You can't explain this

I didn't realize the difference between the two Ryzen generations was that significant.

my stock 9700k seems to do okay.

This is while chrome has 12 tabs open, music playing in the background, and deluge seeding ~200+ torrents.
So not exactly idle usage, would probably score higher if I booted into safemode before testing.

Attached: 2019-04-01 09_48_53.png (400x393, 15K)

>You can't explain this.
CPU-Z is trash.

you're not wrong, and while we're at it, so is speccy.

Comet Lake is Z390, so you have a nice upgrade path there in the future.

I doubt i'll bother, I came from a Q6600. I have no qualms keeping my CPUs for a long time.

CPU-Z only uses 128bit AVX.
That's how a 2600K is even in the same ballpark as Ryzen, let alone Haswell and *Lakes
Clockspeed is really the only difference between any of those CPUs in that graph.

I see you are a man of culture as wel.

There is a beta for the AVX2 bench

Attached: 2019-04-01 10_13_48.png (401x401, 16K)

The OP graph isn't using it though.
Sandy and Ivy don't do 256bit AVX and Zen/Zen+ does it by combining 2x128 units.
Haswell and *lakes should beat Zen/Zen+ fairly well with a real AVX2 version though.

Zen2 is supposed to have 2x256bit AVX so it should come back up to *lakes clock for clock, we'll see how the latency is though on release.
Also Zen2 won't have TSX, so things like RPCS3 are still going to be slower on AMD

I know, but that's why I posted my score, so others who have older CPUs can try and compare to my stock 9700k.

>9700k
>only 12% better than stock 2600X
>117% more expensive
wtf

Even better. That means you can catch up with CPUs 5 years from now. Imagine it like going from a 2500k to a 3770k.

Yeah because it's 128bit AVX, AMD has higher 128bit AVX throughput at the expense of 256bit AVX performance.

Intel has pure 256bit pipelines for AVX, but because of this they sacrifice the ability to handle as many 128bit microops that AMD can.

Shockingly enough, benchmarks like CPU-z are garbage for showing the whole picture.

Doesn't look much better desu.

Attached: AMDbtfo.png (1082x485, 133K)

>first he uses CPU-Z
>now he's trying userbenchmark
wewlad
Honestly, not even worth replying seriously to you.💔

Do you not understand this? You are comparing a plastic gun and a real gun and using the metric of shape to determine how well they shoot.
I don't see why different things being different is so confusing to you.

It's about accurate though.

Attached: jokesonyou.png (1279x764, 103K)

for averages sure.

I never said it wasn't, i was specifically talking about intel vs AMD and how they handle AVX.

Run a 2600x through the CPU-Z AVX2 beta bench and see how it compares.

>25% improvement
>for two times the price
Oh Intel...

>Shockingly enough, benchmarks like CPU-z are garbage for showing the whole picture.
>Run a 2600x through the CPU-Z AVX2 beta bench and see how it compares.
Sorry, I wasn't quite sure what you were going on about. After all, the AXV2 bench is also just one part of the picture.