'The Ryzen response: Intel have forgotten how to deal with a genuinely competitive AMD'
pcgamesn.com
Jewtopia is over
'The Ryzen response: Intel have forgotten how to deal with a genuinely competitive AMD'
pcgamesn.com
Jewtopia is over
Other urls found in this thread:
pcgamesn.com
twitter.com
>NO REAL WORLD GAME BENCHMARKS
KYS
Y
S
I don't want to go to your website, James.
Just post a screencap of the article.
Or better yet, don't post anything.
CanardPC benched A0 sample and it was decent even at singlethreaded turd such as ARMA3.
this
fuck off retard
Yep. Their 3.15ghz engineering sample was only 10% behind the i7 6900k.
The top binned Ryzen SKU is 3.6ghz base with a 4ghz turbo. Overclocking it to a solid 4ghz is so trivial its basically entirely free performance.
...
More concerned with comparisons to the i7-7700k when it comes to games.
...
Oy vey! Ryzen is DOA. Buy intel.
>the 15% performance boost you can expect with the upcoming 8th Gen
Nobody actually believes that shit, do they?
RIP
>intel's response to zen is an overpriced i5 with hyperthreading not arbitrarily disabled on an overpriced new socket
>it's due in fucking August, fucking FIVE MONTHS after the launch of Zen
>it's literally nothing more than a higher overlocking i7 7700k
>their only other response is b-but intel 8th gen goys! 15% improvement in our one biased benchmark just like the 15% we claim Kabylake has over Skylake!
This is incredible. Intel has had this coming for so fucking long. They've been getting BTFO in production, BTFO in the mobile market, BTFO in the memory/SSD market, and they're about to get BTFO in the x86 CPU market. The only thing that would've made it more sweet is if VIA somehow appeared out of nowhere and ended up being the one dishing out BTFO's to everyone.
>The only thing that would've made it more sweet is if VIA somehow appeared out of nowhere and ended up being the one dishing out BTFO's to everyone.
That would be glorious
Lower end Zen chip benchmarks when? Some beaches of the Zen chips at £150~ would be nice
Benches*
~same IPC, moarcorez, moarcachez, not a housefire when OCed. I'd say Ryzen is a better buy unless it's somehow very bad at gaymen.
Ryzen is same IPC as Haswell, not Kabylake.
And Kabylake are clocked about 500mhz higher both stock and likely overclocks.
Also, there are other factors that affect gaming performance. A lot of it is just down to latency.
I know it won't be "very bad" at gaming compared to the 7700k.. but what's it going to be, 3% less FPS? 5%? Will even the 1400X sometimes be actually better? I need to see that but yeah.. have to wait. Sucks.
The difference is they are close enough that the difference in single thread doent matter, but the gains in multi threaded do.
and if canard is anything to go by, "effortlessly hit 5ghz, only held back by validation boards power delivery" likely means that xfr could take it to 5ghz on one or two cores, something that the 7700k only gets to do on around 50% of its cpus, so all around, substantial performance uptick with very little down sides.
Only the 7700k and 6600k are clocked higher, every other chip in the lineup is 3-4ghz
Okay, sure, but the 7700k and 7600k is pretty much all anyone cares about for a high end gaming rig right now so I was comparing to those.
I think there are people that'll pay $100 more because "it gets 3% more FPS in my favorite game I don't believe you about the newer game engines being highly threaded"
LGA 2066 is going to be impossible to sell with the new marketplace that's coming in just a few days.
At the highend sure. but not everyone has the money for that, there are plenty of people who are recommended lower i5s. I think that's the point where the cheaper ryzen5 chips are going to shine in games with added smt.
At the high end though? Free overclocking brings entry price down regardless and opensup the "high end gaming" market to more people combined with multicores often beating higher clocked quad cores in games anyway. The 7700k market is shrinking, the places where it will excel have the 7600k and 6350k for competition.
So many articles written about so few benchmarks being leaked.
Let's assume the 1700X does perform was well as the 5960X, why would AMD sell themselves short with a $400 price tag ?
Obviously AMD has the upper hand here, they can order any/all intel cpus and run their benchmarks against Ryzen - see where they fall in terms of performance and then price their CPUs accordingly.
Ryzen only has 16 PCIe lanes for expansion
That's simply not enough for many workstation and even some gaymers
>needing GPU's at all when AMD is cutting the $/GFLOP for CPU's down to 1/4 what it was
NVIDIOT DETECTED
Nigger please.
from day 1.
This shit annoys me. On the highend chipsets why don't they just make them huge plx bridges, getting the full 24lanes (8x predone for the soc stuff) to the chipset and then having 2x16 off the chip for multigraphics inter communication (not all of that stuff has to go back to the cpu) then all the extra io shit.
Also, aren't there 4 lanes unaccounted for on the z270?
Why didn't you buy?
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
The 28th is when the review embargo lifts, so a week.
>Their 3.15ghz engineering sample was only 10% behind the i7 6900k.
It was about 30% behind the 6700k though.
You realize that the 4ghz i7 6700k is clocked nearly 30% higher, right?
Even if you honestly believed that by just increasing the clock 30% you would get 30% more performance, which is a really stupid thing to believe. The 6700k can easily OC to 4.5 on air.
Just buy now it will only get better.
Easy $500 made the first 2 hours this morning.
I used to be intimidated by the stock market thinking
there's all these smarter people that must know better than me
but nope it's full of dumbasses and so easy u make $500 in 2 hours
Lots of workloads scale very closely with clockspeeds, and no one is saying that Ryzen is limited to sub 4ghz either.
You literally do not have a single point. You're just shilling and trying to spread FUD.
>VIA is proud to announce the first single watt unicore design, that gives similar performance to pentium 4560 processors. But is scalable up to 3 cores with an integrated 2w Mediatek GPU acceleration.
I would buy one immediately.
>Lots of workloads scale very closely with clockspeeds
We are not talking about "lots of workloads" we're talking about games, aka the only thing Intel is still better at.
For anything else you ought have a AMD anyway.
>muh shill
fuck off, the only bench for games we have shows AMD lacking, if you have other benchmarks share or shut the fuck up
Most stock movements are done based on algorithms that factor in all sorts of financial statistics and data. This is good most of the time but in cases like AMD here it would obv fail.
Based on stats and numbers AMD would have looked like a terrible buy a year ago
Based on subjective opinion and knowledge of the field it would be a great buy
As a general rule if the stock you're considering has to do with some field you're very intimate and familiar with you can consider buying.
I would never buy stocks from oil companies or the like that I know nothing about.
I know you suffer from diminished mental capacity, but try to sort this out in your simplistic chimp brain.
Look at the scores.
Look at the clockspeeds of the chips in the same family.
3.15ghz Ryzen less than 3% behind 3.5ghz i5 6600k.
The i7 6900k has an all core turbo of 3.5ghz, has more cache, more cores, and more threads than the mainstream i5. Ryzen is 10%~ behind it.
The 4ghz i7 6700k is only 18% ahead of the i5 6600k.
AMD is currently at a -52 PEG.
It's got to be the hottest stock. I have never seen a company with a billion in quarterly revenue with a PEG nearly that low.
I originally bought 380 @ 2.60 but I bought another 120 this morning. If I had 7 grand more and didn't want to risk not diversifying enough, I'd get another 500. Oh well.
It will likely hit $25 at some point this year and might hit $75+ by 2020.
And if we're going to apply your retard logic a 30% increase in core speed means an exact 30% increase in performance in games.
Except, that is not true. So until otherwise proven by benchmarks Intel still better for games than AMD and AMD is better than Intel at literally everything else.
I use my computer for games and web browsing so I will be going with Intel if the benchmarks after Zen's release remain the same, which they likely will.
It's not that intel hasn't forgotten, Intels marketing is second to none in any industry.
It's just that they have no answer they either doesn't alienate existing customers, or directly addresses the fact that they have gotten so arrogant that they thought they could sit on their laurels and 4 cores for mainstream customers.
They are in a bad spot until next year because AMD priced their chips so aggressively.
Again you're just talking out of your ass being willfully ignorant. Or you actually do have brain problems.
That chart shows very strong clock scaling with chips in the same family with the same core counts.
You're a pathetic little faggot shill pushing an agenda.
The problem is Intel have nowhere to go except bring their prices down.
The "secret tech" they supposedly have hidden away is a meme. They've hit the limits of their architecture and it will take years before they can release a new one.
>muh gaymes
of course ryzen is going to wipe the floor with babylake. intel have been complacent for over a decade. now suddenly amd is coming with 14nm chips, double the cores, double the threads while also cutting the prices in half.
fuck intel regardless, go and pump another 250m into SJW projects you fucking kikes, can't wait for the first heads to roll.
BUT INTEL IS GOING TO RELEASE SKYLAKE AGAIN WITH 3% IPC INCREASES LATE THIS YEAR WHAT THEN
4GHz ain't much though. Ryzen needs to hit at least 4.7-4.8GHz to be amazing. Even then it will probably lose in some games to the Kabylels, but it should be very close at least.
if Ryzen could easily reach 4.8 it wouldn't have a base clock of 3.6
at 4.8 it would also blow the fuck out of a 6950x
I don't know what "easily" means to you, if it could hit 4.7-4.8 on a custom water loop I'd be overjoyed.
It would also have a tdp of 180w. That shit just does not fly for oems.
Cool article, love all that hard data..
But does it even matter?
pcgamesn.com
Jesus that reads like a Sup Forums-sourced article.
I'm curious to see how the temperatures are.
how would slightly overclocked (normal reachable on air stuff w/o turning it into volcano) ryzen compare to slightly overclocked (4.4GHz) 4690k?
on typical gayman usage, no pure multicore stuff
What about the IPC of Ryzen's chips?
;)
As says, it probably will have a high TDP at that clock, but the enthusiast user using water cooling or a fuckhuge noctua cooler doesn't care about that. OEM's care about perf/W, which AMD has for once, consumers care about absolute performance, which they also have this time around.
We won't know until release and real benchies are performed.
>As their new Polaris graphics cards have launched, and with their high-end Vega GPUs potentially taking on the very best of GeForce.
Stopped reading right there. You couldn't make it more obvious even if you tried.
Yeah, from what I've gathered from what engineers have said, it's the low 3Ghz that's the sweet spot for having good performance without using much power.
It sounds like they will be able to clock much higher, but at a much higher increase to voltage relative to the clocks you get.
Ever heard of Sandy Bridge?
>(3 x 1w) + 2w
Single threaded it will, depending on the workload, be maybe slightly below Intel.
In anything multithreaded, it'll wipe the floor with the Haswell chip.
Oh that image.
>Hey guys what if we put single core performance games like X3:TC and mix it in to throw off what happens with current multi-threaded games.
Seriously 6700K owner here, and even I can tell this is some funny smelling bullshit.
Buying one of these and running it stock would be almost nonsensical, what will really matter is how far they can OC.
Sandy Bridge only hit 4.6GHz for most silicon.
4.8GHz was only achievable on a select few i7-2600K/2700K and even fewer i5-2500K/2550K
>Sup Forums doesn't understand the implications of the monstrous Integer and Floating Point performance from the passmark leak
kek
I've got a 750w psu and a cooler rated for nearly 300w - my body is ready.
It was more just an example of a CPU overclocking far beyond its stock clocks. As others have said, AMD have a tighter TDP margin than Intel do right now for 8 core CPUs, yet they are clocked higher. Lower clocks for the 4 and 6 core parts could easily be explained by TDP and market segmentation, it gives no real indication of their maximum clock speeds.
Too many people on Sup Forums and other places make this big point that Sandy Bridge could overclock to 4.7-4.8GHz, but all of them neglect to mention the absurdly high voltages and BCLK multipliers they need to change just to hit 4.7GHz. 4.8GHz was out of the question for a lot of the silicon as well. If you were lucky, you could hit 4.6GHz with minimal headaches and reasonable voltages.
>just increasing the clock 30% you would get 30% more performance
Wtf how did you know he uses a tripcode?
Oh wait...
I wanted to buy back around April last year. I got talked out of it, now I just feel stupid whenever I think about this sort of stuff and don't even want to know how much richer I could have been or could be.
Intel's marketing is shit, hardly better than AMD's. Nvidia is a much better example of a company that's coasted along largely by its marketing.
>Scalable
retard
Simple.
You have one choice, 400$ Ryzen, or 5% faster 5960X for 1,200$. Do you know a single person who will spend the 800 premium for 5% more performance? That 800 premium is basically the entire rest of a good tier PC.
AMD has always been second best, and that will never change.
Intel is still better than AMD
Got in last year when it was 1.80 but I've been back and forth trading it since then so I didn't get to fully capitalize on last year's growth. Right now averaging at $10 pps
Couldn't be more happier with recent developments
Intel did this same kind of flailing with their shitty Pentium 4.
When AMD was raping the shit out of them by 40% while being cheaper, Intel still kept their heads shoved up their own asses until core 2 stepped in.
Maybe this means Intel will go back to developing chips with their funding instead of feminism.
I strongly urged my gf whos sitting on over 80k at age 25 (trust fund baby) to invest even 1000$ into AMD when they were at around 4$, I REEEEEE every night thinking about her loss. She lets it all sit in a shit yield savings account.
Except for that time when they were faster than Intel.
So why cant that happen again?
OLD NEWS GRANDPA
AMD HAS NOT AND WILL NOT COMPETE
No seriously Intel is like 9 AMDs together, they could probably just pluck an AMD killer out of dusty officer corner.
Its over. Ryzen will be good, but it wont be the best, and thats why it will fail.
Woah there cowboy. Put your own money on the line.
the P4 wasn't actually that far off the A64 in pure performance though, it was just less efficient clock-for-clock, which didn't matter much because they could just push the clocks up
I'm an idiot. Kill me.
When overclocking came into place, Intel went to dust. AMD had more efficient chips that clocked higher and there was always a bargain enthusiast CPU that raped Intel's entire lineup, like the AXP 1700+ 1.46ghz that clocked up to 2.4ghz, mobile Barton chips that went from 1.8ghz -> 2.9ghz, or the socket 939 opteron 165 dual core 1.8ghz that clocked up to 2.9ghz.
Intel just had a bunch of 2.8-3.2ghz chips that went to 3.6ghz and started housefires.
cpus take 3-4 years to come to market, regardless of r&d
Intel does has like 6 different markets tho
That's why they've hit a wall and have been releasing fuck all over the last few years, right? Good goy
>amd is fucking retarded and hasnt made a good cpu since the athlon
>intel gets lazy and sells crap for big bucks because crap will still outperform the best amd chip
>amd actually makes something good
>intel has nothing
really makes ur cranium expand
can wait to see what intel does for the 9xxx series in 2024
My $107 billion market!
T. Mac fag
I'm so ready for my new 1700x. I have never had a nice desktop cpu. Currently running a poorfag fx-6300 with a 970 like a faggot