Why are people still so hype about ryzen when Intel destroys it so hard in real world performance?

Why are people still so hype about ryzen when Intel destroys it so hard in real world performance?

Other urls found in this thread:

cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-880-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-1600X/m15321vs3920
cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2939&cmp[]=2660&cmp[]=3029
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

That couch is horrible.

>when Intel destroys it so hard in real world performance?

...

Can't trick me you devious poster

You need to go on a diet after all that bait you just ate

Niggers have shit taste in couches.

Keep baiting fagface

>tfw your not a rich nigger that can be purposefully ignorant, gaudy, annoying, and generally terrible
>tfw you will never be able to just be completely offensive in every way and just be like MUH CULTURE

go back to Sup Forums you Sup Forumsirgin

Go back to Sup Forums you Sup Forumsamer

t. buttmad nigger

go back to the o/v/en you rabbi

Literally can't be fucked with this so

Are those day1 benchmarks lol?

Yes they are.

Does anyone even enough care to redo them?
These are humans you're talking about...

>SMT OFF
Yeah sure no need in updating measurements as long as they fit the narrative.

Wow ryzen really is a piece of shit...
Glad I didn't upgrade from my I7 880 yet.

>real world performance
>posts gaymen benchmarks

Retard. cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-880-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-1600X/m15321vs3920

>33% faster single core performance when compared to an Intel CPU released 8 years ago
Thanks for proving my point.

...

It's kind of their job, so, yes.
Day one benchmarks, dipshit. It's a shitty troll thread/post. The fact you took this seriously means you need to kill yourself ASAP.

It's funny because single core performance is still what's most important except for a few specific niche tasks.

Gaming isn't real benchmarks. You can use any toaster CPU with a Gsync/Freesync display and it'll be silky smooth with a good graphics card. Literally doesn't matter what CPU you use for gaming.

The funniest joke is that most people who think you need a good CPU for gaming use a shit tier mid range gfx card and struggle to reach 60 FPS.

...

because ryzen is the first thing to happen in CPUs since 10 years ago

literally not 1 interesting thing has happened since then

XTREEEEEEME single core speed is the niche now. Outside of old-ass games, 1080p 144 hz monitors and crappy alpha emulators, there's no need for it.

>day 1 benchmarks
even so, every ryzen chip in the top and the hundred+ intel chips that are more expensive aren't there cuz they're garbage

Depends on the game in question. I do agree that a large majority of people spend too much on the CPU and then skimp on the GPU considering their usage of the computer.

I'd rather have 1000 1 ghz cores than 100 10 ghz cores

the worst things that exist currently are browsers. servo will hopefully change that.

Intel atom.

They're good now.

>Intel atom.
rip

>atom

In February 2017 Cisco Systems reported a clock signal issue[49] that would disable several of its products. Cisco stated, "we expect product failures to increase over the years, beginning after the unit has been in operation for approximately 18 months". Soon after this issue was linked to the Intel Atom SoC, and reports of other vendors[50] being affected started appearing online.


thx intel! the jew literally designed a chip that can't last 2 years

Fuck. I forgot about that.

How about core m then?

Not really. Even shit optimized old games run acceptably for me, and I have a 2GHz CPU. In modern games I can get 60-80 FPS.

If I had a Ryzen I'd crush these games.

Dont forget how everyone is suspiciously quiet on this as well, it's a ticking time bomb for a lot of very popular NAS products right now.

Also the fix is pretty much a resistor soldered to the motherboard which apperently only delays the inevitable to ~5years (so they say).

There has been a respin and it is fixed in new stepping and the next gen chips, neither are on the market yet.

I take it you don't play too many multiplayer games? Not that even a third generation i3 or newer won't usually be enough for them too.

Can you name the ambiguous multiplayer game which you're talking about? I can play ArmA3 and I don't think you could name a worse case scenario multiplayer game without dwelling into early access garbage that runs 20 FPS on a 5GHz i7 and dual Titan Xps.

...

Well, for example I had a less than stellar experience in CS:GO using a A6-3620 (4 cores at 2.2 GHz) from 2012. Vermintide seemed to also be pushing the limits of an i3-3220 on a few occasions. I could've been GPU bound too (used 270 and 280 respectively), but I'm pretty sure only the processors were pushed to full utilization.

Perhaps you have a different definition of a toaster CPU then?

ArmA3 actually seems to have pretty low minimum system requirements. Don't know if they are accurate though.

I can't play ARMA 3 on my laptop and I'm running an i7 2820qm.

It barely runs on my I7 3770 + fury x desktop...

That's a bad example. My 2GHz CPU is a Haswell-EP which is slightly worse than Ryzen in terms of IPC, so not utter garbage tier.

The A6-3620 has extremely low IPC and requires very high clock speeds to perform - it's an awful CPU. I do have a different definition of toaster CPU. When I say toaster I mean something that you'd pay around 250 dollars for in the past 5 years or so. So like a i5 2500K would be a toaster CPU. What I'm really trying to say that you don't need a 7700K at 4.5GHz to play games. It's simply not necessary.

ArmA3 barely runs on anything. That's why if you can run it at all, it's a good sign.

So the Witcher 3 screenshot was taken using the CPU you're talking about? I'd hardly call that 12-thread monster a toaster CPU. Nor would I call the trusty 2500K one either.

It's a 24 thread CPU. That's a 12 core with HT that defaults to 2GHz and turbos to 2.4GHz. From a gaming perspective it is a complete and utter toaster CPU.
Games rely a lot on single thread performance and it doesn't have any of that.

Also, it's down to perspective when it comes to calling CPUs like the 2500K toaster tier. I am an enthusiast and CPUs worse than 2500K isn't something you can find today in enthusiast space.

I mean there are a couple of Lynnfields and Nehelems here and there, but that's extremely rare and they still aren't netbook garbage tier.

>Gaymen
>Userbench
>"""Real world"""

And again nothing about the usage of the cpu.

I don't care loosing 10 fps using a ryzen at 50% against a i5 at 100%

If people are buying for games/single threaded programs, its best to have single thread high IPC+clock.

Mainly because game loop code is limited by the main core's speed. In that loop code, game devs also utilize the main core for many other tasks.

Then we get to the GPU stage, the main single core is one deciding the timings/syncronizing between gpucpu, etc

TL;DR high ipc+clock is quite important.

>50%
That's because your Ryzen will never be well optimised. CPU 100% GPU 100% is ideal, if you don't like it cap your fps and CPU/GPU usage drops.

>CPU 100% is ideal
>i5's getting raped on minimums when this happens

lol BUT MUH AVERAGE FPS

I've never seen throttling like that with my CPU desu but I play at 1080p/60hz

that isn't throttling, those frame dips happen when the cpu can't keep up with the game (are at 100% usage)

That couch is horrible.

Where's the ryzen 1500? Isn't that priced against i5? Why exclude it?
Fucking AMD Shill.

Can't make this shit up
cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2939&cmp[]=2660&cmp[]=3029
Zen is weaker in single threaded benchmarks than fucking Excavator.

>b-b-but it's 3.6GHz vs 3.4GHz
Even if you adjusted the Ryzen's score to the same clock frequency, it still loses to the Excavator CPU by a hundred points.

What a fucking joke of an architecture. This is literally Bulldozer rehashed and marketed.

tits or GTFO

...

>pissmark
>pre-release benchmark
Wow it's literally fucking nothing.

>low quality TIM bait
>intel $1k 10core 20 thread
>mad $1k 16core 32 thread
>intels faster!
heh

????
Clock for clock Ryzen is just behind Devil's Canyon in single thread performance.

good goyim, good

You're not funny.

>He doesnt play any RTS or mountain blade

Fucking idiot arma engine sucks dick anyways, educate your self

You're*
Lrn2gramma bitch.

If there aren't enough cores, single threaded performance will still suffer. You don't want the core running the main thread to be bogged down doing things for all the other threads.

There's no need to be upset.

It always amazes me how many CPU experts there are on Sup Forums. Where do you guys learn everything about CPU architecture? How do you get so acquainted with the Summit Ridge architecture so quickly?

I'm considering the Ryzen meme. Tell me why I shouldn't.

I have a 2500k for reference.

>R5 1600 200$
>i5-7600k 215$

Fucking Intel shill