They fell for the 7700k meme

>they fell for the 7700k meme


HAHAHAHAHHA


youtube.com/watch?v=RZS2XHcQdqA

Not even a month in and your precious "gayming" performance is already toast.

And things are only going to get better for Ryzen from here. Enjoy your housefire 4 core Delidlake


HAHAHAHHAHA

>literally 40% higher lows on Ryzen
>delidlake running at 5ghz

>games

Oh fuck off

I wonder how far Ryzen scales with RAM speed.

>In denial
Stay mad jewtel

Nobody cares. Running DDR4 above 2133 MHz is for complete retards only.

...

...

Funny cuz gaymen is the only thing that matters for 99% of Sup Forums.

Even funnier, Ryzen completely rekts Jewtel in proper multicore programs.

> delid.png

Isn't 'gayms' the only thing Intel's Mumbai HQ has been posting here? What else does the 7700k have going for it?

Leterally no-one needs 3200mhz DDR4 you shill

>the human eye can't see more than 2133Mhz on 4 cores

>Even funnier, Ryzen completely rekts Jewtel in proper multicore programs.
In every 5 of them. And loses to 90€ Pentiums in the rest, like every generation.

>spotted the Sup Forums manchild

Pentiums don't beat anything nowadays, might as well start memeing celeron, Apu

>Just OC the ram

You kids and pajeets need to stop this shit.

>He fell for the gaming meme

>gaymin
>Implying a difference in performance means anything
>Also inb4 muh hotter Intel CPU
>Inb4 muh higher tdp, which isn't noticeable

It's Literally nothing


At least Intel wins with good quality control and customer service, which is worth the super slight decrease in performance on a CHEAPER CPU

Plus we have good reliability, so when you're ryzen CPU gets hot, we still have the option to delid to give us even more usability, something AMD doesn't even trust their users enough to do

So kindly

Fuck off AMD shills

so the great budget king amd cpu needs high end 3600mhz ram to perform well?

great design there pajeet

...

$0.01 has been deposited

>At least Intel wins with good quality control and customer service
>Plus we have good reliability, so when you're ryzen CPU gets hot

>to perform well

No, it needs it to be the best CPU on the market for 'gayming'. It performs well without it.

Just like you need a 1080TI to play games 'optimally'.

>not knowing cpu's are ram limited

leave

It actually matters on Ryzen. Ram frequency is related to the speed at which the 'infinity fabric' (think HyperTransport) operates. So higher ram speeds can give a substantial overall performance boost.

...

Would tripple channel be something to keep a look out for?
I was kind of hoping Zen would do that as near base model.

How are CPU's ram limited?

I can't tell if the ignorance for DDR4 is from underage or just retards treating it like DDR2 or 3?

Weird benchmarks, which don't fit into the benches of the renowned hardware sites.

>trusting a Youtuber

Not my problem

Look here

Yeah, too bad most motherboards for Ryzen don't even boot with anything above 28xx.

>literally intels only defence until now
it's officially btfo

Yes and how does that mean it's limited?

See
Fucking intel plebs stuck in their backwards absolutist ways of thinking about tech because the only terminology they know is intel patented

>OCing ram = better performance
Man holy shit! That must mean the CPUs are ram limited!

Limited in the sense that a ryzen CPU paired with low-frequency ram will perform worse than one with high-frequency. So the former CPU is limited by ram in comparison to the latter.

>renowned hardware sites

Funny how you imply jewing when Ryzen needs super high clocked selected ram and a good motherboard which adds up in price.

impressive optimization, even frametimes

3600mhz DDR4

This.

bingo
meaning all the 2133mhz reviews can be thrown out

N-n-not r-r-really!
1700X is only 80€ more than 7700K and 16GB of 3200MHz RAM is o-only 50€ more! And only 50€+ m-m-m-more for motherboard!

>
>implying that AMD is the same as jewtel because they designed their faster CPUs to be faster by utilising RAM
>>butthurt jew concubines mad they have a slower CPU

Cant wait till a decent freesync 144hz IPS comes out, jew-sync puts a $150 premium on jew-sync monitors

AMD is for poorfags. Even if Intel really was worse (which it isnt) I would still buy Intel because I'm not a pleb.

Except 0.01% Zen systems can achieve that ram frequency stable

...

>you now have to spend $300 more just to get the same performance in some games

#TeamRed

ad hominem

...

just bought an i5 7600k
used only the FX series in the past 5 years

I'm actually enjoying Intel

Even your cherry picked results show only a 20% increase max performance from stock 2133 to OCed 3600. Between the 6 tests only average approximately 10% increase performance with lowest being just under 5% increase in performance. That's a lot of money and stability testing just to get max 5% better performance.

How this equates to "Ram limited" in the pajeet mind I don't know. Actually this is kinda fascinating that brown people consider 5% to be a significant limit. This is assuming you're not just some underage retard that came to this site from social media. Both are possibilities. Certainty the possibility of you being a competent enthusiast with years of experience is very unlikely.

Considering the difference between 2133 ram and 3600 is over $100 and this test was done with a 1070. You'd get far better performance putting that money to a 1080.With sales the difference can be less than $100 between the two now and the 1080 has well over 20% better performances in most game over a 1070.

In the scope of this test AMD is a failure and you get FAR better performance objectively from an 7700k build with "cheap" ram and a 1080 over AMD with expensive ram and a 1070. That's ignoring OCing the 1080 which would dramatically increase the performance over the AMD/expensive ram system even further.

All these tests do is prove AMD is pointless. Unless there is a significant sale on ram and CPUs.
Another issue this kids/pajeets ignore. At least there's some sanity ITT.

>1080p

And how does it run at a non-console resolution?

>takes stairs two at a time

>Conveniently ignoring the four extra cores the AMD set-up would give in this set-up meaning it nearly matches the 7700k in games and beats the 6900k in multi-threaded workloads.
(You)

>but muh workload!
Nigga you ain't got no workload.

>Conveniently ignoring the $300 additional cost
(You)

Better than 1080P, 1080P was considered a weakness on launch.

Not sure if anyone realizes how good the optimization is considering the fixed issues on launch, if you compare the current benches with those on launch it's really good and shows alot of potential even with the scheduler issues from win10. An 8 core chip matching a 4 core chip is unheard and uncalled for if you consider the clocks and that intels best 8 core is uncomparable. Intel really needs to release their hexacore (i9?) asap

>Plus we have good reliability
>we

And you call other people shills...

>Better than 1080P, 1080P was considered a weakness on launch.
4K wasn't considered weakness because performance of other processors were capped to the GPU.

>Better than 1080P, 1080P was considered a weakness on launch.

That's not how it works. Lower resolutions like 1080p remove the GPU bottleneck and expose CPU performance. The reason the frame rate differences compress at higher resolutions is because the GPU is the bottleneck.

How do you people not understand the basics? Am I on Sup Forums?

So how big are the chances 1600x will have same smooth fps line as 1800x here? Both will turbo 4.0 on all cores.
Rumor is 1600x got stepping included, and they are much more stable even with failed cores.

this

>1080p remove the GPU bottleneck and expose CPU performance
it's not exactly true, specially for new games, ie 7700K scales poorly with MSAA for some reason.

>samefagging that 3200mhz costs $300 more because PC hardware is inflated to shit in islamabad (the real name of the city he lives in)
>mfw its $100 more for (currently) supported, highest quality RAM
>mfw 1700X is still 30% better than 7700K

Why has no one explained this to me then?
And the fact that other 4K and even 1440p minimums are better on the 1800X when shills keep repeating over and over that those resolutions are GPU bound

7700K choking hard on AMD cock similar to the shills in this thread

Oppposed to raw benchmarks where the utility of 1080p on an 8core CPU are of a marginal usage, an effective real world usage of 4K 120hz (moving from the 1440p "sweet spot) is more relevant considering 8K60hz is very slowly showing up due to bandwidth limitations and slow adoption.

I'll disagree that GPUs are bottlenecks to higher resolutions when in effect monitors need to be upgraded but most users don't want subpar performance to revert to a lower resolution bloated on a high res screen.

With 1080 Ti and further generations showing up soon, 4K as an effective visual output can be more plausible.

I get your point view that your'e effectively removing the GPU limitation, but in reality you're not appealing to a hypothetical large audience using 1080p (with high end) and therefore real graphics performance need to be correlated with optimal best in class output considering new standards are adopted on the display side as a UHD standard (quantum dot, HDR) because it is democratized in this specific area of application instead of being perceived as appealing to a minority

tl;dr 4K matters, 1080p for high end/enthusiast isn't a real-world reference. Vidya pushes tech, resolution since other formats and mediums are capped in slow adoption(stream bandwidth, file size)

>islamabad (the real name of the city he lives in)

lel

hahahahahahahhaha why are AMD users always vigin neckbeards and poorfags?

Typical AMD reply Typical intel replygg plebs

...

>Additional cost
Compared to what Intel chip that offers 7700k single threaded performance and better than 6900k multi-threaded performance?

So you buy these chips to do math for your company?

fug i didn't know ram frequency had such a huge impact

>gaymer crap

b-but muh 360p CPU bottleneck benchmarks

if you guys are so smart, why are you so poor then? HAHAHAHAH check mate boom

gonna have my girlfriend lick my balls later, something an AMD fag can only dream of

why are the min fps so low with the intel 7700 K ? because it has only 4 cores ?
i wannna upgrade to a ryzen 4c in the future would a 6c perform better ?

fucked mine in the ass 2 hours ago, and she's not white trash like yours
gg

I don't understand why you're so triggered. I was simply explaining the concept of RAM limitation to someone else.

Not to mention that your "argument" is responding to both the merit of zen as qualified by performance and price, let me clarify a few things for you.

>How this equates to "Ram limited" in the pajeet mind I don't know. Actually this is kinda fascinating that brown people consider 5% to be a significant limit. This is assuming you're not just some underage retard that came to this site from social media. Both are possibilities. Certainty the possibility of you being a competent enthusiast with years of experience is very unlikely.

In the context of something else you wrote:

>In the scope of this test AMD is a failure and you get FAR better performance objectively from an 7700k build with "cheap" ram and a 1080 over AMD with expensive ram and a 1070. That's ignoring OCing the 1080 which would dramatically increase the performance over the AMD/expensive ram system even further.

The "insignificant" performance difference you are referring to is actually the gap shown in benchmarks between the 7700k and 1700 in 1080p gaming. SO the point being made by whoever posted the benchmarks is that the 1700 can indeed perform as well as the 7700k under certain circumstances and with the correct hardware setup.

But, as you have successfully demonstrated, this performance increase is minimal at best and arguably not worth the price. Now I'd like to take a minute and let you know that at this point, following your own logic, we have now established that the difference in gaming performance between the two processors is minimal and that only "brown people consider 5% to be a significant limit."

also 7700K is cheaper than the 1700K with higher frequency ram
>poor 4 core fag projecting insecurities

Cont...

You raise these points in the context that spending extra/money and time to reach these performance gains is not worth it and that one is better served buying a "just werks" 7700k, cheap ram, and 1080 over a Ryzen build. Allow me to point out a few things:

You are absolutely correct if we are talking about someone who wants to utilize the full potential of a 144hz monitor and is not planning on doing anything else with their computer. In that usage scenario, it doesn't make sense to recommend Rzyen. It should also be said that Ryzen gaming performance is not bad, just not as good as a 7700k in most games. Broadwell-e ipc at a lower clock is not equal to shit performance, even those with a 144hz monitor will still be able to reach high framerates running a 1700 or whatever.

However...

It is just silly to pretend that that category encompasses most people. For most, Ryzen will provide adequate gaming performance for those who game while also supplying enough horsepower to run/do/stream/watch anything they would like in the background. Forget content creators (although they stand to benefit the most), most users who are considering a 300$ processor do enough with their computers where the extra multitasking capabilities will be utilized and appreciated.

For someone who criticizes others for not being a "competent enthusiast with years of experience," you are astonishingly ignorant.

kek

if you add that you have to update 7700k 2 years before the 1700, it's more expensive. 100$ now, or 300$ later

>fucked mine in the ass 2 hours ago, and she's not white trash like yours
I know.. she's an anime character in your VR

>>Implying a difference in performance means anything
Top bait

HAHAHAHAHA

THIS FUCKING DAMAGE CONTROL HOLY SHIT

I usually don't even post in these threads but FUCK.

isnt 1700x more expensive than 7700k? Its like 100dollar more expensive, yet its about the same performance.
I dont understand this. Are you saying buying more expensive cpu and getting same performance means its better?

>we still have the option to delid to give us even more usability, something AMD doesn't even trust their users enough to do

Just put me in the screencap, senpai.

sad world you live in that anal is VR tier

exactly why im buying ryzen

ahaha i forgot the 7700k socket is dead, so you need to add $200 extra and that the 7700k will already bottleneck volta/vega. the 7700k is near death, you will pay more money in the long run

ohhh, NOW games don't matter

Not dead, it might still accept Coffee Lake hexacore next year. i7-7700K is obsolete IMHO, though. Fuck mainstream quadcores 10 years after Q6600.

Ryzen has big L2 caches and mediocre inter-CCX bandwidth.

It does very well when largely independent tasks can be left to do their thing undisturbed but suffers heavily when an OS scheduler randomly decides to migrate threads to different cores and modestly when different cores have high levels of copying data back and forth.

Cranking up Infinity Fabric bandwidth with high clocked DDR4 alleviates the problem, but really things will just run best for it when the OS knows what not to fuck around with and the software avoids excessive inter-thread copies.

no it's 30% better at not stuttering/min fps (1% and 0.1% minimum fps) in games that support hyperthreading and more cores (i.e. the future of AAA games)
It's also 50% better at min fps in GTA 5 4K which means the 7700K also bottlenecks at 4K and isn't worth what it's priced considering it's failure in benchmarks

DELETE THIS NOW

INTEL ALWAYS WINS

AMDUMBASSES GET OFF MY BOARD

>AMD with higher lows and averages in 5/6 tests.
So, I chose right with my 1800x?

>cpu
>games