Intel thread

what's funny is that that bulldozer/piledriver/steamroller lived on 5 years after their initial release which was already a year late to respond to essentially the performance of the nehalem processors. the fx 6300 gets shit on by the x5660 thanks to it's awful cache latency.

you should probably ask dassault and adobe to make more optimized software for AMD. the performance is there and when you open the playing field for optimizations (like darktable and blender benchmarks ran under linux compiled natively) AMD is stomping even with AVX advantage on i7s. this 1.5 gen ryzen posts up really good gains in database as well but the memory latency is still holding it back.

and aged like a wine. it had a shitty concept of "cores" but it scaled with gaymen in time pretty well.

>also seriously games arent everything. Im sick of amd creating these games centric cpus and ignoring cad applications.

amd ignores workstation applications
not sure if trolling or just plain uneducated person

>$30 more for the CPU
>$40 more for the faster RAM
>7% performance increase

lmao

>amd ignores workstation applications

Attached: 1505028192307.jpg (480x470, 39K)

anything with more than five layers and 300ppi

Even stock 2600 is pretty good, overclocking is just a nice bonus

>no 480p benchmark
>no 360p benchmark
>no 240p benchmark
>no 144p benchmark

Attached: 1491958654249.png (653x726, 84K)

right. the 8-cores essentially being 4-cores with double modules or some shit. weird stuff. i run an fx-8120 which is great for what i do. gaming and shit posting. also, I've seen an fx-8120 run at 8 GHz before

it is, i just put a 2600x in my brothers computer and ryzen is p nice but ayymd fanboys are insufferable.

you're comparing an overclocked cpu with overclocked ram that's roughly $70-$80 more in total cost for a slight performance increase.

if you're on a budget nothing's better than the 8400. buying a cryorig h7, scythe kotetsu or scythe mugen 5 rev b would be more than enough to cool it and you'd get equivalent performance to the 2600.

The 8400 doesn't need aftermarket cooler at all.

The difference between cheap 8400 and 2600 OC builds is roughly $100.

nore does amd even for overclocking

>buy 1000€ gpu
>worry about 50€ differences between cpus

lol no

dont forget the delidding tax so it doesn't burn up the thermal paste it uses in place of soldering

Lol yes.

>FX was shit
FX is THE shit, if you have programs that can use it.

Attached: Why the fuck everything single threaded.png (800x522, 265K)

yes, there are also people who buy threadripper for a literal 0% performance increase in this particular application because some people do things other than just play games. you can also overclock lower clocked RAM kits, you just may need to loosen timings, and XFR2 virtually nullifies the advantage of static overclocks, no different than leaving turbo boost on for intel processors. not saying that paying 60 bucks extra (2600+higher speed ram kit) is justified if you just play games but looking at a single application and also thinking price/performance is the first thing to consider and not use case is wrong.

Games don't matter anymore :-(

i hate tests like this. why not also include the cpu overclock with the 2933mhz ram and vice versa? that way we can easily see which increased performance the most. the ram, or cpu overclock.

THIS CAN'T BE HAPPENING

Attached: 1431205291355.png (537x409, 64K)

programs that can use it perform at best as a quad core i5 haswell. occasionally if lucky, a haswell i7. both haswells at stock speeds.

faildozer was horrible because there were simply to many better alternatives. even amd's own previous fucking generation phenom series. as clock for clock phenom ii was ~10% faster than piledriver. you only went pildriver because it could out clock the phenom ii... if you were willing to deal with the retarded heat and power consumption.