"When the benchmarking house agreed to test the AMD Ryzen 2700X with all of its 8 cores and 16 threads actually enabled...

>"When the benchmarking house agreed to test the AMD Ryzen 2700X with all of its 8 cores and 16 threads actually enabled, Intel no longer holds a claim of being "up to 50% faster" than AMD's gaming flagship. That lead has been slashed to about 15% when averaged out across all games tested."

>"And the 9900K will still cost consumers 66% more than its Ryzen competitor. That's before you buy an adequate cooler for the processor, as the 9900K ships without one in the box."

forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2018/10/14/those-intel-i9-9900k-vs-ryzen-2700x-benchmarks-look-much-worse-now

Attached: giphy.gif (320x240, 1.66M)

>95W tdp
lol, who is intel trying to fool?

Attached: Intel-Core-i9-9900K-Core-i7-9700K-and-Core-i5-9600K-details.jpg (1034x370, 86K)

They probably didn't even test AMD with good RAM and timings. That would make them only 5-10% slower on average

Attached: Comb10102018092249.jpg (641x2895, 365K)

:^)

Attached: 2600 vs 8400.png (1338x1181, 70K)

I guess ill wait for ryzen 2 to come out.

I go with intel because of the quality, regardless of price.

Goy I'm going to tell you straight this image is extremely antisemetic and the hitsquad will be showing up to your door soon.

You mean Ryzen 3

Ryzen = zen
Ryzen 2 = zen+
Ryzen 3 = zen 2

Attached: 1511871089596.jpg (1105x738, 82K)

Yeah zen 2 was what i meant.

Intel just works

Works out your wallet goyim.

I love my 2700x so much. Thanks for helping me dodge the bullet Jow Forums

Attached: 1471930329651.webm (480x480, 294K)

DELETE THIS

Can't wait for proper reviewers to do some proper testing. The power draw benchmark is gonna be one to keep an eye on, that's for sure. No way in hell their 8c/16t 14nm++++++ aberration only draws 95W.

>OC vs non OC
>Higher clocked ram
>Non OC 2600 even with higher clocked ram shits the bed
How cucked do you have to be to pay 300$ more for good ram

>OC vs non OC
The 8400 doesn't OC
>Higher clocked ram
You need a more expensive board to use higher clocked RAM on Intel setups
The 8400 only officially supports up to 2666MHz memory

>1080 Ti
I think the comparisons with a 2080 Ti are even harder on the 8400. Poor little chip, we hardly knew ye.

really makes you think huh?

Attached: ScreenShot_20181015112018.png (927x485, 46K)

>OC vs non OC
Totally agreed! Very anti-semetic for the AMD chip to take advantage of a feature that the intel one doesn't have.
>Higher clocked ram
As points out, even with spending more on the ram it's cheaper and you end up with a faster processor with a little bit of time spent on your OC and Ram timings. You have to be a clueless normie to buy the 8400 or just have very unfavourable regional pricing for the 2600.

pls delet sir my children need to eat sir pls buy Intel good brand sir

>14nm is dead and amd wins :^)
>intel is still faster than top of the line amd cpus

Weird

No shit, the 9900K and 9700K are memory bandwidth at workloads that scale beyond six-cores. The ringbus also begins to run into its scaling issue as well as the single L3 cache pool.

Saw it coming from a mile away once Intel decided to scale up the core count from Skylake. Intel even knew the problems first-hand from Broadwell-E and Broadwell-EP which is why they went with meshed topology with Skylake-X and future high-core count chips.


8-Core Coffee Lake = Prescott 2.0

>intel is stuck at their current performance level and waste more time selling another rehashed series with marginal performance increases just to get more shekels while they still can
>amd goes for a high performance node along with a node shrink which are guaranteed to increase clocks
Weird, almost like people read into that kind of stuff huh?

Intel hasn't fooled anyone with their specified TDP numbers for years if not decades.

>the benchmarking house

Attached: 1537654621630.jpg (400x381, 52K)

I'm not happy with my 1700 at all. Fucking piece of shit segfaults every day in Linux (but not in Windows for some fucking reason).

>The ringbus also begins to run into its scaling issue
Hm. That was earlier than I would have thought.
Not certain about pricing on the 9900K, but I still think the 9700K is going to be the choice for gaymen for some time.

Attached: 1356634645746.jpg (576x432, 69K)

When will you learn that windows is just better?

>good ram timings
> having to buy the most expensive ram at current prices
And suddenly the Intlel doesn't even look expensive anymore

>gaming
Are you gay?

>be benchmarking house
>can't benchmark

Attached: 1535902686763.jpg (778x556, 56K)

Well if even the next 14nm refresh of intels cpus is able to compete with AMD, then what's even the point of the whole "Intel is dead" meme? After the next refresh they should have their 10nm problems fixed.

at 1080p:
(1/133 - 1/145) * 1000 = 0.6
>non OC ryzen is a whole whopping 0.6 MILLISECONDS slower
>shits the bed
keep shilling for your jewish overlord, gaymen

>it's okay to buy an intelaviv system for 300 bucks more in total
>it's not okay to buy a ram that's sub 30 bucks more than the ram being used on the intel

No one fails that hard just because of bad luck. There are deeper problems with intel and we can only see the symptoms

Attached: download.jpg (622x435, 56K)

kek

Attached: 1535238777119.png (2000x1543, 58K)

What did you expect, linux is literally run by SJWs. It's no different than firefox now.

If you actually owned one instead of LARPing you would have RMA'd it by now.

Depends on the distro, I'm honestly not surprised desu. Every distro is broken in one way or another. If the wifi or sound isn't broken then there's something wrong with the kernel. Though that being said enterprise linux like rhel will probably work best for its targeted hardware.

Have you updated the microcode and your motherboard? First gen ryzens had one instruction implemented poorly, but AMD fixed it in like 3 months. Oh, and it seemed to exhibit itself only when using ancient versions of gcc on multiple threads at the same time.

Plus Your Ryzen motherboard will have an upgrade path. The 8400 is a dead end.

I can confirm, I'm still running a first gen R7 1700X. The patches fixed any segfaults but I still don't trust it to do any heavy compiling.

One refresh earlier their quad cores were 91 W TDP with a lower turbo boost.

>9900K isn't even out yet
>it's already not worth buying and you should just wait for the next ryzen series

8700k was literally 7700k with 2 more cores and that was intel's response to ryzen. Justify believing that 9900k won't be the same

Attached: ScreenShot_20181015202517.png (1451x849, 90K)

Dam I just realized we would have been stuck in the 2-4 core dark ages if AMD hadn't stepped up.

>tfw blew $150 on an i3-4160 in 2015 and now you can get 3X more cores for the same price

Attached: 1536370174188.jpg (1920x1080, 118K)

except the RAM used in the benchmark was high quality B-die RAM with tightened timings.
If you think you can get a non b-die kit and crank it to the same frequency but with horrible latency and get the same performance you are in for a very rude awakening.