Ryzen has good frame times they said...
Ryzen Frame Times
...
>watchdogs 2
>stable
Also
...
How about Crysis?
...
...
or Doom?
Maybe GTA....
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
AMD fags BTFO for all of eternity
looks good to me?
and I'm not seeing the R7's main competitors, the 6800K/6900K on those lists
is this another shill thread?
>be today
>casually mention to AMD fanboi coworker that Ryzen didn't turn out so great
>Immediate sperging about how gaming performance doesn't matter it's all about workstation performance
AMD fags are the worst.
The FX8370 is $230 RIGHT NOW
THO
HUNDRED
THIRTY
Are you an AMD shill? Because you sound like one. Why would you compare that crap when they lose to the 7700k like the rest.
>7700k is just a rebranded 6700k they said
Because the 6900k competition is literally the only substantiated claim to fall back on, it was only the AMDrones who were screaming about great IPC and single core performance
Lisa knew what her target was and it was never the core series
Top kek
>I get to choose what CPUs I compete against. No god no please don't compare Ryzen to other CPUs, only these certain ones!
>implying this shows consistency of frames
>implying intel doesn't jump all over the place
notice the high and low jumps on the intel (microstutters)
it is
>6850K
Lel let's see the 7700k
AMD BTFO
theese thread have nothing to do with gayming, we just like shitposting and shitpost whenever we get the chance to
Yeah that was the plan, cheap multicore, what AMD does best, and it would've been a good, successful, marketable plan if it weren't for those meddling AMDfags
zero tests done on intel X99 platform
Glad that shit is dead now
If AMD could have just said these chips are for encoding/rendering only, they could've avoided this disaster
Do you have two seperate graphs?
tell whoever put that overlay on theyre fucking retarded
>low jumps
You mean flawless, perfect fps at the end?
Shilltel framelag
kek the guy doesn't even know what the graph means
Uh oh not looking good for Ryzen here
WORK AND GAMING, BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE SHITWRECKER HIMSELF
ITS NOT FOR GAMING STOP IT
Jesus Ryzen is horrible at Battlefield 1 DX12
>DX11
>JEWS
>aots suddenly becomes a game that everyone plays when AMD doesn't do well in it
Pick a side and stick to it shill.
AMD are the jews
They make really shitty gaming CPUs that cost twice as much as Intel
What the fuck happened after the beginning of that test that fucked up AMD's frametimes?
gentoo compiling started
They probably fucked the tests by using a nvidia card
less money from profits=less money for development of new processors
it's a vicious cycle and partially due to intel's unethical business practices
luckily Ryzen wasn't that bad
>7700k, a $350 CPU beats 6950X, a $1000 CPU.
Intelfags will defend this.
if there is a monopoly, a processor company can spend less and less money on development and get away with it
Holy fuck Intel, get your shit together.
Weren't there a bunch of Win 10 scheduling and motherboard issues?
Staying below Ryzens minimum frame time for 90% of the benchmark isn't a bad thing
its under 200 on ebay.
what does that prove exactly?
I don't own a 6950X and i can't imagine why anybody would outside of showing off
I'll defend the $300 CPU :^)
Oh shit Intel BTFO!
Intel wins!
That some guy on eBay only lost $30 on a processor that's been shit for 5 years
kek
>10 cores? Why do you need 8 cores?
...
its 180 used.
An i3 7350K is $180 new and demolishes it
Being all over the place is though.
This shit is just sad for Ryzen desu senpai
Yeah but if it's all over the place while being definitely be faster than ryzen it's still a better CPU for gaymen.
I would take 60-80 fps over a solid 50 any day
For the purpose of Ryzen vs Intel, it's more like taking a stuttery 130fps over stable 100fps
This. People don't know how to interpret these charts. Higher is bad on the frame time charts, the Ryzen gets annihilated here
Windows 10 not fixed for SMT, Core parking bug, memory speed/latency bug, game compiled with intels compiler, take your pick, all probably true.
So it's proof that amd poorfags from reddit created another fake news that their i7 was stuttering and when they replaced it with ryzen all stutters are gone. Fucking cunts, i bet amd pajeets have hundreds of accounts on reddit and keep shilling campaign against intel.
kek i love these
HHAHAHAH BTFO AMD BY AMD
Ryzen looks great.
Those bugs being worked out look like it will give Intel a run for it's money, on 8 cores compared to Intels flagship 4 core. It's overclocking with XFR looks like it's got a few more megahertz too.
When the R5 launches offering similar performance at 250 and lower What's the winner going to be I wonder?
>People don't know how to interpret these charts.
Just like u senpai
The frame times rarely pass AMD's spikes, it'll likely have just as much stutter as ryzen while performing much better
it is
there is literally no OC room left as stock clocks are already at 4.5ghz and ceiling remains at 5ghz.
if you want to OC in the TINIEST bit you need to remove the TIM.
>5GHz below 1.5 volts regularly on consumer cooling
>no room left
6700ks took upwards of a hot 1.5+ volts to reach those kinds of clocks
DX12 is broken in general. You get lower frames in it than DX11 on both AMD and Nvidia cards.
Higher time means more time to render, aka lower FPS. But lower variance is better, because it means each frame took a similar amount of time to render. You can't see variance with just FPS because FPS is a normalized value over time, so it averages out all the variance data.
But better frames with Intel CPUs and AMD graphics card
What does that makes Ryzen which caps at 4.0Ghz while melting at 1.4v, even 1.5v suicide runs don't give 4.1Ghz unless golden chip.
B-b-but just wait until we remove half the cores!
Intlel intshills eternally wrecked, right guys?
It is about Haswell-tier, not too bad at all.
It is the Intel gaming faggots who are getting told hard. Skylake/Kabe Lake aren't that much better and still they try to spin into a "night and day" difference. Pathetic
Ryzen completely destroys its Bulldozer predecessor.
is it safe to say these differences are minimal in real world use?
>gets beat by processors that cost half as much
>not too bad
Eh, there is a difference.
It's small but noticable if you know what you're looking for.
If you did a blind test, I bet Ryzen would come out ahead just because it's times are better.
1700 costs ten dollars less.
how about stop lying fag?
And is 20% slower than the 7700k
By a small margin in causal shit but for real computing workloads (not gayming). R7 Ryzen completely demolishes current Skylake and Kaby Lake chips.
No, it is at most, in a worst case scenario 20 frames lower.
What am I missing here, I thought the AMD was supposed to be cheaper?
1700 is cheaper, 1800X is cheaper than Intel's $1000 abortions.
AMD's cheap 4 cores are coming later.
That you're too stupid to know how to shop online?
>No, it is at most, in a worst case scenario 20 frames lower.
Kek user, let me give you some insight, I upgraded from a GTX970 to a GTX980Ti last year and my performance increased by almost 20 to 30FPS depending on the scene.
Back when I upgraded from my HD7950 to the GTX970 the performance upgrade was also 20FPS.
Even from a 1070 to 1080 the difference is almost the same excluding 4K where the bigger bandwidth of the 1080 shines.
"Just 20 frames lower" isn't good enough.
And you're trying to spin it as though bulldozer wasn't a complete abortion
This, my phone wrecks bulldozer and my laptop wrecks even an 8350
They aren't anymore.
That's the biggest problem with Ryzen IMO
AMD was supposed to be the budget gaming brand and they completely failed on that.
>budget gaming brand
but isn't Ryzen better suited to workstation stuff as well as gaming? I guess it would still beat out Intel's chip with the same # of cores in a price/performance standing.
But if you are only looking to game, the 4 core ryzens will need to be competitive with the 7700s at much cheaper prices.
The full Ryzen line isn't even out yet. R7s are the high end, of course they're going to be expensive. Wait til R3, or R5, before passing judgement
So I guess the question is, how much would all these Ryzen benchmarks suffer from only having 4 cores. If not much, then it will be a much better value than the i7 4 core.
POOLETE THIS RIGHT NOW
>real computing workloads
Like photoshop?
Is Intel the worst company on the face of the planet? They have the money and they're still complete shit.
>cardnews
And I mean there's plenty of of objective non-relational benchmarks so people can see exactly how bad it is
Doesn't matter who you shill for, people who make graphs like that should be gassed