• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

*** AMD "Zen" thread (inc AM4/APU discussion) ***

Soldato
Joined
24 Feb 2013
Posts
4,134
Location
East Midlands
By that token Intel's old i7 is also beating the new one....:rolleyes:

Your seeing only what you want to see, what matters are the minimums, and Ryzen beats them all..... ;)



Nice to see AMD are competing at the top again :)

I'm seeing what's on the slide. To correct you, what I want to see is ryzen leading charts like that so I can justify replacing my ageing setup. I don't want to see 4 core ddr3 setups from years ago being better. I'm impartial to both companies, I've owned AMD for years previously. They're competing near the top, just not for gaming alone on higher end cards. It's annoying x299 is going to be better for a lot more money.
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Jan 2015
Posts
4,904
Location
West Midlands
I'm seeing what's on the slide. To correct you, what I want to see is ryzen leading charts like that so I can justify replacing my ageing setup. I don't want to see 4 core ddr3 setups from years ago being better. I'm impartial to both companies, I've owned AMD for years previously. They're competing near the top, just not for gaming alone on higher end cards. It's annoying x299 is going to be better for a lot more money.

How much more money would x299 be if AMD didn't have ryzen? These chips are doing everyone a favour.
 
Joined
16 Feb 2010
Posts
5,215
Location
North East England
2yuyop2.png


Ryzen holding its own


I love that slide as my nearly 2 year old 6700k at 4.5 is beating a £400+ 8 core CPU :p
 
Soldato
Joined
19 Oct 2008
Posts
5,951
Will be interesting to see the financial results for AMD this quarter. I was expecting Intel to take a hit but according to their results yesterday, Ryzen has had little impact on sales.
 
Associate
Joined
26 Apr 2017
Posts
1,253
Ryzen may be good in the enthusiast space.
But what about the machines the average Joe will buy? Unless they're in pc world they're not selling etc.

ryzen desktop today
naples server soon
laptop apu down the road
server is key anyhow and maybe mobile space due to money isnt desktop but servers mainly.
graphics it is soon AI and medical, cars and such not gaming.
money and fun often isnt going togheter.
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
47,624
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
I'm seeing what's on the slide. To correct you, what I want to see is ryzen leading charts like that so I can justify replacing my ageing setup. I don't want to see 4 core ddr3 setups from years ago being better. I'm impartial to both companies, I've owned AMD for years previously. They're competing near the top, just not for gaming alone on higher end cards. It's annoying x299 is going to be better for a lot more money.

You're not, it also doesn't help that others in here, some who should know better are also NOT seeing whats on the slide.

2yuyop2.png


There is an Intel 8 core 16 thread on that slide no faster than an Intel 4 core 4 thread of the same type, what that says about the game is that it uses 4 or less threads, so the £160 Ryzen 4 core will result a similar performance as the Intel 4 core CPU's on that chart.

With that now known the fastest and newest 4 core Intel CPU on that chart is not the best result in terms of average FPS, in fact the older Intel 4 core has the best average FPS showing, what that tells us is Average FPS in this benchmark is not a reliable CPU performance indicator.

The one thing that's consistent in relation to how we know how each of the Intel CPU should perform are the minimum FPS, in that the AMD chip has them all beat, the fact that its an 8 core is irrelevant given we can clearly see that game does not use more than 4.

In conclusion AMD's Clock for clock core for core performance is around the same as Skylake in this game.

Before Ryzen launched many people here said they would be happy with per core - clock Sandy Bridge performance at a significantly lower cost, while not consistent, IE sometimes it is 20% slower per core - clock than a 7700K overal the actual performance is Haswell to Skylake at less than half the cost, a 4770K - 6700K equivalent is less than half the cost.... WOW!
I get the impression some people are more than a little annoyed AMD did more than just come good for us.

Here is an apples for apples gaming comparison, IE 16 thread Intel at stock vs 16 thread Ryzen at stock, which CPU won it?

Wy_ZHas_Y.jpg


I believe you when you say you want to see AMD do well in CPU performance, 95% of us here do and they are so you can be happy about that, take how a very small but very loud minority are acting around here for exactly what it is, Intel bereavement.
What AMD did here was way beyond all expectations, its ok to be happy about that.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom