This is Intel's BEST gaming cpu, versus the similarly priced R7 1700. Anything you notice?

This is Intel's BEST gaming cpu, versus the similarly priced R7 1700. Anything you notice?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_(microarchitecture)
thestack.com/iot/2016/02/05/intel-william-holt-moores-law-slower-energy-efficient-chips/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

less fps?

7fps neat, but why is it topping out so hard?

that's right. amd btfo!

Less cpu usage you retard intel
>less fps?
Less cpu usage you retard

You swapped the temps around/the i7 is on He3 cooling?

>the cpu usage depends on the graphics card as well

thats a misleading way of putting it. a faster gpu will keep the cpu more saturated and thus naturally higher utilization

Just tried to find this vid I think it was spliced from two other tests done. I can't fivd where they tested the two together.
Plus they're from different scenes in the bench..

>Nearly 10 fps less

Are you implying that ryzen wasnt a giant failure?
I would have really hoped that someone could provide ANY competition to intel, but it doesnt seem like it will happen.

Stuttering negates the 10 fps advantage.

Intel btfo

>GPU being underutilized
>10% worse overall performance
>hotter

I don't know why you thought this is somehow flattering to Ryzen, because it isn't.
If it managed to max out the GPU utilization then having 66% of the CPU performance in reserve might be useful, but it doesn't, so it's just a useless number.

take a minute and reflect on how stupid this post is

how exactly?

>22:57:18
>22:57:52
>take a minute
You dense double digit fuck.

fuck your dubs too :^)

Oh baby, a tripple!

games don't use all the cores?

impressive

it has less cpu usage because it's an 8 core and this shit won't change for a long time since devs still don't optimize well enough for 4c/8t

kill yourself, you dumb piece of shit.

I see an unoptimized engine used for what it does best (shilling)

Where's the original video you cuck

Notice anything?

Games can't use all 16 threads, wow surprise of the century. They only just recently started utilizing 8.

(((novideo for amd)))

>back when intel lost to amd in gaming
>told gaming is for babies and it doesnt matter
>amd gets beat by intel in gaming
>told gaming is a viable metric and does matter

the ebb and flow of autism

Can't use a radeon - it makes others look bad.

cute nanu outperforming 1070

It does show what fiji is capable of if a game actually hits it in a friendly way (much like DOOM does).

People are pissy about the these benchmarks, but I have an R9 290X and it's honestly pleasing to see how well it has aged.

Hawaii cannot be stopped - it is such a brute force chip. Considering the 290x released late 2013 and it is still crushing games at 1080p (and doing alright at 1440p) it has proven to be fantastic value.

Huh. 91 watt quad core @4.5Ghz is faster than 95 Watt eight core at 3.8Ghz
Go figure

I don't get it, the CPU is bottlenecking on 1700

>gaming
all i care about is which compiles gentoo faster

Yeah, Ryzen has less CPU usage while having housefire temps.

...

nowhere near as big a failure as your life though

that hurts...

I notice that the CPU usage depends on the graphics card you use as well.

>only 5°C extra
>twice the cores

>>twice the cores
twice the UNUSED cores

>65watt 8core.

>290 purchased just before 390's release for £215
To this day it's still cheaper than 8GB 470s/480s.

>twice the cores
>Ryzen 60° at 33% usage
>i7 55° at 68% usage

What I'm seeing is the i7 putting out less heat per core % utilized.
I guess it's a good thing there are almost no games that would scale well enough to make use of 8c/16t, imagine all the Ryzen housefires otherwise.

Yeah, because idle cores use no power, yeah.

>no power
They obviously produce significantly less heat.
This is basic knowledge.

You are operating under the assumption both chips are usuing very similar coolers. Right now because AIO brackets for AM4 are a bit thin on the ground a lot of reviewers have been slapping single tower coolers onto ryzen while using 240mm AIOs for older platforms.

You mount a proper cooler to ryzen and it shows what sort of housefire kabylake is.

>twice the cores
>half the average usage
Don't you see it? They are both under the same % of load considering that GTA V sucks at multithreading.

1700 only clocks at 3.0 - 3.7 up to 3.75 with XFR
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_(microarchitecture)

Nothing pic related can't fix

Can cool quad SLI

Sure, blaming the testing methods is the only way you can hide from the fact that ryzen was a failure. Nice try AMDrone.
I really wished that ryzen wasn't so awful, it would have been nice to see some competition for intel.

>They are both under the same % of load
And that is why the ryzen is 5° hotter. Because half of its cores are completely unused and produce barely any heat.

thats what i will buy then and looks like i have to buy a new gpu too.

that looks really loud. would probably be fine for a server but not for a desktop pc that is in the same room.

>Anything you notice?
Yeah, fewer FPS, runs hotter and doesn't utilise as much of its power.

In the review that pic comes from the 1800x bests every other cpu in every single test.

>shilling for 5°C
>implying the game is the only thing running, no background processes or kernel keeping cores awake
kys

>I really wished that ryzen wasn't so awful
Sure thing, Schlomo.

>implying all of that isn't included in the CPU utilization to begin with

kys
y
s

You were the one chimping out a bout the 5° degree difference.
Everyone but you understands that, this is just the result of half the CPU cores being unused.

Also, if you are benchmarking you try to minimize background processes and the CPU power the Kernel needs is still the same for both CPUs.

>>I want competition for intel
>gtfo intel shill
Sup Forums in the year 2017

low rpm won't be as loud

Sup Forums only wants competition for Intel so they can buy Intel products cheaper, regardless of how good (or bad) the equivalent AMD product is.

>lol VIA

>FX-8350

Now that's what I call wishful thinking.

Even that makes you the opposite of an intel shill.

In any sensible timeline it would, but Sup Forums is a special kind of retarded and thinks if Intel doesn't have to spend money on marketing because of total world domination they can pass that saving onto the customer!

When fx were released everyone said the same things they say now
>better scores in benchmarks
>almost same gaming but much better productivity
>4 cores in 2013 kek
>it is underutilized it would perform better
Some years have passed and everyone sees now what a failure it was. The same now with Ryzen. It is underutilized in games but can't show better fps than i5 when there is no gpu bottleneck because it is simply bad. Intel 6 cores will destroy ryzen, as by then everyone will see what a failure it is.

umm, no sweetie, my FX 8350 is more than enough for 1080p even 4k in some games, so not all of the FX are failure.

If Ryzen is so great, explain this: in some games i5 is fully loaded to 100% and 1600x is only to 40%. So, if we remove gpu bottleneck, and test in multithreaded games like AS, Doom, Battlefield, it would be logical that 1600x will show more fps. Sounds logical. Does it happen? No. Ryzen stays underutilized, gpu stays underutilized, fps is the same.
So, architecture is such shit that 12 thread cpu can't beat 4 thread cpu in multithreaded games no matter what.

And of course every amd shill is ignoring this because they can't fucking explain why their ryzen is under performing so much with so much spare resources. Shit architecture.

>gaymen cpu

yeah, back then Intel's answer to the fx series wasn't re-re-releasing skylake with literally 1% ipc improvements and
>lol moar hurtz moar bing buses ebin XDDDDDD
off yourself

...

>33%, 60 degrees Celsius
>68%, 55 degrees Celsius
Really makes you think

i5s are dead, dumb shill.

Thats the power of having 8 cores.
You can have 4 sitting around, doing nothing.

Because Nvidia's drivers are bottlenecking the Ryzen CPUs. This becomes evident when the same games are compared across AMD and Nvidia GPUs.

>Pretends to be ignorant that this phenomenon has already been studied in some depth.

Irrelevant. Why doesn't your 12 thread CPU beat 4 thread dead CPU in multithreaded games? Why is your Ryzen unable to get better results from its vast resource?
Repeat after me - shit architecture.

because the games aren't programmed to deal with the new architecture.

So, pair 2 580 in crossfire and show me 1600x beat i5 in doom, battlefield or whereever. i5 is 100% load with 1070 already and crossfire 580 are better than 1070. Will it happen? No.

I notice that the 7700k provides better performance and is pretty much GPU bottlenecked, while the R7 1700 is CPU bottlenecked and runs worse because the game doesn't give a fuck about moar coars.

See

I see obvious GPU bottleneck.

i5s architecture is even worse than shit.

Sure, kido. It is so shit that its 4 threads beat 12 threads of 1600 in a game that utilizes 8.
It is so shit it is actually able to utilize its 100%.

>Gaymang benchmarks
Hey guys, can I join in with the shitposting too?

...

Remember this?

What happened?

Anyway, back to benchmarks.

Keep telling yourself that.

Where were you when Intel's efficiency plan was BTFO'D by AMD?

thestack.com/iot/2016/02/05/intel-william-holt-moores-law-slower-energy-efficient-chips/

d-d-d-d-d-d-elet t-t-tt-this

...

Off topic, but is this leak true?

Skylake-X

That somehow only seems to occur on one of the two cards. How interesting.

Glad to see Intel stepping up their game.

Hmmm...

Here's something a bit more controversial.

No more gayming benchmarks.

As of March 3rd 2017 power draw doesn't count.

...