Why would AMD lie, though?

Why would AMD lie, though?

Other urls found in this thread:

newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117559
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

They always do, you should expect it by now.
Besides games rarely use more than 8 threads.

once intel catches up, AMD is basically finished again

they don't call em POO for nothing

What did they lie about?

Another Massive Disappointment™

PC gaming needs to be destroyed. It is a cancerous abomination. PCs are for work and browsing the internet. Blu-Ray players are for movies. iPods are for music. Consoles are for games.

Let's examine the PC "gaming" experience"
>Sit at a desk (yes, like an office desk) to play games
>Face is two feet away from a 20-30" monitor rather than 10 feet from an 80" screen
>Uses a literal keyboard to play games (yep, like the same thing used to write documents)
>Constantly complain about graphics rather than being immersed in the game
>Needs 60fps then 120fps, then 144fps
>Needs 1080p then 1440p then 4k
>Decides how they want the game to look rather than letting the artist do it ("excuse me chef, I want my steak served with peanut butter please")
>Deal with Windows operating system on a daily basis
>Rampant piracy
>Tend to be obnoxious and entitled assholes

The thing is, you can't disprove any of this. You KNOW it's true. And that's why PC gaming needs to be shot in the head like a diseased animal. Gaming was best when PCs were quarantined as the platformer for shitting "machur" games. Now they've infected the rest of gaming and ruined it.

Isn't a stock 1700 around 3ghz while a stock 7700 is like 4.2 ghz?

>comparing the cheapest in the ryzen line to the over 1k$ i7

you intelcucks are desperate at this point

>"excuse me chef, I want my steak served with peanut butter please"

possibly the worst food analogy ever constructed.

how much do both cost?

what did he mean by this?

>7700k
>over 1000$

Why would OP lie, though?

I mean, I know this is a pasta
but you still piss me off

Intelkucks on SUICIDE WATCH.

You are retarded right?

i7 7700k is $299

marketing.

horrible comparison as resolution and MSAA hits the GPU instead of CPU

so this shows that they are bottlenecking the CPU because of some weak GPU

fucking embarrassing

kanker leave

>Sup Forums

and stay out, faggot

way better than fake benchmark of OP

Here is why anything over 4 cores is a meme

...

no it's inexcusable that fuckheads like those behind the pic you posted are doing this tech shit when they don't understand even the basic shit

GTA V max settings at 1366x786 and 1080p have almost the same hit to the CPU so this graph is fucking retarded

yeh I'm still mad at myself for wasting money on a i7

>i7 7700K
>average 1080p 4xMSAA 52fps

horrible GPU bottleneck as you'll be getting way more than 60fps on average of you GPU can handle it

as I get above that with a i5 4690k and a GTX 1070

it's not fair... AMD was supposed to win this time...

>some people on Sup Forums are so young they don't even remember the time when AMD's $350 CPU kicked the ass of Intel's $1000 CPU

They said the 1800X would be the end-all be-all budget rendering machine! It isn't fair!

I don't plan on buying anything AMD, but I want them to succeed, since that would mean Intel lowering their prices.

AMD needs to sell off their gpu division. They're like world war 2 Germany fighting 2 superpowers at once right now

a bit too late for that

>OCed 1700x losing horribly to stock 4770k

kek. it's bulldozer all over again

So Intel spends the quite the big bucks on development?

And how much of that intel R&D is spent on mobile bullshit

They aren't lying. It's a low clocked 8 core CPU.
I'm really hoping the 4/6 core CPUs will have higher clock speeds.

yh

Never happened. AMD has always been shit.

>comparing a quad core to an 8 core
>for GAMING
Shills are getting desperate.

>talking about GAMING
>on Sup Forums

fake graph. the damage control is real.

I think you meant 1

The 1800x ($500, 8 cores) almost loses in multithreaded performance to the 7700k ($330, 4 cores) as well. See And that's with stock clocks. The 7700k's stock speed is 4.2ghz while even an average specimen can easily go up to 5.0. The 1800x can barely be clocked 200mhz forward, because there are 8 points of failure and it leaks voltage like the rushed shit it is.

AMD has committed another Bulldozer. They can't recover.

The amount of secrecy around ryzen can't be good.

nobody gives a shit. stop living in the past.

>Fake benchmark

You people are worse than the 6.8 cunts

>1.296V
>5800MHz

I'm sure if you ran anything intensive that would BSOD, but it's impressive that it booted at all.

>3Dmark
cool game

Titles like GTAV have more cores making a difference.

what did he meant by that?

Meanwhile, no paid online.

Lyin' kike
>The 1800x can barely be clocked 200mhz forward,
Absolutely no proof. We'll know everything tomorrow, you scared jewish filth.
> 4.2ghz while even an average specimen can easily go up to 5.0
>m-muh siliconlottery.com stats
From their own site:
>Passed the ROG RealBench stress test for one hour with these settings
>1 (ONE) hour
>he thinks 1 hour means it's stable

Test equipment:
>Motherboard: Asus Maximus VIII Hero ($400 motherboard)
>Cooler: Corsair H105 AIO

>can easily go up to 5.0
lies, 80% can go up to 4.8ghz from 4.5ghz boost also 4.5ghz to 4.8ghz gives just 4fps while it increase temps by a ton

>retarded right?
I think he is just shilling.

>released 2013
>released 2014
>released 2013
so when Intel phoned up review sites they told them to only benchmark old games developed for last gen 3 core consoles. Got it.

If you'd like to see actual numbers go ahead.

>pc gaming
>doomed to look at charts and bicker at strangers on the internet until the end of time

>has actual things to use to prove his point
>doesnt use it and makes obvious false flag

Sad!

>octacore loses to a quadcore
amdkeks on suicide watch

>Blu-Ray players are for movies
that's why the ps3 had one

The CPU-z benchmark is literally wrong, it's a synthetic benchmark with algorithms built for 256kb l2 cache. Ryzen is scoring higher in CPU-z exclusively for this reason.

Why are AMD customers lying to people? What is your endgame? Let's say someone is deceived and pre-orders a CPU, do you think they will be happy and likely to buy AMD again when they find out it's not as powerful as you fooled them into thinking it was? You will permanently sour their opinion of the company.

>>Needs 60fps then 120fps, then 144fps

Step aside, whyte boi.

>Console gaming
>Destined for sub-par visuals, no backwards compatibility and paid online

>Nintendo gaming
>Destined to one game a year and ten year old visuals

...

Read the thread, it's not only the CPU-Z benchmark, the Ryzen is slightly behind Intel's single core performance (5%-10%) for a fraction of the price, multithreaded they mop the floor with them.

Zen is a better investment if you want longevity.

I'll wait for legit reviews on Friday.

By the way, OP is a faggot.

BIG framerate
how can whitey compete?

See Now go back to your cave, Pajeet.

>read the thread

Weird, I did, and these say Ryzen is garbage:

(multithreaded benchmark)
(gaming benchmarks)

Why do people love to argue about which gaming platform or which CPU is the best, and they seemingly deliberately lie about the enemy thing as if they're waging some important political war with ends which justify dishonest means

Why do you idiots feel the need to compare an overclocked Intel CPU to a stock Ryzen? If they wanted an equal benchmark they would have overclocked the Ryzen 7 too, but they didn't because they're on damage control.

At least a few of the 'leaked' performance tests between the ryzen and i7 were from fucking retailers, you know, the guys with a warehouse full of i7s they need to sell.

That's not an overclocked Intel CPU. 7700K's base clock is 4200MHz. An average overclocked 7700k would be 5000MHz.

I don't think you know how to read. This is exactly what we wanted, competitiveness with Intel. And low res results where the framerate's already well over 150 don't really matter.

Not to mention that this is a totally new architecture; no games are optimized for it.

cpus aren't like GPUs, you won't get 'drivers' that give you more frames per second

>coworker is an AMD elitist
>he never shuts up about how great his 480 is and how the 1700x is going to be GOAT because muh ryzen
>my stock 4770k is 3.5 years old and still outperforming it in most cases

2/10, got me to reply. only actual downside on the list is the windows meme.

>CPUmark
>Benchmarks clearly showing that Ryzen exceeds 60fps on average and is marginally beaten (single digit difference) by much more expensive Intel processors that are also heavily overclocked

WOW IT'S FUCKING NOTHING.
Intelkeks are on damage control so bad they are literally just making shit up.

The 7700k is just an overclocked 6700k.

...

>it's the broken CPU-Z benchmark which the CPU-Z developers said themselves is not accurate for ryzen
>again

like cockwork!

the 7700k is just too good

sadly AMD literally can't compete

D-delet THIS RIGHT N-NOW!!

The 1700x is $400, 1800x $500

i7 7700k (the highest CPU on those charts) is $300. It's not overclocked in any of those benchmarks

...

...

>thinks optimization == new drivers
You're a moron.

Did Intel made their CPUs cheaper?, people were saying they would be cheaper with the release of the new AMD cpu

please, explain to me what you meant instead
were you thinking that game developers will write a new graphics API which uses 8 cores? because neither dx11 nor dx12 do that and that isn't changing any time soon. see

Not quite yet in a lot of places, they're only going to reduce the price of their more expensive stuff though, I'd guess, unless AMD releases a Ryzen CPU that competes with the de-facto poorfag Pentium G4560, doubt it.

>ES cpu
Sure m8

This is why PC gamers are autists.

>Highest CPU on those charts
Retarded? 6950X is the more direct competitor with Ryzen.
>Is $300
It's more like $350, which is expected because it's 4 cores whole Ryzen is 6-8.

>everyone posting the graphics form that arab website to defend or attack the ryzen cpu

that website and that review are shady as fuck in every aspect, even the fact that the photos of the CPU don't actually show a normal Ryzen CPU but some old engineering sample.

the Ryzen could be a load of crap or it could be good but at least wait for proper reviews with finished products and made by people who aren't a bunch of dodgy sand niggers.

DELETE THIS RIGHT NOW.
YOU CAN'T POST THINGS THAT DISAGREE WITH MY MISINFORMED "GAMES DON'T USE PARALLELIZATION" NARRATIVE
DELET IT

At least we have something to discuss, go back to your BOTW and Horizon threads child.

newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117559

>$309.99

Is there ANYTHING that comes out of you which isn't a lie?

The graphics API is just a small piece of the pie, especially since DX12 where overheads have been generally minimized.

>ES
it's QS

Welcome to Sup Forums, where literal children take leaks as fact.

Um, you might want to re-read what it says at the bottom of that chart.

>Ryzen overperforms