COVFEFE DED

techpowerup.com/239069/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-slashed-to-usd-319-on-newegg

>320$ for 1800X
>250$ for 1700X
>Zen+ comes out February 2018

COFFIN FAKE D-O-A

Other urls found in this thread:

cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-Ryzen-5-1600X-vs-AMD-Phenom-II-X6-1090T/3920vsm417
cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-2600K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-1600X/621vs3920
cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-2600K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-1800X/621vs3916
youtu.be/11NfsMykyAk?t=5m1s
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

can I ask you stop being so antisemitic and delet this post, sir?

There is no reason why the 1800X should cost any more than 320 to begin with. Also it's not like it doesn't get btfo by a shitty core i5 with 6 cores for gayman.

...

>shitty core i7 with 6 cores for gaymen
At least you tried:

You still didn't disprove the fact that a shitty sub

You need to try way harder than just that, kid.

>The pic-related shows us that:
>Lower "average" FPS on RyZen, but it must be noted that: a) RyZen doesn't stutter at all, while Inturd stutters like fuck all the time, b) RyZen has much smoother overall experience because minimal FPS is much higher than on Inturd, c) RyZen has much more accurate and better load distribution across cores (which adds even more to the improving the overall quality of the playing experience, alongside two of the previously mentioned factors). Basically what this means is - higher average FPS doesn't mean jack shit in this modern day and age. Only frame-pacing and minimal FPS matters, and both of these are way better on Zen than on Inturd. In other words - if you're buying a CPU for quality gaming you have to be a total idiot to buy Inturd instead of Zen. But dirty kikes would try to sway you into thinking otherwise, of course. Do NOT get pixie-dusted by Jews.

>P.S.
>And if it's productivity - Zen still completely and utterly obliterates Inturd. This is truly a bad time for anyone to buy anything Inturd-related or branded. Just don't. Don't be a moron. Know better. Get Zen.

>One core always 100%, rest 80-50%
>good game for any benchmark

>Assasin's Creed: DRMigins
>benchmarking with gaymes

back to Sup Forums faggot

>replying to the designated pajeet who samefags and bumps his own treads after 10 hours

...

>muh games
The only argument intelshills have.

>If I'd wanted to "boost productivity", I'd just get Threadripper, not Coffin Fake. We're not talking about "productivity" here, however. Both i5 2500K and i7 2600K are GAYMING CPUs first and foremost, so is 8700K (it's being advertised as 7700K's successor. which is already utterly retarded in itself since 7700K sucks ass in games due to INEPT stuttering and other problems). That's why their performance in games is all what matters, NOT synthetics or any other shit. And that performance difference is ~8% between the two, regardless of GPUs and settings used. That's 6 years. In 6 years Intel only managed to increase performance by measly ~8% (and that's in best, Intel-compiler biased cases. In many it's actually no more than ~4% usually). And this is with "two more cores" while being horse cum-splattered, with RF ID under the lid and with hidden Minix, and costing more money. Literal DOA garbage.

>And the most hilarious thing about that is the Witcher 3, which is Intel compiler-fucked as hell. Witcher 3 should theoretically get the most benefit from new Intel processor, but it actually doesn't and difference is so negligible it's downright laughable considering that Sandy came out 4 years before Witcher 3. 2 FPS difference on 1070 and 5 FPS on 1080 Ti. And Deus Ex is 1.5 FPS on 1080 Ti and on 1070 2600K actually BEATS the fucking 8700K! EL-OH-EL! SIX COARZ, HIGHER FREECUMZEES! AYY LMAO!

>5 rupees have been deposited into your designated account

You can't be that retarded can you?

>Calling me a Pajeet

He's a typical brainwashed horse cum-gargling Intbecile, what did you expect?

P.S.
Checked 'em.

>ignoring the various added features and graphics processing added to the latest processor

>pajeet got gifted someone's old 2600k
nice, enjoy it

>Not only 1440p, but 1080p also. It's barely noticeable (margin of error) regardless of resolution, settings, or GPUs. Increase from 1070 to 1080 Ti is obviously noticeable, sure, but in lieu of comparison between same GPU/RAM setups with 2600K and 8700K - it's almost nonexistent.

>The point is - you won't see a big difference even with 1080 Ti. FPS will be higher between 1070 and 1080 Ti, obviously, but ~8% difference between CPUs is same across all GPUs and settings. It's downright disgustingly laughable, as it just shows that i7 2600K STILL DOESN'T BOTTLENECK EVEN THE MOST HEAVIEST OF MODERN YOBA EVEN SIX FULL YEARS LATER, so 8700K's "relevance factor" is literally NONEXISTENT as "better productivity" can be gained with much cheaper Zen.

>>The point is - you won't see a big difference even with 1080 Ti. FPS will be higher between 1070 and 1080 Ti, obviously, but ~8% difference between CPUs is same across all GPUs and settings. It's downright disgustingly laughable, as it just shows that i7 2600K STILL DOESN'T BOTTLENECK EVEN THE MOST HEAVIEST OF MODERN YOBA EVEN SIX FULL YEARS LATER, so 8700K's "relevance factor" is literally NONEXISTENT as "better productivity" can be gained with much cheaper Zen.
You are a fucking buzzkill. just don't buy the new processor faggot

Ignore him. He's a shitposting retard doing it for 12+ hours straight every day. I wonder how the mods still tolerate him.

>He's so buttblasted of a total retard that he seriously implies I didn't buy it
At least you tried, kid:

I'm a 2600K god, it's only natural that I'm not so autistic as to buy any poocessors Intrash been shitting out since Ivy and I'll obviously will be buying Zen from now on instead of that GARBAGE SHIT you're eating with a spoonful.

Cry even harder, you amuse me with your inept retardation.

>slav
>poorfag
>retarded shitposter
checks out
So I can safely assume that you're a paid AYYYMD shill because slavland doesn't have welfare and you're here every day.

reported, shut the fuck up you materialistic retard

...

wow i'm really too poor to care about AMD/Intel, i purchased my pc for personal stuff like p2p servers, VMs and gaming

>Actually having brains and not being a brainwashed consumerist sheep is now considered being a poorfag

FUCK OFF CIA NIGGER SHILLS.

>FUCK OFF CIA NIGGER SHILLS.
this passes for humor here?

You missed the thread, Terry.

JUST FUCK OFF YOU NIGGER CATTLE

unfunny...

tell me about this pic user

Is the 1600x a good upgrade over the 1090t?

Gen1 Zen's RyZen is literally two 2600Ks by IPC and PPC, so go figure. Just add 2600K to 2600K and you'll get 1700X. 1600X is just slightly below that.

Yes
cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-Ryzen-5-1600X-vs-AMD-Phenom-II-X6-1090T/3920vsm417
1600 with free cooler and overclocked is an even better deal.

>2600k
>implying

It's closer to Haswell/Skylake IPC. Also 1600x is 6 cores compared to 8 on the 1700, it's a big gap for anything that likes cores.

>It's closer to Haswell/Skylake IPC
See . Literally same shit for 6+ years.

GPU bottleneck. Taken clock for clock there's something like 10-20% improvement from Sandy to Haswell. Sky/Kaby/Coffee completely fucking stalled out though.

>GPU bottleneck
See and . It doesn't matter what GPU and what settings. There is no bottleneck factor, as only CPU performance between generations is tested. And that increase is ~8% in 6+ (almost 7) years, which is best case scenario as majorly it's actually no more than ~4% increase in 98.2% of cases. Disgusting.

>Taken clock for clock there's something like 10~20% improvement from Sandy to Haswell
Only if you judge entire real-life everyday long-term performance by cuckolded goy synthetic benchmarks aimed at brainwashed consumerist victims of dirty Jewish marketing sharks. It is really about the time you finally wake up, Neo. You're living in a little pink world of delusional denial of the harsh reality. Intrash been cucking you hard since Ivy, only Sandy was actually major breakthrough and an absolutely worthwhile purchase - right after that everything went to shit in Inturd.

So what everyone is saying itt is, you don't need to upgrade if you have at least a 2500k unless you're a consumerist whore? Or do these threads exist for babies to throw their favorite brand name around and laugh at the other one?

>you don't need to upgrade if you have at least a 2500k unless you're a consumerist whore?
Exactly this, but only in relation to Intel's "modern" (read - anything beyond Sandy) garbage. If you're going Zen from Sandy, upgrade is more than worthwhile and absolutely warranted for as long as you're going straight to 8 core models or higher (Threadripper, Zen+, Zen 2, or etc).

What benefit at all would a new cpu give anyone who is running a 2500k? Nothing even comes close to maxing it out except rendering, and then you're better off using your gpu anyway. CPU upgrades seem like the worst value upgrades on the market next to networking adaptors and sound cards.

A 2500K is pretty garbage now for gaming, you need at least 4C/8T, upgrade to a 2600K at the least. 4C/4T stutters pretty badly in modern games. An 8700 or 1600 won't improve your average framerate much however the experience will be much more stable and smooth.

>What benefit at all would a new CPU give anyone who is running a 2500K?
Are even for real, NIGGER?

>8700
>experience will be much more stable and smooth
>Literal 7700 2.0
>smooth
KYS, Intbecile.

I'm running one with a 1070 and it doesn't hit 100% on anything new, or it does and I don't notice it (frames don't drop below 60)
More speed and a few watts power saving is pointless for the cost when I'm not rendering much, even when I am it's enough to still do other shit like play games with no drops.

--> . That's all you really need to know. And this applies to every field, including Sup Forumsoyming.

What the hell are you even on about? The main issue with Kaby Lake was lack of cores causing games to not be smooth, Coffee Lake has 6 cores which solves that problem. If the 8700 isn't smooth in a game than neither will the 1600.

>2500K
>min frames don't drop below 60
>doesn't hit 100% on anything new
Who are you trying to fool here, NIGGER?

Please stop calling me that, I'm a white guy from Argentina

>Coffee Lake has 6 cores which solves that problem
It doesn't even in the slightest as it's a horse cum-splattered, RF ID and hidden Minix spying rootkit-ridden, concentration camp oven-tier temps, stuttery POS. It's also still monolithic garbage, which Zen already shown to be a completely wrong approach on how to make a modern CPU. And it's being advertised and promoted everywhere EXACTLY as "7700K's sucksessor for M-M-MAXIMUM Sup ForumsOYMEN". Two shitty cores on a nuclear stove don't make jack difference when these two more cores are way more expensive and worse than what competition offers. 1600X tramples Covfefe Fake into dust, on every field. Yes, they both have 6 cores, but Zen's 6 cores >>>>> Inturd's monolithic garbage 6 """""(((cores)))""""". The situation that was with FX back in the days - it's completely reversed now. Back then Intel was worth it and AMD was producing pseudo-cores with artificially inflated corn Hz that didn't do jack in real life. Now we have Zen that's absolutely worth it and it's Intel who inflates Hz artificially and produces inept garbage shit. If you're not seeing this or deliberately ignoring these facts - KYS already. Intel's haven't been any good or worthwhile at all since 2600K/2700K.

Again, you SPIC NIGGER, what part of the "average FPS doesn't mean jack and only higher minimal FPS with low frame-pacing matters as these are the only two catalyst which guarantee 100% smooth experience" you don't get/unable to comprehend? Your "my 2500K almost never drops below 60 FPS on AVERAGE" doesn't mean JACK SHIT, as it's MINIMUMS are ABYSMAL in the case if you're "averaging" with 60's on it (usually an AVERAGE of 60 means that your MINIMAL FPS is AT LEAST two times lower than that, in 30's OR even lower. Which is SHIT and does NOT give "very smooth playing experience" AT-EFFING-ALL! Only and ONLY if you're able to output your MINIMUMS at AT LEAST 60 FPS, THEN you will get 100% smooth experience IF you're using a 60Hz refresh rate on your monitor. For you to get a 100% smooth experience on a 120Hz monitor, you need to output 120FPS AT THE VERY LEAST on MINIMAL side).

>be any year after 2011
>new release is 1-9% better
>is slightly more power efficient
>costs 25% more

Ryzen isn't as bad as Intel's last 3 release cycles, but improvement is still minimal.

Holy shit, do you have any more buzzwords to spout? What a waste of a post. Intel is a shitty company but you haven't posted any evidence of the 8700(K) being a non-smooth experience, or at least worse than the 1600.

Improvement is insane, you stupid neoFAGlord.

See here - cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-2600K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-1600X/621vs3920 ~ cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-2600K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-1800X/621vs3916 . And this is only "gen1" Zen that's a completely new IP made from scratch which is VERY RAW and clearly unpolished at all. Zen+ comes out February 2018 and it'll be EXACTLY the same jump for AMD the equivalent of which was Intel's Sandy in comparison to Core2Quad. Even if you're so retarded as to dismiss gen 1 RyZen for one way or another, ignoring that Zen+ comes out early next year and it'll be "AMD's Sandy Bridge" is downright INTBECILIC.

I didn't say average you literal sperg, learn to read

You IMPLIED it, you dumb fuck. Now you're just backpedaling.

No, I said frames don't drop below 60.
You imagined it, and then you went to sperg mode.
Learn to read.

THEY DROP BELOW 60 IF THEY'RE AVERAGING AT 60, YOU DUMB FUCK! You NEVER said that you have MINIMAL of 60, and even if you'd did - this would've had been a FUCKING LIE in 98.20% cases with 2500K.

Read the posts again, I didn't say minimal, or average.
Also take your heart medicine.

The fuck are you on about. I game on a 7700k at stock and there is no stuttering.

He has a brain tumor and anxiety issues

Stupid goytel, that one maxed core is the one bringing down the fps, a cpu can get as many fps as long that 1 core doesn't maxed out

This is the very first time in my life I say this: Take a chill pill dude.

Also he never said it was 60 AVG, he said it doesn't drop from 60 so that means his minimals are still above 60.

So what you're saying is the new Ryzen+ CPUs will be faster than the current Ryzen CPUs? Do we have an idea as to how much faster they'll be? 5% - 9%?

Off yourself already.

>7700K doesn't stutter
youtu.be/11NfsMykyAk?t=5m1s

Gen1 Zen is 14nm, Zen+ is 12nm. Calculate off of that in relation to density and power savings per shrinkage.

There will be both ipc and clock gains. I expect 15%.

>I goym on a 7700K
My deepest condolences to your family/relatives. It's hard when there's an autistic kid in family.

>at stock and there is no stuttering
Wash off horse cum away from your face and eyes.

AMD-tards so furious ITT.

Getting my i5 8400 tomorrow. Stay mad, nerds.

Gen1 Zen is currently able to go up to 4.1GHz on air and 4.3GHz on FCWCL alongside with lottery won. Zen+ and it's 12nm will enable for it to go at least 4.4GHz stable all cores & threads on air and stable ~4.8GHz on FCWCL with lottery won. This will basically make one 8 core RyZen 2 equal two 2600Ks OverClocked to 5.2GHz on FCWCL, while RyZen 2 would consume less energy and produce less heat than 2600K.

Eat shit, coprofag. No one's stopping you from being an autistic idiot, that's for sure.

That'd mean we're looking at Intel-level single threaded performance and better-than-Intel multicore performance.

Possibly even more headroom to overclock.

There's already Intel-level core performance in RyZen, just not latest horse cum-plastered gens-wise. RyZen 2's 12nm will allow to rip past that hymen.

>i7s stutter
>Only ryzen is smooth
This is just a lie spread by AMDs shill force.
It's a response to Ryzen losing across the board to i7s.
In a fanboy's mind, if ryzen is smoother; it's OK that it loses in AVG framerates.

If you look at 0.1% and 1% lows, there is no discernible data that says i7s stutter more than ryzen.

That being said, I'm probably gonna buy zen2.

>4.1GHz on air and 4.3GHz on FCWCL
You mean a Max of 3.8ghz on reasonable voltage
And 4.1ghz with stupid high voltages.
All ryzen chips after TR and epic are all bad bins and OC like garbage.
I saw a thread of ryzen OCs and a few people were hitting 3.7ghz at 1.4V.
That's dogshit OC potential.

This 12nm refresh will probably allow a 4.2ghz boost across the board

I want Zen+ Threadripper so I can get better single threaded as well as (at least) 2 full x16 PCIe slots

youtu.be/11NfsMykyAk?t=5m1s
At least you tried, schlomo.

You need to try way harder than just that, kike.

Threadripper 1950X already has enough lanes to fully provide 3 x16 PCI-e 3.0

I know, but I want to wait for Zen+ for better IPC and potentially higher OC. I'm not really in a hurry.

Average FPS doesn't mean jack shit as it fluctuates all the time just as Max does, you Intbecile. Only higher minimal FPS matters as it, alongside with low frame timings, guarantees butter-smooth experience, because after certain threshold (60 FPS on 60Hz monitor) minimal FPS is so solid that it doesn't matter at all if you have at 100500+ average or Max, because at minimum of 60 FPS you'll be just applying V-sync/Radeon's FRTC/Frame Limit etc., to avoid tearing. Intel has much worse frame timings and due to that it stutters as fuck in many games, and it also has generally lower minimal FPS in games across the board than RyZen does. This is a FACT, and no amount of baked-up BS FUD paid/bribed """""(((reviewer)))""""" charts would change any of this HARSH TRUTH OF REALITY. Intel SUCKS MAJOR DIRTY LIMP NIGGER DICKS in games, Zen does NOT unless you DELIBERATELY GIMP IT with shitty memory or other shitty components in a system.

Your picture PROVES that single core performance is more important than multi core performance in gaming. One core is always pinned to 100%.

RYZEN IS A NICHE CPU. Get it through your heads AMDIOTS.

Read the text, you DUMB fuck. It's AVERAGE FPS there and it doesn't mean JACK SHIT. Look at LOAD distribution AND take into consideration that RyZen does NOT stutter while Intel DOES, and that RyZeb has HIGHER minimal FPS than Intel does.

Minimal FPS is not a reliable analog for smoothness, because the absolute minimum could literally be a single frame of the benchmark (for instance immediately after loading). What you need to look for are benchmarks which show frame time percentiles, that way you actually get a reliable figure which you can trust. If you look at the highest 1%/5% frame times, you know that those numbers are reached regularly, as such it's a measurement of true "stable state" gameplay performance rather than a potential freak slow frame.

...

lol nobody in their right mind buys ryzen
people want their PC to work, not experiment with it

>Minimal FPS is not a reliable analog for smoothness
Are you even for real, NIGGER? You can't be THIS dumb? Because I was clearly referring to MINIMAL FPS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRETY OF A GAME, not "load during a benchmark", you SHITHEAD. I never said anything about BENCHMARKS, I was referring to REAL WORLD, ACTUAL PLAYING PERFORMANCE. Zen guarantees much higher minimal FPS ACROSS THE ENTIRETY OF THE GAME, while Intel STUTTERS AND DROPS LIKE FUCK AND IT'S CLEARLY SHOWN HERE youtu.be/11NfsMykyAk?t=5m1s FUCKING OFF YOURSELF ALREADY, YOU DUMB INTBECILE

>FUCKING OFF YOURSELF ALREADY, YOU DUMB INTBECILE
Woah there AMDIOT, don't have a housefire now.

Get the fuck out, glow in the dark CIA nigger.

>housefire
Look who's talking, lel

...

>February
but thats the 8 cores, right?

It's Zen+, that's all that matters. Also, they usually release top first and lower tier models later.

>The "PCs are for games" post

>"I can get over 80fps and I can really see the difference"
>60hz 1080p monitor
Die fagit