*destroys the competition*

*destroys the competition*

Attached: IMG_20181023_164952_437.jpg (810x456, 38K)

Literally.

Attached: 9900K owner's house.jpg (2000x1126, 213K)

Why did you post a photo of a 2700x owner?

Who spends that much on a heater?

The 2700X doesn't go to 105-115°C under full load.

>free FIFA19 key(not included)

Attached: 1521884839655.jpg (560x346, 41K)

>dice

*your mom pays for this*

Put a 2700X at the required voltage it would need to sustain 5ghz and see if that shit doesn't go up in flames

>22+ VULNERABILITIES
>MINIX EMBEDDED
>......

SIX MILLION REASONS TO BUY AMD

Attached: c99180f5-75af-48be-9c68-eab0ba3b94b2..png (112x112, 12K)

How is that supposed to fit in the socket???

It doesn't need 5 bigguhurtz to perform well.

It doesn't need to hit 5ghz to compete with Intel

Intel hits 5ghz to ensure the owner uses their fire insurance to buy the next processor iteration.

Like clockwork

Attached: blacked.png (1228x1502, 944K)

Do it on an intel and your house goes up in flames.

Attached: intelinside.png (255x243, 133K)

Do it on any processor and it'll be hot and power hungry.
For some reason people act like the i9 9900k is special because it runs hot when ran way out of specifications. (yes 5ghz on all cores is out of spec)

I never knew competition was a synonym for wallet.

The more your know!

How is 5ghz out of specs when that's just the turbo boost of the CPU?

It also runs hot on stock clocks, retard.

Attached: i9_0.jpg (1906x1536, 864K)

You do realize turbo boost is for a limited time and only for a select few cores?
Most motherboards by default break this with multi-core enhancement, removing power limits and removing the turbo boost time limit. You do all this to a i9 9900k and you get 8 cores at 5ghz with the power consumption and heat output to go with it akin to a i7 7820X when you push that CPU to 5ghz

All that does is let the all-core turbo go up to 4.7 GHz, which is still within spec. Idiot.

At 4.7 you still have to up the power limit but even then it still runs much cooler than what everyone is memeing

It hits 85c on water, that is not what anyone who isn't a drooling fanboy would describe as "cool".

Where did you get your number then?

I love how Intel bait threads are extremely poor now and getting poorer by the day. I can't wait to see what they come up with when Zen 2 is out.

You'll actually use more power and have significantly higher temps with a 9900K over a 7820K - it's quite boggling how Intel managed to botch this up so bad.
There is no reason except stupidity to buy the 9900K - even if you want more clockspeed and the AVX256 performance advantage - just buy a 7820K, they're cheaper AND faster.

>pays 2-3 times the price of 2700x to be able to compete with it

absolute state of intelcucks

9900k runs at 4.3GHz to get to 95W limit.

More like 4.3mhz

More like 4.3 megawatts XD

Because it's the "after"of a 9900k owner barging into his house and running a CPU benchmark.

Post yfw AMD goes 5Ghz next year and does so through a better architecture that consumes less power, not by focusing all their efforts into conducting heat away from their 14nm+++ compact room heaters.

Attached: 1507055361022.jpg (633x651, 25K)

Neither does the 9900K. TJ Max is 100c

Attached: actual TJ.jpg (800x243, 24K)

More like i9 9900Kelvin

The heat wave from the explosion has a tendency to do that

Attached: 1394809751705.png (625x626, 479K)

SHUT UUUPPPPPP

Attached: 1539079592707.jpg (1035x1000, 189K)

*burns down your house*

Attached: intel housefire.jpg (2048x1370, 319K)

system crashed when it reached 100c

Can't wait for Zen 2, when is it out user?

you said it friend!

Attached: 1539973028714.png (1000x746, 235K)

>be Intel 2600k owner
>OC to a comfy 4.7GHz
>do my damndest to ensure it NEVER exceeds 90C under torture test, and 70C under regular heavy load
>6 years later, Intlel try to sell me this rebranded Cherynobyl-chip
And that's how I became a #AMDmissile

Attached: 1539978349289.jpg (1327x1222, 331K)

AMDpoor fag, you probably can't even afford to buy a second house after Intel burns down your current house. Must suck being poor.

fastest space heater on the planet

Attached: 1540282523364.png (750x563, 368K)

>roll 1d12 for yields per million

Attached: housefire_meme_3.png (480x3072, 2.63M)

Attached: dodecahedron.png (400x359, 199K)

Are you guys all retarded?
One of the few if not the only benefit of the 9900k is the power efficiency, delievering the stock speed with the same power consumption of the 2700x

Attached: 1364634131754.png (400x400, 7K)

*mom paid for this*

Except you can't fucking buy it anywhere.

lmao

finally someone did it, i was waiting for this for so long lmao

I bet on 4.9, but with an IPC that crushes a 6Ghz intel CPU (that will exist, but will be a very, very hot boy).

I don't understand why Intel fanboys get butthurt when AMD processors are doing well.

Competition is always good for us, the consumer, you idiots.

Jow Forums is full of /v/ and PCMR rejects and as such does not actually want competition - merely to shitpost that they spent more money than someone else because the term "enthusiast" has now been usurped by said retards to mean anyone who spends lots of money. This is reflected by most of Jow Forums's shitposting.

>fanboys
You answered your own question. Now what I really don't understand is why corporate fanboys exist in the first place.

Call me a mother fucker all you want but I'm considering getting this.
I have a 1700x and it just never seems to run as smooth as my old Intel build, ,2700k.

That's not a good time to buy CPUs.

when you buy an intel cpu you are forced to not only upgrade your motherboard but your house circuit breakers

>destroys
Did it go full blast?

Attached: Intel is totally anal about Ryzen.png (580x482, 257K)

On the plus side used parts are cheap and abundant thanks to those retards.

>thinking the processor is the fault.
user, do you really think any problem your computer encounters is because of the CPU?

PEBKAC

Attached: 1525551728082.png (937x581, 161K)

>NO HYPERTHREADING

Attached: 91nbcNBPOgL._SY445_.jpg (328x445, 36K)