AMD BTFO

And this only proves that intels HPET is shit?

Precisely. Never trust Jews.

You aren't supposed to be noticing this goyim just DELID

DELID TIMER

>Never trust Jews.
OY VEY
Y

V
E
Y

Attached: 1521134686517.jpg (1170x1974, 287K)

When you force HPET along with Meltdown and SPECTRE you make it a level playing field. Obviously Intel does not want that. Smeltdown combined with forced HPET shows how much of an impact the patches will have.

BTW when a lot of people initially tested Meltdowns affect on gaming, you can pretty much guarantee it was without HPET.

What stop review from going to use hardware people would normally use, install windows, drivers, games and updates and run their test directly ? I'm pretty sure no customers will start messing with options. And same as no one will buy an expensive mobo for AMD CPU since the 100- 150€ are actually good. Same for the CPU cooler.
Then for intel CPU, if they actually need more expensive mobos and another CPU cooler, that's a problem from intel side that should be acounted as price/value in the tests.

AMD CPU cost less, the hardware around cost less, and you get the same performances without following intel's guide line to jew some fps

why would I give a shit about GTA?

What is this HPET thing?

Mfw
8700k are $339
2700x are $349

High Precision Event Timer. It's a holdover from old PC's that keeps time. SO 1 second is 1 second in reality. Some applications make use of it. Some not. Games tend to be all over the place using different timing techniques. Intel gains from having HPET disabled. Because Intel CPU's have always been lousy at keeping precision time. It may be why some folks complain of stuttering on Intel CPU's.

Because 6 year old console ports from the xbox 360 are best benchmarks

Am I insane or does the Ryzen5 2600X look like an amazing deal?

Its competing with products $100-$500 more expensive.

Mfw
(you) aren't white

You sang a different tune when the results were in AMDs favor. Kappa.

It is

>8700k are $339
>2700x are $349
wonder who is behind this

Attached: 0a4.png (200x294, 68K)

(I) am a Jew.

>cheaper Mobo soon
>112W BOXED cooler
>no need to delidd this
do what you want but those are the facts, (((yahon)))

>Mfw 1800x was $399 and didn't have a bundled heatsink
>Cheaper mobo
>>Blown VRMs

Nothing fucking uses hpet except for and ryzen master, which then breaks shit on Windows lol

Amd themselves tell you to disable hpet

This article leave me perplexed. The problem with their results was not that Intel was too low, but that AMD was too high. But their solution of disabling HPET boost Intel results substantially, and AMD ones minimally. Iassumed the "fix" would bring back down AMDs results to be in line with other reviews.

Also how are they the only one affected by this? I can't believe others reviewers don't have HPET force enabled in Windows since it's common for overclocking tools to force enable it.

>Blown VRMs
things that never happened

Can anyone point me to AMD and Intel review guidance? Like official statements or docs?

Attached: 1522776275673.gif (320x320, 240K)

yeah when 5+ GHz 8700k is presented as 300$ part it's quite misleading.

Only for first gen Ryzen. They fixed it now so it matters not whether it is disabled or not. There are no real gains either way. Intel on the other hand...problably due to Smeltdown being tied to HPET somehow. Games and non-IO intensive apps probably don't call to HPET so forced HPET causes games to slow down.

I've seen reviews with Intel underperforming against the 2700x. These were all from smaller sources.

Anandtech is simply the biggest who tested incorrectly.

techradar.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-2700x

Here's techradar getting an absurdly low score on cinebench, showing how their system settings may have the 8700k gimped.

>Intel shits the bed when forced to operate in an environment that does things right
>A-AMD BTFO guys!

Attached: 1523521433420.jpg (500x307, 39K)

sorry, I never played it before
checkmate

wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-cpu-gigabyte-x370-damage-burning-bios-update/

Oops

>However after releasing the results, we discovered a big fat paycheck by Intel in the mail so we had to redo the tests

With HPET off you get results that are difficult to quantify and untrustworthy. Which Intel's HPET 'bug' seems to use to its advantage. I would not trust any benchmarks as some of those require HPET to be forced on anyhow. As stated above. The only proper way to know if the results are correct is using an external time recording raw from the outputs.

Intel probably knew all about this and has been remaining quiet about it for years playing on it for higher performance benchmarks.

Again I ask. Why else would they ask reviewers to disable HPET for benchmarking?

>vendor fucks up
>AMD BTFO
grasping every straw, shekelchaser

>an environment that does things right

>forgets that hpet is disabled in Windows anyways

>'I'm dubious of any further reviews/testing done where HPET isn't FULLY forced on entirely bios and OS... because i've seen example in which the reported frame rate or scores given by a program/benchmark/game can be greatly inflated due to the lack of an accurate timer, i watched this unfold previously, one of the very reasons HPET was implemented years ago. It seems entirely dishonest to continue to test systems without it fully enabled, it's not a level playing field at all, any individual company producing components could end up with greatly different "results" with claims that "this one is faster than that one" when in reality had they had HPET fully enabled, probably would have spat out either EXACTLY the same results, or damn close to it, if anything, we'd find problem products far quicker and easier, and we'd also figure out wtf is wrong with a system far easier knowing it's not just some confusing data being thrown at us.'

I agree with this dude.

oy antisemitism!

Intel shills are so butthurt that will post any unbacked, unsourced pajeet tech site article without even checking it.

Attached: 1524159741789.jpg (496x600, 34K)

Except in this case, you're forcing HPET ON. Not turning it off.

Attached: 8700KGPU.png (1529x1000, 120K)

If anything it shows there is an issue with how Intel runs on HPET and possibly innacurate results due to Intel CPU's messing with the timers.

I can bet you this is the reason Intel stutters.

GOTTA HAVE HPET TO ENUSURE ACCURATE RESULTS!
>it's default off on a system level to begin with
>HPET WAS MADE FOR THIS!!!!
>ignores the myriad of other timers, some more modern in scope and design
>HPET IS LOVE
>HPET IS LIFE
>YOUD NEED REALLY ADVANCED EQUIPMENT TO GET RESULTS WITH IT
>ignores digital foundry gets accurate numbers and frame times on fucking consoles with all this nonsense

Attached: upload_2018-3-4_6-0-2.png (953x792, 1.07M)

Tweeted DF about this. I want to see him test with his external vidcap shit.

but...but can you not write like a retarded sperg next time?

It does in fact something that intel and ms developed.

>but...but
Same goes for you.

you're mum gay

Attached: 1522782330752.jpg (1200x675, 90K)

The wildy varying Intel results when HPET is enabled tends to make me think that measuring Intel benchmarks is innacurate as what is being reported back to those tools may not actually be what you are actually getting. Same goes for ingame FPS counters. Whatever is being reported back may not be correct. This needs to be verified externally. The fact that Ryzzen+ barely saw any difference with HPET forced on and off makes this even more suspicious.

>HPET off disables the effects of the Smeltdown patches

So the "low" performance of the 8700k with the timer on is because the meltdown patches are not actually working without it...
INTEL BTFO LOL

Attached: yeezy2.jpg (700x500, 64K)

TOLD YOU FAGS ANANDTECH RESULTS WERE INVALID AND NOW ANANDTECH THEMSELVES HAVE VINDICATED ME

Maybe. In any event the fact that Intel see's massive performance jumps (biut not consistently) with it not forced on and AMD hardly see's any performance difference pretty much shows there is something else at work.

I told you guys to stop posting those initial charts, it was just embarrassing on the reverse shills and the genuine dumb amddrones.
This is nothing new, it now lines up with the others. The 2700x is still the one to get, it's incredibly good out of the box and when you factor in OC and memory timings on both sides, the 2700x is 95% the 8700k on gaymes and obliterates it on everything else. Not to mention you can run optane better than Intel, consume less power, have an included cooler that isn't trash, and have an upgrade path to glorious Zen2.

Attached: b3efdeb1e7b63c1c3824e92ab483bf74.jpg (724x1024, 115K)

Invalid yes. But it opens things up to a whole series of other questions that need to be answered about benchmarking methodology. How can we trust those results now we have this information to hand?

>reverse shills
Is that regular ass people people who aren't being paid by Intel?

Attached: cap.jpg (840x736, 406K)

>95%

Attached: 1524501808777.png (500x613, 81K)

Aw shit nigga is this with XFR2 and PB2?

Attached: 1524614813159.png (960x1378, 864K)

>French cherry picking

Attached: smug anime horse.png (700x684, 39K)

I want to results with HPET on but smeltdown patches off.
I bet 37 dollars that smeldown fixes are disabled when HPET is turned off and they only function with it on.

Attached: Commodore_Grace_M._Hopper,_USN_(covered).jpg (2400x3000, 1.57M)

>yfw AMD smoothness is a thing because Intel is not reporting frames correctly
>yfw no one can distinguish anything above 120fps
Where the fuck are the high speed cameras?

Attached: the wolf of wallstreet.jpg (982x1350, 233K)

It's with Precision Boost Overclock on the Asus Hero with latest BIOS update. It allows you to keep all that PB and XFR2 goodness whilst still allowing overclocking on a single core to 4.5Ghz.

>4.5Ghz.
>on a process not optimized for it
Guys, we're getting 5GHz on the 3700x next year.

Attached: cum.jpg (1280x769, 211K)

Racist cunt. It's a feature of new BIOS updates. It allows you to push BLCK on single core overclocks and keep XFR2.

>yfw "smoothness" isn't a subjective metric and is entirely placebo

Attached: 1522773645076.jpg (455x675, 113K)

Basically it lets loose the voltage to go to 1.5mV temporarily (and safely) during heavy load scenarious. Games tent to be bursty and not hit the CPU hard all of the time. So the CPU and boost to 4.5Ghz with a decent AiO when it needs to.

What is this wizardry? Does it work with say, a 103MHz base clock or is there a limit to it? All I know is that XFR works in 25MHz increments.
Fiddling with all cores one at a time to find the best one is too tedious, letting it do everything on its own is fucking neat. Shit, how will overcloking manually even recover?

Attached: unnamed (4).jpg (316x464, 89K)

So this is all like how car companies would rate their car's power by testing it at the flywheel with the engine outside the car and with no water pump or alternator dragging it down?

t. stutterman

Attached: imageproxy.png (601x447, 53K)

>6900k
Who?

Attached: Nano trips.gif (300x169, 2.58M)

%2-3 faster in games %15-20 slower in application guess who wins gaymer shits.

The irony in this post is honestly the most hilarious thing I've read all week. Thanks user.

>x - generation doesnt matter!!!!
laughing every laugh, ovendodger

Don't need high speed cameras, just record the GPU output from the hdmi/dvi/dp port.
Did you forget about fcat?

>'Smoothness' and frametimes matter when discussing ati gpus, but totally never matters when discussing our CPUs goyim, now buy another 8700k and 1080ti or I'll tell the ADL about your truly anti-semitic post.

The point is that it just faded away. It has aged like spoiled milk just like the 6700k except it was on a very expensive platform. The 8700k is about the only CPU you should buy from Intel, going less than 6 cores/12 threads is dumb.

>using 1080p to compare CPUs
>what is gpu bottleneck
>why is OP always a faggot?
thread hid

Most people on this forum are playing games, so we win?

>Smoothness

Attached: 1522962167712.png (484x440, 46K)

Most people buy CPU's for 1080p, that's still the most used resolution for new PC's by far.

No gaems results can be trusted, thankfully most game benchmarks are for manchildren that don't even actually play
Just check out productivity benchmarks for whatever you do

This is when HPET IS FORCED IN THE OS . Since HPET relies on I/O comunication , and spectre meltdown patch affects I/O , intel gets btfo . But everyone has HPET off in the OS so jewintel is safe

unless you install any number of programs that require it to be on in order to run properly and report correct benchmark numbers

of course we are, the process gives 40% higher clocks compared to 14LPP
the 1700X had 3.4 base and 3.8 boost, so this makes the 3700X have:
>3.4 + 40% = 4.76
>3.8 + 40% = 5.32

Still BTFO by AMD, fag.

phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ryzen-2600x-2700x&num=3

Attached: intelbtfo.png (623x489, 37K)

>any number of programs that require it to be on in order to run properly and report correct benchmark numbers
Citation needed poonigger

pajeets on suicide watch

Attached: POO.jpg (1841x1227, 577K)

ebin

It boosts voltage to 1.5 and above for short periods of time.

fake news

I dunno about this thread even but buying a Ryzen was the best thing I've ever done so jewtel can go f themselves.

>go f themselves
hello ribbit