How did AMD screw up so bad?

...

Other urls found in this thread:

cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>highest min frames
Looking good

>tfw you bought a 7700K over Ryzen and have to deal with garbage tier frametimes

You've memed me for the last time, Sup Forums.

You mean how did Bethesda screw up so bad. Besides, I like how nothing is consistent in this benchmark: frequency, RAM speed (probably the timings too), etcetera.

intel = less cores, more performance per core
amd = more cores, less performance per core

video games are hard to scale to more than a couple cores, so this favours intel

multithreading 101

They didn't screw up that bad, I believe they made a good product that has caught up to previous generation intel processors. If only they could have done something with this Core cluster thing I think they would have made a great product. This is coming from some one who owns a 8350 and a 4770k and 4790k. Right now we have to just hope that intel becomes more competitive and creates superior products with more than a few percent increases per generation.

Posting this garbage benchmark a month after Ryzen launched should be fucking bannable.

>intel = less cores, more performance per core
>amd = more cores, less performance per core
source?

their clock speeds and cache sizes are similar, what makes the difference, microcode implementations of individual instructions?

Well you know that is not going to happen since they added another refresh release to each generation cycle.

cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

this page has charts of overall cpu performance in various categories. this one is Single Thread performance. Intel cpus rank the highest since they have more per-cpu performance

>PassMark

What kind of fucking retard unironically uses sites like this?

do you want to discuss or just shitpost

DELET

stop posting
I hope you're all the same faggot because I really hope there aren't multiple people this fucking stupid

I don't want to discuss anything with a retard who links to sites like that, because you clearly have zero idea what you're talking about. Go back to Sup Forums, or better yet just kill yourself.

not him, do you know a better website or source to compare cpus

> because you clearly have zero idea what you're talking about
why do you think so?

wait™

Cinebench or CPU-Z if you MUST have synthetic benchmarks. Other than that real workloads, because synthetic benchmarks are worthless.

Fuck off.

no you fuck off

Nice shilling, faggot

Stop embarrassing yourself.

>screw up
AMD didin't.
Zen never was meant for high single core performance. So it's obvious that applications that rely solely on single core only will perform bad. Those scores are correct. It could do better with a few optimizations but per se have nothing wrong.
So AMD didn't screw up, AMD achieved exactly what they wanted with Ryzen.

Ayyy, too bad we let the thread die.

My 6300 is a thousand times better than that.

>Fallout 4
Benchmark dismissed

This is like benchmarking with sc2.

>Ask a question
>"OP you're fucking stupid"
>Not helping with discussion

I don't enjoy trying to talk myself down to a retards level of comprehension. I would rather ignore them or tell them to go back to daycare.

i take it personally that you excluded me from the screencap ;(

>he doesn't know the 101 of shitposting
sad

LONGER BIPELINES

>somebody posts the horridly optimized Fallout 4 graph again

Hey OP...

ebin :D

>using a fall out game as any sort of metric

captial keks all around

>i3 literally better than i7
>still these cucks waste their wages on i7's

The bar is bigger, you see, so this validates my masculinity and lack of penis size.

um... the 7700k is not going over 60 average...

This is less a how did amd screw up and more a how the fuck did fallout come out as broke as it was and never get patched better?

>Cherry picking /daily edition/

How would you draw that conclusion from that graph? It would seem to put the i7 strictly above the i3.

88% difference in cost.
28% difference in performance.

What the fuck are you even doing with an i7 for your gaming console?

>28% difference in performance.
That still means that the i7 is better, though. Whether it's worth it is highly subjective.

This picture should be posted as a reply to everything he says.

kek

>clock speeds are similar
What the fuck? The 1700x is a 3.4Ghz CPU. The 7700k is 4.2Ghz. That's a 24% higher clock rate.

AMD on suicide watch, will they ever recover? buy intel stock

I made that screencap.
Sorry :(

is this real?

The i3 is faster when the RAM is at 2400Mhz and the i7's RAM is at 1333Mhz.
Both having the same RAM speeds still has the i3 as slower.

yeah, high mhz RAM makes a massive difference, and it gets good min frametimes when the threads get busy because it's got cores for days

Dafuq? If RAM clocks make such huge differences, why don't benchmarks comparing DDR3 and DDR4 RAM show the same kind of difference? Is normally clocked DDR3 just fast enough not to be a bottleneck?

for one, Fallout 4 is retarded
for two, Ryzen isn't improving because of the RAM itself, internally it's two quad cores connected by a 256 bit bus that runs at the same clockspeed as RAM. Most applications don't give a flying fuck about this, but games do. On average you'll get around a 12% performance boost out of 2133mhz vs 3200mhz RAM with Ryzen.

>Ryzen isn't improving because of the RAM itself [...]
Sure, but that's not true for the Intel CPUs.

I know, like I said, Fallout is retarded. It's the only game that scales with RAM like that; other than F1 2016 but practically any setup runs that at 200+ FPS so no one cares.

Zen is faster per core than KL on integer loads, and are barely behind on FP loads
gb2/v/

It was autosaging, it couldn't do anything more than die
Thanks based user, doing God's work