Quake 2 - Ryzen vs Intel

I PUSH MY FINGERS INTO MY EYES

youtu.be/oMNFoNtKCR8

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=ylvdSnEbL50&feature=youtu.be&t=315
youtube.com/watch?v=yyCXBfblYPQ
youtu.be/LgbWu8zJubo?t=5s
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Shit. I have to return my ryzen. I bought this cpu for quake 2.

Not even a Ryzen fanboy but the "tech press" really needs to be called out on this bullshit.

They assume this shit is an accurate measure of future performance when it fucking isn't. It has nothing to do with it and everyone just blindly believes it does.

AdoredTV already debunked this bullshit but for some reason idiots still keep parroting it

youtube.com/watch?v=ylvdSnEbL50&feature=youtu.be&t=315

heh

it really hit home when I actually built a 1700x system
OBS always drops a few frames, or at least that is what I was conditioned to believe

brb stoning myself to death with ryzens

wow
it's like quake 2 is not optimized for multithreading

Fuck you, i had my volume at max

Ebin thread op!

Underrated

I just finished replaying through quake 2 and this thread comes up, thank you OP

>OBS always drops a few frames, or at least that is what I was conditioned to believe
you can check the logs, doesn't OBS keep count of these things?

Adoredtv always says AMD products will dominate in a few years.

He said the same thing with the fury x a few years ago, and now look where we are.

The 1700x is a fine cpu, but it's not the best that can be bought for what it costs when it comes to gaming.

If it may get better in the future isn't really relevant as we can't know for sure. We don't know if games will become so heavily multithreaded a 1700x will outperform a 7700k.

>with the fury x a few years ago, and now look where we are
fury x is best investment you could've done
look where 980(600+?) is, and compare it to 1070(650)
now look where fury x(650) is and compare it to 1070(650)
launch day for partner cards prices
fury x is anti inflation GPU

>If it may get better in the future isn't really relevant as we can't know for sure. We don't know if games will become so heavily multithreaded a 1700x will outperform a 7700k.

the 6900k is already outperforming the 7700k, we know that they can take advantage of more cores and threads. if ryzen can't end up beating the 7700k in most benchmarks it won't be because of a lack of multithreading. it'll be because of ryzen's specific hardware differences (and especially its flaws) in comparison to broadwell-e, and whether or not software will be optimised for it

isnt his argument sorta pointless.

its like having a scientist in roman times build a Tow Truck before they learned how to make Diesel fuel. So Horses and Carriages are the superior technology to move items. And only until a 2 thousand years later is the Fuel tech there to make his Tow Truck better than 4 horses. But by the time his tow truck is better than 4 horses, its now the standard to use Maglev Hover Transports and his shitty truck is now irrelevant as rival companies blew right past them.

I want the thing that is Good Now and will continue to be good for 5 years or so until I upgrade and get the Next best thing. Im not growing a garden, my computer does not get better over time, it breaks and becomes obsolete.

another analogy. Its like having a Race between long distance runners over the course of a mile. one person is fast and gets slower towards the end, and the other is slow for 75% of the race and gets a bit faster at the end. the 2nd runner might hit a top speed towards the end faster than his competition, but they will also lose the race. And by the time Runner #2 finishes, there is stronger competition waiting to crush them.

yeah, this is the thing
IT IS good now

you realize it loses only 8-10% in 9 games out of 10? it doesn't bottleneck GPU, did you see 3 games running at the same time? it can feed the gpu alright

youtube.com/watch?v=yyCXBfblYPQ

whole argument that ryzen is bad for gaming comes from "it won't hold up in the future" not that it's bad right now

>Using a Quake 2 as a Benchmark in the the time year of our saviour 1480464000

Intel drones are getting fucking desperate to earn their paychecks

AYYMD IS FINISHED & BANKRUPT

right above your head, user

author even makes a joke about how it loses only 5% at 13% lower clock

yep, this is why it's a good cpu
people fucking cry over 2-10% fps loss
but forget you can do 2000 other things on your comp, at the same time, and still only have that 2-10% fps loss
you go on your garbage 7700K (believe me, I know) and try to do OBS at good quality or watch movie + OBS and rip your fps

baited

Also look at it this way

Say 7700K benchmarks 7z @50s
Say 1800X benchmarks 7z @60s but drops later to 40s.

You're better off getting the 7700K now because you save 10s each time you do the thing

wrong example

ryzen does 7z at 20s
while 7700K does it at 50s

and this later might be coming next month, not next year

i'd hold off any judgement for now, unless you need to buy gaming PC right now for whatever reason.

i dont have anything against ryzen. when a lot of the benchmarks are above 60fps its overkill for what i would personally need.

but their argument seems idealistic/tribalistic.

youtu.be/LgbWu8zJubo?t=5s

its like amd making this Square Wheeled Tricycle and saying its not that its slower its that the Roads arent rounded. And AMD fanboys promising that one day in the near future all the roads will be rounded and all the Flatroaders with their evil circle tires are bias.

games are just starting to see a benefit from more than 4 cores and by the time 10 are needed ryzen will be a distance memory.

Except Ryzen users will still be benefiting from it while Intel cucks will have to upgrade their CPU and motherboard etc AGAIN.

baited ;)

hahahaha classic
>just wait! ((tm)))
>it'll be good in (((((insert_year))))))
amdfags keep waiting for ever, surely some day amd won't stop living on hype and just waiting.

hm, I wonder what will it do if you put both at same clock.

all i have to say is AMD has to stop dragging ass and release their full line of Ryzen CPUs and Vega. this waiting game and need for everything to be patched to even function correctly prevents me from trusting them as a company.

>x99 motherboards burned $1000 CPU
>p67 SATA burned HDDs

you still trust intel, right?

all the current problems are nothing compared to more fun launches, you seem to compare CPU launch to GPU
it's very very far from each other, they just happen to go in same case together.

CPU is x100 more complex, there was no actual new CPU arch launch without problems. Even skylake had handful of bugs and you can barely call it new.

Funnily enough, 2500k@stock gives better frames than 7700k@stock with ioquake3-1.36-r1 using novidya-driver-35*.** (GTX980), linux 3.12.* (core2 gcc optimizations), all compiled with gcc-4.8.5, amd64 (ioquake3 binary too).
Same thing with yq2 (not latest version).

>future performance
Who is implying 'future performance'? Zen loses to SB clock-to-clock on pretty much all single threaded operations and that's a fucking joke for a 2017 cpu.

>Zen loses to SB clock-to-clock on pretty much all single threaded operations
what?

What? Zen loses to Sandy Bridge in single threaded operations, ie. all older games (even with games - using source modifications like ioquake3 - compiled with latest gcc).

With SHOC, CoP, Armed Assault, Arma2 on Windows (both nt6.0 and 6.1) Zen loses to Sandy Bridge too, so it's not a isolated incident on linux.

But 7700k is something kind of anomaly, because it performs worse than 2500k on some single threaded operations.

Release it and then file for bankruptcy.
tip top kek

P67 SATA decradation has not happened: I have two Asus P8P67 Deluxe rev b1 boards and single problems to this day. It was simply a theoritical problem, which Intel decided play safe (free replacement boards with newer chips from mobo manufacturers).

>not a single probem to this day

i was running a Q6600 for 10 years until i upgraded to a i5 7600k in January.

im not comparing cpus to gpu launches, i just want them to get their products out cause they are leaving a bad impression on a customer new to building pcs.

i dont have any confidence in Vega. it will probably be great at mining Bitcoin but lagging behind Nvidia in games.

what kind of accent is this? Sounds like an Indian man speaking Scottish

Good point made though. Interesting to see the 7700k maxing all threads in BF1, but Ryzen being nowhere close to maxed, at the same framerates

are you that guy that posted his breakdown of old games where ryzen was 3% lower?

because i've seen how 2500K performs, sure it got averages but compared to even i56600 it got some serious drops

Yeah, this is right, quake 2 is absolutely unplayable below 1000 fps

Just buy the one that's cheapest you spergs

>AdoredTV

Fuck off AMD shill and kill yourself. If you even mention AdoredTV you are completely retarded, that guy is an actual shill.

>can't come up with any real argument for what's contained in the video
>call it a shill
>????
>profit

I'm pretty sure what he means is
>I was conditioned to believe that OBS is always supposed to drop frames and it's not a problem with Intel CPUs. Now that I have a 1700X, my streams/recordings don't drop frames.

>I "upgraded" from 4c/4t to 4c/4t

HAHAHA B T F O

> it will probably be great at mining Bitcoin but lagging behind Nvidia in games.
t. retard that thinks GPU mining is still a thing.

Then why do you trust Intel when it took over 5 years for HT to catch on when all the reviewers were saying "HT coming next year!!! it'll beat AMD dual cores then!!!" and 10 years later it's only just now becoming commonly used in games?

Are you using a VIA processor, or are you just underage?

Intel has had many times more bugs in their CPUs and chipsets, and the need for optimizations in software for their CPUs to work properly in the past 20 years, than AMD has.
AMD has had 2 real fuck ups. Phenom I, and Bulldozer. Just lucky for Intel, Bulldozer was such a disaster at the start that software did start getting optimized specifically for Intel beyond the forced degradation for AMD CPU performance that Intel created with their compiler and other shit.

The flaw in your first analogy is the relation of traction to power, the expenditure of energy through different formats. When you equate performance to a single dimension of visual output of a medium, you don't see technology as a whole but instead compartmentalized because in effect the tow truck is a progression from horses and carriages and they wouldn't exist without their proper course and utility. Tools can differ but the output is sometimes different, this is where optimization enters and matters.

>I want the thing that is Good Now and will continue to be good for 5 years or so until I upgrade and get the Next best thing. Im not growing a garden, my computer does not get better over time, it breaks and becomes obsolete.

You are always growing garden which isn't the computer but yourself, in technology and by supporting higher technology in effect you contribute to a higher intention outside of the mainstream because of your inner conviction.

>another analogy. Its like having a Race between long distance runners over the course of a mile. one person is fast and gets slower towards the end, and the other is slow for 75% of the race and gets a bit faster at the end. the 2nd runner might hit a top speed towards the end faster than his competition, but they will also lose the race. And by the time Runner #2 finishes, there is stronger competition waiting to crush them.

In a race the athletes have an awareness of positioning and calibrate performance to optimize the best result. The flaw in this analogy is the blindness of performance when performance isn't always achieved as classification in relation to peers but as conviction that technology is superior and therefore it doesn't make it a race but more of a research in motion.