>>60724778
Unlike you, I don't give a shit about reddit.

>>60724017
>1700 is above 7700k
lol what a failure

>>60723974
>>60723993
>>60723998
Good to know the 1700X beats the 7700k in every scenario, not to mention better gayming experience. Nice.

>>60724835
>falling for gpu bottleneck benchmarks

>>60724877
>falling for quad memes

>>60724805
Unlike you, I don't pretend to not give a shit about Reddit tier consensus when I actually do
>>60724891
>falling for moar coarz

>>60724935
Holy shit you're obsessed with that site kek.

>>60724736
You are not interested in technology if you are interested solely in games and don't care about anything else.

>>60724966
Just your average braindead Intel shill

>>60724966
I'm not interested in technology if I'm interested in technology? Ok

File: 0jQHQgf.png (239KB, 800x1000px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 800x1000px

I don't use neckbeard linux, edit autistic videos or stream shitty games.

No point getting Ryzen or Intel moar cores meme

>>60725002
If you disregard everything about anything else and can only talk about games then seriously, >>>/v/ will be more up your speed. Because here you will get shat on for being a retarded gayymer who knows nothing about technology.
I bet you also post in server CPU threads with retarded comments like
>who needs 18 cores for gayyming, Intel still has more fps

>>60725049
>poorfags

>>60725049
This
PewDiePie wannabes plz go
>>60725067
I'm fine with being shat on by exclusionary non tech enthusiast AMD seekrit clubz. There's more components to a PC than just the CPU. Do mechanical keyboard, monitor, headphone and mouse generals belong on /v/ too? I don't think so.

>>60725112
For the last time, AMD is NOT for gaming. Why do you even come to a thread that talks about something out of your scope of interests?
Just to shitpost?
>Do mechanical keyboard, monitor, headphone and mouse generals belong on /v/ too?
Gayyming equipment is frowned upon in those threads. They talk about actual quality stuff.

>>60725112
I bet you own one more more Razer products.
>>60725151
>AMD is NOT just for gaming
Fixed.

>>60725151
You can use quality stuff for gaming, like a quality headphone and amp/dac
I'm using a cherry mx blue keyboard to game on right now
And people ask about high refresh rate 1440p vs 4k 60 all of the time
>>60725167
Nope, never have, never will, why would I buy something with QC issues and cloud drivers?

>>60719289
>shit multicore performance

In massively multicore tasks they beat i7s.

>>60725167
I mean gayymers only care about max fps and are too retarded to think that maybe something that doesn't drop frames would be better than 300+fps in CSGO (on their 60Hz screen).
They also buy overpriced intel shit and a 1060 when cheaper CPU and 1070 would give better fps.
Just admit Intel is best for gaming to avoid arguing with them.

File: 'The_Madman'_by_Francisco_Goya.jpg (26KB, 384x497px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 384x497px

>>60725197
>defending bulldozer

>>60722523
It has a higher theoretical IPC, but in most real world situations Skylake is faster. Maybe with improved L2 Cache bandwidth and latency it might be able to close the gap.

>>60725223
>subtle supporting nvidia to avoid being called amd fanboy

kek

>>60725227
It was better at compiling Linux kernels than the i7, so /g/ should be defending it as well.

>>60725238
Are you retarded?
AMD is a budget option. If you have enough money AND need the performance nVIDIA is a superior choice.
Everybody knows that, /g/ is just laughing at 1080p @60Hz screen + GTX 1080Ti retards.

File: AMD-Ryzen-Vs-Kabylake-Single-THreaded-Test-IPC.png (20KB, 493x280px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 493x280px

>>60725237

>>60725264
>AMD is a budget option
Wut?

>>60725237
see
>>60724231
Kabylake still faster but only by 5-7% in most cases.
>>60725284
This was some stupid guesswork done by wccftech. It's not accurate.

>>60725299
Did the prices fluctuate again, few months back AMD was better bang for buck for budget builds. (Though you could argue electricity bills make nVIDIA better even here in the long run.)

File: 12314521121431.jpg (506KB, 1600x1545px) Image search: [Google]

506KB, 1600x1545px

>>60725312

>>60725264
AMD is far from being a budge option you amd shill.

>>60723993
what gpu ?
because the doom result don't make sense

>>60725264
lol. We're only saying it's OK to buy 1060's in /pcbg/ because all the 570-80's are soldout. Even then users are still opting for them in their builds.
But what you said about the 7700K rings true. See >>60724615

File: 1496473762827.png (278KB, 1406x724px) Image search: [Google]

278KB, 1406x724px

>>60725331
You don't want to know

>>60725349
>AMD is far from being a budge option
Probably, I don't even know what it means to be honest.

>>60725331
Cryptofaggots raped the market again.
>>60725352
It's a 970 or something, all those results are GPU bottlenecked.

>>60725334
Every one of those is from the link that was already posted, lol

Stop cherrypicking that goddamn winrar bench and farcry primal, it's so fucking obvious

http://www.zolkorn.com/en/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-vs-intel-core-i7-7700k-mhz-by-mhz-core-by-core-en/view-all/

>>60725334
were these before patches? love to see up to date ones.
>>60725347
fry cry primal and rise of the tomb raider are hardly cherry picked ones

>>60725370
hum that explain the bad dx12/vulkan result

>>60725352
Some amd shill made those benchmarks using a 3.5gb meme card.

>>60725381
>my cherry picked specific use case benchmarks that aren't even stable at the tested frequencies are better than your cherry picked benchmarks!

>>60725361
Holy fuck.

>>60725415
Fuck off. The majority of results on that link show that they're within 10% of eachother.
>aren't even stable
What the fuck are you even talking about?

>>60725415
>same ram frequency
>no gpu bottleneck
>same set ups

NO IT'S CHERRY PICKED. Give it up Amd shill

>>60725432
>>60725454
The only solution so far to random Ryzen crashes has been to downclock
https://community.amd.com/thread/215773

>>60719182
>bulldoser
>bad
are you ze intelcuck?

>>60725476
>linux

>>60725381
You don't even understand the point being made. Ryzen is demonstrably very close on the majority of IPC tests in the article you linked to the 7700k which is kaby lake.

Being that close to Kaby Lake is very strong evidence that Ryzen is very close to even with Skylake in IPC, which is the actual claim I was refuting.

Maybe try actually reading the posts you are responding too before you jerk your knee.

>>60725476
This is an issue that already has a thread (that's been shit up with samefagging), but anyway if it's a microcode issue AMD will just fix it. They've been very proactive in fixing these things. It's not like Intel doesn't have errata with random issues, either. http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/specification-updates/desktop-6th-gen-core-family-spec-update.pdf

>>60720386
delidcuck didn't hear about agesa 1.0.0.6

>>60725237
>>60725284
>>60724231
Single synthetic benchmarks are not a good indication of IPC

>>60725515
Almost the best IPC and clock speed
≠
The best IPC and clock speed
>>60725542
Neither is Cinebench

>>60725542

http://www.zolkorn.com/en/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-vs-intel-core-i7-7700k-mhz-by-mhz-core-by-core-en/view-all/

Here's a large number of them, and they show that Ryzen is fairly close to Kabby Lake in IPC, suggesting it's very close to Skylake IPC, if not dead tied with it.

>>60720814
>free
intelcucks pay for it

>>60725570
What part of
>I was refuting "It has a higher theoretical IPC, but in most real world situations Skylake is faster"
Do you not understand?

I never claimed Ryzen has "the best IPC and clock speed", though Ryzen does appear to be capable of better base clock speed and all core turbo than Skylake or Skylake-X CPUs with 8 or more cores.