So how many times has this happened now?

So how many times has this happened now?

>Bulldozer
>GCN
>Fury
>Polaris
>Now Ryzen

Other urls found in this thread:

marketrealist.com/2016/06/advanced-micro-devices-versus-nvidia-a-face-off-between-polaris-and-pascal-gpus/
geforce.com/whats-new/articles/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060)
hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/73945-gtx-1060-vs-rx-480-updated-review-23.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Three years I've owned my 290X and there are still only a handful of high end cards that beat it.

THANK YOU BASED GCN
THANK YOU BASED AMD

every release since core 2
Boy do I remember the early core 2 benchmarks. AMDrones were calling them fake and were completely btfo.

>So how many times has this happened now?
Every single release since K6

Why AMD cant compete

just buy intel and nvidia

tfw got a fury x and in 80% of games I play I get better performance than the 1080.

>have switched teams FX-8350
>still no reason to deprecate my 8350

>implying Ryzen didn't BTFO intel's thousand-dollar chip

...

>implying Ryzen didn't BTFO Inte's thousand-dollar chip

>implying it's $1000 due to cost balancing and not due to 0 competitions in the area

>not Intel and AMD
Why can't we all be friends you bunch of worthless nigger loving cuckfarts?

Also how has your day been

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA MY SIDES

Just wait for ZEN+ and Navi. They will wreck Intel/Nvidia. AMD was too far behind, but after Ryzen I expect that they will get some money will be able to compete better.

Honestly for what it is, I don't think Ryzen was that bad. I don't play very many games so it doesn't particularity affect me, but Ryzen for things like Auto CAD seems really promising. I'll probably be going for it when later on in the year.

I hate to admit, but this was me for my last two graphics cards. I will not fall for it next time I upgrade.

>intel
single-purpose gaming rigs

>amd
>general computing/workstation/server

Why even use intel if you plan on using literally any other application along side your gaym? Intel is good only if you use one application at a time, which no one does except on dedicated gaming rigs.

Intel shills are pathetic.

Because it's not bad. It's a server arch scaled up for general purpose computing. Hence why it's on low power process ffs.

3 times cheaper 5960x performance, on par at both ST and MT, much lower power consumption in most workloads. Even in gaymes it's close (~-15%) to an overclocked 7700k and at 1440p+ it's equal or even better. It's not just good, it's outright amazing. All this hate on ryzen just doesn't make sense.

>amd
>general computing/workstation/server

>still hasn't launched workstation and server cpus

>Bulldozer
shit and everyone knew it long before launch

>GCN
Better than nvidia's offerings at the time

>Fury
did as advertised

>Polaris
did as advertised

>Now Ryzen
did as advertised

your point?

Yeah, yeah, Ryzen it's perfect.
For poorfags, I mean.

10 rupees have been depositied to your designated shitting street

Here let me give you a rundown

For poorfags?

Are you joking?

Ryzen has some of the most awful price-performance you could possibly get

A $500 Ryzen processor gets beat by a $240 Intel processor

kek

Oh, you want me to stay quiet, AMDrone? They say every man has a price, 10 rupees aren't enough, if you want me to not say the bad about your raayzen give me more rupees.

>low power process

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

A fucking 7700K that is 20% faster than it uses less power

>Polaris
>did as advertised

Failing to deliver and rebranding the promises as Vega isn't doing as advertised user

But don't AMDrones say ayymd is always cheaper than Intel?

Not for Ryzen, you are literally paying more than twice as much for a Ryzen CPU than the equivalent Intel CPU

>Polaris advertised as a midrange gpu
>it comes out
>its a midrange gpu

commit suicide newfag

>equivalent intel cpu
show me this $300 6950X you speak of

Are you retarded?

>gaymen

>my mommy didn't allow me use Sup Forums during Pascal v Polaris

>AMD promised $200 VR-ready 970 competitor

>Got a $200 VR-ready 970-980 card

Polaris exceeded all of AMD's performance claims. It does better than the 1060, a more expensive card that Nvidia explicitly touted as a 980 replacement.

AHAHAHAHAHAHA

This picture never fails to make me laugh

This chart is accurate.

I really want to see how a 1200X or whatever performs against a 7600K, consider they have 4c/4t design but 1200X is like $100 less.

I see you've already moved on to the "wait for the next generation" part of the cycle

Whats wrong with poolaris?

I have no reason to upgrade, and even if I did I'd probably get Intel/Nvidia again like my current setup considering AMD's wild performance discrepancies plus claiming that these are due to BIOS revisions.

I'm in no hurry to upgrade. It's just that I think releasing only the R7's was a big mistake on AMD's part.

Polaris got rebranded as mid range when it couldn't compete, Vega vaguely announced to keep stockholders happy.

I was there user, it's the day I abandoned AMD

>2x 480
RMA yourself cuck

he thinks Crossfired 480 can compete with a 1080

>he thinks it can't

>barely beats 1080 in ashes of amd
>corssfire meme
hahahahahahaha

And just a few weeks ago the line was
>Just wait for Zen and Vega. They will wreck Intel/Nvidia.
You're fucking proving the point.

Show me one mention from AMD that claims it as a high-performance/enthusiast card.

amdfags neither work, nor game
they just wait while shitting the internet

...

>People actually use your OC

Feels noice.

marketrealist.com/2016/06/advanced-micro-devices-versus-nvidia-a-face-off-between-polaris-and-pascal-gpus/

>Not being here before Pascal v Polaris
>Not being here before Vega was even announced

>truly defeating the competition
>being cheaper than competition
pick one.

>what is r7 1800x

>Bulldozer
shit and everyone knew it long before launch

>GCN
shit and everyone knew it long before launch

>Fury
shit and everyone knew it long before launch

>Polaris
shit and everyone knew it long before launch

>Now Ryzen
shit and everyone knew it long before launch

>cheaper


AHAHAHAHAH

RYZEN IS BOTH MORE EXPENSIVE AND SLOWER, A COMPLETE DISASTER

it's as if all the models we're competing with the 7700k

The difference with Ryzen is it actually does crush Intel... in some use cases.

Thank you user

>7700K that is 20% faster
In what? Poorly written gaymez that cannot utilize 4+ cores? I really don't get people who are comparing these 8 core chips with the 7700k when they are intended to be competitors of the 6900k.

>mfw not even amd owner but want amd to win so that intesrael has less of a monopoly

>marketrealist.com/2016/06/advanced-micro-devices-versus-nvidia-a-face-off-between-polaris-and-pascal-gpus/

>At a Computex 2016 press conference in Taiwan (EWT), Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) claimed that its first Polaris GPU (graphics processing unit), Radeon RX 480, will be able to deliver a similar performance as a $500 GPU, but at the low price of $199.

This is exactly what they delivered. A 980 was $500 at the time.

Lol no the 480 could not beat a 980 or even match it

It couldn't even beat a 390x

The
>I'll wait for next gen and buy intel/nvidia
step doesn't apply this time. I'm buying a Ryzen to finally get an enthusiast grade system for half the price of an Intel.

>an enthusiast grade system for half the price of an Intel

Are you insane? Look at the prices, you are literally paying twice as much for Ryzen for less performance.

(You)

>similar performance
can you read fag?

So Nvidia lied too? They claimed the 1060 matched the 980.

(geforce.com/whats-new/articles/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060)

The 480 matches the 1060.

Ergo, 480 matches 980.

>11% slower is similar

I see AMDtards live in an alternate universe

he'll probably compile gento and encode k4 hevc at the same time
too bad ryzen iommu is fucked

>So Nvidia lied too? They claimed the 1060 matched the 980.

Of course they didn't, they are not a scummy company like AMD.

The 1060 not only matched the 980, it was even slightly faster

[insert x] wars is the lowest form of board culture

this is what ruined other boards and is part of why Sup Forums is shit now too

*looks at the prices*
>6900k
1267 eur
>1800x
599 eur

So... yeah...

7700k - $340

1800X - $500

>The 1060 not only matched the 980, it was even slightly faster


So the 480 is just as fast too right? Glad to see we agree that the 480 performs just as well as a 980.

PS: Don't use outdated charts.

>hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/73945-gtx-1060-vs-rx-480-updated-review-23.html

>11% slower
In gaymes. And guess what the clock speed is? 11% slower. Really makes the ticker tock.

1 shekel is deposited into your bank account

>on par at both ST and MT

Wrong


>much lower power consumption in most workload

Wrong

>at 1440p+ it's equal or even better

Wrong

>11% difference is not similar
kill yourself nigger

...

>7700k
$340
>OCed 1700
$320

this is outdated
1600x - 3.6/4.0 6C/12T 95w
1500x - 3.5/3.7 4c/8t 65w

What an argument

Dude, I was talking about an enthusiast grade system. That's a four core.

>Spits idiocy
>Expects an argument
wew

>complains about lack of argument
Just says "UR RONG HURHURHUR"
bur, inteldrone

The 480 is clearly not as fast as a 980

I'm gonna give this one little bronze medal to Intel for having slightly higher IPC per core. For

Sigh are you really children? Let me walk it through for you

Performance: Power: 1440p: Ryzen fails at ALL of them, and not only that, it costs $160 more.

>enthusiast grade system

You are really confused about what an enthusiast grade system is

The 7700k wipes the floor with the 1800x in 99% of scenarios

If you have a dedicated rendering/encoding machine, then go ahead and put a 1800x in it and let it process all day

Same picture, onee just zoomed out.
You cant present the same piece of evidence again after it has been refuted, thats called circular logic.

I want all dem cores and threads. And now I can finally have them without the Intel tax. I always secretly wanted an X99 but it was just too damn expensive.

You didn't refute anything, go ahead and prove the RX 480 is faster than a 980

>performance
Stock clocks
>Power
If that is accurate, you got us there.
>1440p
One bench, one game, stock clocks.

>launch benchmarks

Here's the latest set. A throttling reference 480 with its shitty cooler is now only 4% slower than a 980 on average, including the GoyWorks titles that TPU uses.

OK if you want a slower CPU that has more cores, be my guest

But it is as fast as a 1060.

You claim that a 1060 is as fast as a 980.

A = B
B = C

Therefore, A = C

Did they not teach simple logic where you went to study?

Again, don't use outdated charts.