AMD :
> 1700X - $349
> Vega Nano - $399
Total: $748 for top notch, 8-core/16-thread hardware.
Meanwhile at Intel/Nvidia :
> i7 7700K - $349
> 1080ti - $599
Total: $948 for a 4-core/8-thread rig.
How can Intel even compete?
AMD :
> 1700X - $349
> Vega Nano - $399
Total: $748 for top notch, 8-core/16-thread hardware.
Meanwhile at Intel/Nvidia :
> i7 7700K - $349
> 1080ti - $599
Total: $948 for a 4-core/8-thread rig.
How can Intel even compete?
Other urls found in this thread:
guru3d.com
twitter.com
By continuing to dominate marketshare.
> Vega Nano = 1080ti
aHahahahahahaahahaha
Vega nano equivalent is maybe overocked 970. Even then amd wod struggle
Have fun paying $200 in an expensive useless piece of crap while I'll be doing the exact same thing with my Vega Nano.
Intel fanboys are the saddest posters around.
You are goint to pay 400$ to do "exact same thing" ? Are you retarded?
AMD makes products in relation so what customers actually need.
Intel make expensive products no one needs.
It doesn't matter if on the benchmarks Intel is ahead... no one needs this extra power. AMD are actually the smart ones here but you're too dumb to understand it.
>You are goint to pay 400$ to do "exact same thing" ?
Yes, I am going to pay $200 less to do the exact same thing.
Where do AMDrones like you get such bullshit information like this?
>customers actually need
>8 cores
>How can Intel even compete?
State subsidized purchases and marketing, same as usual.
If AMD really get their shit together, these tactics won't work like they did in the past.
It's like you don't watch/play movies, games, music, and shitpost all at the same time...
heh. i always find entertaining these threads.
i was born in a poor third world shithole, so of course the 1700 is 500, the 1700x is 630, and the 1800x is 750.
the 7700 is 385, and the 7700k is 450 dollars.
go fuck yourselves
>If AMD really get their shit together
hahhaha fffffuck me thanks for the laugh
Intel cuck detected
I'm on AMDs side but multi-core != multitasking.
This is OS 101, wait until you're above 18 to post uere
Are you retarded? That shit is way faster than AMD.
>way faster
>13 fps
also
>gaymes
They will. Intel and Nvidia are overrated.
>Intel and Nvidia are overrated.
I agree
>They will.
I hope.
It's 20% faster for the same price.
Literally no reason to buy anything AMD.
is it?
latest 1080ti benches
Fuck Ryzen. Why the fuck does have to suck that much?
hue?
the 1800x came out at 742 usd here.
I found it to be pretty good pricing.
the 7700k can be found as low as 445, but that's on a good deal. it's usually found at 470~, I've been looking for while deciding between upgrade paths.
where do you see it sucking? its at the top more often than i7 7700K
It's a rigged benchmark, look at their methodology, they disabled a ton of settings.
This is what happens in real life.
so did guru3d rigged their benchmark too when they did review of gtx1080ti?
guru3d.com
>Literally no reason to buy anything AMD.
Personal preference
Liking the color red
AMD synergy performance gains
Not liking intel's price:performance
Already have the motherboard. (read: hundreds of dollars more isn't worth 4% performance gain)
Exchanging money for a product with a company that you like more than the alternative.
etc
I saw a lot of benchmarks, and it's too often under the 7700K, in terms of performances. Sometimes even under the 6700K, and it has the same clock. How is that possible? How can single-core performances be so low? Wasn't it supposed to have the same IPC as Skylake/Kaby Lake?
Sure they did. Every benchmarks that shows Ryzen winning is paid by AMD.
Nope, only eteknix and joker were caught rigging their benchmarks so far
>i swear guise, they're cheating when they win.
>no fair ~
>Not liking intel's price:performance
Umm
good to know that guru3d counts then
Notice how the eteknix review is literally the only one out of hundreds of reviews to get those results
Yes very good lol
>1080p
Here have some 1440p
Ryzen is horrible
cost per FPS
ON A FUCKING CPU.
remove yourself from the gene pool and please, please, don't forget to take any progeny you might already have doomed us with on your way out.
Keep telling yourself that.
why did you steal my post and made a thread out of it?
Also, the 1080ti is $699
For the (You)s.
Sorry about your autism
Intel is literally dead. Doesn't have """"""""""""""sufficient memory""""""""""""""
kek intel is so much shittier
lol
Who cares about about core numbers? Absolue performance is all that mayters.
>970
>They have cards that beat the 970 already
>learntobaitsubtly.jpg
intel jews, gassed and gone.
rofl what the fuck goy
...
Enjoy the bottlenecking
>cost per fps
Are those real cores or is AMD still trying to ruse people with their shitty gimped half cores?
>deus ex
>on windows
wow it's fucking nothing.
They had an adult design the architecture this time.
They hired back Jim Keller.
Was that 480p or 4K?
> joker were caught rigging
How? And don't start with that aussie cunt non-arguments?
240p
...
>7700k is 450 dollars
Is the largest microprocessor company in the world finished?
No, don't be such a stupid fucking retard.
streaming
>largest microprocessor company
That would be apple
The bait
How is that os 101
That benchmark is fake.
When 1080ti takes up, 1080 will be same price as vega or whatever shit amd pumps out
1700x is 400
7700k 350, cheaper still if you look around
Synthetic
Ynthetic
Nthetic
Thetic
Hetic
Etic
Tic
Ic
C
> 1080ti - $599
I think you mean $699
1700 is 329 though
I'm buying Intel because I actually need computing power.
Those threads aren't necessary, you're not tricking anybody.
The mere fact that Intel hasn't lowered their prices only shows how shitty Ryzen's launch was.
Nvidia only cuts prices so they can make room for their newest more powerful GPUs.
It is AMD that always does the price cuts user ;)
>1080ti - $599
lol wat?
Literally no reason to buy Intel.
Holy shit, Intel btfo;
HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHA
RIPTEL
fpbp
...
germany
>germany
My condolences.
Top kek, it's almost as if the jews are still taking revenge on you
>Vega Nano
double meme'd
what is a vega nano? did amd released vega already?
Holy fuck look at these amd drones BTFO
>stop comparing performance in real world tests! Look at these square root and array sorting tests instead!
who the fuck compares the cost of a cpu with the fps it produced?
are you fucking insane? this is what the gpus are for
Your theory crafting doesn't match the data.
>use same gpu in the tests
>results in huge performance differences
Looks like the cpu does matter.
When it comes to workstations AMD wiped the floor with Intel.
>huge
same site posts a 5% difference in overall perfomance
goes then to produce a cost per fps that elliminates the 5% and instead installs a healty 17%
sure thing seems legit..so legit that only pcgamer thought of that
Accordingly to some rumors, it's between a 1080Ti and a 1080, but at a much lower tdp.
>Nobody needs fast computers
AMD shills will actually defend this
I don't think you're understanding the implications.
If ryzen fails at both being competitive in performance compared to the top dogs, and fails at even being a good value, then what does ryzen have going for it?
No kidding pal Brazilian taxes made my 1080 from 700 to magically 1000$.
It's not enough to live in a poor shit hole, the government overtax you. Plus this is the price without VAT.
that card that got on today is an underclocked vega at 1200mhz with 4096 shaders
it cant be a nano its the real deal
being 5% behind the a 7700k on gaming doesnt say absolutely anything
especially if you consider that it has A LOT of problems
if you think its a fail being 5% behind despite everything well i have bad news for you
>he doesn't understand dollar per performance
Br nigger here, I remember the day the RX480 released, some people bought it for R$4000 (US 1200)
Top kok, the best part is tablets, remember when there was a law called "lei do bem", I got my iPad for 2000 dilmas at the time, now the base model iPad is 3500 temers.
What the fuck are you even saying?
price for perf on a cpu is a WHOLE range of things idiot
price for fps on a cpu IS JUST RETARDED as you are
>performance where performance actually matters is a bad judgment of performance
Ok, maybe you should leave since you don't know anything about computing.