I'm about to upgrade from an FX8350 to this.
Talk me out of it/Shill me into it.
I'm about to upgrade from an FX8350 to this.
Talk me out of it/Shill me into it.
make your own decisions you lazy bastard
I don't care
no reason to buy ryzen right now unless its r3 1200 because 8400 beats everything in ryzen lineup
why would anyone buy a mb that may only last a generation?
What Os, and what are your planned usages? I'm on Linux with both a 8350 and a 1800x, and I can't really notice much of a difference between the two. Linux will run on a potato though. My point is, I wouldn't make any rash decisions if you plan on running Linux.
>buying a new mobo for every processor generation
>NSA brand backdoor
>no hyperthreading for you, goy
...
R7 2700 soon
Why would you upgrade your processor every generation.
That's not something to brag about
>2.8 ghz clock with no oc capability
games, memes, ((((((VR)))))) and shit.
W10, 16gb ram, R9 390
...i know.
>"""""soon"""""
>FX8350
I don't give a fuck what you upgrade to
Just fucking upgrade. Piledriver a SHIT
meant to reply to
>That's not something to brag about
Who's bragging? Just saying, upgrading may not be necessary in this instance. I did because I wanted to use my old machine as a file server.
>SHIT
>outperforms constantly-shilled Sandy Vag chips in the latest games
>always outperformed them in non-childrens' tasks
nothin personnel...kid...
I'd upgrade, then.
>8 (actually 4) shit cores
>Housefire
Fuck off, Piledriver was fucking shit, and anyone productively using it outside of server serving should steer away from it ASAP
>But muh gaymes
>muh opinions
>muh feels
Nobody cares. Go away.
In gamea yeah, in everything else no except photoshop
you could wait half a year and get the second gen.
Piledriver had 8 cores, calling modules cores gets you nowhere. Otherwise you'd be calling Ryzen a dual core.
>the retarded defending fx chips in every thread the god forsaken cpu is mentioned
my ryzen has saved my life from normies
They're not separate units so it doesn't make sense calling them cores (which is why they're so fucking slow). You could call them core-pairs at best.
>Otherwise you'd be calling Ryzen a dual core.
Ryzen have actual cores, so no you wouldn't. It's more accurate to say that it's a dual processor.
>You will never be a gook whore wearing a latex bodysuit.
Feels bad.
There are two entirely separate integer cores per module. You're just bitching about the encode/decode, cache access, and co-processor. None of those are required for the definition of a core.
oh no, Ryzen has shared memory controllers and cache, by your definition it's a dual core processor!
don't buy it its shit.
wait for ryzen 2 of buy i5 8400 now.
amd infinity fabric in current state is meme.
cause in fact its "cripple fabric".
you can overclock your memory to make it less shitty but frame time will be still worse compared to frame time stability in games on intel processors.
buy a cooler master hyper 212 and boost to 3.8GHz
Is this 2009?
>2.8GHz 6 core CPU
>forced to buy premium Z370 motherboard to be worth a shit, on a locked CPU
>better in any way than 8c/16t that can OC on any 70$ B350 motherboard
lmaoing at Intelshills, surely no one falls for this shit? The 8400 is one of the shittiest CPUs out there. Who gives a shit if you can get 5 more FPS in CSGO at 480p.
Keep the FX-8350. It isn't backdoored.
>There are two entirely separate integer cores per module. You're just bitching about the encode/decode, cache access, and co-processor. None of those are required for the definition of a core.
shared L1I is retarded (demonstrably, in retrospect) but doesn't quite make Bulldozer cores equivalent to being half-cores. shared FPU coprocessor doesn't either. But shared fetch and decode is an extremely strong argument that they aren't full cores. Literally nothing since like the i432 has had fetch/decode separated from dispatch.
bulldozer is really like pairs of weak integer RISC cores hidden behind a shared crappy ISA translator.
Poozen has been btfo
Don't get a Ryzen 7 unless there's an amazing deal on them somewhere. 1600/1600X is more than good enough for gaming when paired with a cheap board and overclocked, unless you have a 1080/1080ti. I'm assuming you don't really care about compute because you're still using an 8350.
>Intel Core i5-8400 @ 4.0 GHz
Overclocking locked CPUs? Interesting test.
>muh boost
So it can maintain those 4.0 GHz for an entire 15 minutes and then shits the bed? Shit benchmark then.
>20 FPS difference out of 200
Thanks for proving my point, I guess. I'll stick to Ryzen, faglord.
Boost clock is 4.0 Ghz on the 8400 you retard. Blck overclocking still works as well.
>I don't know how boost clock works: the post
They wouldn't mention base clocks if they could stay at boost clocks the entire time, you fucking retard.
they "accidentally" made "error" so it can boost all cores to maximal boost intended to 1 core. most z370 motherboards have this "feature"
>literally a game with a fucking vm running in the background
>more cores do better
in other news , water is wet.
>you need to overclock ram and cpu to achieve
>10% FPS ....less than i5
> will still buy amd
guys you understand that you are in fact humanoid amd fagbois shilling botnet?
how amd butthole tastes?
why are you keep licking it?
>guys you understand that you are in fact humanoid amd fagbois shilling botnet?
>how amd butthole tastes?
>why are you keep licking it?
Do you understand that not everyone plays games the entire day, right?
You also understand that some people keep more than just a single game running on their PCs at all times, right?
Or that maybe some people just don't want to have to give a shit about their PC grinding to a halt when opening shitloads of stuff, so they go for quality of life over a meaningless number that no one gives a shit about and that you can only attain with a GPU that costs 4 times the CPU itself, right?
Keep on retarding, kid. You're still not fooling anyone.
No you retard. MCE does nothing for the 8400. There are absolutly zero 8400s that can do more than 3.8ghz under full load. Observe the "best bench" for the 8400 below
cpu.userbenchmark.com
So you think Steamroller and Excavator were actual full cores then? Because they separated that out on them and it really didn't help performance a whole lot.
Most reviews will show the latest Coffeeshit Intel cores outperforming Ryzen. What they don't show, is Intel's microstutter. I'd rather have 80 fps with no microstutter, than 95 fps that is constant microstutter.
I went with the R7 1700 and no regrets. I could have gone R5 1600, desu if you're on a budget, go for the R5, otherwise, go for the R7.
Or go for Intel HousefireLake and pay premium price. Cross your fingers for no microstutter.
Its 2.8ghz because they would be lying about the 65w tdp. It never runs at 2.8. Mine sits at 3.9ghz idle
>You also understand that some people keep more than just a single game running on their PCs at all times, right?
I remember time when emule+utorrent+mpc+ICQ+WoW+firefox+av was running on single core cpu without any problems. But nowdays amd fagbnois are telling that 4 or 6 core intel processor that is 10 times faster can't do it. Such a weak overused argument.
>shill posting this hard
Funny thing is poozen has worse frame times LOL
Only works on K processors, this has been tested multiple times.
8400 is still a shit processor though
>Mine sits at 3.9ghz idle
Because it's not actually doing anything, you dipshit. Ryzens also run at whatever clocks you set it at and still only use 10W. Put some actual load into it and it'll downlock back to 2.8GHz the moment it goes over a certain power usage/temperature. Boosted clock cannot be maintained like that. Period.
Running at 3.8ghz on a stock cooler ama.
>I'd rather have 80 fps with no microstutter
The thing is... ryzen gives micro-stutters.
It gives unstable frame times cause of cripple fabric.
No shit retard that was my whole point
[Citation needed]
Shill posts from curry tech on release week don't count.
the individual cores haven't gotten much faster, around 80% per clock since the Pentium 3, of course barring special cases like AVX
Why don't you do yourselves a favor and watch:
youtube.com
Status:
Intel: wrecked
Ryzen: smooth AF
good chip , get the 1700 and use the superb stock cooler and be happy for years
r3 1200, more cores is a meme
I own the 8400 lad. It doesnt stutter
I'm going threadripper next year, the R7 just doesn't have enough cores for OBS
>I own the 8400
I'm glad you enjoyed getting cucked.
So fuckin mad lol stay salty poozen loser
you're not using OBS right lad
I want native quality, and doing 4k on Older games, takes 7c/14t to get basic 4k gameplay recorded.
Yarrr Matey!
I have an 1800x and from what I hear the 1700 is pretty much the same so if you can nab one, it's great. I can stream and play games with no issues at great encoding settings.
The watermark doesn't show up in recordings luckily
Not paying microsoft $100 to spy on me, especially when they give away the ISO for free.
Do you fags really stream games? Dont you have jobs? Or does mummy just buy you 500 dollars cpus to help you with your "streamer career"?
but streamers don't use cpu streaming.
they use capture cards / nvidia geforce experience
This. Shadowplay is a thing for a reason
post your settings user
cpu encoding = better qaulity/smaller file sizes also AMD has Relive.
that's what capture cards are for, and if you're not a """professional"" streamer the gpu encoding is good enough
Yeah bullshit you can actually cpu stream and play games without using some very lossy fast running encoding.
Actually Intel has its own streaming/encoding tech too. "quick sync".
amd fagbois pretend that its not exist.
>Yeah bullshit
try it yourself record a 20 sec clip using cpu and gpu encoding. I bet the cpu encoding will come out smaller
because "our guy" talked about it
>tfw used to lick intel asshole
>tfw bought the ryzen meme
>tfw better than any processor I've ever used or even tested
>tfw 30c temps, 40-42c under heavy load with wraith cooler/stock thermal pad
>winter is here
That was long time ago, now with Pajeet coders and webshits using javascript for everything that's sadly no longer the case.
new processor is faster than old processor that you bought x years ago. mind blown.
also how you can even believe in temperature that amd cpu shows you?
do you believe that 1700x and 1800x have +20C offset for example and not other way around on non x cpu's?
>this level of denial
Even if you don't take into account how lazy Intel has been for the last 6 years, how they still charge extra for overclocking and SMT, etc., the 8400 still isn't all that great over Ryzen.
Ryzen obviously wins in productivity
Unless you're playing Arma 3 or exclusively use a 1080p 144hz monitor over 1440p for extreme CPU bound framerates, the 8400 doesn't automatically win.
The "8400 is more future proof for games" argument is flawed. The 8400 may be the better choice with a 1080 or 1080ti right now - but seeing as for example the 2600K is leaps and bounds faster than the 2500K in 2017 for games because of better multithreading support, by the time midrange cards become as fast as the current high end, support for a lot of threads and Ryzen itself will only let it gain on the i5.
Less threads only lets the 8400 down for DX12 and Vulkan. Also, I'm not sure whether AC:Origins is badly optimized for CPU (but loves threads), uses a ton of threads for the DRM as the rumors say, or just scales very well by design - regardless, in its current form it serves as an excellent example of how the benchmark numbers will look for well scaling games in the future.
>also how you can even believe in temperature that amd cpu shows you?
With an IR pyrometer.
Ryzen 5 processors, especially 1400/1600, are better bang for your buck.
CBR 18 Very Fast preset or 50,000 bitrate, CBR makes way more sense for local recording
at 4k I have to do like 20 and Ultrafast, so motion kind of sucks at 4k
anybody actually done that?
I have a couple friends who sometimes like to hang out and watch my stream from time to time when we're not playing together.
As for expendable income in this case I use it for work most of the time, it's generally worth the investment and I didn't feel like oc'ing the 1700. Why are you upset that I got an 8 core which performs mostly on par with what was at the time a 1000 dollar cpu?
Yeah, they aren't lying. It's one of the first things I checked upon setting my shit up. I didn't trust a lot of the claims being made at release time, which is also the reason why I went with a 1800x even though it was more expensive. The thought being, I'd up my chances at a more "durable" processor.
1700 was such a disapointment. I was going to buy it at release but i saw its single core performance so i waited and bought the 8400
single core is on par with skylake if they're clocked the same and generally it performs the same as haswell. This is completely suitable for 99% of anyone's needs outside of a competitive gamer. Are you one of those, user?
>8400 higher than 8700K
I told you Intlel was shite.
The 8700K is shit!
d-do you play rise of the tomb raider over 200fps user?
All i do with my home pc is game, so i bought the cpu that's best at gaming. I do all my work on my work computer provided by my employer.
higher than 8700K
At a lower clock, too! Is Bernie Madoff running Intel from prison?
if you're gaming on a 200 hz monitor or something I'll concede maybe you're making a decent decision but ryzen has no trouble pushing high frame rates in games either, it's just not the maximum out there.
I game at 144hz and it can make a difference for this use case
post review mang, these numbers seem low as shit for 1080p even for the intel -lake systems
Ryzen is beat out by the 8400 in every game but civ 6 and ashes. Any review can tell you that. It's understood the 8400 is a better gaming cpu and ryzen has better workstation performance.