Real benchmarks released

>real benchmarks released
>40% faster than Ryshit
>$100 cheaper
microcenter.com/product/451883/Core_i7-6700K_SkyLake_40_GHz_LGA_1151_Boxed_Processor

AMD is doned.

Other urls found in this thread:

wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-i7-6900k-gaming-benchmarks/
youtube.com/user/dinopcdotcom
youtube.com/watch?v=YWEHs_R5t9s
youtube.com/watch?v=gUNAvkY6Ops
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Soon you're going to tell me that broadwell-e doesn't overclock well. Fuck off shill

Press S to spit on grave

Why is the Intel clocked 50% higher only 7% faster on average?

To sum it up:

No reason to buy Ryzen unless you are a video editor.

It fails to compete with Intel in both average desktop and gaming usage.

>look mum i posted it again!! xD

>no reason to buy any octacore unless you are a video editor
ftfy

Because AMD is literally shit

>MUH MAX FRAMERATE

Consider the following

>Starting up GTA V
>Most textures loading in, therefor the load is on the CPU not the GPU
>4.5 Ghz beats 3.8 Ghz in max framerate
>Average is 3-4FPS apart.


Next time try to processing the information you see before you post the same shit over and over

I don't think video editors can get away with bad single thread either during the actual editing of the user, unless you mean video rendering/encoding only. You see, all interactive applications need at least one fast thread because they must coordinate interactivity in a safe manner. It's a stupid meme of technically illiterate people that CPUs will ever get away from serial requirements, unless the only thing they do is to not use the computer at all and have it do offline operations like simple rendering.

stop it.

its a week old bench where the 1700 $ 3ghz vs a 4.2ghz 7700k.

its no where near a real scenario.

if you take the 1700, disable 4 cores on it, and clock it to 4.5ghz + then we are talking competition.

imo the best way to judge fps would be the difference between dips and how fast it recovers

are you blind child? the average is better there, not only the max.

Yeah the minimum is worrying a bit, but it may be Driver problem for the CPU (or motherboard)

Yeah I don't know, I'm not a video editor. Maybe it's only video encoding?

Basically Ryzen is only good for very specific scenarios where multi-threaded performance is a priority.

Yeah not shit, a 4.5Ghz clocked CPU is better than a 3.7Ghz. Oh... only with 3-4 fps? Okay....

Fuck me sideways right?

...

at prices like this I would be stupid not to buy Intel. Imagine how mad AMD must be right now. They just released their brand new chips and intel slashes the fuck out of their prices.

Yeah, basically most of the shilling memes are purely offline recording or encoding or rendering. The memesters don't understand the actual reality of how computers work. When you do something interactive, meaning the human input must be taken into account in a very live manner, serial performance is always required because a central global loop must be run safely which is a quite inefficient process and slow cores do show their major weakness at that point.

this
Desperate shills are desperate.
Even pins are getting brought up as if it's a real reason to buy Intel.

With all the ass blasting that's going on I'm going to get a 1800x just to salt mine every time I post about it.
I'd be fine with a 4 core, but this is just to good. And it's in the budget. Everyone (that's white) Can afford it! Intel is done and dusted.
There's so many people that'll get this boosting AMD's R&D that the damage will keep on rolling.
OHOHOH. Intel still has to pay debnts to the EU to subsidize AMD laptops. HAHAHA Better pay up soon fuckers, or you'll have to compete with Ryzen laptops hahaha.

Kike's built their own chambers this time.

my guess is texture loading is only one thread and the single core performance is hurting it there. just a wild guess I don't really know much about game engines or directx

all preorders are sold out, they sure are mad, you have no idea

>bigger Ghz means better CPU

I honestly can't tell what is and isn't trolling anymore.

>Finally AMD is competive again so we won't get buttfucked as much for buying a $100-150 for $300

The production cost of the intel CPU's are fucking low, yet they keep increasing the price because dumbfucks like you would keep buying them

Why test overclocked against stock? Heck why even test at all with such a huge clockspeed difference?

At prices like these, you would be stupid not to buy AMD if you were considering the x99 platform. You're comparing the wrong chips

>And it's in the budget. Everyone (that's white) Can afford it! Intel is done and dusted.

>it's okay to buy 450 GPU
>its end of the world to buy 400 CPU

nvidia+intel for the win, right?

>implying ryzen doesn't have the single-core capability

the minimum fps could just be anything, it could even be a 1s fps drop

It's going to be pretty sad if you buy a $500 1800X and it won't even beat a $350 Intel chip in real world scenarios.

Performance = [IPC]*[clockspeed]

If one of those is significantly lacking then the performance will suffer.

...

another shitposting thread
great

what a time to be alive

Not trolling but relative performance, do you think if I overclock JUST a little bit (not 4.5Ghz but like 4.1Ghz safely) the performance would be... kinda the same? I mean we talking about 3-4 FPS difference.

Also you get +4 extra cores for the same money. Which for gaming is useless yes, but for normies who stream or render something in the background thats usefull

You realize these new Ryzen chips cost more than almost all of Intel's chips?

by 1s you mean 1ns? because that's how they count min fps
frame times is proper metric.

I contemplated buying AMD but I thought about it and doesn't feel right like I would get dirty buying poorfag poo shit off the ground. Then there is the whole thing of mixing and matching amd with nvidia which as we all know is absolutely haram

AMD's own doctored cherry-picked meme benchmarks show it 25% worse. It's literally the same shit again. Don't even poke it with stick if what you do is not purely offline and non-interactive like video rendering or encoding.

The guy who made the graph does not own Ryzen

screenshot its taken from a youtube video where a homeless looking person is showing these graphs, without single shot on the CPU itself, or cpuz or even gameplay

Wait for real benchmarks Beltalowda

So do the Broadwell-E ones, for a good reason.

We are comparing it to the 7700k which for my knowledge is the same price as the 1700...

>look ma i posted it again xD

The r7s are half the price of broadwell-e, the processors that they are meant to compete with

AMD should have tocked when Intel ticked now they're timing is all fucked up

>show it 25% worse.
example of this every being said?

>5ghz oced intel ship
>still lose on average to a 3,0 ghz stock ryzen on average

Goytel is finally finished.

Damn, intel shilling team has arrived.

This is so sad, AMD just keeps making the same mistakes over and over again. Just add MOAR CORES

He's a well know reviewer. And a moron for pressing the wrong button on youtube and violating the NDA.
He might actually be homeless soon if AMD decides to sue him

I think that just GPU bottleneck.

Why isn't the 1700 OCd?

>25% worse
wow, you sure showed me with all of that evidence

PLEASE DELETE!

>He's a well know reviewer.
did you see their previous videos? I wouldn't call that reviewing.

OK so Ryzen is meant to compete with a workstation CPU?

What is the market for this? Video encoders only?

Because it would be an unfair advantage against Intel

>3.0GHz
It's 3.7Ghz
>lose on avg
Are we looking at the same image?

because it can't SAD

memory problems up the ass shitty pins it's another bulldozer

ALL.OVER.AGAIN

Stock is all that matters.


Also Ian hourly reminder that every 7700k can easily OC to 5.3Ghz

Look for that AMD-promoted image posted frequently in Sup Forums which shows it at ~1.51 and Intels are on ~2.00.

wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-i7-6900k-gaming-benchmarks/

>The Ryzen 7 1800X delivered consistently higher framerates, averaging a 12% lead across the board. The 1800X is said to even outperform the Kaby Lake speed demon i7 7700K in single threaded performance and the 10-core i7 6950X $1700 desktop flagship Intel HEDT processor across the board with a one-click auto-overclock on air cooling.

here you go again drooling everywhere, need a handkerchief?

youtube.com/user/dinopcdotcom
is his channel
This youtube.com/watch?v=YWEHs_R5t9s
is just a reupload

the 1.51 and 2.00 are meaningless numbers if you don't give proper context

The R7 is meant to compete with i7 in price, while reaching 6900k-6950x performance in some scenarios.

The r5 is meant to compete against the i5 series, with a performance of 6 core broadwell CPU's.

The R3 is the budget centric one, obviously against i3 with a performance of i7 6700-7700

>He's a well know reviewer
he is not
>And a moron for pressing the wrong button on youtube and violating the NDA.
he did not violetad NDA as he did not have hardware or any guarded information

you can make video about ryzen today, and would not violate NDA

he is just trying to jewup some views

1800X is a $500 chip. Pointless for Sup Forums. Comparisons should only be done around the 200-350 range in here for both Intel and AMD products.

Are you saying that the IPC for Ryzen is going to be bulldozer-tier again? because this isn't the case

3.7 on 8 cores in 65w?

Lol, Amd doesn't even need the gamer market then, with that perf/watt it would brutalize Intel in servers, like holy shit the 6900k uses 180 watts at 4.0.

yes. that's the one i'm talking about
it's not good.

His post was trollish but according to other people who broke the NDA the 1700 can only OC to 4.0 IF you have the X motherboards, and 3.8 on the B ones

>gta 5
Nah I will wait for a proper reviewer

It was a a weighted normalized average of single thread.

Just buy the R7 1700 and overclock it a bit to 4.0-4.2ghz

you can stream to twich dotard2 without the need of iGPU ;^)

I'm interested to see how the R5 and R3 compete

But it's looking really bad for the R7

There are even userbenchmarks that show the i7-7700k beating a 1700x, which is $60 more expensive.

of what test and which processors?

>amd is for poorfags but if they sell a chip that's faster for more money it doesn't count

>you can make video about ryzen today, and would not violate NDA
You can't post benchmarks that you did yourself. The NDA ends on the day of the launch.

AMD nailed the TDP because they left out that horrible iGPU.

There will be Zen APU's tho

3.7 single core, all core turbo is 3.3 or lower.
It's 65w for a reason.

Second rate companies like AMD tend to pre-overclock because they don't have their own Foundries. Don't expect Ryzen to get 500Mhz that easily. Most people would be getting like 200Mhz.

>comparing an octa core to a quad core
Again with this retardation. This "Price class" bullshit is completely arbitrary

>server market
But those are all enterprise contracts

here you go again posting things nobody ever said anywhere

>literally making shit up with no evidence

Its 65w because of I mean Kaby Lake is basically skylake with a beefier iGPU and TDP went up by 30-40w

>pay more for less because reasons
>rubs hands

is lower TDP better or worse?

pls spoonfeed babby

>all core turbo is 3.3 or lower
Does your ass hurt when you pull shit like this out of it?

Sure I can.

see?

That's based on history. You can't overclock easily what is pre-overclocked. AMD tends to do that recently because they don't have their own Foundries so they tend to be behind technologically or just more expensive because they have fees.

How is price arbitrary?

Even regardless of price, just look at the performance. If a cheaper Intel chip is beating Ryzen R7 in average scenarios, it's really bad for the R7.

using gtav as a benchmark

youtube.com/watch?v=gUNAvkY6Ops

And those come from having power hungry processors like Intel, right?

In case you didn't notice, he was being sarcastic.

literally broadwell-e for gaming
It might be priced really low but looking at it's specs, it's much more appropriate to compare it against the broadwell-e

>Many decent reviewers say they can't release info due to NDA but they say Ryzen kicks ass
>Some retarded shitty youtuber release an obscure chart for the weakest Ryzen chip by using an older game
>Sup Forums is retarded enough as well as full of shills to base their claims on this shitty chart.
Yeah, no. I will wait for March 3 to make a decision.

nah, TDP went up bacause they did this

I love this oldest propaganda tactic in the world, turn truth about yourself into "truth" about your enemy, nauseating

max turbo speed has always been single core speeds.

Lower is better. It stands for how much power you need to run the cpu.
AMD is currently having a TDP of 60-90w (non-overclocked) while intel went up to 90-130w