Why can't amd compete?

damn, that's a big difference. What are we supposed to do then, buy 5000Mhz RAM?

Also most CPU tests like gookbench and pissmark include HW acceleration dec/enc of archives/video/images making them irrelevant desu.

Attached: Blender_Short.png (1327x1222, 59K)

Then the CPU test included HW accelerated tasks like compression and encoding which us unfair if you want to test FP64 raw ST & MT throughput of a processor.

No, after $200 3200MHz CL14 RAM its diminishing returns.

2700x is quite good if you don't game

techrankup.com/pc-processors-ranking/

What workloads were used for that test? In most HEDT workloads the 2950x is well ahead of the 9900k.

Otherwise the chart shows the 9900k 16.8% ahead of the 2700x at double the price. The 2700x is self evidently competitive at half the price for 84% of the perf.

>good if you don't game
>can literally do just fine in games

Maybe if you're retarded enough to buy $20 bottom of the barrel 2133MHz CL17 ram sticks.

It's really interesting how much Zen is cucked by its CCX implementation, and its subpar IMC in conjuction with that.

Makes me wonder what would've happened if they went with a monolithic solution.

>CPU costs 4 times as much as a high end Ryzen
>needs water cooling, huge power draw
So it's better to buy 2x AMD CPUs, thanks for confirming.

They didn't have a choice desu. It was the only way they could reach 6W/core at 3.4GHz or about 5W/core at 2.7 GHz (ie epyc server chip). Remember AMD is out for blood on the server/HPC market first.

Attached: TR2990WX Stock.png (1424x1034, 113K)

i9-9900K for comparison (about 30W watts/core)

Attached: aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS9DLzkvODA1MjU3L29yaWdpbmFsL2ltYWdlMDA3LnBuZw==(1).jpg (755x561, 88K)

>2700x is quite good if you don't game
2700x is very good if you dont 144Hz
fixed for you

see Though not all games will benefit that much.

Intel was always shit kikery, now that everyone on the planet is buying Ryzen shitkike shills are out in full force.

Attached: riptel.jpg (1280x720, 120K)

2700x is very good @ 1080p 144hz. I have a 1080ti and 2700x and i am GPU limited 99% of the time and anything that actually needs the 144hz is so easy to run it doesn't matter at all.

Attached: 04b02ee2ef6b313d9dd849d644ee5ad2.png (696x678, 174K)

>conveniently omitting threadripper 2990wx
I wonder who could be behind these benchmarks.

It's even better if you're not a poorfag gaming in 1080p in 2018

AMD is just controlled opposition

Intel and Nvidia will always reign supreme

AMD is just there to ensure that the two won't get hit by anti-monopoly laws

>AMD CPUs are power sippers
>AMD GPUs are house fires
How and why?

Attached: 1542474702535.jpg (700x700, 87K)

They're not even fair benchmarks.

see It's now either buy $200 RAM with AMD or buy a $200 AIO with intel. They're both practically the same price.

vega is pretty overvolted out of the box. A ton of 56s do like 1,000mV from base-boost if you undervolt them. When you account for that it has about the same power consumption as a gtx 1070.

SIRS PLES BUY INTEL NEED RUPEES FOR 9900K SHILLING GIVES RUPEES BUY INTEL OK

Attached: 1506977173618.jpg (882x758, 324K)

Attached: My failure.jpg (208x242, 8K)

>144Hz
meme shit without g-sync/freesync

I game at 144hz with a 1700X just fine.

competitive gaming isn't a meme.

2950X is already up there with the best of Intel's housefires.
Zen2 next year is going to turn Intel's bullhole inside out.

Attached: 293847569.png (700x700, 315K)

>5.1ghz overclock
fake and gay

Attached: 9900k has worse overclocking than ryzen.png (1327x1222, 69K)

>needs a $900 processor, $500 motherboard, and quad-channel RAM just to compete with Intel's consumer line.

ATI still has a lot of autonomy in AMD even if they killed the brand and "absorbed " them

I think it is, but I'm talking about from the perspective of eliminating stuttering as much as possible

>need a $2000 chiller to cool a stillborn doa meme cpu that will cost more than $5000

Attached: bigburn.jpg (1500x1500, 478K)

also isn't 144hz kind of low end for a "competitive games player" when 240hz panels exist?

144hz is more the standard, 240hz is more enthusiast.
Moving from 60hz to 144hz, I absolutely could not go back to 60. I did use a 240hz for a while, but that sadly ended when my cat pulled over a lamp right into it and damaged the panel. Going back to 144hz didn't really feel like a step back the way 144 to 60 felt. Going from 27 to 24 inches did take a couple days to get used to though.

A
FUCKING
CHILLER

what are those slots by ram?

>le 240Hz meme
2.78ms faster frame time compared to a 144Hz monitor (assuming you can drive your monitor to a steady 240FPS).
Bottom line: placebo

bumb

dimm.2