Why haven't you switched to Ryzen already?

...

Other urls found in this thread:

legitreviews.com/ddr4-memory-scaling-intel-z170-finding-the-best-ddr4-memory-kit-speed_170340,
youtube.com/watch?v=f7BqAjC4ZCc
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

1. My autism would only allow a 4.0ghz or 4.5ghz overclock. only the $500 1800x allows 4.0ghz and 4.5ghz isn't possible

2. Ddr4 support is still bad. Most people can only run 3200mhz or lower.
I always buy the fastest ram available, and ryzen can't run 4500mhz ddr4

3. It scores lower in games than a comparable Intel i7

4. Since games aren't using more than 4 cores, having 8 isn't needed.

5. My 2600k can render video just fine. waiting 15min isn't a big deal as making the video takes 4+ hours.

maybe Zen+ will be better.

I'm not an anime fan

>Since games aren't using more than 4 cores, having 8 isn't needed.

Games using 4 cores doesn't magically render 8 core cpus pointless. Your system will greatly benefit from having processes spread out over 8 cores rather than 4.

Because despite what Sup Forums would have you think, except for a few fringe cases, Intel is still the superior choise for gaming.

If they can get their shit fixed with the Zen refresh, higher clock speeds and more optimizations for games, I'll be happy to jump over.

Right now it's still a new architecture that needs to mature, and I feel it's premature to jump on it already.

>Your system will greatly benefit from having processes spread out over 8 cores rather than 4.
When it comes to gaming, that simply isn't true.

If my work needs me to make more videos, I will probably get a thread ripper if it's any good.

Applications running in the background could be running on other cores leaving more processing time to your games, however small the difference.

I mean sure, I'm not saying you should immediately throw your rig in the trash and get a Ryzen machine, but in the future there's no reason you shouldn't pick the higher core count over the lower core count if they are similarly priced (unless single thread performance is important to you).

No one disputes that intel is better for gaming but its only a marginal performance advantage for a lot more money and power usage all on only 4 cores. It just doesn't make sense to stick with them unless you allocate all your money to your PC and don't care about being ripped off for what you're getting.

4 years later, 4 core Sandy still holding up.
they told me games would use 8 cores and that bulldozer would be future proof.

>lot more money
The 7600k is far cheaper than ryzen and out preforms it
>power usage
A 1700 pulls way more power than a it

Those are not arguments

because youd be an idiot to jump to amd immediately after the decade of hot garbage cpus they put out

1. relatively slow for gaming
2. rushed launch, too many bugs
3. no overclock potential
4. poor industry support (although this is partially due to intel shenanigans)
5. coffee lake is gonna be better

The hardware prices in my country went to shit like 5 years ago. My i5 3470+mobo costed around 170$ back then now I need to spend 240$ on Ryzen 1600 alone + 100$ on the mobo. I can't justify it yet. Also I don't really need it. My current system is still enough for my tasks.

Did you not even bother to read what I just fucking wrote? For a >>>>future

>I always buy the fastest ram available
>My 2600k

The 2600K can't run anything higher than 2133MHz DDR3 thanks to the limitations of its memory controller. DDR3 goes up to 3200MHz. Guess you don't do that thing you said.

shrekt

Because my FX 8350 and Radeon 7950 are still running fine.
I'm not a consumerist whore who buys shit I don't need.

Or you can compare it with a similar processor of its class, the 1600/X...

The only reason people wouldn't switch over is gaming in CPU bound scenarios. In nearly every single other scenario there's complete parity or superiority of the 1700, 1700X, and 1800X over the i7 7700k. The fact that Sup Forums can't think of any other uses for parallelism other than "rendering videos" and "gaming" is laughable; it's mighty clear that no one on here has worked on a large codebase, had to manage any sort of mid range servers like a VCS, worked in scientific computing, or needed to do anything related to rapid prototyping and PLM.

Im poooooor
First ill save up
Then i get vega
Then i save up
Get a ryzen chip
Good thing i got 2500k back before economy collapsed

>It scores lower in games than a comparable Intel i7
If the only game you play is CS 1.6 at 640x480, sure. Using video game benchmarks to decide what CPU to buy is about as retarded as it gets because it makes no difference when you aren't GPU bottlenecked which 99% of people aren't.

>Empire strikes back was the best movie
>Intel confirmed best

I'm poor as fuck and can't afford $230+shipping for the (current) cheapest Ryzen processor.

>1
Nothing's stopping you from clocking a 1700x, 1700 (YMMV), 1600x to 4GHz

>2
With a decent x370 mobo you can get 3600MHz (super high speed memory is a meme anyway: legitreviews.com/ddr4-memory-scaling-intel-z170-finding-the-best-ddr4-memory-kit-speed_170340, you're fsb limited anyway)

>3
See 4

>4
No foresight; literally the same argument from pentium vs core 2, core 2 vs i series, on and on.

Buy at your technical comfort level I guess. It's been "mature" for over a month now.

>1. relatively slow for gaming
Not in any realistic setting.

>2. rushed launch, too many bugs
Good thing we're currently living in the past.

>3. no overclock potential
Overclock from 3.0/3.4/3.6 to 3.8/4.0 GHz is not "no potential".

>4. poor industry support (although this is partially due to intel shenanigans)
Untrue.

>5. coffee lake is gonna be better
Possibly, but if intel's current mess is any indication, likely not (certainly not by value).

>coffee lake is gonna be better

>my 2600k

So your 2600k is better in games, has 4.5k memory, has better "scores" and none of your applications use more than 8 threads?

Or are you comparing this to a 7700k?

coffe lake is a process refinement user, sorry to burst your bubble.

Sandy was good but dont get me wrong, there is actual performance improvement over.
With 5ghz, 7700K is a decent, albeit 4 core successor.

wait™ing for the gigabyte mITX mobo to be released soon™.

No way they will keep the same socket.
If this bench is true, and no one knows, then it just confirms that intel releases new socket just to give money to mobo manufacturers

It's using the same socket but likely a new chipset (Z370). No idea if it's backwards compatible or not with Z270. Really, really doubt it would work with Z170.

Because I don't live with my mom and don't have an overconsumption disease to upgrade PC every year.

Because I'm a braindead intelfag.

I need more than eight cores and 16 PCIe lanes with higher single-threaded performance
i9-7900X is up my alley

Hope you aren't planning on overclocking it. youtube.com/watch?v=f7BqAjC4ZCc

Ryzen has non-free boot firmware and a spying chip called the PSP. I would only use the AMD opteron as its compantible with libreboot.

I can get waterblocks for the VRMs like I already do for my older ASUS X99 board

>coffee lake is gonna be better
this tbqh. who /coffeelake/ here?

He also mentions anything with an 8 pin CPU power connector is also a risk.

>jizz TIM'd i7-6800K with worse stock performance

I can replace the wires in the CPU power cable with heavier-gauge or lower-resistance wires.

Won't that just fuck up the power draw? You're going through a lot of effort for 20% more single core performance.

>fuck up the power draw
Fucking how? All I'm doing is either lowering the resistance in the wiring material or raising the thickness of the cable.
>You're going through a lot of effort for 20% more single core performance.
Because it's worth it.

>Why haven't you switched to Ryzen already?
Because it costs money.

Already got myself a 1700
Was a nice upgrade from my FX8350
But the main reason for the upgrade was my piece of shit MSI board being on its last legs

Doesn't support Winblows 7, shithead.

Neither does Intel.