>>59222576

Still wondering what AMD failed to delivered based on there promises. Which is something that is similar to Broadwell-E at half the price. Which is what they gave so still don't know what all the fuss is about.

Other urls found in this thread:

overclock3d.net/news/cpu_mainboard/amd_confirms_that_ryzen_supports_ecc_memory/1
amd.com/en-us/markets/game/community
amdrtp.com/index.php/red-team-plus/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Nice campaign, Intel!

holy shit please delete this or my 34 children will starve

Maybe it has to do with their misleading marketing regarding being the best choice for gaming. The retarded mouth-brathing obnoxious fanbois shitting the internet AGAIN and Sup Forums in particular. Their apologetic shit-eating lot currently doing danage control. You tell me.

>Kaby Lake has 7% higher ipc and 12% higher clock speed

that's 1.07 * 1.12 = 1.1984 = 20% faster

and 1800X is 500$ compared to 7700k 350$

Right now as it stands 1800x is for production and not gaming. Fair and square Intel takes it for gaming.

Anyone with a slice of common sense should know that a 8-core with a relatively low clock speed is NOT a magical sliver bullet for gaming in the sameway a high core count Xeon or 8 core i7 is not.

the R7 1800x is not meant to compete with the 7700k which was always going to be better for general use and gaming for the reason above. Wait until the R5 and R3 comes out with higher clock speeds and draw your own conclusion on what is a better value for money.

DELET SIR

Did they actually say the Ryzen 7 would be the best choice for gaming?

I think they just said it's for gamers too, just like how you can technically use a 6950X for gaming but its $1700 price makes it not worth it.

You can game with a Ryzen 8 core. You can also do other stuff with it.

And a 7700K will handle 99% of those tasks better for $160 less.

No it won't. And a 1700 is much cheaper than a 7700k.

Go buy your 7700k then since you clearly have no need for the more cores that Ryzen offers.
For people who do need it the 8 core Ryzens processors are a better buy then Intel's own 8 cores. You people keep comparing Ryzen R7s to a 7700k which is not what its meant to go against.

>You people keep comparing Ryzen R7s to a 7700k which is not what its meant to go against
You're right, the 7700K is much better value in every way imaginable.

>much cheaper
source

It's 20 dollars cheaper, or at least the preorder was.

That 20 dollars buys you 20% better performance on average.

I-its okay when AMD does it! They're the little underdog fighting big bad Intel all on their own!

>source
Simple math that people who passed the 4th grade should be able to do in their head.

>$20 cheaper
Sorry about your ignorance, but Intel licensing fee on motherboards and coolers aren't free.

>$329 vs $338

Are you being serious right now?

>basic bitch B350 motherboard vs Z270 motherboard
No fucking shit the lower-end part is gonna be cheaper.

For your games and general use, yes it is. You just can't grasp the need for a high core count CPU and just don't want to see that a Ryzen R7 is a better value than a 6800k or a 6900k.

>can't read

>basic bitch B350 motherboard vs Z270 motherboard
lol?
B350 isn't a 'basic shit motherboard'. Your ignorant mind is thinking of the A320.

Not my fault that Intel jews you out of an extra $30 motherboard for overclocking than AMD does.

Those motherboards are equivalent.

A $250 X370 motherboard would be more equivalent to a $280 Z270 one. So it's still $30 more expensive for Intel.

No one is falling for your shit, dude.

Someone even posted a $300 7700k yesterday.

I don't think you're getting it. Ryzen 7 is a workstation CPU first and a gaming CPU second. They don't expect anyone to buy Ryzen 7 purely for gaming, which is why they have the R5 and R3 lineups. If the only thing you do with your computer is play games and you don't care that thread count is becoming more and more important to computer games, go ahead and buy a 7700k. Nobody cares. There are octacores in Microsoft and Sony's consoles and Vulkan will suck your dick if you give it more threads. You'd honestly have to be an idiot to not understand what's going to happen over the next couple years-- it's already started for fuck's sake. Running DOOM Vulkan virtually eliminates any CPU bottleneck provided the processor has enough threads. The 8370 gains over 50% performance in Vulkan just because of threading. That should tell you something about where PC gaming is going. So the question shouldn't be whether or not Ryzen is the best right now, it should be whether or not it's enough right now, and I think that it is.

I will say, however, that I wouldn't buy R7 because I don't need that much CPU. I'm very interested in the R5 lineup for my main computer and the R3 lineup for my HTPCs. If I can get a 4c4t part with Broadwell-level IPC at ~30W holy shit I'm so down for that.

>Ryzen 7 is a workstation CPU

>no GPU passthrough
>only 20 PCI-E lanes
>dual-channel memory
>no multi-socket support

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>workstation CPU

BUT I CAN COMPILE GENTOO AND RICE MY TILE WM

>Someone even posted a $300 7700k yesterday.
Stop this BS, 7700K is $399 RRP.

And it's frequently going for way less than that in the real world.

Show me an R7 1700 going for sub-300 dollars.

Fuck AMD seriously

This is why they pushed the preorders so much, so retards would buy this crap before they got exposed

Its a workstation class processor in a mainstream desktop platform that doesn't cost a few thousand dollars that also does support ECC. If you need anything heaver you should have the money for some Xeons or Naples when it comes out.

Top kek

Jesus christ Ryzen is such a fucking disaster

Even at $300 for a 7700k(which is in-store only at Microcenter), it's still almost $30 more expensive.
Also, Microcenter also gives an additional $30 discount for buying a Ryzen with a motherboard. So even then it ends up still being $58 more instead of $68 more for a 7700k.

There's no "shit" to fall for.
There's just intelligent people who understand Intel charges a much, much higher licensing fee for their motherboard chipset than AMD does, especially for the Z270.
Then there's ignorant babies like you that ignore the facts and simple math.

>32 PCI-E lanes is suddenly 20 now
Kill yourself, lying shill.

It may seem that way because that poster is blatantly lying.

Fun fact: X99 only has 10 PCI-E lanes. Ryzen has double! No, triple!
You know it's true because I lied about it in a post on Sup Forums.

>that also does support ECC
[citation needed]

From the specs I saw, the Ryzen motherboards only have 8 PCIE lanes

>Buy Ryzen 1800X
>only play games in 360p and 480p windowed mode

Master race?

It's okay when AMD does it because some hipsters on Sup Forums said so.

Oh yeah you're right, it's 28 PCI-E lanes total not 32.

There is no technical reason a mobo manufacturer can't add more PCI-E lanes than the spec, but none have so far from what I can see.

overclock3d.net/news/cpu_mainboard/amd_confirms_that_ryzen_supports_ecc_memory/1

go read the ama, go look at some am4 motherboards, ecc support depends on whether the motherboard guys want to support it, the cpu can support it anyways, the Gigabyte GA-AB350-GAMING 3 supports it - so does almost every ASrock am4 mobo,both the b350s and x370s

Shady scumbag fucks. So much for the /ourguy/ meme. Screencaping this.

>so does almost every ASrock am4 mobo
It'll recognize the memory and it'll run, it won't correct any errors though.

>Maybe it has to do with their misleading marketing regarding being the best choice for gaming.

"WOOHOO, Our new CPU is SECOND BEST for gaming, kek."

Said no marketer ever. Of course they are going to praise their stuff kingdom come.

You two are idiots.

100% you two were on the "Ryzen is going to dominate everything" bandwagon and suddenly now that it's found to be lacking in one aspect you're going with your retard revisionist history and saying it was never meant to compete in gaming.

Next month when reviewers have had even more time to test it and find it really isn't even that great at non-gaming workloads, you'll fall back on your usual "MUH PRICE/PERFORMANCE" arguments.

Feel free to post your need for validation below by arguing it's "already proven" to be awesome at non-gaming workloads.

>no GPU passthrough
Actually, it looks as if it does have that, but the IOMMU groups are a little fucky right now. Expect it to be fixed relatively soon.

As for the rest of your points, all true, but are you seriously trying to tell me that the R7 1700 8c16t systems at ~$600 a pop aren't going to look juicy to people who otherwise would have been on X99? Get real.

It's true. But retarded people are never going to go away despite the facts. You'll never win the war against fanboys because they'll turn it into something subjective that you cannot win.

AMD confirmed ECC support bro. It's even listed on some motherboard spec sheets now.

Even if it didn't support ECC, un-buffered ECC would still run just fine just without the error-correction. ECC on AM4 is supported and will provide error-correction on motherboards that support it

Intel is still worse, I'm not buying Ryzen, I doubt I'll buy Ryzen+ either.

Computer hardware in general has been running on steam for far too long now.

>800x600 Gaming Nexus
Stopped reading there

yeah, that dude over at gamer's nexus is sperging out really hard. "um, we're trying to benchmark the PROCESSOR, ok, not the GRAPHICS CARD, which is why we're running VIDEO GAMES, ok?"

Does this guy think he's like a fuckin' sommelier or something?

>if I close my eyes after the GPU bottleneck is removed then my overpriced, underpowered AMD cpu is just as good at gaymen!

Hello, AMD

The thing that shows the obvious bias of Gamers' Nexus is that they only tested 6 games.
I bet they did test many and found that it tested worse on those 6 so went with them.
They were mostly games that scale well with hyperthreading, while SMT is currently not working correctly in any game.

They're a fucking gaming oriented site and they only test 6 games. It's obvious bullshit.

All benchmarks out right now coincide with theirs. How do you explain that, AMD?

Every site is clearly being paid by Intel.

Except all of them don't. Just many do.

They don't coincide with computerbase.de or joker productions. It seems it's only Gigabyte boards that are working properly.

what is this resolution new meme people are talking about

Doesn't Ryzen get closer to Intel on 4k?

Because they cranked up settings as high as they would go to create a GPU bottleneck, just as AMD instructed them to do.

Joker did a 720p test afterwards to rule out GPU bottleneck and suddenly Ryzen shit the bed. Go figure, huh?

Because the GPU is bottlenecked, ya dummy.

Remember to hide and sage shill threads!

Totally trustworthy folks over at AMD.

Note the fanboy shift in narrative from "Can you point to ONE instance where they misled people?" to "Everyone lies, what's the big deal!?" whenever you produce an example.

Except it didn't shit the bed. It got at least 144fps in almost every test and was less than 7% behind in most games.

Most of the problems it's having where it does have problems in that test is due to SMT being enabled which is confirmed to have software bugs making it perform worse than it being disabled.

Hahahaha....

This is your evidence?

Oh no! They want to put their product out looking the best they can?

Those dastardly cads!

They should totally act as third party reviewers of their own product.

Well, in terms of being several years late competition-wise, being overpriced compared to competition and underperforming in single core performance, yeah, AMD did shit the bed. Even AMD knows this, which is why they're instructing reviewers to gimp intel performance and give AMD a leg up in comparison benchmarks.

>used intel dual-core processor and ATi Radeon 4500HD to run Skyrim full-screen
>worked perfectly fine on ultra-high after I cleaned the dust out and applied new thermal paste

B-BUT WE NEED MO CORES FO DEM PROGRAMS

>it's okay for companies to lie and deceive me as long as they're AMD

lmao, AMD cucks I swear

Standard industry practice to send out review guides.

Never once did AMD compare Ryzen to the 7700. Never.

They are offering X99 performance at half the cost. 6900 was their benchmark, and they match it in IPC while beating it in multithreaded benchmarks, all while consuming less power.

>They want to put their product out looking the best they can?
Showing the chip at areas it excels in via direct and fair comparison to competitors isn't an issue. I have no problem with their Cinebench scores. The testing variables were the same for both.

Deliberately manipulating a program (in this case, Sniper Elite) so your chip has a smaller workload than a competitor (in this case, by constantly staring at the skybox), and then claiming that it's a direct comparison, is the very definition of dishonest.

>It's anothers responsibility to use critical thinking.

You Intel fucks haven't used your brains in forever.

Fine, they lied, the test results from independent reviewers confirmed that.

Now what?

>Intel's been selling you the same 4-core CPUs for years and you've been happy paying them outrageous prices for features as simple as Multi threading

AMD may be doing some shady stuff with reviewers, but Intel is undeniably more anti-consumer. They've been convicted in court of using shitty business practices to lock AMD out of the market. I'm not defending AMD's actions but keep in mind Intel is no better. Companies exist to make money, they don't care about us.
The best we can do is support them fighting each other, because their greed (and by extension desire to either make better products to beat the competition or sell CPUs at lower prices to undercut the competition) is the only way the consumer will ever benefit.
Why can't you fucks understand this

Only the acknowledgement from people attempting to spin what AMD did. Their other activity, such as pushing reviewers to bottleneck the CPU on the GPU and pretending it's a fair comparison when the CPU is functionally taken out of the equation, is also pretty scummy.

I wish AMD would roll with the punches rather than try to obfuscate obvious weaknesses via misleading/outright deceiving people.
I'd call out Intel for the same thing. But Ryzen is the news, so that's the focus.

They're offering worse performance in games for $100 more than Intel if you buy at Micro Center's regular sale prices. No thanks!

So in other words, buy the best product for the money currently: intel. Thanks for taking one for the team and buying an underperforming CPU from AMD to keep things competitive.

>"Please show benchmarks at 1440p and 4K, where we're very competitive, in addition to 1080p benchmarks. Thanks!"
OH MY GOD ARE YOU ATTEMPTING TO SWAY REVIEWS? AMD IS THE WORST COMPANY EVER REEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>Best product for the money currently
>PCs can't be used for things other than gaymen

Intel has done 10 times as worse shady shit as Nvidia.
Nvidia has done 10 times as worse shady shit as AMD.
AMD has done their own shady shit still, still, even if that's nothing compared to manipulating the results of benchmarks or compilers.
Only VIA is pure.

>where we're very competitive
Competitive since their CPU isn't actually taxed. They know it. Hence, the desire to push a benchmark score that doesn't represent CPU usage. In a CPU review.

>OH MY GOD ARE YOU ATTEMPTING TO SWAY REVIEWS?
That is exactly what they are doing.

Now you're veering off in to conspiracy theory.

And AMD HAS rolled with the punches. To the tune of nearly going bankrupt because of Intels tactics. AMD are the nice guys of the tech industry. They always have been from the moment they were founded. Seriously, read their history.

I get it, you feel mislead because they tried to amp up their product at a press event. That's what it was for, to generate excitement and passion and buzz for a product to take back consumer mind share about their perceptions of AMD as a company.

It's also not a vast conspiracy to undermine reviewers who don't playball. They ASKED for representatation of higher resolutions to reflect their current product. They ASKED for more than one perspective.

The only people who took issue with it is Steve Burke who made a video about fanboys ruining the industry.

And Jay who is old enough to know how ANY industry works and has repeatedly shown he has no idea what he's doing beyond benchmarks.

So now it's a vast AMD conspiracy to manipulate the message, when instead they wanted a fair shake at being represented in the media, something they have not really had in the past ten or fifteen years.

>Hello, we're AMD. Our automobiles are very competitive, albeit overpriced, where the speed limit is only 55 mph. Please do not show our speed results where the speed limit is 70 mph as our automobiles cannot go that fast!

As far as I'm aware, AMD has supported ECC memory on their desktop processors for a long time. It's intel that artificially stratifies their product line.

>AMD are the nice guys of the tech industry
>Blatantly lied, withheld information, skewed benchmarks and tried to control third party benchmarks to try and sell people CPUs

>When nVidia does it
>3.5! 3.5! LOL TOP KEK ROFLMAO nvidiacucks btfo!

>When AMD does it
>c'mon guys, give them a break!

AMD fanboys are the *worst*

>AMD asking reviewers to show resolutions above 800x600 in their gaming benchmarks

these people are worst!

I'm glad i got the 7700k 3 weeks ago! Fuck the AMD nerds!

When did AMD lie about VRAM then make a press statement that it's not a bug, it's a feature.

Who then got sued in a class action lawsuit over it?

>1333mhz 16-18-18-35
>gtx 970
>gtx 970
I see you like slow memory.

IT JUST WORKS

AMD reminds me of me CTR or wherever Hillary's shill group was

it does dominate everything

Intel is offering worse performance in games with in their own product stack for 3 times the cost.

I really do wonder how many of the people who make this argument actually have a practical use for an 8 core cpu.

I'm guessing it's like 10%.

As a member of the AMD Red Team Community I can assure you this is #FakeNews

For any other anons who wish to understand the true power of AMD please join us over at amd.com/en-us/markets/game/community

>I get it, you feel mislead because they tried to amp up their product at a press event.
They "amped up" their product by showing two different use cases, with the AMD processor under significantly less strain, while presenting them as comparable scenarios.

That's deception. It can be "amping up", "hype-building", "a tuna sandwich", you can call it whatever you want. But in addition to all that, it's lying. And that's bad. And they deserve to get called out for that.
Unless you are in favor of consumers being lied to.

>They ASKED for more than one perspective.
It's all well and good to frame it as "more perspective". But in a review where the question isn't "Does the CPU get bottlenecked by the GPU at 4K", but, "How powerful is the CPU in absolute terms", showing a use scenario where an i3 would return similar results is just shoving meaningless datapoints into an article. It's not representative of CPU performance. The article is about CPU performance. End of story.

Failing to do so can give a consumer the impression, for example, that there's more in his CPU than there really is. And when he upgrades to a new GPU that isn't bottlenecking... surprise! Or perhaps he'll find another game that taxes the CPU more heavily than the current round of benchmarks? He's going to be sorely disappointed.

The "perspective" in this case is like testing a 1080 and an RX 460 at 800x600, seeing the benchmarks, and then saying that clearly AMD has surpassed it's competition. It's not a useful test. Not because it never happens. Because it doesn't actually test what you are supposed to be testing.

>its the Sup Forums crossboarder again

Gamers Nexus= Anybody who gets different results than us is wrong.
Basically what the whole video was saying for 20 minutes

It's probably lower than that, even. The people who buy AMD usually do it for budget reasons. Very few people are likely to buy the current Ryzen offerings especially at their price points.

This is even worse than Bulldozer. At least with Bulldozer you had cheap solutions for the people who wanted it when it was released.

Armed with information and equipped with AMD's latest technology Red Team+ is now here to set the record straight. So begone trolls! The power of truth compels you!

amdrtp.com/index.php/red-team-plus/

Do you have a counter-argument to GN and all of the other sites that show similar benchmarks or are you just memeing for #TeamRed

Yup, they lied, just like every other company. And?

Now what? You want a pinky swear they won't ever do that again?


The rest is just fanboy bitching. They didn't ask to restrict 1080 testing. They didn't ask to reflect the views of the reviewer as anything less than amazing. They just wanted those "data points" because they are relevant right now.