Why does a $500 flagship AMD CPU from 2017 have worse single-threaded

heil hitler

>>61740874
>$500
>flagship
Um, threadripper is their flagship, try again sweaty.

>ryzen beats the competition in cpu-z benchmark
>cpu-z update released
>this is no longer true

>>61740975
Why does a $999 flagship AMD CPU from 2017 have worse single-threaded performance than a $320 Intel CPU from 2011?

>>61740874
Why does a $1700 flagship Intel CPU from 2016 have worse single-threaded performance than a $320 Intel CPU from 2011?

Why are you comparing an overclocked CPU with a not overclocked CPU?

Ryzen at 4Ghz has the same single thread performance as Sandy Bridge at 5Ghz

File: 5ghz.png (55KB, 806x402px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 806x402px

>>61741049
Show me a Rypoo at 4GHz even coming close to this score. Go ahead, I'll wait.

>>61740874 (OP)
Lets think about this for a second.

Hardware+Software that has 16 cores and 32 threads might be optimized for using 32 threads rather than just one alone.

Have you considered that? Ditto for 32 cores.

File: 2011 vs 2017.png (17KB, 407x404px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 407x404px

>this is what Intel calls progress

>>61741124
jesus

>>61741026
op and Intel btfo

>>61741124
>>61741140
>4.7GHz vs 3.8GHz

An overclocked 7600K scores nearly 600 points single thread.

>>61740874
is single threaded performance even important now?

>>61741160
that's 27% improvement in 6 years

4.06% improvement per year
4.89% per processor generation

>>61741109
nobody fucking cares
Ryzen fucked Intel's anus whether you like it or not

>>61741109
http://www.cpuid.com/news/51-cpu-z-1-79-new-benchmark-new-scores.html

reminder cpuz adjusted their scoring because ryzen was too good.

>>61740874

don't pretend like your CPU is stock fag

>>61741195
>"P-P-P-Poozen can d-do that t-too!"
>Prove it then.
>"Benchmarks don't even matter Poozen is the best!"

AMDrones everybody!

>>61741236
Yesssssssss, it's all a big conspiracy to mask Poozen's amazing performance! All benchmarks and real world applications have been bought by Intel and the Jewish Global Conspiracy, otherwise you'd see Poozen on top, because the performance is there. Honest. :^)

File: 47.png (13KB, 403x402px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 403x402px

>>61741109

lmao 5Ghz is worse than my 4 core i5

File: Capture.png (16KB, 399x398px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 399x398px

The 7770K is a beast..
Anyone got a 7600K to compared against my [email protected]?

>>61741261
>Intel CPU from 2015 beats Intel CPU from 2011

Really made me think.

Still worse multithreaded performance though. Imagine falling for the i5 meme.

File: 2500k vs 1700.png (63KB, 946x862px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 946x862px

>>61741256
4% difference single threaded
+175% multithreaded performance

Because GPU-Z got gimped with an update when Ryzen outperformed Intel. GPU-Z confiormed for Intel shill or got paid.

File: jhffikufy.jpg (8KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 225x225px

>>61740975
>sweaty

File: merchant.gif (12KB, 501x504px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 501x504px

>>61741370

>>61741370
>>61741429
>It's all da jooz fault!!!

>>>/pol/

File: Screenshot 2017-08-05 03.14.39.png (22KB, 407x404px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 407x404px

>>61740874
The CPU-Z scores are weird

>>61740874
who the fuck still use 2011 processor??

get a fucking job man!!

>>61741504
It's using dated instructions so more CPUs can bench on it.
If we used something like AVX2 the older CPUs would crawl or not manage to bench at all.

>>61741256
>PEE PEE POO POO
>MOMMY TAKE THE MEAN AMD AWAY
>MOMMY CHANGE MY DIAPER
>PEE PEE POO POO
what the fuck is wrong with you

>>61741438
>literally calling facts /pol/
are you a parody of yourself? they straight up changed the algorithm for CPU-Z because ryzen could fit the entire benchmark in cache and it was "unfairly overperforming"

but no tell me more about the raycism and how it triggers you

>>61740874
How the hell are you supposed to compare against a "reference" 1800X when the performance of Zen CPUs seems to rely entirely on RAM speed and timings?

>>61741559
I have a 2400 i5 and it doesn't bottleneck me and works perfectly at 3.4GHz. I'd rather add $250 to GPU savings instead of 5fps gains CPU

>>61741236
>we found out that their ALUs executed this unexpected sequence in a much more efficient way so we removed it from the test
not even hiding it kek
hurr durr this particular part of our synthetic benchmark is irrelevant, but the rest of the score totally is!

File: 1489103005792.png (162KB, 633x900px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 633x900px

>>61741236
DELID THIS!!!!!!!

>>61741256
You're mentally ill.

>>61740874
>cpu-z
The (((update))) was a success.


|
|>
|
|3
|
|

>>61741236
oy vey

File: CPUZ.jpg (76KB, 417x413px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 417x413px

Guys, aren't the modern CPUs supposed to be 10 times faster than my ancient shit by now?

File: cpuz_2017-08-05_12-45-33.png (16KB, 403x402px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 403x402px

>>61740874
Not sure.. why does my $200 AMD cpu come so close to to this $1000 Intel CPU from 2014?

>>61742256

Yeah but having lots of cache is an unfair advantage because efsyvghdgfjn trnfmkbmurvtydfnverdstbwts!!

>>61741236
>almost 30% higher than Intel Skylake
>We reviewed many software and synthetics benchmarks without being able to find a single case where such a performance boost occurs. We're now convinced that this special case is very unlikely to happen in real-world applications. Our new algorithm described below does not exhibit this behaviour.
It's not like this explanation doesn't make any sense, though. Zen doesn't exhibit 30% better single-thread performance than Skylake in any real-world test.

That being said, though, it does imply that their benchmarking methodology consists in trying to develop a benchmark that matches some perceived real-world performance, which is problematic.

>>61744578
It really is a terrible benchmark tacked on to an info tool. Don't know why anyone uses it except to troll. Which is probably what the OP is doing here.

why does a $9000 xeon from 2017 have worse single thread performance than a highly overclocked $320 intel CPU from 2011?

>>61741160
Also disabled HT

AMD is a joke

File: intel ceo yells at clouds.png (232KB, 800x449px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 800x449px

>>61745997
Get back in the cuckcage, Brian.