Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Amd almost had me lol.
hatefulpeace
Member UncommonPosts: 621
With all that hype, and those blender things, I was almost believing that ryzen was as good as intel...
This is their top end one. 1800x
15518
Single Thread Rating: 1960
This is Intels low end haswell 6800k
14506
Single Thread Rating: 2176
The ryzen is 500 bucks. the 6800k is 400.
This is the i7 7700k
12312
Single Thread Rating: 2599
Lol that is 300 bucks, so once again AMD loses bad at everything. There is 0 reason to buy a amd once again. Intel beats it at price, and at performance.
that is their top end 6950x
19970
Single Thread Rating: 2128
So all that garbage about ryzen being with intel, is that garbage. The ryzen isnt much better than a 8350 overclock to 5 ghz.
10297
Single Thread Rating: 1731
that is a 9390 or a 8350 oced to 5ghz
Yeah the ryzen is faster because it has hyper threading, but on the single core it isnt their 40 percent they were boosting about. So yeah, if you could over clock a ryzen to 5 ghz, it would be close to a low end 6800k in single core. but a 6800k at 4.5 would still beat it.
So in gaming the intel beats it, in multi tasking, if your the rare person who needs that kind of horsepower for multi tasking, the cheaper 6800 would come close, but would also be better for gaming, and the 6950x just wipes the floor with it.
This is their top end one. 1800x
15518
Single Thread Rating: 1960
This is Intels low end haswell 6800k
14506
Single Thread Rating: 2176
The ryzen is 500 bucks. the 6800k is 400.
This is the i7 7700k
12312
Single Thread Rating: 2599
Lol that is 300 bucks, so once again AMD loses bad at everything. There is 0 reason to buy a amd once again. Intel beats it at price, and at performance.
that is their top end 6950x
19970
Single Thread Rating: 2128
So all that garbage about ryzen being with intel, is that garbage. The ryzen isnt much better than a 8350 overclock to 5 ghz.
10297
Single Thread Rating: 1731
that is a 9390 or a 8350 oced to 5ghz
Yeah the ryzen is faster because it has hyper threading, but on the single core it isnt their 40 percent they were boosting about. So yeah, if you could over clock a ryzen to 5 ghz, it would be close to a low end 6800k in single core. but a 6800k at 4.5 would still beat it.
So in gaming the intel beats it, in multi tasking, if your the rare person who needs that kind of horsepower for multi tasking, the cheaper 6800 would come close, but would also be better for gaming, and the 6950x just wipes the floor with it.
Comments
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
If you are a gamer, saving 200 and buying the i7 7700k would get you better fps in games. Which i personally only care about games, so yep if you want it to multitask stuff or just process something that can use all cores, the ryzen gets better, but not 100 dollars better the 6800k is the better deal. And the 6800k would be better for gaming than a 1800x. So yeah I cant see a point in going amd.
Then add in the fact that ryzen only has 28 pci lanes, vrs the compareable in price i7 6850k which has 40, and again, if you were going for 3 gpus, and some pci e ssds, again the i7 would be the better choice.
I dont see how you are saying they are competitive. What situation can you think of that would make some one buy a amd 1800x over a 6850k. I honestly can't think of one, minus misinformed people or fan boyisum. The 6850k which is the same price has more pci lanes. The 6800k has almost the same performance, and a higher single clock, and can be overclocked easy to 4.3, and if your brave 4.5 but i warn ya that might blow it up haha. Hyper threads, are useless if you ask me maybe if you are running a server, but there are better intel choices for that to.
Intel got the low end, the high end, the middle end, the server end, the gaming end, I cant conceive a reason to buy a amd
here is a 480 and 8350 build.
Subtotal (10 items): $770.40
Here is a amd ryzen 1800x and a 480 build
Subtotal (10 items): $1,157.40
Here is a i7 6800k build.
Subtotal (10 items): $1,162.40
Ahhh there it is, I see now since the x99 motherboards start at 200. If in a rare case, you wanted multi tasking the ryzen would be a better choice.
Here is a i7 7700k build. With a 1070 instead of a 480.
Subtotal (10 items): $1,137.40
Here is a i5 7600k build. With a 1080
Subtotal (10 items): $1,217.40
So alright for a specfic build, not for gaming and the person never ever wanted to use it for gaming. Ryzen has it, which I dont know who wants that kind of thing but maybe some where.
Clearly the best deal for gaming/multitasking hybrid is the i7 with a 1070, and the best deal for pure gaming is the i5 with a 1080.
Tick Tock Tick Tock, pre-release and launch perceptions are everything, if you couldn't see there was an issue with windows with your product before launch, and are now after launch waiting for a "Fix".
On top of that you were pinning not a small amount of hope into the product turning your fortunes around then I believe AMD is as per its history is cursed to repeat its mistakes time and time again till it exists in name only.
This may take a few more years, but they just keep failing to light the world on fire, heck they are lucky to strike the damned match in the first instance.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-cpu,4951.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-am4-ryzen-chipsets,33806.htmlThe performance in games suffers for two reasons;
1 - lack of games optimized for more than 4 threads.
2 - The Ryzen was rushed to market too soon. The CPU itself has a lot of potential, but it is suffering from lack of polish. The CPU will probably get a firmware update or two over the next year or so (scary!) that should make it very competitive with Intel's current offerings by the end of the year.
The game performance isn't bad by any stretch of the imagination; it is just lower than Intel's performance. When AMD releases the 6/12, 4/8 and 4/4 parts, which will have the time invested in optimization to make these parts more gamer-competitive with what Intel is offering, and at a much lower price, we can make a better judgment.
*** EDIT ***
Linked the wrong article. The correct link is in this post now.
The world is going to the dogs, which is just how I planned it!
It is no different than I phone selling their obselete garbage phones for 4x the amount of a android phone. The i phone 7 isnt even as good as a lg g3, which sells for 150 bucks. You get that hype train a going, and you can sell garbage for gold. More proof would be no mans sky, which has got to be the worst game in existence, there is no game on steam that equal it in bad feed back. Yet No man sky has some of the highest feed back numbers. So again some one used the power of hype to sell garbage at non garbage prices.
In reality though, there is no reason any average person would want a ryzen, and the people who would want a workstation cpu, would buy a xeon, or i7 6950x. So yeah the only people buying a ryzen got hyped up on the train, bought garbage, and so they dont feel bad will defend it forever.
I wish i had a i5 7600k and a 1080, so i could go into games, and laugh at the ryzen fps.
Ryzen 7 is competitive with Broadwell-E, not Kaby Lake. If you only care about gaming, there's little reason to look at either Ryzen 7 or Broadwell-E, as more cores clocked lower doesn't help you in programs that don't scale well to more cores.
And why are you basing everything on a single synthetic benchmark? Even if you want to go the synthetic route, at least look at a bunch of synthetic benchmarks that will tend to give different results from each other. Ryzen 7 beats Broadwell-E at quite a few things, though to be fair, it also loses as quite a few.
And yeah, bad link posted when on phone..
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-performance-negatively-affected-windows-10-scheduler-bug/
Regardless, it is pretty much everywhere...
Around the launch of the APUs would be a good time to buy into the platform. Very powerful integrated gpus, large memory bandwidth, and most of the platform issues worked out.
If all you do is game stick with the intel until they work out the problems with the Ryzen. Ryzen 4-core and 6-core processers will be coming later this year and then compare. Cannonlake is coming from intel this year and oh they will be 6 core. AMD screwed up by not working with venders except for three weeks. I am sure that once they get all of this worked out like memory, windows and input and output problems the AMD offering will become even better. The key to me is we need competition as intel is basically gouging the consumer with mediocre updates on their processer lines.
I have only had one AMD CPU and that was the Athlon64 FX as it was indeed a great processer and it laid the smack down on all of the intel processers at the time as it was a 64bit processor for a lot less then intels offerings. AMD has produced a winner in my opinion for the audience it is intended for workstations and occasional gaming, and who knows in 3 or 4 months when all the kinks are worked out the processer may well kick some ass in gaming.
It's also possible that AMD will wait to launch the cut down versions of Ryzen until the platform and scheduling problems are fixed, in hopes of more favorable reviews. For the workstation market where you need a ton of cores, $330 for an 8-core CPU will tend to make 4-core and 6-core not so interesting. But the cut down versions could be very interesting for gaming, so game benchmarks matter there a lot more than for the 8-core version.