gamersnexus.net
overclock3d.net
tomshardware.com
guru3d.com
Other urls found in this thread:
tweakers.net
youtube.com
anandtech.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
purepc.pl
youtube.com
phoronix.com
youtube.com
anandtech.com
twitter.com
ITS LITERALLY WORSE THAN 6600k WTF? Bulldozer 2.0...
...
>The 1800X is an impressive competitor to the 6900K in production, and it’s significantly cheaper. We’d recommend the 1800X over the 6900K for folks who genuinely use software acceleration. It’s just not good for gaming, and GPUs kill both AMD and Intel CPUs in accelerated rendering.
Sup Forums BTFO.
INTEL BTFO
>2600k performance in gaming in fucking 2017
>Sup Forums BTFO.
THIS!!!!
1800x only slightly worse than i7-7700k at Handbrake.
Hmm..
@handbreak
jesus christ Ryzen is shit
retard
>an 8 core cpu is slower in x264 than a 4 core 7700k
how could they fuck this up so hard?
handbreak is multi threaded you moron
intel 4c beating it is embarassing
Literally AYYYMD on suicide watch
>costs 100$ more
>performs worse
AYYYYMD does it yet again
It's pretty obvious that it scales extremely poorly by how close 6900K is to 7700K.
You're not, not wrong.
>An 8 core is comparable to a 4 core in single core performance
Is this supposed to make AMD look bad?
Considering that 1800X is $150 more than 7700K, yes?
>SMT showing some overhead
that's disappointing
Ho boy, intel shills were right once again.
I was waiting for ryzen/vega to change my cpu but I'm buying a 7700k and a gtx1070 as we speak.
Fuck these guys and their overhyped BS.
Vega can fuck itself for all I care now.
Long life intel + nvidia wombo combo
...
the 6900k is also much more expensive than a 7700k
>4.2GHz at 1.45v wasn't stable (hardware unboxed)
>had to settle for 4.1GHz
God damn it. I'm buying the 7700k, fuck it.
The 6900k costs twice as much as the Ryzen and performs like shit in that test, you retard
polish purepc.pl
results start at 4th subpage
>on average a $50 pentium is only about 10% slower in games than a $500 ryzen 1800x
>tfw bought i7700k 2 months ago while faggots are still waiting for the verdict
sucks to suck PHAM, you almost had me worried hypeboiz
And that should make me buy Ryzen that is worse than 7700K because...?
1800x on par with i7-7700k with HT disabled in Watch_Dogs 2.
With HT enabled, the i7-7700k gets ~30 more average FPS...
What the fuck, AMD?
muh cores
I don't know, do you only use programs that requires a single core? Then knock yourself out
Guess I'm getting the 7700K after all
You got me again, AMD
While its shitty, it seems like Watch_Dogs only utilizes Intel Hyperthread..
I cannot blame them that much tho, pretty sure they didn't had a Ryzen Reference to support it
HT are not real cores, have less performance.
With HT I guess watch dogs picks the Thread instead of the actual core.
Ryzen 7 1800X pulls 110w under full load in Prime95.
LGA 2011 fagots on suicide watch.
>2011 is the power user socket
>2011 is the enthusiast socket
>2011 will be the 10/20 cores threads socket
>2011 pay extra for the quad channel
All AMD had to do is ditch the 1700 and release a single R5 1600x which has a higher rated clockspeed
did you see the handbrake results?
>Intel's octa-core is within margin of error from their quad-core
Hmmm....
I wonder how its going to scale up in the future when software uses more cores.
We've seen the FX 8350+ series of CPUs scale-up recently with newer releases.
I wonder if the benhcmarks will look different a few years down the line.
I like what I've been seeing. Seems like AMD has a winner.
That's not too shabby.
I mean for me the only reason I ever cared about CPU tdp is PSU requirement.
You could probably build a full AMD build (R7 1700+ RX 480) and have a 450w (hell even a 400w) PSU to power it
>The 6900k performs nearly identical to the 7700k
Yes I did, what's your point?
Most programs barely use 4 cores, in which Intel will be slightly better for 70% of the price. Thanks, I will.
This looks fine to be honest. Slightly disappointing but it's not an extreme situation. Neither "AMD IS DOA" or "Intel is finished" I guess. Good for AMD, it's still an all new product that has good potential in the future.
>sucks to suck PHAM, you almost had me worried hypeboiz
I was one of these hypeboiz and I'm buying a 7700k right now.
I should have known that expecting something from pajeets was a bad idea.
Never ever again, glory to Israël and Intel.
Really makes the ticker tock
...
Hmmm.
Ohm, its a winner yes, against Intel 6-8 Core CPU's.
Its not really a winner against their mainstream i5 and i7. Its really weird but I think AMD will truly win with their R5 series.
weird because it does better than any intel cpu
in 4K on dx11
Joker Production :
ayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
HAHAHAHA
>shit at winrar
>shit at games
>shit at encoding
DOA
fuck you guys for making me fell for the ryzen meme
All reeks of intel damage control. Don't you dare post good things about AMD goy or we cut off your supply of shekels!
Even if its 10% 'behind' intel's over-inflated offerings, I'm getting one.
They obviously launched it this way to avoid having their R5s interfere with the more expensive R7s. It gently forces the people who have been waiting for high end processors to buy the more expensive models first.
never question the jew again goy.
muh cores on a SINGLE THREAD bench
shils dont even try to hide their technicall illiteracy
>Even after down-clocking the -7700K to 3.8 GHz, it still beats Ryzen 7 1800X in nearly every game in our suite.
Welp...
>Most programs barely use 4 cores
Except for those that actually matters if you're a productive adult, i.e not video games
But user.... Linus Shill tips
General consensus is the CPUs are good for a lot of stuff, beating broadwell in some tasks. But in gaming, they drop to haswell levels of performance.
>actual multithreaded test shows that ryzen is shit
>handbrake shows that ryzen is shit
>games show that ryzen is shit
I was ready to build my AMD system but it's less then mediocre scores in games think I'll wait for intels response or just hold off for a skylake-x build and Volta
Ryzen isn't bulldozer 2.0 by any means but it's not going to live up to the hype
That being said, would you recommend a Ryzen R7 1700 upgrade from my i5 4690?
>I only notice benchmarks what benefits my "facts"
Pfthahaha, guess Linus doesn't mind a bribe. He needs them to keep his shitty 'company' afloat.
See
>The only CPUs that beat it cost twice as much and have way higher TDP
Please don't breed
>tfw wanted to upgrade from FX8350
>tfw its still pointless outside of one or two games to upgrade from it since DX12 and Vulkan has been a massive boon for it so far
Best £50 I ever spent.
Maybe you should read full reviews and not base your opinion on one cherrypicked benchmark.
It's better than every single Intel product below $1000 there.
It seems there a rather large discrepancy between WinRAR and 7zip also.
This is why I still read anandtech
Kernel compilation. I don't think it will scale over 8 cores much given the difference between 6800k and 5960x. Still I would skip 1800x and 1700x in favor of 1700.
i just look at the average, and the average shows that ryzen blows
HAHAHA BULLDOZER 2.0 ALL OVER AGAIN
Where's your "52% IPC increase" now?
pic related
Are you a gamur manchild only concerned with muh FPS'es? No
Do you actually need 8 cores for other reasons? Yes
>The fucking differences between the toms and the guru3d review
WEW LAD ITS JUST A (((COINCIDENCE))) GOYIM BUY INTEL PLS
I recommend buying a cheap R3 tho as an upgrade. It will be around $100
If the most demanding thing you do on your PC is play video games, no
But i use handbrake a lot
I sometimes render videos for family, and I only play Rocket League time to time.
So what is Ryzen good at?
>1280x720, no effects, no AA
reely makes me tink
>AMD told GN in a last-minute phone discussion that most board vendors have had 3 weeks (from March 2) to finalize EFI, and noted that some motherboards still “need more time in the oven.”
>This should explain some of the initial bugs in EFI from multiple vendors. Note carefully that EFI version can heavily impact performance in some cases.
>GN used the latest (correct) ASUS EFI version, detailed on the next page, but other board vendors shipped updates late into the review week.
>Disparity in review performance can be partially attributed to motherboard support and EFI revision.
so, this is what AMD was panicking about yesterday. now it's pretty obvious that some reviews are going to get abysmal results due to their test hardware and Intel fags will cherry pick the fuck out of those.
I'd urge you all to ignore the outliers.
gamersnexus look like getting Intel payroll
steve im disappointed
Look up what margain of error is
anandtech.com
>However there are a few edge cases where AMD is lacking behind 10-20% still, even to Broadwell.
AYYMD IS FINISHED & BANKRUPT
AYYMDPOORFAGS CONFIRMED ON SUICIDE WATCH
>less than 10fps difference when it costs half
are we looking at the same thing?
Point is that anyone with more than five brain cells would buy the 7700k over both the 6900k and the Ryzen
it was intended to disable GPU bottleneck
Pretty much everything. It only really makes sense when you get past the $300 range though and if you play games you're probably best off with 4 cores. Whenever AMD launches the R5s those will probably be the best products in their range.
I'm not trolling but honestly its not suprising that most "Youtube Reviewrs" like the Ryzen.
I mean for video rendering/editing a cheaper version of a 6900k-6950x.
All depends on the real world performance honestly.
Im in no hurry to upgrade. Only Arma 3 and GTAV cause me any trouble.
A FX8350 and 390X is overkill for 1080p as is anyway.
Wow, so glad I bought a 7700k without waiting like a little cuck. I knew AMD would fail for us gaymers.