Why would anyone buy AMD? I seriously don't get it.
AMD is both more expensive and slower, literally no upside.
Not only that but it's riddled with bugs and incompatibility issues.
I swear some of these idiots just buy AMD to support "the underdog", while AMD just jews them just as hard or even harder than Intel and Nvidia.
Got any topless pics?
They're not Intel. Plus I can't wait to have a 16 thread processor.
PC gamers having no life since the begining
What a rat race
>more expensive
the bait is real
Actually in my country ryzen is more expensive than it's intel rival^^
to make you angry.
yes, specifically you.
I'm going to buy a ryzen + polaris or ryzen + vega, sapphire aib, ofc, system just make you angry. Whenever you remember that day when you chanced up some user that decided to purchase a full AMD system, I'll even throw in AMD branded ssd and ram kits, your brand new ulcer will hurt like a motherfucker.
>^^
Germany I guess.
:^)
What a fucking poor falseflagging. Go and jerk off on some anime figurine, you retard.
Aaaah here it is, the damage control thread, I've been expecting it all day long.
Why would anyone buy Intel? I seriously don't get it.
Intel is both more expensive and slower, literally no upside.
Not only that but it's riddled with botnet backdoors and temperature issues.
I swear some of these idiots just buy Intel because they are normies who don't know any better, while Intel just jews them by selling housefire quad cores in 2017.
>AMD
>more expensive
Compared to what, a celeron? An atom?
On price vs. performance, you can almost always find an AMD that works out cheaper than an Intel.
That doesn't mean it'll necessarily match the performance of the Intel alternative, but it does mean the cost saving is enough to offset the performance hit.
Of course, if you're not being a troll (you are, but assuming someone that isn't reads this thread) it depends on your usage scenario.
You're all about "muh gaymen"?
a.) Go ahead, buy the Intel i7
b.) You need a machine to do a lot of multithreaded work without breaking the bank? (eg. ripping bluray to x265, or running a lot of medium-intensity applications simultaneously)
In that case, you're better off with something like an FX-8350 instead, and it's enough cheaper than the Intel equivalent, even if per-thread performance is a little slower, to make it the better choice for that job.
Of course, if you just want to shitpost on Sup Forums, you could make do with a Core 2 Duo E7500, or, more appropriately, an AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+
Old, poor copypasta.
>I swear some of these idiots just buy AMD to support "the underdog"
In all fairness, that's what I always thought
>while AMD just jews them just as hard or even harder than Intel and Nvidia.
Kind of true, having stepped on every fucking failure AMD produced hoping it would be better than before
To be clear, I'm a "proud" possessor of a FX-8150 and R9 390X. That's why it checks with this shitty old meme.
>AMD going to release 16 core for ~$1k
>Intel releases 18 core for $2k
Good goy, sure showed them!
Your tears are DELICIOUS, shekelchaser :^)
Daily reminder that if Intel had their way, we'd still be running 32-bit operating systems and maxing out at 4GB of RAM.
Or we'd all be stuck in Itanium hell.
>They're not Intel.
This is the only explanation I can think of.
Intel is the better choice, yet AMD fags completely refuse to accept it because "It's Intel"
(You)