i3-8350K spotted

>>61989451
If we get 6c/12t i7s for the same price (yeah, that's what makes me worry) then I'm sold. However, the whole lineup seems rushed as fuck.
>tfw can't go r5 because 3000MHz RAM is overpriced where I live

>>61989506
It's all going to come down to pricing (and if the i5-8600K/i7-8700K is a housefire)

>>61989451
$150 unlocked 4/4 from Intel would become the default gaming CPU or cause a price drop on Ryzen.
Extremely interested in the performance of the new 6/6 i5's and I'll be buying the 6/12 for my own computer.
It's a purpose built 144hz box or I'd buy Ryzen, relax poos.

>>61989451
Was the 7350K released at a reasonable price? No? Wow, it's fucking nothing. $250 minimum.

Good. Intel can try and pump out a competitive product at a competitive price point. Then AMD will simply price drop their already cheap r3/R5 lines and Intel will be out in the cold. Again. You have to realize that AMD has something like 85% yields on the Ryzen production line since even their Threadripper series is just multiple Ryzen chips sharing the same piece of silicon. Their margin for profit is huge.

Besides, until Intel starts using fluxless solder or metal under the lid again, I refuse to buy their garbage.

>>61990115
>AMD has something like 85% yields
this is for only fully functional dies. total number would be close to 99%. nothing goes to waste.

>>61989506
The difference between 2133 and 3200 ram is 10 points with a 1600 on cinebench. Tested it myself several times.

>>61990178
Even better. 85% of fully functional 1800X's and even the "defective" ones are just cut down properly and turned into the lower core variants. So their profit margin is huge. While AMD is looking to make as much money as possible, they now have wiggle room to go toe to toe with Intel.
>>61989506
This anon >>61990193 is right. I have a 1700X paired with 32GB of ddr4-2400mhz at CL14. The performance difference is negligible, and only matters if you MUST have 85+ fps in everything. If that's the case, you wouldn't be considering Ryzen anyway.

>>61990178
This makes me happy for some reason. All that effort into the complex as fuck wafer/ die making process doesn't end up in the trash.

File: RAM.png (46KB, 1299x936px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 1299x936px

>>61990193
With poorly coded games ram speed matter.

Do you really want to gimp your system for a saving of less than 50USD? In a 1000+ USD system?

>>61990063
It would be $170-$180 as that is the MSRP for the current i3-7350K. Which is still a big drop from the i5-7600K at $240-$245 MSRP.

>>61990216
I haven't tested anything in between but i bet 2400-2600 is likely where the diminishing returns really comes into play. Was getting like 1148 with 2133 and 1158 with 3200 on CAS 16 vengeance.

>>61990272
It's around 2666mhz where benefits of faster ram drops off. Most people buy 3000/3200mhz kits because the price difference is so little. However RAM has recently gone up in price. Nothing stopping you from getting a 2400mhz kit and bumping the voltage a bit to achieve 2666mhz.

I went the opposite way. Kept my ram at 2400mhz, but lowered latency. I got my kit down to CL12 down from CL14.

>Intel
>lowering prices
fucking lmao, not happening at all. they would rather spend billions bribing OEMs rather than dropping prices

>>61989451
You think AMD won't drop prices until Pinnacle Ridge comes out in some 3-4 months?

>$150 quad core i3
>$300 300 series board

Yup real AMD killer.

>>61990937
This pretty much, they'll do in on launch day to shit on Intel's parade.

>>61990193
cinebench doesn't scale with RAM speed, muh gaymes do.

>>61989451
but is it better than my i5 2500k?

>>61989451
Good, if AMD drops the Ryzen price even more.

I'm still going to get an AMD kit.

Intel never again. FUck intel!

>>61990598
It would just be a rebrand if they brought it out at the same or similar MSRP as the i5-7600K.

>>61989451
>4c/4t i3
>6c/6t i5
>6c/12t i7
This really shows how Intel has fucked us for like 7 years.
If that i3 pricing is right, AMDs low end is fucked.
4c/4t i5s have dominated in gaymen for a long time

A 38% drop in MSRP seems pretty drastic for Intel.

>>61991231
>$300 300 series board
Wait, what?

>>61991231
>$300 300 series board
Low end Z boards are like $120, what are you talking about.?

>>61991633
10 core Intel underwent a 70% drop.

>>61991359
>cinebench doesn't scale with RAM speed, muh gaymes do.
High speed ram is the only way to get ryzen to play games.

Actually, a 6c/12t could with the ability to run 4,500mhz DDR4 is what I wanted.

We'll have to see how well the chip contacts the HIS.
My water cooling loop can handle the heat, only if the thermal Jizz actually works.

>>61991662
Yeah, 200 series z boards. Just wait for the kikery.

>>61991239
It won't stop people from buying intel. Unless amd does a significant price drop.

>>61990319
What noticable benefits are you getting?

Even if Coffee Lake proves to be good, AMD already has my money with 1700 an'd I'm not gonna go through another mobo, cpu and os install. With AM4 being upgradeable platform I can just toss a new cpu in if I feel the need.

File: aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS9MLzEvNjg1MDQ1L29yaWdpbmFsLzEyLVRlbXBlcmF0dXJlLURpZmZlcmVuY2VzLnBuZw==.png (21KB, 711x533px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 711x533px

>>61991819
>only if the thermal Jizz actually works

>>61992077
This is targeted for the rest of us who didn't upgrade this generation. I might even skip coffee lake though, and wait for zen2.

>>61992077
>With AM4 being upgradeable platform I can just toss a new cpu in if I feel the need.
I never got this meme
Mobos die long before the CPU.
I've had two lga 1155 boards die on me.
In 3 years, ur ryzen Mobo will probably be going bad.

>>61992271
I had my 3570k rig for 5 years before upgrading and only problem I had was a dead ram slot which was solved by using the other two slots. Anecdotal evidence like yours.

>>61989451
>If this is released at an i3 price point and not an i5 price point, AMD is in trouble.
Why? If AMD drops the price of the R5 1400 by 10% then we're looking at the same price, yet the Ryzen CPU gets better performance.

Also, Ryzen CPUs are cheaper.

>>61991615
R5 1400 gets you better performance than that i3 and it only costs 10€ more.

>>61991900
slightly higher score in benchmarks and games. As little as 5 FPS. The whole point of higher clocked memory is to make up for the accompanying looser timings. So even if my clock speed is reduced, overall latency is less because of my tighter timings.

Honestly the memory speed differences for Ryzen are hyped up. I only changed my timings because I could. I'm still at stock voltage. It's a free performance boost that took me 30 minutes of changing a few settings and stress testing.

>>61992242
Well, I've done a lot of De-liding.
I shouldn't have to

My theory is: Intel doesn't want you to overclock.
Intel wants to better split their lineup.
They don't want a $200 overclocked i5 to match a more expensive i7.
So they use a larger tolerance between the chip and HIS to increase heat to limit OC.
(The TIM isn't the issue)

>>61992271
sure if you're buying bottom of the barrel garbage boards and then pushing 1.4v to the CPU for it's entire life span. My buddy still has a fully functional Asus ROG LGA 775 board that kept his Core 2 Extreme heavily overclocked for years on end.

And if you're not overclocking, motherboards last even longer. My 1700X is still at stock because I don't see the need of OC yet, and I have an Asus Crosshair VI

>>61992381
>The whole point of higher clocked memory is to make up for the accompanying looser timings. So even if my clock speed is reduced, overall latency is less because of my tighter timings.
Except the part where CCX communication is dependent on memory clock.

>>61992337
>yet the Ryzen CPU gets better performance.
So i5s still easily beat AMDs lower end lineup.
And this i3 is just a rebadged i5.
Anything below the 1600x is pointless

>>61992421
Look at the link you moron. It quite literally shows you that the R5 1400 gives you better performance at a 10€ higher price. Yet it's 65W compared to the i3's 91W.

i5s are much more expensive, and thus you'll deal with much more expensive Ryzen CPUs as well.

>>61992407
>sure if you're buying bottom of the barrel garbage boards and then pushing 1.4v to the CPU for it's entire life span.

Both boards were $250 high end ones.
2600k was at 1.25v it's whole life.
The z77 I have now was $300 new and it's dying as we speak.
No USB, Lan, dead ram slot, bios doesn't work.
MOBOS don't last

>>61992415
and yet performance difference between Ryzen 3200mhz and 2400mhz has shown to be at most 7% faster in some tasks. It's not the end all be all.
>>61992457
I still have my generation 1 Asus Sabertooth 990FX fully functional

As is my MSI G46 970 AM3+ board

Then again those are AMD boards. I did have 2 different intel boards die on me. Maybe it's an Intel thing?

>>61992337
>Why? If AMD drops the price of the R5 1400 by 10% then we're looking at the same price, yet the Ryzen CPU gets better performance.

You are vastly overestimating the performance of the R5 1400. It would match it in multicore and lose in single core by 20-25%.

>>61992457
that problem sounds like you have Dirty power delivery. What's your Power supply look like? When is the last time you replaced it?

>>61992450
>Look at the link you moron
That link is comparing it to the i5-7600K. Not the R5 1400.

>>61992457
What did you do to it? My X58 920 is still kicking around in a NAS even.

>>61992568
>Dirty power delivery.
It had a 800w Gold Corsair PS for a long time.
And now a 1000w good CM one.
Both pass a 45min PS test.

I think MSI and Asus just make shit boards.

>>61992670
Well both our experiences are anecdotal. I've owned MSI and Asus boards and never had them die. But all my boards that are still kicking are AMD boards. Maybe because older AMD CPUs were so power hungry and hot running that all AMD boards are built WAY overkill?

Still, look into a decent surge protector.

>>61990115
so you're saying amd is charging more than they should and jewing us

>>61992731
And you have any doubt of that?
When your rivals are literal jews, you have quite a big headroom for jewing yourself.

>>61992731
>More than they should

How so? AMD CPUs are priced below the mainstream Intel competition. (1700 pricing vs 7700k, 1600 vs i5, 1200 vs i3). Just because the company has finally gotten their production line in order doesn't mean that they have to start selling their product at absolute rock bottom prices. If anything AMD needs all this money. Look at what Intel was becoming when they had absolutely no competition. I paid full price on release day for an i7-6700k, which I then sold to buy the 1700X on release day, also for full price. Buying the 1700X seemed to hurt me less.

>>61989451
It's really hard to tell what this means.

I mean, the thing says that it has 4 cores and 4 threads, so that's i5 territory as it is, unless the i5s are going to shift into 4 cores and 8 threads while i7s become 6 cores and 12 threads and i9s higher.

But it is just a single benchmark so who the fuck knows.

>>61989451
Nice, just bought 100k

>>61989451
>suddenly intel becomes affordable

>>61990266
If you put $ you dont have to put USD