Literally another shoah

Literally another shoah

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/9AVZ_x64hg4
guru3d.com/articles-pages/nvidia-geforce-titan-x-pascal-review,19.html
twitter.com/AnonBabble

...

oy vey delet

>w-who cares about MT muh 3% ST performance delided on a custom water loop...

...

pajeet is dumb but persistent

>Intelkikes have spent the entire yesterday trying to convince people this run doesn't exist on CPU-z website

Loving every laugh

>mt
who cares

PAJEET STOP

AMD BTFO

...

lmao

Oy vey!

youtu.be/9AVZ_x64hg4

i want to fuck she

>ryzen overperforms
Loving
Every
Laugh

>caps
You're getting desperate shit shin.
The amount of time you've posted this and you get outed as a dumbass for it.

There's nothing wrong with a larger L2 cache, design decision, smaller ones have their own benefit.

Some nice info, Intel has lowered associativity from 8 to 4 way with Skylake, effectively lowering the speed of their cache, for what reason besides power consumption though I don't know.

>Showing multithreading scores up against mainstream Intel CPUs and old-ass FX CPUs.
No shit Ryzen's gonna kick the shit out of the competition.

Intel's 10 core doesn't fare much better.

is this a 1700x?

wew fucking lad. I'd love to see a 1700 at 4.0ghz. that would be the real nut kicker for intel

>is this a 1700x?
Yes.

I don't care if that thing's overclocked, it's a $400 CPU obliterating a $1700 one in a workload more suited the latter.

how can it be that much faster than 7700k

It is, around 4.4-4.5

...

who /solderedCPUMasterrace/ here

>industrial solder

Based AMD

You're far better off sticking with things more concrete.

You don't understand the point being raised at all, so you shouldn't have bothered posting. Contributing to the background noise of stupidity isn't a prudent choice.

What the writer for CanardPC is highlighting is that CPU-Z's benchmark is a cache loop. It inordinately benefits from larger caches more so than it actually benefits from the throughput of execution units in a core.

Look at Sandra cache bandwidth performance for Skylake compared to Haswell.

Wait, so they're saying that the ryzen sample is faster, because it's better?

I don't understand why they would tweet this. It's like saying "well yeah, that ferrari is faster than that mclaren, and yeah, it is cheaper as well, but it's got a v12 instead of a v8 and comes with a turbo, so it's a totally unfair comparison".

Hes pointing out simple facts.
I don't see what you'd be confused about.

RX 480: the CPU version
Prepare for it to OC like shit, use more power than it was advertised and fry your motherboard.
At least it will keep you warm and nice in winter.

>3.4GHz

Why? Some architectures scale better at higher frequencies.

>don't understand the point
>post another thing showing it's faster

Isn't the point that it's faster? I get that the test skews towards ryzen, but the ultimate point is that it's faster, no?

MOAR CORES

>synthetic benchmark

Oh wait, let's see how it does in the real world?

OY VEY

>he thinks 100% more cores equals 100% more performance

Lmao, not even in your wildest dreams.

>debunked every single thread

well... here's your (((you)))

Why is a 3.00GHz base chip averaging 5% lower than a chip clocked over 50%+ higher in a game that doesn't use more than 4 cores?

>I don't understand how to interpret data so I'll keep looking like a dumb ass.

>be intelfag
>mommy buys you 7700k
>OC it
>get lower fps

wut?

BUT MAA HIGHER FPS WHEN KISSING A WALL YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND

Are you seriously asking why a bench would show performance at equal clocks?
The Ryzen chip in question has a 3.4ghz base clock, so the author of that graph set his Haswell-E system to equal clocks to show its perf/clock. Stock base clock for the i7 5960X is only 3ghz.
The other half of your statement is just silly. Perf/clock is always going to be exactly the same so long as cache/uncore is clocking at the same ratio. IPC is a fixed architectural trait that does not change with clock speed.

How are you not understanding this?
CanardPC is merely pointing out several facts that wccftech are omitting. Being decent people who have already published a review of an engineering sample they're being good stewards of information. The point is that CPU-Z's bench is a cache loop. High numbers in that metric don't correlate to strong performance in anything else, but that is the story that clickbait sites are running with.

>>>/vg

>lower fps is better

AMDtards everyone

Lmao slow

Much lower price for 3 less fps is better, autismo.

Uh... Why are the averages so weird?

Stock chip doing better than OCd chip, a low power underclocked chip within spitting distance.

What's going on with this game?

AMDfags only quoted cannardpc when they commented on 1c 5GHz OC. The moment they try to expose blatant shilling and clickbait shit, amdfags start calling them jews. It's quite hilarious.

""""""Console port""""""

The Batman-tier kind.

They are desperate.
Deep down they know this will be shit, just like the RX 480 and the bulldozer.

They are literally the same price

Serious question, why are AMDtards such lying little shits?

They always try to hide and obfuscate the real numbers.

gta v is one of the best PC ports of all time

That's why it still runs like shit on top end hardware?

it doesn't

With out buying from Microcenter?

What it looks like when an Intel shill runs out of talking points

By top end hardware I don't mean fucking poorfag 1080p

Yup, look at b&h, no sale price whatsoever

the game actually has great performance on all spectrums of hardware

that benchmark comparing the 1700 to a 5ghz 7700k is really retarded and completely unlike the performance we've seen out of GTA V elsewhere

guru3d.com/articles-pages/nvidia-geforce-titan-x-pascal-review,19.html

Hahaha.... That's still a shitty deal.

>1080p, 2xMSAA
The score would be fucking 50FPS or lower with a 4k screen, who the fuck tests a bloody TitanXP on 1080p!?

What a shit game.

you're a retard who enjoys ignoring information so you can pretend to be smarter than other people

>Not so fast AMD fan
>The benchmark is better because the Processor is better

>better processor at the same price
>shitty deal

AMDtard logic everyone

>RX 480
literally 10% weaker than a 980 at half the price of a 980

>You don't get it
>The AMD chip is faster and the CanardPC shill is complaining about it.

So below 60FPS for $600 hardware, over that you need a $1000 GPU

Got it, are you trying to make me switch to consoles or something? Because I got 60FPS there much cheaper.

>GTA V is a shit port

wew the damage control is real

Sad but true

It's just a symptom of the way AMD is run as a company

They keep doing this shit over and over again

in three successive posts you've made bad arguments on three separate topics that have all had nothing to do with that the person you're replying to is talking about

you might be the dumbest person I've ever talked to on this site

>overclocked 7700k average lower than stock 7700k
Sure thing, Brian.

>really retarded benchmark that doesn't line up with good benchmarks
hmmm i wonder why you believe it to be true

>implying xbone can do more than 30 fps
>implying it can do 1080p

>muritard console
I'd rather have a fucking Wii U

>intel shills resorting to samefagging out of desperation

>GTA V
>WiiU

k

>4th post arguing about a 4th topic that has nothing to do with what the person you replied to was talking about
how long can you keep this up?

Really makes you think

So you're admitting that it's an army of intel shills instead? I applaid your honesty

>I applaid your honesty

AMDtard spelling

>if you don't follow the AMD hype-train you are a shill

Must I remind you of the RX480? How did that turn out?
How about Bulldozer?
Stop hyping this shit so much and wait for proper reviews.

The RX 480 turned out very well.

Must I remind you of Presshot, iAPX 432, Larabee, IA64, first few atoms, How did that turn out?

>hurr company fucks up once they can't do anything again
>unless they're Intel they can fuck up 6 times

>RX 480
But it literally did outmatch the 980, though. Even the power draw was fix and they didn't even have to gimp the card for that fix to work.

AMDtard revisionist history

The power issue wasn't even fixed, it still goes over the power limit to this day

They DID gimp it to try to fix it and reduced the power usage, yet it still goes over the limit

AMD just constantly cuts corners like this and it's why they make subpar products.

Except it did not

>i-intel also did b-bad a long time ago
The last good things that came from AMD was the HD7XXX series

>RX480
>Sells out.
>Bad

Nice alternative facts Brian.

>overperforms
toppest of keks

The last good thing that came from Intel was Pentium 3.

...

>Atom chips bricking tablets in 2017.
>"Intel was only bad in the past guys! Please buy Kaby Lake."

Stop.

ryzen got 2327 in single thread

your picture got 1505

lmao

And AMD still plays second to Intel since the Core2Duo.
kek

Yeah, it did. All 100 of them.

So Jesus Third coming is in a form of silicon? Amazing. When can we start the gasing?

Phenom II 965 here.

Soon. u can already start to fire up the oven with those sweet sweet i7 7700k @ 5.2Ghz

The Fire is Rising

All Halo games run with 60 fps on the xbone
and the graphics of Halo 5 is probably 1000 years ahead of GTA V