Can we agree that while Ryzen isn't the huge leap in performance it was meme'd to be, it is undeniably competitive?

Can we agree that while Ryzen isn't the huge leap in performance it was meme'd to be, it is undeniably competitive?

I sure can.

Sincerely: 7700K owner.

Even in very abstract and niche metrics Ryzen has an average 46% uplift in IPC over Excavator.
Its perf/watt is extremely high.
In productivity workloads the 1800X has an average 99% of the performance of a i7 6950X.

Its already great, and it will only get better as vendors iron out the kinks in their BIOS, and Microsoft eventually has their crack team of curry code slaves release a scheduler patch.

FUCK OFF ALREADY

LITERALLY A HUNDRED THREADS ABOUT THIS FUCKING SHIT

AT LEAST TRY TO KEEP IT IN ALREADY EXISTING THREADS YOU FUCKING RETARDS

...

The perceptron branch predictor does perform admirably as well. Substantial performance increases are seen in commonly used workloads.

I mean compared to Bulldozer it's a massive leap in performance. And yes, they're most certainly competitive for the first time in like a decade.

Even Linux performance is strong for something that just launched.

...

Productivity benches from Hardware Canucks, very good over all.

Peak power when all cores are loaded is 110w~ while intensive gaming only has the CPU pulling 60w.

TheStilt measured the same max power at stock.
Also measured a 3.9ghz overclock power draw, and a 3.3ghz under clock.

Sure.

Here is your participation award.

The voltage/clock scaling between 2.1ghz and 3.3ghz is totally linear. Even under 3.8ghz
Its incredibly tame, requiring 1.25v.

Considering a 3.4ghz 1700X at stock will totally dominate a 5ghz OC FX 9590 its a tremendous single leap in performance. Not just performance, but efficiency as well. That is laudable no matter what shills try to say.

Ryzn is pretty good over all.
The 14nm LPP process looks incredible.
Performance is only going to increase as time goes on.

>undeniably competitive
we won't know until r3 r5

yeah but i can just use a 7700k and a gtx 1080 or a quadro for my prosumer shit so why bother? this doesn't compete with the Xeon lineup so who cares? are they even launching opterons this year?

The i7 7700k is nowhere near the 1800X or i7 6900k in well threaded workloads. Naples Opterons launch Q2 this year.
Your post is pointless immature shitposting.

>The i7 7700k is nowhere near the 1800X or i7 6900k in well threaded workloads
top kek it's within 20% for compilation time which is one of the only things you actually need this for

it's shit

>that scale
bait

>well threaded workloads

So shit that 99.99999% of consumers won't be using regularly? Not even Adobe's suite uses 8 cores well.

>So shit that 99.99999% of consumers won't be using regularly? Not even Adobe's suite uses 8 cores well.
servers are going to devour naples cores.

Can't wait for AMD to post a 1.5B+ dollar quarter this year.

All else being equal the sales they've made with Ryzen alone (being sold out at every major retailer and e-tailer) should push them to 1.4B this quarter.

It's not competitive at all.

A fucking Intel processor that costs $340 beats a $500 Ryzen

It's truly horrible

A fucking Intel processor that costs $340 beats a $1000 dollar Intel, too.
Any other shilling you want to get out of your system before going?

perf/w isn't competitive so naples is DOA for the majority of the server market.

The difference is Intel isn't competing with itself.

Try again, kid.
All 8c/16t at 3.3ghz pulling under 60w at full load.

>hurrdurr TDP = power draw

tech illiterate shill.

>being this retarded
Yet again, try again, kid.
See: Broadwell does not scale down as well as Zen does, neither does Skylake.
32c/64t Opterons will have a significant clock advantage over Skylake Xeons.
8c/16t Ryzen at 3.3ghz is only pulling 58.598w with all threads loaded 100%.
Voltage and clocks scale perfectly linearly between 2.1ghz and 3.3ghz.

Your shitposting is low energy. Maybe if your IQ was actually over 90 you could try a bit harder.

>it is undeniably competitive?
Its IPC is almost competitive, but its performance in 99% of everyday tasks is not thanks to its abysmal clock speeds and the resulting lackluster single-threaded performance.

I agree with that. I think the lower end chips will be the most compelling. The 8 core stuff is pretty silly.

>a scheduler patch.
What's wrong with the scheduler? 8+ cores has been a common workstation thing since Windows Vista.

Treating all cores the same and moving workloads between the CCXs incurs a latency penalty.

power consumption =/= perf/w. if the AMD chip draws the same power while getting less work done then it has lower perf/w, which is by far the most important metric when you're a company like amazon or facebook who are buying 100,000s of chips at a time.

>Broadwell does not scale down as well as Zen does, neither does Skylake.
32c/64t Opterons will have a significant clock advantage over Skylake Xeons.

completely false. the few naples mcms we've seen so far couldn't even clock over 2ghz, while the skylake-ep chips that intel shipped out early in response to ryzen have base clocks in the mid 2ghz range with 32/28/24 core SKUs.

>just posting total bullshit because you don't have a single fact
Its sad that this is honestly the most you can muster.
I've got facts, you have nothing, you hook nosed subhuman shill.

>resorting to blind insults when your propaganda gets refuted

why are you AMD shills always so triggered, it's not like I said your favorite company's product was bad, just that it isn't competitive in terms of perf/w (which is true).

AMD is stuck in the bottomless pit of competing in terms of perf/$, which nobody in the server/enterprise market is buying CPUs based off of, otherwise Intel wouldn't be selling $10k xeon e7 chips with the same amount of cores as the $4k xeon e5 flagships.

>b-b-b-but TDP isn't power consumption
>b-b-b-b-b-b-bbut power consumption doesn't matter
>bb-b-b-b-b--bbut perf/watt is still bad anyway

All you're doing is lying like a little kike. You don't have a single fact on your side, because you're a subhuman. At 3.3ghz, with all cores and threads 100% loaded, Ryzen pulls under 60w.
With cTDP set to 35w Ryzen still scores 1000 in CB15 multithreaded.

These are facts, and you're shitposting because as a pathetic subhuman kike shill they make you angry. Pathetic little faggot kid.

>These are facts, and you're shitposting because as a pathetic subhuman kike shill they make you angry.

You haven't posted any facts so far, and every counterargument you've tried to make has been completely irrelevant to my original point (which was that zen is worse perf/w than intel's offerings). You confused this with raw power consumption and got triggered by the fact that you perceived me as being anti-AMD, which isn't true in the slightest.

>butthurt subhuman kike shill continues to lie in absence of presenting any real facts
Wow, never seen a Jew do that before. This is totally new.
The 65w 1700 scores over 1,400 in CB15.
With cTDP set to 35w it still scores 1,000.
You literally do not have even a semblance of an argument. You're just lying and trying to discredit concrete facts because you don't like them. Because you're a kike shill.

It's fine, it's just not what most of the people on this board wanted.