This is fake right? Coffee can't be this bad right?

covfefe

RIP in peace coffinlake

File: 1500175438483.png (118KB, 261x261px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 261x261px

oh its real, its real son

>>62443308
DELETE THIS

>synthetic multi thread

i couldn't give less of a shit, that's a gaming cpu and it's going to btfo every poozen cpu in gaming, i'm tired of pajeet amd bullshit so i will never gonna buy their crap again, gonna go with intel and nvidia, i amd dies desu

File: 1502204258688.jpg (158KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 1024x768px

ahahaha HAHAHAHAH

>>62443308
>6c/12t
>high clockspeeds/high ipc

This kills the rypoo

File: 1492120641547.png (42KB, 600x620px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 600x620px

>>62443406
>>62443412

>>62443308
>This is fake right?
Yes.
Guru3D hasn't published an 8700K review yet.

>>62443308
Give us the single core performance, intel has always sucked dick at multi-core.

thats decaf benchmarks post the ones with caffeine in them.

>>62443406
You can always tell the Intel marketers.

>>62443308
>Multi-threaded
>since the launch of Ryzen 99.9% of AMD cpu owners are now content creators or streamers
Sounds legit

File: delid this.png (334KB, 679x702px) Image search: [Google]

334KB, 679x702px

>>62443406
>>62443412

>>62443444
>only a few games benefit from single core performance in 2017
Sorry corelets, you're old news.

File: 1310483412100.jpg (36KB, 413x395px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 413x395px

>>62443447
>yfw when I actualy have a delidded 6700k

This triggers the poo

File: 1501013225673.jpg (12KB, 300x168px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 300x168px

>>62443406
>>62443412

>>62443454
>Intel has CPU design teams in India
>AMD has GPU driver teams in India
Really makes you wonder who is actualyl the poo...

File: poozen gaming.jpg (547KB, 2531x1359px) Image search: [Google]

547KB, 2531x1359px

>>62443453
Sure thing buddy

>>62443444
So are you saying intel users are 99% manchildren playing video games day/night and have no jobs?

>>62443472
>literally not a single 2017 game.

>>62443478
Are you blind?

>>62443478
DELID THIS

>>62443434
Worse than Ryzen, if you look closely, the 1600X has a few more points than 8700K, both have 12 threads.
Oh and remember the 8700K is some 6 billion niggerhertz housefire with the worst thermals yet, while 1600X is 3.9Ghz 95W and the heat spreader is actually soldered to the die, and if you want to upgrade and AMD CPU you don't need to buy a new motherboard because they don't change the socket and chipset every 6 months.

>>62443472
wow poozen is the new FX lmao

File: india inside.jpg (387KB, 1500x1164px) Image search: [Google]

387KB, 1500x1164px

>>62443406
>poo
>>62443412
>poo
>>62443454
>poo

File: 1262163212155.jpg (11KB, 220x168px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 220x168px

>>62443485
>yfw

>>62443476
You sound upset

>>62443308
>synthetic benchmark
Okkkayy

Now, post the gaming benchmarks

>>62443472
why do the i9s outperform a 7700k in csgo?

File: 14623910195620.jpg (102KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 1280x720px

>>62443406
>>synthetic multi thread

>>62443472
oy vey you only get 400 fps with the amd! Buy Intel™ goy, our extreme processing processors allow you to achieve 450 fps in 15 year old game engines!
*ignores frame times*

Holy shit the amount of butthurt shilltel damage control ITT.

>i-it's still better for muh gaymes
>yes brian plz let me pay $400 for 1600X performance

>>62443525
>oy vey
>you need 8 cores goy, don't buy the cheaper 7700k if you want to game, get the 1800x goy

>>62443529
>>i-it's still better for muh gaymes

it's impossible to not be better for games and that's what the cpu is for, poozen as amd tradition goes blows in ipc and that's all that matters you can put 1000 cores it's not gonna change shit because no dev will bother to go through the nightmare to optimize for them

>>62443525
>complaining about frametimes when the minimums are higher on the Intel cpu's

This is the level of tech know how that AMDrones have

File: 6196608+_713731d607611232f52c70c1082a302f.jpg (19KB, 230x460px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 230x460px

>>62443484
Cool, I am not going to take some random person on /g/ for it. Single core performance is not as simple as comparing 2 cpus with similar cores and measuring their multi-core performance. Alot of applications are still not made with multicore in mind. AMD main selling point has always been cheap multicore performance and they optimized the shit out of it. Intel has always been about single core performance. So these stats are literally cherrypicking. Fucking christ, stop this fanboy shit. I keep a PC with intel for gaming and a PC with AMD for actually working.

this thread is pathetic
>amd wins at synthetic benchmarks
>synthetic benchmarks are useless
>intel wins at synthetic benchmarks
>ayyymd btfo how will they recover
the amount of damage control is off the charts

File: CpAJ0p-VYAA5G6C.jpg (192KB, 1200x900px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 1200x900px

C O F F I N L A K E

File: 1502259085076.png (32KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 600x600px

>>62443551
>>62443569

>>62443577
>triggered AMDrone

>>62443534
>Not buying 1600 and overclocking to 4ghz on the stock heatsink.
>No delid or expensive cooler required
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8K2yc11eC4

7700K BTFO by Ryzen 1600 in all titles at half the cost.
In productivity is does even better.

There is no reason to buy shitty LGA115x platforms ever.
X299 has a reason to exist, Ryzen NPT bug makes then good value VM platforms.

>>62443588
i'm using a i3-2120 right now
fuck off

>>62443585
>make a stupid remark about frametimes
>le xdeeeeeeee intel funny.jpg
Yeah...no

File: 5.jpg (106KB, 1264x704px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1264x704px

>>62443589
>7700K BTFO by Ryzen 1600 in all titles at half the cost.
wooow hold on there buddy

>>62443589
>There is no reason to buy shitty LGA115x platforms ever.
actually there is, the i3-8300 will be better in games (just because it's intel and it has a high clock) and cheaper than almost every ryzen

File: 1501344578579.png (84KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 653x726px

>>62443596
>>62443611
>>62443612

>>62443612
After paying an extra $150 to delid it possibly.

>>62443615
epic xD

>>62443619
why would you delid an non-k cpu? are you retarded?

>>62443611
>amdrones lying trough their teeth as Always

What a surprise

File: 1501322510876.jpg (123KB, 638x599px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 638x599px

>>62443620
>>62443633
>>62443625

File: when-the-macaco-soup-almost-kills-you.jpg (51KB, 329x329px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 329x329px

>>62443406
>being this buttblasted

>>62443650
>>62443651
>buttblasted AMD fanboyos

>>62443569
>b-b-b-but t-t-t-the m-m-minim-m-mum fps!
okay have fun with your latest stutterlake
don't forget to put the game on lowest settings and play in a 640x400 window to get those 6 gorillion fps

>>62443406
Enjoy your stuttering anon.

>>62443308
Not necessarily fake, for instance the result could be real but the CPU isn't boosting properly, it's not exactly uncommon for pre-release (or even after release with how rushed shit is) UEFI versions to be fucked in one way or another. Or maybe the results are completely legit and it just doesn't scale very well, for whatever reason.

>>62443665
Maybe you shouldn't talk about frametimes if you haven't got the slightest clue what the term even means.

Fucking kek are all amdrones this clueless

>>62443651
>>62443650
>>62443615
>Gives legitmate claim
>Fuck... he is right. I am just gonna post a meme pic like a teenager
wew you sure showed us lad.

>inb4 another meme pic

File: br-intel-shill.jpg (21KB, 267x297px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 267x297px

>>62443661
>ye-yeah, hehe... bu-but-buttblasted AMD fanboys heheh...

>>62443611
How the fuck is this possible? The 7700k should have done way better than this since it has way stronger core? What am i missing here?

>>62443691
you're clueless retard, must be a bliss being so ignorant of actually smooth gameplay when all you experienced was the stutterfest that are intel's mainstream offerings

>>62443707
GPU's make more difference than cpu's, surprise surprise

>>62443702
Calm down, Brian

>>62443551
>poozen as amd tradition goes blows in ipc
I see you've never looked at any benchmarks.

>>62443721
Clueless about what exactly?

You have already demonstrated you don't understand what frametimes are.

Both the average and the minimums are higher in that graph, please explain to me in what world the AMD cpu could possibly have lower frametimes

>>62443737
you out of pics?

File: intel-crematorium.jpg (315KB, 800x531px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 800x531px

>>62443751
Here's your future, Brian.

>>62443768
>>62443702
>proved my point
kek

>>62443472
>PUGB
>F1
>CSGO
>DOTA

lmao Intel truly is finished

>>62443308
It's probably performance when all cores run at base clock or 3.7-3.8 GHz.
It can probably go faster with an OC-turbo motherboard or if BIOS disables TDP limits. And you have the cooling to handle it.

people will OC it of course, what will matter there is how high can it go, what does the paste do and so on.

File: 4.jpg (91KB, 722x817px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 722x817px

>>62443743
You sure told him

File: 1465741878114.jpg (161KB, 1446x1462px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 1446x1462px

>mfw this monkey eating favelado is STILL defending intel's disaster of a cpus

File: 1503332780004.png (808KB, 1000x545px) Image search: [Google]

808KB, 1000x545px

>>62443796
Sure thing, Brian.

>>62443811
kek it's just the one guy doing it, too. Check out the number of posts and posters on this thread.

>>62443744
You don't even understand the difference between FPS and frametimes it looks like
>microstutters on his way out

>>62443810
Kek AMD is finished

>>62443429
It's the score that the canadian got in the store with a HP computer, put into their graph.

So real score, but unknown circumstances. The chips might have vastly different performance based on the motherboard, firmware and cooling, due to the incereased power consumption/going over TDP.

>>62443810
... Fucking AMD fanboys... Why do fanboys have to ruin everything. I knew this processor would kill AMD in single core performance. Fucking no objectivity anymore.

>>62443810
191/4.5=43.5
168/4=42
Oh wow, it's fucking 3% difference.

>>62443854
>>62443870
>>62443880
Stop samefagging, brazilian faggot. We know it's just you.

>>62443853
explain how a cpu can have higher minimum and average yet still have slower frametimes you colossal. inbred mongoloid?

you can't because you don't have two braincells to rub together, or two dollars so you shill poozen trash for poorfags who shit in the streets because they can't afford toilets

>>62443853
Keep digging yourself deeper into that hole kek

Tech illiterates are so funny

Come dude, spout more memes, I want to laugh

>>62443880
Yeah but most of the retards volunteer-shilling Intel here or in other places probably don't know what IPC actually means.
It's acronym for "muh Intel ST", right? Massively better!

File: projecting.png (5KB, 602x125px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 602x125px

>>62443887
>projecting
You gotta resort to delusions now since you know you are wrong?

>>62443894
he's talking about the stutter meme
minimums are an average as well

>>62443853
You literally have no idea what you're even talking about. You can't accuse a CPU of stuttering when the minimum framerates are much higher. I own a fucking Ryzen CPU but you're being a complete fanboy.

>>62443909
Nice inspect element, macaco. But you're still samefagging.

>>62443927
>>62443894
Pajeet BTFO

File: macaco-delicioso.png (44KB, 419x418px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 419x418px

>>62443894
>>62443939
Still samefagging

>>62443917
No they aren't, the minimums depict a percentile score not an average

File: lol.jpg (9KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 200x200px

>>62443928
>being this delusional
>and still cannot make a valid argument against data

>>62443957
Stop samefagging.

Why is this anti Semitic r/amd shill not banned yet?

>>62443970
SOPA

Also 6 million was DEFINITELY not enough.

>>62443981
DE

>>62443966
>accuses of samefagging
>shows only one tag
Oh fuck my sides.

>>62443981
Fuck of to /pol/ cretin.

>>62443308
Shouldnt Apllel ship macbooks with ryzen cpus soon? Supposedly apple uses best hardware, and its obvious that AMD is the best you can get nowadays...

>>62443992
>implying I need to tag all your posts
>implying I can't read the number of posters in this thread

>>62444004
Apple uses whatever gives them the highest margin

Why do you think they waited forever before they stuck an oled screen on their phones

File: bk.jpg (165KB, 633x633px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 633x633px

>>62443308
YOU WILL REMOVE THIS IMAGE FROM THE INTERNET NOW OR WE WILL SUE YOU FOR ANTISEMITISM AND CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY

>>62443927
Also if we're making minor nitpicks about CPU's I've noticed that Ryzen sees occasional spikes up to 100% on one thread in games. It's not too common but it happens, might be due to that rumor going around at Ryzen's launch that the latency from switching cores across a CCX is slightly higher than switching within.

>>62444004
Not likely, if Apple is moving away from comfy Intel supply contracts now, they're moving to their own ARM gear.

AMD almost got a win with Apple for Llano, but GF sunk it.

>>62443308
What's with these daily sour grapes AMD threads?

Are they still buttblasted over the disaster that was Vega?

>>62443894
Not him, but the minimum FPS is essentially a measurement of the worst (longest) frame time in most benchmarks. It's possible to have a higher minimum FPS and also a higher average but to have very large variance in frame time, which would not be apparent in these 2 measurements.

That being said, it's more of a theoretical possibility, as in practice it seems that low minimums which are very far from the average correlate with large frame time variance and uneven frame delivery, as one would intuitively expect. Basically, high minimum FPS is not a rigorous measurement indicating smoothness, it's merely an indicator in that regard.

>>62444044
>I've noticed that Ryzen sees occasional spikes up to 100%
Prove it

>>62444052
So instead of meming a theoretical possibility, lets see some actual evidence this is a problem on Intel cpu's

File: 1481604540337.webm (373KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

373KB, 800x600px

>>62443894
oy vey

File: newfgaga.png (9KB, 479x202px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 479x202px

>>62444018
>doesn't understand the basics of accusing someone of samefagging
>somehow one guys is samefagging for intel when two pro intel posts were only 27 sec from eachother
>doesn't know you need to wait more then 27 sec to actually post again
Fuck me my sides. The answers are right too, but you gotta be so delusional

>>62444049
>Are they still buttblasted
No, but it seems that you are, giving that you already posted over 50 times on this thread.

>>62444045
>>62444024
just asking because of hackintosh support lol.. would never buy any shit from applel anyways. They became 100% shit since Steve Jobs died of Aids..

its a literal nigger company which wants to milk their customers as hard they can..

>>62444079
You seem upset

>>62443953
yes, so not the one single absolute minimum value

File: master-jej.png (456KB, 804x876px) Image search: [Google]

456KB, 804x876px

>>62444077
>implying you only posted those two times
topkeki you are one stupid shill.

>>62444095
Close enough to it though, some even add 0,1% percentile framerates and you'll still have people bitching.

>>62444066
It is a problem on i3s and i5s, I'm not going to bother looking up videos, but DigitalFoundry has some which show the actual frame time graph and illustrate the issue. You can find them yourself on their YT channel if you want to see, I remember some video comparing 6C Ryzens with i5s. i7s are fine and it's nonsensical to think 6C i7s will stutter, they will not. I would imagine even 6C i5s will be smooth, while they don't have HT, the 2 extra cores should do well.

File: 1413598963136.gif (2MB, 300x161px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 300x161px

>>62444060
Fine, let me just record an hour of gameplay footage with MSI Afterburner, brb.

>>62444092
You seem buttblasted.

>>62444114
Finaly a sensible post

>>62444118
Go ahead, I'll check out the thread later.

File: sec.png (1KB, 198x90px) Image search: [Google]

1KB, 198x90px

>>62444102

>>62443870
>>62443880
>>62443854

>posting 2 posts 27 sec from eachother
>Somehow it is me
Holy fuck anon. you are delusional.

>>62444128
About what

>>62444102
I don't think you know what samefagging is. Posting in the same thread multiple times is pretty normal, especially when there's some sort of discussion going on. Samefagging is typically when the same person pretends to be two or more different people.

>>62444102
>>62444077
>newfag detected
Figures it is an AMD fan afterall

>$380
>1600x multithreaded performance
>7700k single/quadcore performance
Looks like the ideal consumer desktop and 144hz cpu. Ryzen is amazing but because my pc is purpose built for 144hz I basically can't enjoy it's cheap, low power, cool multithreaded performance. 8600k and 8700k will be the default gayman chips.

>>62444194
This annon gets it
>1440p 144hz masterrace

File: yes.gif (281KB, 640x240px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 640x240px

>>62444148
>>62444102
>>62444178
>>62444174

>No new post since 10:40
>anon leaves cause he can't do the samefagging argument anymore
>and it is the only thing he had left.

>>62444114
And even then 99% of the time poor framepacing is a GPU driver issue, not a CPU issue, unless your CPU is underqualified (Like a dual core) Capping the framerate at 30 or 60 with Rivatuner or your GPU driver is much easier solution than buying a whole new mobo+CPU.

>>62443810
AMD fags on suicide watch and don't get me started on draw calls: AMD "CPUs" are two times worse than Intel in that regard, goodbye heavily modded Skyrim performance.

File: kek.png (124KB, 500x537px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 500x537px

Mfw 1600x master race.

>>62444289
Yeah, that's generally right, I can get behind 60FPS capping (though it can give rise to some horrible tearing with no *sync), 30FPS though feels so stuttery to me that the "smoothness" of even frame time is irrelevant, the entire game stutters anyway. I'd say it's time to lower some settings or get an upgrade if 30FPS is the target, rather than 60.

>>62444194
they wont because 144hz is not the default refresh rate

>>62444370
Even a Pentium is enough for 60hz in most games. People buy off max capable fps. I would buy a ryzen anyway over Intel for 60hz. But people see ryzen at 115 fps and 8700k at 130 and think the i7 is better for them.

>>62443997
t. goldstein

File: tfw.png (8KB, 509x619px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 509x619px

>>62443406
I had to buy a Ryzen 1600 because I'm too poor to afford an intel CPU.

File: 253453465435.jpg (75KB, 535x577px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 535x577px

>>62444907
had to buy a Ryzen because residence insurance isn't covering fire

File: Screenshot_2017-08-10-22-24-14(1).jpg (91KB, 720x539px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 720x539px

>>62444907
>>62444953

>>62445007
>16 cores chewing as much power as 8
wtf I love AMD now

>>62445007
>R7 is actually awesome
HOW THE ACTUALL FUCK does TR 1950X consume >3x the Power of Ryzen 7

>>62443308
>This is fake right?
Seems to be off. I don't really see how a 1600X could beat a 8700K. We've seen Skylake-X beat Ryzen in raw performance when the amount of cores are the same. Now I have to mention that Skylake-X is an overpriced abomination and housefire yada yada or I'll be called a shill, but the point still stands that when Intel slaps the same amount of cores together, they still beat AMD.
Just wait for trustworthy reviews.

>>62443724
>muh gpu bottleneck
every time

>>62445123
It's barely 60 watts more at stock.

Turbo fag 3.0 to the rescue.
What if I accidentally run a browser+torrent client+music player+e.t.c. on my p.c. while gay ming?
Welp, this ideal sandbox that the benchmark shows collapses, since the turbo fag 3.0 doesn't like more than 1 or 2 cores to be occupied, so the performance per thread and the multi core one collapse to some 210$ cpu levels.
Good job retards, you are using a test case scenario that is not applicable to real world workloads.

>>62445347
>m-muh dorf fortress

>>62445123
All 16 cores are being forced to work at 3.9 GHz with no breaks.

God help you if you run 16 intel cores at 3.9 GHz.

>>62445389
Can all cores really be turboboosted to 3.9 GHz at the same time?

>>62445453
At least on AMD they can actually be locked and forced to stay at 3.9 GHz. On intel thermtrip would just shit them all down if you tried that.

>>62443308
no way, sauce?

>>62443444
thanks to youtube/twitch + AMD now everyone wants to be streamer.

this is somewhat a curse after all. giving those people a cheap an 8-core processor was a mistake.

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

232KB, 800x449px

>>62443406
>>62443412
>>62443444
>>62443454
>>62443472
>>62443485
>>62443490
>>62443505
>>62443512
>>62443534
>>62443551
>>62443569
>>62443588
>>62443612
>>62443661
>>62443691
>>62443810
>>62443854
>>62443870
>>62443894
>>62443939
>>62444049
>>62444313

>>62443612
>just because it's intel and it has a high clock

Complete fucking retard. Only the K-series have any significant single core advantage over Ryzen, and Coffee Lake won't be any faster there, either. Since you can't OC them, they're useless.

>>62443472
>Shitty early access game pre-patch
>Over 144 FPS so who gives a shit
>Another one well over 144 FPS
>Game running on an engine from 2005 also well into the hundreds of FPS

Here's the actual video, too. Fuck off with this "no sourced benchmark" shit plz. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rnf5QzoLjG4

File: doitfgt.jpg (85KB, 835x703px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 835x703px

>>62443454
>bragging about having to take the lid off your CPU to keep it from overheating
>>62443490
>posting MUH MANLY ALPHA MAN images to go with your shitty intel "muh clox" 4 core jerk-off fest

File: Cinebench426sing.png (34KB, 322x817px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 322x817px

That's slow

File: 1504508343253.gif (3MB, 355x201px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 355x201px

>400 dollar cpu
>getting 10 more fps than a 200 dollar one
>intel drones see nothing wrong with this

>>62445690
Oops, I need to update my shit posting pics.
Got it stable enough at 4.5 for a run and it was like 2000 something.

>>62445220
>>62445389
yes, i retard didnt see the @3.9 ghz

>>62445681
>triggered AMD poo

File: UMA_MACACO_STRIKE_AGAIN.png (98KB, 361x453px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 361x453px

>>62445871

>>62445130
clocks. The raw IPC advantage of intel is 5% at best. Intel's single thread performance comes from the +~0.5 ghz that they have over ryzen.
This makes me think that the 8700k wont be able to have six cores clocked to more than 4ghz. Thermals, and TDP must be low. six core turbo is going to be around 3.9 i would guess.

>Everyone is now a multitasker who needs 32 threads regardless of their single core performance

Sure smells like POO in here

>>62447218
https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/zircon

>>62447218
Should I buy 7551p, Pablo?
I sure love compiling /g/entoo.

This is a nice change from the apple threads at least

>>62443308
The Cinebench results got fucked up for some reason. The CPU-Z results from later in the video are much more in line with what you'd expect. 40% improvement over the 7700K.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiRg0D-fNe4

>>62443472
>4 games
Yes, that'll show them! AMD is dead xDDDD

>releases their own version of ryzen (higher cores, lower clocks) instead of improving their thermals and increasing their lead in singlecore performance
Intel management has gone full retard.

>>62447218
It sure does.
>>62443486

>>62443308
>intel 7700k to 8700k upgrade
50% more cores (4+2)
28% more performance (1230/960)
>amd 1600 to 1700 upgrade
>25% more cores (6+2)
>23% better performance (1415/1147)

fuck intel what are you doing?

File: 1501032598329.png (3MB, 1172x1416px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1172x1416px

>>62448343
Crashing this company with no survivors

>>62448343
Intel got their own Hector Ruiz.

>>62443308
That score is about 200 points low. Must be a really poor ES chip.

File: 546875988.png (1MB, 2000x1367px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2000x1367px

>>62444031
:^)

File: Ryzen7_7700k_1080ti.png (2MB, 1920x1440px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1440px

>>62448861
>Imblying the 8700k won't be slower than a 5hz 7700k in MUG GAYMZ!
(You)

File: 4424222-3742185-0844797568-28187.jpg (67KB, 600x518px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 600x518px

>>62443486
>internet of the toilet

>>62443574
If you want single core perf then buy a 4790k and oc it to 5GHz. Nothing newer than that cpu is going to get anything better in single core perf.

File: 1496608156512.png (6KB, 350x314px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 350x314px

>>62448811
you know its not

>>62449701
>4790k
>5ghz
stop shilling for intel you retard

>>62447922
>((((CPU-Z))))

>>62445453
People with custom water loops are hitting 4-4.2ghz on the 1950x.

File: GMG.jpg (59KB, 1090x821px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 1090x821px

>>62443908
It irritates the hell out of me when people look at something like single threaded performance, and either ignore the clock speed difference. Or somehow conflate that clock speed = IPC. There's also a fun little fact that most stuff is optimized for Intel, and ryzen is hugely underutilized.

Enjoy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lN5mxFfkr7g

>>62451625
Who the fuck cares, really.
Ryzen killed every Intel CPU out there besides 7700k.

>>62443707
>GTX 1080
>Not 1080ti

File: CINEBENCH Windows 64 Bit_2017-07-24_22-34-00.png (838KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

838KB, 1920x1080px

>>62445690
That's nice and all, but really not that impressive when you consider 50% more cores / threads, and 3 times the power draw.

>>62445178
The goal wasn't to find out which CPU or GPU was the best like a traditional benchmark. He was trying to determine whether it matters what CPU you pair with what GPU. People always say you should pair Intel with Nvidia and AMD with AMD. It doesn't really matter, some games AMD/AMD has an advantage, sometimes it actually hurts performance, depends on the game. It proved AdoredTV was jumping the gun by saying Nvidia was crippling Ryzen performance.

>>62451814
No, there was some driver issues with Ryzen on launch.
These were fixed long ago.

>>62451841
Exactly, that didn't stop /g/ from spouting conspiracy theories that the 1080 and 1080Ti were bottlenecking Ryzen on purpose.

>>62451872
>/g/ is fucking retarded and always ready to shitpost about both sides
Whoa, what a fucking surprise.

File: kc tier.jpg (60KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 800x533px

>>62443472
SOPA DE MACACO UMA DELICIA

I expect better

That only thing that will save this from being another disasterous launch is lower prices.
But well it's not going to happen because
>muh 60% margins

>>62451727
And a third the cost.

>>62452036
I'd like to see you get an SR-2 motherboard, and a pair of x5680's for less than what I got my 1700 and taichi. Don't forget the higher cooling requirements. The cpus alone will run you $130. You can easily expect to pay $300 for the motherboard. So you're at $430 for the cpu's and motherboard right there. My 1700 was $252, and the motherboard $190. You'd lose the $12 in savings in cooling. Even had I not gotten a good deal on the CPU and paid the full 300. The systems would end up costing roughly the same.

File: stock is good.png (67KB, 506x1080px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 506x1080px

>>62451727
stock is good enough for me. What do you do with your Ryzen 7?

File: JPEG_20170607_202600.jpg (152KB, 1040x780px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 1040x780px

>>62452290
Game, record videos, video transcoding, streaming, benchmarks, e-peen. Need to get better cooling so I can actually max it out. Corsair gen 2 AIO pumps are terrible. Rads are nothing to be impressed with either. At least I got it for a decent price. It's also been a good learning experience for me and allowed me to have hands on experience with the architecture and chipsets I suggest to people.

I upgraded from an e5-1650 v2 @4.3ghz simply because I wanted 2 more cores, and it was cheaper to get the 1700, taichi, and ram than to get an e5-1680 v2.

Don't have any pictures with the AIO installed. This looks better anyways.

Will Ryzen 2 use the same socket as Ryzen?

>>62452873
Yes.

>>62443472
Oh lord it's Bulldozer all over again lmao

I remember just a few months ago when AMDrones were laughing at benchmarks that removed the GPU bottlenecks, just like they did with Bulldozer. oi vey it's a shoah

>>62443819
>It's okay when AMD does it

>>62452924
Well hello there Brian.
You know that your every post here speeds up HVM date for 7LP by a single day, don't you?

>>62453004
Sorry, I don't visit /g/ very often. Give me a quick rundown on this Brian guy, please.

What I know about him so far:
He's apparently well educated and upsets lots of fanboys by truthposting

File: manbearpig.jpg (918KB, 2560x1600px) Image search: [Google]

918KB, 2560x1600px

>>62448343
>intel 7700k to 8700k
$370-400 cpu, $150+ board
$500 min for anything decent
multithread+ is only pro

>ryzen 1600 to 2750x
$400?
better single core
better multicore
lower ccx latency
better memory support
bundled wraith max hsf
smug asian moms

>Desktop Kaby Q1 2017-Q3 2017 Never 4get
ever wonder why there was no H210 chipset?

Wait
Why are all these Intel fanboys defending the 8700 while it will get destroyed in muh single thread by the 7700k? They do realise this right?

>IT MIGHT LOSE YOU 10 FPS IN CSGO OR A COUPLE OF OTHER GAYMES GUYS

>>62453410
tfw the intel shills are eating themselves now

also tfw a r5 1600x is literally better than 8700k

>>62453410
they have identical single thread performance.

>>62453483
Wrong because coffee lake can't hit 5ghz.

>>62453483
No they don't. You might be able to get 1 or 2 cores up to the same speed with Turbo 3.0 but you're not going to get the same single core performance on 4 or more cores.
You will end up with compromises compared to the 7700k while not being able to catch up with the 1600x and we're not even talking about Ryzen 7 yet. Covfefe lake is a failure, even for Intel shills.

>>62453410
No one knows how high it can overclock yet.

>>62453612
>overclocking 6 Intel cores with jizz
Boy it's not going to be pretty.

>>62453612
>Well I really wonder how Skylake/Kabylake with 2 extra cores will overclock. There's no way it could be any lower than 5ghz.

Maybe you'll reach 5ghz with 2 cores disabled. However I've got a feeling I've seen that before.

>>62453523
The typical overclock for the 6700K was about 4.6GHz while the typical overclock for the 7700K seems to be around 4.9GHz and 5 if you're lucky or delid. Even if Coffee Lake has a modest increase in clockspeed it should be enough to put the 8700K on 4.8-4.9GHz. Broadwell-E's 6 core could max out at around 4.4 and Broadwell had shit clocks compared to the *Lake series.

>>62444907
Why didn't you fuck yourself over and buy an i5? Nobody forced you to buy a r5

>>62453688
It will get really toasty though.

>>62443406
>128 vs 123 fps
>mattering at all

>>62443724
1080p doesnt matter

640p is the new intel approved resolution

>>62453688
Which would still make it a failure. The only thing Intel had going for it was single core performance. If Covfefe lake can't reach 5ghz the single core performance would drop. Don't forget that while we're comparing it to the 1600 the Ryzen 7 series will be it's competitors from a price standpoint and the 1700 will destroy it on multicore.

If Intlel wanted to do anything it had to imprive single core perf or catch up to R7 multicore performance. Since it did neither it's a failure (even to intel fanboys own standards which they still haven't realized it seems).

>>62452960
>forcing new motherboards for a completely new architecture vs forcing new motherboards for the gazillionth time for the same architecture that you've been rebranding and selling since your mother gave birth to you

>>62453772
How is a 4.9GHz 6 core a failure when the 1600/1600X are still stuck at 3.9-4.0GHz? And again, the max overclock is just complete conjecture at this point. Skylake-X 7800K could hit 4.7, and that was only 14nm, this is 14nm++.

>>62453801
Skylel-X is 14+ or ++ or whatever it's simple vt tweaks barely worth noting.

>>62453812
At least according to Intel's marketing Broadwell and Skylake are 14nm, Kaby Lake is 14nm+ (14nm with higher clocks) and Coffee Lake is 14nm++. Cannon Lake and Ice Lake will be 10nm, and Tiger Lake will be 10nm+. It's unknown of course whether Intel will be forced to do another 10nm refresh, they might have 7nm yield issues just like what's happening with Cannonlake right now.

>>62453857
Icelake is 10+ or Zen2 will crush and burn and rape it. Skylel-X is either 14+ or ++.
These are simple vt tweaks anyway.

>>62453894
Nothing is singlethreaded anymore.
It's 4/8 minimum and I assure you 8700k will not boost to 4.7 with 4 cores active.

>>62453909
I just deleted my post. I had enough of this stupid arguments.
have fun.

>>62453909
>It's 4/8 minimum and I assure you 8700k will not boost to 4.7 with 4 cores active.
The fucking 7800K can overclock to 4.7GHz already on all 6 cores. What the fuck are you on about disabling cores?

File: 1486382806305.jpg (31KB, 509x625px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 509x625px

>>62453766
delet

>>62453801
4.9ghz*

*excellent example, delidded with liquid metal, thermal interface and 240mm or larger liquid cooling solution. Professional overclocker with non standard hardware, your results may vary**.

**Overclocking voids warranty, Intel® is not responsible for any structure fires, damages to hardware or persons.

>>62454009
***Do not overclock.

>>62453959
Have you liked at how big 7800x is?

>>62443810
>higher IPC
But the max single core boost clock on the 8700k is 4.7ghz
It's a full 1.1ghz higher, that's not an IPC comparison

>>62454190
Going off of CPU-Z, clock for clock Ryzen has about the same single thread as Haswell. (Both are measured at 4GHz exactly) Of course Intel hasn't made many improvements since then, probably like 10% improvement maybe.

>>62453784
>it's only new architecture when AMD does it!

>>62454288
>CPU-Z
Trash.
It's Broadwell on average.
IPC depends on the workload anyway (and compiler trickery).

File: 4c5.png (293KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 640x480px

>>62454293
That's some low effort shitposting.

>>62454288
CPU-Z was invalidated a few months back
at the same clock speeds in cinebench (which isn't entirely valid either due to genuine intel) there is less than a 10% difference between a 1700 and a 7700k in single core

>>62454338
Nothing says "I have no argument" like calling a truthpost 'bait'.

>>62454367
Oh hi Brian.
7LP is coming closer with every second you wasted shitposting here.

>>62443529
>>62443737
>>62443768
>>62443819
>>62453004
>>62454382
The face of mental illness

File: Inturd.png (971KB, 484x682px) Image search: [Google]

971KB, 484x682px

>>62454407