GJ INTEL

WORKING HARD TO FUCK YOUR SHIT UP EVERY DAY

And the drive and system are?

JUST

Didn't really do much to my drive, maybe 100MB/s

Optane?

Nope, just NVMe

how's 100mb/s not really much of a change you mongrel

Now im glad the high ddr4 price kept me from building a new pc.

Maybe because that's still 10-times more than your HDD.

the 4kQ1 scores are identical, maybe 10MB/s slower on the write.
the 4kQ32 is maybe 50MB/s slower.
The 4kQ8 is ~150-300MB/s slower the most effected.
The Sequential read/write are both about 100MB/s slower.

In the grand scheme of things it's not that bad, it's not as if i'm hammering this drive 24/7, it's my OS drive. Most things i'm doing don't require the type of performance that would see any real slow downs in my usage so it literally wont matter to me.

It's still 2-3x as fast as my SATA SSD. And obviously far beyond HDDs.

SIR DELET LIS PLES

...

NOOOOOOOOOO

It's still so fast you won't perceive any difference

this is what they'll say
along with "you're a nerd" and "gaymen aren't impacted" and "only datacenters care"

...

AHAHAHAHAHAAHHHAHAAHH

*teleports behind you*
"nothing personell, Fuckwit_"

in the grand scheme of things aka datacenters/server where each cent matters that reduction is HUGE

What processor ram and hard drive?

Dude Optane would hit much higher 4K QD1 numbers.

Why did you put your SSD from SATA3 to SATA2?

5820k, 950 pro 250gb

Makes sense. Press skylake and 950s got hit hard. 850s didnt get hit nearly as much

Yeah, it wont impact my workflow in the slightest.

Still a bummer though to have an nvme that fast and lose so much. Id sell it and downgrade to a larger asd

Yeah, since I took a ~10-15% performance hit, might as well just take a 200% performance hit, am i right?

Fuck off moron

850 is 200% slower than 950 huh

Depending on the metric its 400% slower.

950 pro hits 1800-1900 MB/s sequential read
850 pro hits 450-550MB/s sequential read

400% of 450 is 1800

Oh ok

what are you using to test this?

Samsung magician

>Testing disk speed on Windows

Its almost like you WANT to get inaccurate results. Brainlets everywhere.

...

850 is goat

stupid freetard. no-one is going to test on a broken OS.
>inb4 fix it your self

works on my machine, core i7-7700

You would rather test on an OS that doesn't let you isolate the hardware for testing.

No, he'd rather test in an OS that 90% of consumers will be using so as to more accurately represent a real world scenario.

NO having thermal issues in a non sable system is not something INTEL will ever recommend, and we wount pay for non-real world testing.

don't worry in a few weeks these morons will forget about the bug and carry on using INTEL products with no regrets we can wait this out.

To us there is no bug. Its already forgotten.

>90% of consumers
Android?

What kind of BS are you on? This is a post patch SSD benchmark of my second SSD used for games.

Welp, KB from Microsoft literally raped my core 2 quad, didn't made benchmarks as it was pretty evident when from the start sandboxie got fucked up (only last beta work), and just to keep open 4 tabs on chrome (2 in Sup Forums, 1 gmail, 1 new tab) the chrome process never went under 35% CPU use (20% in core 0, rest 15% equally distributed in other 3 cores) when before patch even while having 20 tabs (being at least 3 or 4 from youtube) never went over 15% constant CPU use. And i'm talking using chrome with javascript disabled, flash disabled and uBlock Origin.
When i tried to open other tasks the change was incredible, Steam took like a minute longer to open and the program i work with (some shady third world cunt program that use like 50 *.mdb files each like 25mb for tax audit) took like 10 minutes to load with CPU on 100%, rolled back the patch and now its back to the normal 2 mins with CPU never over 25%, for fuck sake not even my Pentium 4 was that slow.

Thanks shitel and microshit.

windows stupid

Yeah microdong wangbloes dumb shit

Intel will have the last laugh when you're forced to upgrade.

>AMD fanboy
They say, they got the advantage, but they still need to shill their cpu at every Intel problem :^)
Ryzen isn't flawless either. I got to see an ryzen build not starting up with an specific gpu, but another same gpu made it work. No one understood why it was. Another thing is with always need to carefully select ram too.
Both side has it's flaw. So it's useless to argue about which is better. Instead which is worse.

No, "intel fucked amd wins" or "amd fucked up intel wins" isn't a good argument.

...

I also got core 2 quad, but i haven't noticed anything.

>I got to see an ryzen build not starting up with an specific gpu, but another same gpu made it work
Dead GPU maybe? Did you even test it on another computer before blaming the CPU?

>always need to carefully select ram too
False, unless you want 3000MHz or more, which is overclocking and not supported by AMD. And even when overclocking, the latest AGESA fixes most issues with high frequency RAM.

who knows, maybe it's just my case, i'm on W7 SP1 x64 and knowing M$ i wouldn't be surprised if they fucked up things intentionally just to force and ((update)). And it's a q9550 in a P45 motherboard, so while it's old it shouldn't shit the bed that hard.

>Q32
Opinion invalidated, You literally can't even reach that retard

That's nothing in comparison to Intel's recent fuckery.

It truly is.
Like most things AMD does.