What went wrong?

What went wrong?

Other urls found in this thread:

pcgamer.com/the-amd-ryzen-7-review/
servethehome.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700x-linux-benchmarks/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

their fanbois exist

Mainly BIOS problems

Cores

It was alright. Gaming performance isn't as great as everyone hoped, but if you look at 1440 and 4k the rayzen gaming benchmarks are on par or better than Intel, but people only look at 1080 for some reason, plus "future proof" is nice.

Low stock clockspeeds.

>Ignoring the massive IPC improvements and smt
Ok

>a $170 Intel processor beats a $330 Ryzen processor
>alright

170$ nigga what?

See the i3-7350K? That's $170

It's beating a $330 Ryzen 7 1700

...

Since I play at 1440p, I don't give a shit about 1080p benchmarks

>350$ processor beating a 1000$ processor
Really makes you think

That's not at 1080p though

Might want to look at this

It is, it's an average of 14 different games tested at 1080p

>the 7 games were from before 2009
NICE ONE INTEL, THE CONSEQUENCES WILL NEVER BE THE SAME!

>costs more
>performs worse in games
>even worse than a 6900k

christ

this dumbass with a what went wrong thread

They're 14 games and none of them were made before 2009, see pcgamer.com/the-amd-ryzen-7-review/

I don't even play watchdogs.

Show me witcher 3 and doom

It is really pathetic desu, even I didn't expect Ryzen would be this bad

No idea if those were tested, but should be similar

Here's one of bf1

I don't fuck with EA or ubisoft.

nothing you retard
it shits all over intel in perf/watt and is an HPC monster
it will be in supercomputers all over
it has slightly worse single threaded perf, and there are some issues with the mobos etc, so this accounts for the slight deficit in gaming.
The gaymer market is very small overall, especially compared to servers/HPC.

t. Someone with just a laptop

Lol so delusional

>If you happened to skip straight to this page, please go back and read page three. It's really important. Basically, there are some idiosyncrasies with gaming performance on Ryzen right now, and the results here should be considered somewhat preliminary.
RYZEN DOA RIGHT GUYS!?

LOOK AT THESE BENCHES, TOTALLY VALID
A 7350K BEATS A 7700k? IGNORE THAT
RYZEN DOA

You must be very new, notice how all the scores are the same?

That's called a GPU bottleneck

>1080 at 1080p
>gpu bottleneck

Like sure if this game was made by literal first time diversity hire devs sure....

>"guys, muh GPU bottleneck!"
>i3 beats i7
HAHAHAHAHAHA

>Like sure if this game was made by literal first time diversity hire devs sure....

You must not be familiar with The Division...

retarded benchmarker probably turned up supersampling in these games. i know bf1 has a resolution scale slider and i also know the division has ssaa

...

how is this delusional? even the negative reviews of it indicate it has very good perf/watt. have you seen any comparisons to server parts? The current ryzen lineup is competitive with incredibly more expensive server setups (dual socket, etc) and has ECC memory. It truly massacres the current server offerings in price/perf and price/watt. These are well established facts, read any review.

I repeat
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>"proud 7700k owner here"
>"Guys come on, AMD can't beat Intel"
>"THEY JUST CAN'T"
>"THEY MUST HAVE FUCKED UP THE SETTINGS"
Oy vey!

The whole platform is missing tons of server features, it's not a server CPU.

It's also hilarious considering it was marketed as a gaming CPU.

...

>missing tons of server features
Such as?

AMD hasn't beat Intel in any of those, that's how bad it is

Ryzen is pretty awesome for workstations and the price is great. If you want to complain about gaming fps's then go to Sup Forums

Amd aimed mainstream market.
Totally destroyed X99 instead making it obsolete and ridiculously expensive overnight.
Thats what went wrong.

Why should it have server features? What is Naples for? What is significant is that it already shits on intel's server offerings at less power, and it's not even the server part. How dense can you get?

i own all these games, and it's easy to see how they have induced a gpu bottleneck, whether it be accidental or on purpose. all these games have an option for super sampling and it's clear they maxed that shit out.

only some retard will disagree with me.

>AMD's 330-500 CPUs beating Intel's 1000-1700 CPUs
>"b-but muh i3!"


This is the least shill thing I'm going to say in this thread:
If they're too stupid to even put in the right in-game settings, something even Sup Forums kiddies can do, then none of the benches should be trust worthy.

user, a $300 dollar processor beats a $1000 in gaming (6900k). So...

Like what? You think every server needs 40 PCIe lanes? Ryzen 1700X is right on the tail of a Dual Xeon with 32 threads, this is 64 threads getting burned in the ass by a 16 threads. Now go check the costs, you can have two ryzen system for much much less than one dual xeon system and have almost double performance. Do the math. Oh, I just did it for you.

I'm trying to figure out, because AMD just disrupted main intel revenue market servethehome.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700x-linux-benchmarks/

>All these people comparing vidya scores and you just want that SME & VME with ECC memory.

>ignoring Intel's HEDT line