Oh shit son CPU-Z thread rate muh overclock?

>>61349242
also compared to 8350 because thats what i upgraded from

File: file.png (5KB, 1224x83px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 1224x83px

waiting for threadripper since x299 turned out to be a bigger joke "upgrade" than x99, R7 1700 is nice but in reality outside of the extra 2 cores everything else is on par with my OC'd 3930k @ 4.4ghz, and I can push this to 4.8ghz 24/7 during the winter months.

>>61349242
95% of the performance
For 1/5 the price

>>61349510
I'm talking about 6950X vs 1700

Very nice anon, got mine at 3.6 just for the temps and stability, cheers to the new 2600K

>>61349451
Those were / are still pretty damn expensive, and the r7 1700 is $269.99 right now cause amazon, also, I plan on just moving to Zen2 (the 7nm upgrade that is on IBMs process) and it sounds like that process hits 5ghz easy, like, thats the speed they are looking to ship at (from IBM at least) and all i would need to do is swap the CPU, also I plan on using the computer for streaming and video editing, I found that I can play vidya at 1440p on my r9 390 well enough, and my r7 1700 can record on bandicam, 95% quality, 60FPS without dropping a single frame, and the files come out to about 10gb per 15 minutes.

>>61349520
I tried for 4ghz, but the vcore jump from 3.9 - 3.95 for stable was 1.3250 - 1.3750 and I found that to be a bit high, but from what I've read, 1.44 is supposed to be where r7 1700's are hitting 4ghz, so maybe mines a great chip? dunno, not really up to pumping 1.4v or higher into it, my 8350 could take like 1.55 all day but i dont wanna do that to my 1700