So Sup Forums what's your excuse for not buying ryzen? it's literally the logical choice

so Sup Forums what's your excuse for not buying ryzen? it's literally the logical choice.

Other urls found in this thread:

forums.anandtech.com/threads/rumor-rx-480-overclocking-1500-mhz.2477683/
archive.is/2017.02.21-212937/https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06W5Q7B38/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

I won't need to upgrade my computer for probably a year or two, I might buy Zen+. If a friend needs help building a computer or I come into unexpected money I'll do a Ryzen build assuming it lives up to hype.

The fact that my 4790k @ 4.7 still performs great and that my video card is my bottleneck in most things anyways.

I'm a professional who needs 200PCIe 3.0 lanes, AMD can't provide that.

>200PCIe lanes
For what purpose?

I don't need MOAR COAR

>"price-performance" chart
>skewing results

performance is performance and intel still wins if you're not a poorfag

Sure it can, 288 lanes in fact, you just need to buy this.

>Intel 10 core at $2000 gets beaten by a 200MHz overclocked 8 core at $400 in threaded test

>but it doesn't tho

Lmao

Pre release bencharmks don't count

Kek, all this desperation

>intel getting hammered in a synthetic physics (FP) tests, the very same workload bulldozer fell flat on its face

Lol that pathetic IPC, AMD needs 1GHZ more to be 3% faster than Intel

> what is turbo
>what is higher core count
>what do your tears taste like
>most of all what is $1700 vs $390

Intelfags have become insane in the last week.

People seem to forget that Broadwell-e has 4 channel memory, twice the bandwidth and it seems to be doing fuck all to help them.

$1,650 dollar CPU being beaten at anything by a 350 dollar CPU.

I don't render shit all day.

Single threaded performance will benefit me more than multi threaded.

Get a pentium and overclock it.

Might as well buy an old xeon for $20 and gush on and on about how great of a price/performance it is.

Old Xeons are great value t b h. That one is too old though.

not only that but the 6950x is a 10 core cpu lol, not an 8 like Ryzen

I got a free 3 year old Xeon, its value is infinity.
Anyhow suggesting that people who buy stuff CPUs look at how much they can get for a certain amount of budget is just plain wrong.

The intel CPU has 4 more threads

I got an i3-3220 for $50 CDN. But that doesn't matter, because we're talking about new shit, not used.

>ITT people not knowing how to read the chart properly and confuse best value with top performance

I have this cynical hunch that game performance is either very similar or under-performs.

>6 core AMD beating 6 core intel cpu while costing less

Has the shitwrecker actually done it?

It's not going to take much effort to beat Intel on price when they're literally gouging the entire market due to lack of competition.

AMDs strong point has always been multi threaded stuff, even with bulldozer/piledriver it was their strong point.
We need to wait and see a more comprehensive review of the new cpus to come a better conclusion about ryzen rather than depend on leaks.

Anyone still jerking "muh single core" dick after this is a confirmed Intelshill. Guaranteed.

>same or better performance against intel competitor with the same core count and clockspeed
>??? (calculating concussion in halfwit brain) ???
>OBVIOUSLY ITS SINGLE THREAD SPEED MUST BE SLOWER???

This is how Intelfags sound the last couple of days

b-b-but the only metric that matters is whether i can run quake at 3000 fps or 2950

desu amd could have a better implementation of smt

That's even less likely.

Y-yes goy, buy Intel. DO IT NOW GOYIM.

AKTSCHUELY

There's two ways this can still mean lower IPC, even if they're very small chances they're still there

- AMD has better SMT implementation (already posted)
- AMD has a better command queue and thread scheduler leading to better thread utilization

They're both pretty much fairy tales though, these are server-facing software/firmware issues Intel and its partners have been refining for decades.

I have had several shit cpus from amd. I don't know if it is worth giving them a chance again.

Remember what happened when the RX480 before it went on sale? People were saying it offered GTX 1070 performance for $200. Turns out it's basically an R9 390 that's always way over $200.

Things won't be different. It will performn like a 6700K at best.

I remember how CPUs and GPUs are the same thing.
What I will remember a few years down the line is your lot' tears.

>so Sup Forums what's your excuse for not buying ryzen?
Not out yet, you fucking retard

>so Sup Forums what's your excuse for not buying ryzen? it's literally the logical choice.

I already have a PC, don't need to buy a new one for a while.

My excuse is that I already have a 4790k and none of my daily tasks will say any performance benefit from installing a Ryzen.

What are your daily tasks?

>People were saying it offered GTX 1070 performance for $200.

nobody said that ever. All the early benches put it at 390x level with less memory bandwidth.

you can get quad core 771 xeons (modded for 775) for under $10 on ali

That's my same CPU and I bought it new for 100 euros 4 years ago. You got ripped man.

It's also a piece of shit, but I didn't want to give Intel more money than that.

shitposting on Sup Forums and masturbating to trannies

I know for a fact that ryzen wont have better ipc than kabylake, and that it might not even hit 5ghz+ like kabylake can so it can fuck any game up.

But for workstation pc, r7 1800x all the fucking way. 6900k performance workstation for nearly half the cost? hell yeah

Everything but video editing/rendering.

Bullshit.

>This will be where we get the most out of these chips. Ideally matching a stock 1070 with OC


forums.anandtech.com/threads/rumor-rx-480-overclocking-1500-mhz.2477683/

They're more than 50% less performants than i7 in pure horsepower.

Not only that but they also suck at multi-threading since they were the first models who really tried that. Your computer will feel as slow as a 2008 one.

Waste of money.

No, you need all the threads to run all your tabs in your browser. Everything is multithreaded at this point.

>my cellphone has a quad core processor
>my fucking TV has an octa core processor
Ireally don't even fucking get the TV. It doesn't even do anything.

>mfw amdrones thought they were getting the 1800x for $499
>mfw amdpoors will be eating rice and beans for months if they want to buy their latest and greatest space heaters

archive.is/2017.02.21-212937/https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06W5Q7B38/

>/w liquid cooler bundle

You think we're blind?

>masturbating to trannies

>archive.is/2017.02.21-212937/https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06W5Q7B38/
>CPU plus a LIQUID COOLER package is $100 more
Are you that fucking retarded?

All I see are Cinebench benchmarks. I could give a shit less about what processor tops the charts in Cinebench. I give a fuck about how it's going to play my games.

Until I start seeing benchmarks on games like Battlefield 1 to me Ryzen doesn't even exist.

you can skimp on the liquid cooler if you want your house to go up in flames

only kidding i know you guys don't own your own homes

Dumb frogposter.

You dont even hide yourself

t. manchild that can't understand CPU engineering outside of "Intel = better in game benchmarks"

And that's still cheaper than a 6900k without any cooling.

You can safely fall back to the slightly lower clock and cheaper 1700X now and it'll still be same performance.

>not getting the base 8 core version and just overclocking it
Wow it's like you hate money or something.

>I don't want better processors imma suck Intel's dick till the day I die

If they deliver i am selling my i5 6600k, if they don't i am saving for a Vega GPU.

Did AMD paid you to shill this to us here?

need to send in a video card to msi for warranty shit, wont buy ryzen till it comes back.

most likely getting a 1800x unless the 1700x exactly the same just lower base.

Can't buy something that doesn't exist

has there ever been a good cpu that plays games horribly? I mean sure bulldozer and its derivatives could multitask with the best mainstream i7's but when anything single core and taxing came by they struggled.

an all around fantastic cpu won't play games like shit.

not a waste if you get everything cheap enough.

a while back could get a dual socket motherboard, 128gb of ram and 2 8 core 16 thread cpus for 400$.

You mean just because we have literally no gaming benchmarks despite all these leaks with the exception of that really old one which shows AMD lower than 6600.
Yeah I have the exact same impression.

Lets be 100% fair on this point

If a game is gpu bound, it plays well, just not getting all the frames it can.
If a game is cpu bound it plays like fucking garbage.

its better to have an overkill cpu and a weaker gpu just for the sake of not binding the cpu.

amds multithread has always been better then intels, just look at the construction cores and where they fall single core and where they fell multicore.

that's bullshit and you're missing the point besides: only ancient/shitty indie gayms are actually single-threaded.

...

most games slam one thread exclusively and pay lipservice to the fact the cpu has more than 1 thread.

the game is multithreaded, is still hammers one core FAR more than the others.

and like I said, to be fair cpu bound plays like fucking garbage with stuttering and massive frame rate drops everywhere, while gpu bound just doesn't play at a higher framerate.

If I had to pick a system I would rather it be cpu gpu bottlenecked then cpu.

That said, the worst case scenario for amd is a 6600k, and once you clock the cpu up to 3.4 it sits between a 6600k and a 6700k, likely all chips can handle an all core overclock of 4ghz, and that puts it at top of the pile, possibly, depending on how smart amds self overclocking is, it can see what the game is doing, see its using 1-4 cores, and clock them up to 4.5+ and neglect the other cores, and now you are tied with intel's best quad cores in games, and shitting on it mercilessly.

Im going with a 1700x or a 1800x, benches will tell me which one I chose.

Lol that pathetic IPC, Intel needs 2 cores and 4 threads more to be 3% slower than AMD

if xfr is good, I can skip the days of burn in to see if its stable, and then skip the months of finding out its slightly unstable and dicking around with clock speed, as its all done for me with sensors that should be able to pick up if something is going off the rails and compensate.

if xfr is a meme, getting a 1700 and manually putting it to 4.0ghz and being happy with that.

>filename
stupid phoneposter

Intel can't share memory channels across dies. THat is why they have quad channel memory. It's a holdover from the Xeon die. Pointless with 1 CPU, The new Opteron CPUs will be 4x Zeppelin dies sharing a MCM for 144 PCIE lanes and octo channel memory.

Still need to sell current setup and it isn't out yet.

why so much intel damage control and shilling? why would you defend intels ridicolous prices?

Buyers remorse, younglings who don't know the value of the dollar, or just fanboy for the best they can buy and feel threatened.

I won't need a new processor for many years, my 4790k is still PWNing

literal intel shareholders trying to salvage their poor investment choices

>not a i5 2500k for $90

you know nothing about being a poorfag

Its gonna be fantastic when Intel just halves the price of the 6950x, after the release of Ryzen.

We all know the manufacturing cost of those chips isnt anyhere near what they sell them for. They only sell them so high because theres currently nothing better and they can.

AMD buttbuddies are gonna be so sad.

Lmao this is fake as fuck, there are no real benchmarks yet

Ryzen is a complete failure like everything AMD does, I can't wait to see the massive disappointments here when it comes out

My Desktop still runs flawlessly everything I ask of it. So no need to scrap it yet. Really though for older games, the Phenom II is only option for amd platform if you want the game to run without clock rate/timing issues. So for me, Phenom II is it. Best of both, old game compatibility yet powerful enough for everything else.

I use a laptop at work running an old Phenom chip. It takes it 45 seconds to a minute to load scan files with more than 10 images, takes it around 20 seconds to load the file explorer everytime I go deeper into the network drives.

I realize its an old mobile chip but theres no way in hell a Phenom can handle a modern work load, Id be wiling to bet the laptop I use would crash if I tried to open a powerpoint.

...

Will you be greatful for AMD then?

WHERE THE FUCK IS THIS FROM ALREADY

Hardly, only thing AMD would have done is force Intels hand. After they decrease the prices of all the enthusiast chips Ryzen will be second best.

That is to say, the cores on the Ryzen chips are more than likely shit, just like every CPU/APU AMD has made.

I have a 5820k that I just got about 1.5 years ago and it should last me another 3.5 years at least. I barely push it doing what I do as it is.

I hope Ryzen kicks ass though.

What's it like being that bitter at AMD?

All they do is make your life better.

why bother if you can buy ES V3 Xeons on ebay at 200 usd