>AMD has processors with good performance/price ratio but that are a bit slower than the top intel models which are very expensive and hardly anyway will buy anyway.
>The difference between the intel's top models and the AMD ones is small considering the price difference.
>"lol Are you a poorfag? You need more than what AMD offers. Intel has the bet top processor therefore you should buy intel even if you ain't gonna buy their top models".
>AMD launches Ryzen.
>Top end models beats intel in most tasks while being cheaper.
>More computational power while being a better offer than what intel used to have.
>"lol you don't need more than what intel offers."
>"My crystal ball tells me that programs or games will never use more than 4 cores. Settle for a 4 core cpu."
>"The proof is this specific kind of task (games not prepared to use more than 4 threads for example). Therefore multithreading is a meme."
>"AMD has been hyping their expensive processors that are not that good in games anyway."
>"Buy instead a pentium processor, it performs the same as the expensive Ryzen anyway."
- How does this logic works?.
- Now Intel users hates AMD users because they're richfags?.
- This people basically accepted in those threads that they hyped and recommended Intel's expensive core i7/i5 processors as an argument to not buy amd when a pentium is more than enough for the tasks "that matters" anyway making moot their own initial point?
- Are this people not even aware of the efforts to implement better multithreading in different tasks including videogames?.
How many of you have noticed all this fallacies and backpedalling coming from these people? are we being telemarketed?
Are we being telemarketed?
Also
>AMD has processors with noticiabily worse energy efficience but not necessarily bad for the average user.
>"Buy intel, energy efficiency matters. Do you want a housefire? enjoy"
>AMD launches Ryzen.
>Better energy efficience than intel.
>"Buy a core i7, what it matters is clock frecuencies and a bit more FPS in games".
>Energy efficiency now even mentioned in the threads.
So, since when energy efficiency doesn't matter anymore? Is this the pentium 4 era again when people used to think clock frecuencies is a way to compare performance?
>AMD breaks overclocking records.
>"Ryzen is terrible on overclocking."
>It's not mentioned that overclocking 8 threads is not the same as overclocking 4 threads.
>It's not mentioned you can disable cores and overclock only 4 cores.
Are this people forgotting this "details" by mistake? or it's on purpose?.
Also
>"Look, AMD make this honest mistakes that can be fixed (for example the failed overclock on live or the EFI issues). Ryzen is DOA!."
>Meanwhile they're defending a company (Intel) that has screwed their users over the years, for example milking them with a lot of different incompatible sockets and setting unrealistic prices.
>Meanwhile this people forget that Intel has been found guilty on using anti competitive tactics like bribing laptop and pc makers, manipulating opinions on social media (by social media i mean any public place where people can chat, including Sup Forums) with astroturfing tactics, bribing reviewers (see the recent leak), looking at ways to cripple competitiors instead of making better products.
>Meanwhile this people defend a company that clearly just invest the minimum on innovation and that can survive a long time losing money if they want until competitors cannot work anymore.
This people don't grasp the bubble they're creating by thrashtalking and trying to deter people from buying AMD. They'll get cheaper processors from Intel now and if AMD dissapears the prices will rise to the moon.
In what way is this people benefited by rewarding this kind of behavior from intel? In what way is this people benefited with a monopoly? Are they people paid by people who invested in Intel to avoid losing as much money as possible?
thank you captain obvious
Suddenly this thread won't get any response.
ITS THA JOOS
AMD is better for games, deal with it Intel fags.
op I appreciate your intentions but you can't really beat the paid shills.
do waht I do, filter out cancerous threads with expressions like "what went wrong" "doa" "finished and bankrupt" etc. it's the only way to deal with it.
>AMD has processors with good performance/price ratio
No they don't, they are horrible price-performance
That always happens. If you ask those guys for a reasoning and why they changed their mind in a so extreme way as long they can bash AMD you usually don't receive any reply. Making the correct questions is the best way to BTFO shills.
>42 vents more
>Cost per fps
>PC Gamer
Good job proving OPs point.
it is though. it's always them.
oooyy veeeyy shut it down!
>Cherrypicked example from a host, many of which show AMD with larger frame times.
Here we go.
...
...
...
...
Still going.
...
...
Muh frame times.
>gaymen benchmarks
kid please go
Just noting how frame times are not, in fact, better on Ryzen. At least not in every game.
There appears to be a misconception on the board. Doing my civic duty clearing it up.
As cherrypicked as the ones shown by intelshills? Nice number (5555, 66, 77) tho.
OY VEY THEY'RE ON TO US
As ignored as the fact there's still bugs to address and optimizations to do for the new architecture? This statements are usually answered with memes.
And done.
Worth mentioning that there are a handful of games where Intel ends up with worse frame times on Computerbase's benches (such as Watchdogs). It's fair to argue that Ryzen has the edge in certain cases, but it's far from uniform, and appears to be, in fact, the minority of cases.
The argument that Ryzen offers better frame times across the board is wrong. Glad I could clear this up.
I followed Ryzen on Twitter and now I get Intel's tweets as advertisement. Interesting marketing.
...
Whoops, forgot my image.
Interesting, thanks for posting.
My buddy wants me to build him a gaymen rig he can edit video and stream and shit on with 1000 bucks. Had considered the 1200 dollar RYZEN build on logical increments. Probably do it now.
I smell curry ITT
>All the test comes from one source when it's known that different motherboards provided different results due to bugs.
hmmm
>it's a jew kind of feel
I like how this post doesn't have replies.
Yeah, really.
I don't really know why people bash on amd and defend a company with monopoly tendencies.
No one gets benefited from a stupid monopoly.