So is it shit or not?

File: 1498027921228.jpg (89KB, 520x974px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 520x974px

Way too expensive, way too hot. If you're looking for a workstation CPU go for threadripper, if you're looking for a gaming CPU go for a 7700k or 1600.
Similar to the I3 and I5, this CPU has almost no market.

>>62074615
unfortunately, I can't use AMD for this build because it's for a music production rig, so is my only option the enthusiast i7s?

>>62074688
What software are you using?

>>62074702
Pro Tools, Bitwig, and a shitload of VSTs that are huge cpu hogs.
Unfortunately, in order to record at low latency/ buffer rates Im gonna have to use an intel cpu

>>62074688
i9 doesn't seem bad it does trade blows with threadripper, but if latency is your concern then it might be better off to wait for next gen, or get an i9.

>>62074767
Price isnt really a factor, either- It will also be dedicated to production software only.
I was planning on liquid cooling it as well, so is there any major problems with its performance or is the problem mostly because it kinda only caters to a niche market like me?

>>62074747
Then go for the I9, Just get a really good CPU cooler

>>62074849
Liquid cooling is fine, right?

>>62074867
If you're not OCing, yeah

>>62074747
>>62074688
Just an FYI, you're full of shit if you think AMD's Ryzen / Threadripper CPU line isn't suitable for your listed requirements.

Motherboards are way too expensive. Get something else.

>>62074898
The power output, yeah I'm not doubting that - this is entirely about latency
>>62074916
Price is not really a problem for this one
>>62074890
Nope, I need it to be as quiet as possible

>>62074557
dont expect to ever upgrade the cpu or buy a future motherboard.. becasue what is on the market at launch will be the only thing that it will ever work in.
The intel rubickcube of socket + chipset has to line up JUST right inorder to get it to work with anything

I'd still get x99. Just too big risk of cpu/phases overheating even on stock voltage. X99 would also be more quiet.

I do not understand why ryzen can't be used because of latency but still, x99 is nice.

>>62074946
>this is entirely about latency

Again, you're full of shit.

File: bouaziziburning.jpg (20KB, 422x396px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 422x396px

>>62074557

The fuck is this "latency" nonsense? The only thing latent around here is my gayness, not 2017 AMD.

>>62074557
See if you can get a 6950x for 800-900$. not becauseit's cheaper but because it's better

>>62075468
or just get x99 and a xeon cpu

>>62074812
>I was planning on liquid cooling it as well, so is there any major problems with its performance or is the problem mostly because it kinda only caters to a niche market like me?
Honestly you seem like the target market. For latency the i9 wins, so for your use case it's probably the best right now. Supposedly it has higher ipc over threadripper, but TR comes out ahead for MC, but that's negated if you go for the higher end i9's with more cores, and you'll be water cooling, so that should handle temps., and you could even oc a bit which would take care of the low base clocks.
Since you have the money, and the actual use case scenario that would benefit from an i9 I would say go for it. Just my opinion anyways.

>>62074898
>Just an FYI, you're full of shit if you think AMD's Ryzen / Threadripper CPU line isn't suitable for your listed requirements.
Why? OP needs a low latency solution for music production.

>>62075500
>>62075517
Is latency your code word for single threaded performance? What latency are you talking about? Core to core communication latency? Memory access latency? Instruction latency (lol because modern CPUs are superscaler and can exec out of order)?

What in the hell are you talking about.

>>62074557
Less features than AMD's high end platform. Truly high core count skus are still unavailable. Has no frequency advantage when all cores are in use. IPC edge is there, but for the price of a 18 core i9 you could buy a 1950X, a 1080Ti, and a custom CPU watercooling loop. Will consume less energy and be subject to less heat per unit performance.

>>62075530
I'm talking about something that threadripper can't accomplish unless you work on a single ccx, so shoo shill shoo.

>>62074557
Your life? It's shit, no doubt.

>>62075553
Again, until you actually substantiate your accusations you're full of shit.

>>62075618
Again op's use case would benefit more from the i9. If I wanted to attach my personal opinions for op I would suggest for op to use ubuntu studio, and make use of the included low latency kernel, but I did not attach my emotions to my post. So can you tell me why the threadripper is a better buy for op's use case without any of your faggot emotions getting in the way, or is threadripper just better, because you feel that it is?

>>62075661
I don't give a fuck about TR vs i9, I want to know what your (((latency))) meme is you faggot.

>>62075692
he probably means audio latency that relies on single thread performance

>>62075724
I asked if that's what they meant >>62075530 and got called a shill >>62075553

Why can't SOPA posters answer a simple question?

>>62075692
>latency meme
>audio production
Nigger you don't know enough to be interjecting on this subject.

lmao at this latency garbage

Wtf, intel has better latency?
I hate amd now

>>62075760
>Wtf, intel has better latency?
Yes
>I hate amd now
why? Do you need low latency?

>>62075739
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you're either a time traveller from 2011 or have been misled by someone in your classes.

>>62075783
Sure. I'll give you the benefit of a doubt, and just pretend that you aren't forcing a bad alternative for some sort of compensation.

>>62074557
Yes, i9 series are shit, lack of L2 Cache showed to be real issue for Intels current arch.

>>62075795
Again, until you explain your latency meme you're full of shit.

>high end CPU
>audio production

This has to be bait

>>62075767
No, but I want only the best!

>>62075795
>LATANCY LATANCY
>What latency??
>LATANCY LATANCY
Please, explain to a person what do you mean by latency, you see computers have many inherent latencies, what exact latency is the problem with AMD CPUs?

>>62075840
Well, then you want to stay away from Intel, it's inner core latency is horrendous compared to AMD and with introduction of Mesh it's worse than AMD's IF.
Oh and, 7700k letancy is not comparable to i9 CPUs

>>62075862
This. AMD's intra CCX CCT is ~40ns, inter CCX CCT is 110ns compared to Intel i9's 105ns over all cores.

>>62075862
i7 7700k actually probably is the strongest CPU with extremely low latency (cache) imo.

>>62074557
Wait a month for 8th gen.

File: Hp-eDq8Oc-LRIxG5OLaVHJOVluXg0HHvbnfbaA2CMvw.png (437KB, 1024x659px) Image search: [Google]

437KB, 1024x659px

>>62074688
that post so just so wrong on so many levels
i guess my ryzen must be better than other ryzens..

>>62076858
I could use my pentium, but it doesn't mean that it's the best choice.

>>62076910
>ryzen is bad for content creation

Leave

There's no such thing as low latency when you're loading 16 cores, be it Intel or AMD.

>>62076910
You're too deep in jewish plots to buy a superior processor.
That's fine, waste your money.

>>62074688
Even if you want to do hackintosh you can use Ryzen, retard.
Unless you believe that Intel somehow "sounds better"

Yesterday I had high latency in World of Warcraft, should I buy an i9 as well?

>>62074946
How much is jewtel paying you to start this shitty fucking love-in for their crap CPUs?

"Latency issues"? Get fucked.

all things considered it is pretty much shit, yeah

What is it with normies thinking that their "special" use case requires the most expensive CPU available?

Fuck off OP

File: 1499705385692.png (21KB, 711x533px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 711x533px

>>62074890
>>62074867
>>62074849
You can use the best cooler on earth but it will still overheat since it's not soldered. You can go buy one if you are fine with load temps hovering around 80-90C

>when I heard about i9 I was fucking psyched

good goy

>>62074557
i9 is the fucking king of latency, though you're kind of memeing everyone in the thread with your latency spiel
not sure why you would be needing all these cores, but a 6core coffee lake might be for you, OP
otherwise just get a coffee lake i3 and overclock it to the high heavens

>>62077456
King of latency? Core to core is over 90ns

>>62077526
That's what he's saying; it's the king of high latency. It's CTC is over 100ns.

>>62074747
You could seriously get away with using a regular 4c i7 if you bussed your shit proper. People professionally do what you're talking about with ancient macbooks and iMacs with less than half the power of any 8c Ryzen. Also what the hell is your recording process if you're having issues with a million VST's during "live recording"? Do you really do tracking with full sound processing? If so you should really be looking at either going partially outboard or just picking up a UA solution. If you're thinking the rest of the world goes from tracking>production>mixing all with the same latency setup without external hardware or a UAD you're crazy since it's not even close to a hassle to change settings anymore.

File: core_i9.png (568KB, 1820x972px) Image search: [Google]

568KB, 1820x972px

>>62074557
Pic sums it up for you

Seriously though, I wouldn't feel safe with one in my house.

File: IMG_4458.jpg (105KB, 750x738px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 750x738px

>>62075434

Its a music production thing brah, more VST's used at once = longer processing times = music signal latency

>>62074557
I don't know. "Media people" generated a lot of hate against i9, AMD spent a fuckton of money on negative campaign....
But then it also became top seller CPU in all the nearby countries (including mine), and local reviews all praise it.

Then again it costs a pretty penny, so if you have the money, go for it, I guess? But it won't be that much more powerful.
I would go with the 7700K or the next one if you just building, it's right around the corner. 8700K. Though it will be only 10-15% powerful. But if you are just building, don't see why not buy the newer.

I skipped Ryzen too because it has no iGPU. I mean I used quite some computers without an iGPU and let me tell you it FUCKING SUCKS if your GPU dies. Like yeah, "just buy another meanwhile"... fuck you.
tl;dr: 7700K is awesome, 8700K is around the corner, iGPU is fucking godsend.

>>62077723
Uhm, replace that Intel with an AMD Vega, a lot more suitable.
> inb4 muh 700W power consumption and heat output is totally normal
Get the fuck out Rajeesh. Renaming, renaming and more renaming. Then playing the wait game and putting out cards that are totally worthless.

>>62078104
this post is fucking painful to read
please fuck off

>>62078104
> AMD spent a fuckton of money on negative campaign....
Yea, 0 cents is fuckton.
i9 is an abortion because it was forced piece of shit not because AMD had counter promotion

Or are you saying that nVidia is making counter promotion for Vega and not that Vega is just bad?

>>62078143
>Yea, 0 cents is fuckton.
How much time did you spend online during Ryzen's launch and before? Even /g/, the shithole of the internet was swarmed with posts like "OMG ITS THE BEST THING EVER", and it wasn't even out. Linus? Made an hour long feature movie about how bad the i9 is and how great is AMD. That are just two examples but the internet literally exploded with AMD Ryzen4ever posts long before it was even out.

> inb4 if I close my eyes it doesn't exist
Yeah... sure thing bro. All companies have "social posters".

>>62078154
I was one of the people saying that Ryzen is better, you know why? because it fucking IS.
i9 is shit not because of AMD or Linus, it's shit because it fails versus itself. i7-6800k is better than i9 abortions. You have to be literally retarded to think that it's AMDs doing.

>>62078154
People jumped the gun on Ryzen and said it was underwhelming. Everyone said this. Then out come the microcode updates and patches from developers and suddenly people were saying how nice Ryzen is.

Good that you brought up Linus, because he obviously wasn't allowed to talk about certain things when it was time to make a "proper" i9 video. Skiping over the TIM the thermals and powerdraw as if it didn't matter. It was pathetic.

>>62078191
It was shitposted literally for months on /g/ and any other site how great it will be. Even though there was 0 benchmarks or info available. Then it came out, "best thing since sliced bread". I mean it's not hard to prove.

Make a thread: "I need the strongest single thread CPU, what do I buy??"
5 seconds later: "Buy Ryzen OP, it's the best CPU. Some shitposters will say 7700K but it's all lies, Ryzen is the best ever made."

I am not even kidding. Wish this was fucking satire, but this is the state of /g/ and the internet forums in 2017.

>Intel Shills really wanna buy sth like this
https://de.pcpartpicker.com/list/D7ZLQV

>AMD Faggots save a whole PC buying Ryzen
https://de.pcpartpicker.com/list/qdBDsJ

Just to make it clear. Buying Intel is not really recommandable at this point.
AMD's Ryzen use less power, heat up less, are better at multithreaded tasks(like content creation), are cheaper and are compatible with higher RAM-Clocks.

But ist okay, stick to Intel if want to throw away money.

>>62078516
>stop recommending things that are better
>buy Intel because I say so
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

UMA

>>62078809
Remember that devs coded for single thread because it was easier and Intel cpus had good enough ipc for it. Now that 6+ cores will be the standard they will have to code everything to multi threaded performance. In a few years you won't be able to do shit on 4 cores.

>>62078104
>I skipped Ryzen too because it has no iGPU

Talks only about the Intel K-models....guess what, with no iGPU

>>62078516
And yet ryzen continues to be the no-brainer CPU to buy. There's no reason to buy a 7700k unless you play nothing but dwarf fortress.

>>62078516
What the fuck are you talking about? There's universal agreement that the 7700k is king of single thread and the best choice for high end gaming. What people have been saying is that this is unlikely to remain true going forward, so for people who don't upgrade often, a Ryzen chip is probably the better buy despite the 7700k being better at this time. People have to make that decision on their own based on how much money they want to spend on their computer over a period of years and not just what they want RIGHT NOW.

You're a child. That's the problem here. Fuck off to Call of Duty or whatever it is you do with your gaymen PC

>>62077211
No one said that ryzen was bad. Just that intel in this case is the better option.
>>62077358
You can barely write in English.
You're too deep in mental retardation. That's fine be a retard.
>normies
you're plebbit is showing, get lost chump.
>muh how dare someone suggest an i9
Poojeets raided this thread hard. Stocks are probably under performing again.

>>62079212
>you're plebbit is showing
His English is better than yours. That much is apparent.

>>62079212
>Just that intel in this case is the better option.
certainly not lavalake-x
https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Intel-Core-i9-7900X-10-core-Skylake-X-Processor-Review/Thread-Thread-Latency-and-

>>62079239
>His English is better than yours. That much is apparent.
It's not a matter of opinion.
>>62079248
>certainly not lavalake-x
For OP's scenario the i9 is the better choice.
Cry about it elsewhere faggot.

File: 080.jpg (34KB, 550x633px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 550x633px

fuck this thread is hilarious. good job intel marketing interns

AMD has fans, and they are enthusiasts who passionately care about other people's cpu choice.

>>62079332
>every time someone mentions a brand for a second on 4chan they are a shill

>>62079350
SOPA

>>62079350
i dont really care what your motivation is for posting this nonsense. it was an entertaining read and a welcome change to that faggot that just spouts his shitty all-cap flames.

>>62078871
Nigga whaaaaaaaaaaaat?

https://ark.intel.com/products/97129/Intel-Core-i7-7700K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_50-GHz

> Intel® HD Graphics 630
> inb4 the Intel Ark page is lying

>>62079506
Sir you are very much brazil emplyee of intel.

>>62079546
> gets proven wrong
> br shitpost (in broken English)

Get the fuck out.

>>62079600
Sweety my english is very good please do not be nasty boy. Based Threadripped is more powerful for half the cost of intel. Why do you sell intel when you know this to be true?

>>62079636
Threadripper has nothing to do with the 7700K. It's not even the same market.
And also, it has no iGPU either.

Threadripper = i9.
Epyc = Xeon Platinum (and other new series).

It's not exactly rocket science.

File: 1503174744101.jpg (10KB, 238x276px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 238x276px

>>62079326
>For OP's scenario the i9 is the better choice
>higher core to core latencies than previous intel CPUs
Were those graphs too complicated for you betthyno?

>>62079678
>higher core to core latencies than previous intel CPUs
Lower latencies than threadripper.

>>62079719
literally false

>>62079653
Sir threadripper is over a different league. Please do not overstate the power of an i7. You have been btfo all over this forum, and now you lie.
For you all there is to say is UMA DELICA

>>62079743
is this supposed to be funposting?

>>62079732
>Then you're just spreading false information, or are just going to compare the i9s slowest latencies to a threadripper's fastest single die latencies while being completely vague about that fact.

>>62079754
SOPA

>>62079782
Soup?
http://www.spanishdict.com/translate/sopa

>>62079787
DE MACACO

>>62079719
>higher core to core latencies than previous intel CPUs
>previous intel CPUs
>threadripper
looks like someone forgot to drink his SOPA today. Also OP could easily avoid cross CCX communication with the magic of process pinning and enjoy 4 MOAR COARZ.

>>62079787
Yours not funny

File: b297fa9f91d724c3db66314070a2ec2d--jackson-galaxy-funny-jobs.jpg (18KB, 500x279px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 500x279px

>>62079797
Hmm.
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/sopa-de-macaco-uma-delicia

At this rate I will be a Spanish-Alien translator in no time.
Kinda like this guy.

>>62079806
>looks like someone forgot to drink his SOPA today. Also OP could easily avoid cross CCX communication with the magic of process pinning and enjoy 4 MOAR COARZ.
what would be the point of "pinning" when op could just use all 18 cores of an i9, again I knew that you where going to suggest something useless.

File: 1502143993622.jpg (81KB, 444x444px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 444x444px

SOPA THREAD? SOPA THREAD.

File: 1503327587857.png (228KB, 489x394px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 489x394px

>>62079830
>i9 when even a 7700k/5960x/6950x has better CTC latencies
SOPA

>>62079819
Sir you have been btfo. Please leave thread and take your intel fud disinfo with you. Next time show proofs. I need proofs.

File: 1498256245652.jpg (30KB, 216x250px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 216x250px

>>62079819

>>62079846
What? This is now some serious shitposting.

>>62078883
>>62078929
>>62078170
>>62078143
Now check the bottom of the thread.
> inb4 I didn't tell you about this

>>62079864
SOPA

>When dumb AMD niggers fall for a bait thread

Btw, check the archives.

Wtf is sopa

>>62079955
you not funny

>>62079864
This conversation is about i9 and nothing else.
Ryzen is being introduced because it's a better product and directly competes with i9.
You fucking moron.

>>62081380
>Ryzen is being introduced because it's a better product and directly competes with i9
>better product
Not for op's intended use.

>>62081433
Indeed it is, and that was the whole point of this conversation until faggots came here to talk about how Ryzen has bigger latency than fucking 7700k

>>62081439
Op was interested in i9 (vs threadripper). Has the cash, and somehow has one of the very few use cases that an i9 would make more sense than a threadripper. Shillanons still try to sell op a threadripper.

>>62074747
ryzen is fine for those programs

>>62077361
Intel does sound better. There's more silicone between the traces which helps to isolate from interference which gives more clarity

>>62079212
you're not going to win against the average neckbeard /g/ shill. they're the only people who can have an opinion, stop arguing with them already.

>>62081517
I don't know who's joking anymore

>>62081476
i9 has no competition to threadripper, it has only competition to Ryzen 8

>>62076858
The fuck is that program doing that uses so much CPU?

>>62074557
>found articles criticizing i9, but didnt bother to read anything

>>62081639
I'm converting some mp3s to flac so I can upload them to a private tracker

>>62081680
mp3 to flac

stupid is, is stupid does

>>62081680
Good joke, they demand spectrograms.

>>62075739
>Nigger you don't know enough to be interjecting on this subject.
Clearly neither do you, since you can't actually answer his question in a coherent manner.

>>62081680
>audio production
lel

>>62074688
I understand you anon. Intel has at least the required performance amd has too many issues like lags and general poor performance.

About the heat is grossly overstated. You can run stock without any issues, the trouble is really people trying to oc like hell on it. Just couple a good aio WTH 2 fans and you are good.

>>62077421
Thermals aren't a issue if you don't oc.
Also majority of rigs I saw on 7900x don't get closer to that, early bios were overvolting as fuck. If you are doing work, a measle 200-300mhz clock will not be much different so you can do stock.
7820x can do 4.7ghz pretty easy even without delid.

>>62081923
I'm not the anon you were replying to, but I think their whole problem is that they aren't seeing where core-to-core latency will have any negative effect on OP's work.
It's not like if you compile a song using multi core cpu's, the latency from core to core will be present in the song. It still puts all the sound bits where they are supposed to go. Or am I missing something entirely here?
>lags and general poor performance
cite source please.
Also true, i9 is generally fine on stock settings, but you still need a pretty aggressive cooling solution.

>>62079806
Amd is so shitty you need to constantly handle by hand the process and tie it to cores or it shit on bed and start doing process with >200ns latency

This is the state of amdrones. More cores but clearly with some hidden defect like a old car sold by a shaddy vendor or a counterfeit snicker from a chinese

>>62082546
Or you could just enable NUMA in the BIOS if you're using threadripper and let the OS handle that automatically.

>>62082457
Once you leave optimal voltage, which is very low around 1.125 or you push avx on 10 cores non stop like prime95 does, it will heat like hell.
On general usage over the cores it's much lower power

>>62082568
Read
>>62082546

>>62083005
See >>62082568

>>62083005
So shitty you need numa on consumer chips. Nice so you can limit your process to max 8 cores to not have underwhelming shitty penalties

>>62082546
So I guess >MUH LATENCY is the new shill talking point of the day that will end up being the most important thing ever, even though it only matters only a small number of latency sensitive workloads. Even in games which are notoriously latency sensitive, TR is only ~10% average FPS off i9 in gaming performance.

File: latency-pingtimes.png (115KB, 602x389px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 602x389px

>>62083140
i9 has it's own latency problems, namely from the new mesh shit it's using.

>>62082418
>>62082546
>>62083140
How's it going amdrone reddit accuser? Here to shit up another thread with garbage and retarded accusations?

>More cores but clearly with some hidden defect like a old car sold by a shaddy vendor or a counterfeit snicker from a chinese

You should work for Intel's marketing department, that is just beautifully written. Would look great on one of their official shill slide decks.

>>62083260
Why ryzen look so shitty?

get a ryzen 1700

File: hcc_lcc_18_10cores.png (123KB, 1296x648px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1296x648px

lmao if you really think Intel's 16-18 core i9's won't have even bigger latency issues due to the larger size of the mesh and consistently longer core-to-core latencies.

You're going to have to split the cores in two, just like Threadripper, to get optimal memory latency performance. Intel even has a name for it, sub-NUMA clustering.

>>62083428
its great until it hits the 8th core

File: BR3.png (40KB, 1262x883px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 1262x883px

>>62083356
SOPA

>>62081870
>>62081999
dumbfucks

>>62083428
Jumping from one CCX to another is expensive. Luckily the ping times inside a CCX are very minor, thus good shedulers will be able to place interconnected processes right next to eachother which migitates this issue.

>>62083210
>even though it only matters only a small number of latency sensitive workloads
It only really matters in op's situation which is why people are suggesting the i9, but people still argue otherwise.

>>62079844
OP is interested if the i9 was a bad decision. No mention of which i9, but I'm going to assume op wants the $2000 18core i9 for the claimed workload, and mentions of threadripper as comparison.

>>62084838
>Backing the anon that proves ryzens are good enough for audio production, because of a screenshot with an irrelevent workload.
How do you function as a human?

>>62085050
>converting mp3 to flac
>anything other than bait
How do YOU?

>>62085092
>anything other than bait
>AMD poster backpedalling, because he was full of shit.
This seems more plausable lately.

>>62085141
Not that guy, friendo
but I guess this was the last approach you had left to try and save face on an anonymous imageboard?

>>62085092
I can run all of op's software on an athlon II. Should I suggest an athlon II even if it's not best suited to the task?

>>62085177
I'm a different poster pal. To me it seems like you're just the same anon that's been riding the thread.

File: ayano inside.png (441KB, 855x829px) Image search: [Google]

441KB, 855x829px

>>62074557

>>62085247
yeah you're doing a good job at not coming across as completely retarded

>>62085294
Sir you are wrong. AMD has a dandy lineup of multicore processors that will handle any of your concerns. Please understand that these AMD processors come at a value when compared to the competing Intel lineup.

>>62083260
>>62083428
>>62084851
It looks shitty because that setup is using 2400MHz DDR4 memory. When using 3200MHz DDR4 the cross CCX latency goes down to 110ns.

this thread is dejavu

>>62074557
It's pretty shit.

>>62083484
WHY