Is the ryzen 9 3900x the most based cpu in the market?

>12 cores 24 threads
>state of the art 7nm lithography
>boosts up to 4.6ghz
>uses less power than the i9 9900k
>499$
>0 security issues and vulnerabilities
>can BTFO server and workstation chips that cost double the price

Attached: ryzen-9-3900X.jpg (1326x1025, 179K)

Other urls found in this thread:

software.intel.com/en-us/articles/optimization-notice#opt-en
browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/13241660?baseline=13267824
github.com/jimenezrick/patch-AuthenticAMD*
theguardian.com/technology/2009/may/13/intel-european-commission
anandtech.com/show/3839/intel-settles-with-the-ftc
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

BUT I WANTED 16 CORES REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

I just want 8 that boost to 5niggahurtz

>Is this unreleased CPU with no reviews the most based CPU if we trust the amd marketing department?

the 3800x will be able to do so
if not it will be close to 5ghz
either way it still btfo the i9 9900k at 4.5ghz

It's not the most based but it is the most sneed

Still better than the intel's marketing department
>benchmarks dont matter
>lets test those cpus without applying security updates
>trust us guys the 9900ks beats the 3800x and its definitely not a space heater

>benchmarks dont matter
This actually happened...

thats why im mentioning it here

Still can't beat intel

Stay mad AMDshills

Formerly intel

>the competition can't compete
not showing up to the fight doesn't mean you won

Yes it can retard
the ryzen 7 3800x at 4.5ghz beat the i9 9900k at 5ghz
stay mad

3800X is $100 cheaper, so I'm torn. Do I really need the 4 extra cores?

Friendly reminder that Zen 2 is the same speed against the 9900K while being 500mhz lower clocked.

It already beat Intel.
Come the end of this year there will literally be no reason to buy any Intel product, it's quite incredible really.

Yeah unless intel drops their prices below zen 2 in order to compete
and we all know that wont happen because intel is greedy as fuck

XFR might as well reach 5ghz. It already proved to work better than manual overclocking.

then it will BTFO intel for years to come

>WE'RE LOSING MARKET SHARE SO WE WON

Attached: 89f.png (777x455, 424K)

>Run program
>It's compiled for Intel
Enjoy your 30FPS in any Unity game AMDfags :-)
software.intel.com/en-us/articles/optimization-notice#opt-en

Attached: opt-notice-en_080411.gif (702x303, 53K)

Enjoy 3x less FPS than based Ryzen LOL

Attached: 1543967632202.png (632x535, 13K)

>Poorfag CPUs
lmao gotta love how AMDfags only care about the low end market

21 fps

>>Is this unreleased CPU with no reviews the most based CPU if we trust the amd marketing department?
Eh, publicly available data comparing a 2600 to the 3600 seems to corroborate a 13% increase in single threaded IPC and a 16% increase in multithreaded. That plus the clock increases lead to the +15-20% single threaded and +25-30% multi-thread performance per a given number of cores.

browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/13241660?baseline=13267824

Attached: IMG_20190529_002243.png (987x537, 121K)

So, you're going to embarrass yourself again, after claiming that JEDEC is a RAM vendor?

>goybench
For fuck's sake, where's Cinebench?

where in both versions, Intel gets BTFO'd?

Wait for Cinebench R30 with AVX-1024
AMD BTFO

highly doubt that. Given that the board manufacturers were out in full support of AMD right now. There'll be a paradigm shift and Cinebench would instead now lean on AMD.

Which would be hilarious.

The overall numbers on Geekbench are worthless, but the individual sub-tests are not bad for comparing chips of similar design.

AMD themselves used Cinebench R20 for their presentation.

Attached: inteliskill.jpg (2053x1025, 220K)

Memory latency should read -6.49%

and -9.76

where is my amd NUC? can you even name a good ryzen powered laptop? Normies don't care about muh gig nig hartz.

Attached: 1556998942588.jpg (960x495, 105K)

*applies github.com/jimenezrick/patch-AuthenticAMD*
Heh, nothing personel, Intel

Won't be that bad, really. Intel compilers do intentionally fuck up performance on AMD (beyond what's required for compatibility), but raw power can compensate.
Also, while there's lots of games made with unity, many of them are not.

Also
>Intel and Unity intentionally drop performance on non-Intel processors
>Intelfags portray this as a good thing
Do we have to take you seriously?

>0 security issues and vulnerabilities
hahaha

buying overpriced intel cpus doesnt make you more rich or smarter

AMD used an intel biased benchmarked and still btfo intel

let's be honest here, it still has some security vulnerabilites, albeit far less than Intlel

Attached: assburger.jpg (188x268, 7K)

gtfo and i9 9900KillYourSelf

Attached: Intel Wojak 01.png (443x512, 70K)

Stop posting benchmark!

I'm more impressed 3800X gets roughly the same or even more FPS in PUBG

Attached: 1559059123890.jpg (2322x885, 203K)

Of course you do

My 2600X runs any unity game well above 60 because unity games are generally not gfx intensive

>no quad channel memory
>no 128gb ram
Into the trash

Attached: 1424468231507.jpg (1335x2048, 373K)

>The Intel C++ Compiler adds to generated binaries a CPUID test that looks if they are executed on a
Intel CPU, so the binaries don't run with full optimizations on non-Intel CPUs.

How is this legal?
This is literally anti-competitive practices.

I'm still waiting for the one with 16 cores to be announced

Almost nobody use the intel compiler.
GCC just work better and have no shady shit in it.
And proprietaryfags just use the Microsoft compiler that also don't do the crap.

>Is the ryzen 9 3900x the most based cpu in the market?
No, it's not. Ryzen 3 2300X is.
>4 (FOUR) cores, 4 (FOUR) threads
>mature, BASED and REDPILLED 12nm
>boosts up to 4 (FOUR) GHz
>$89
>0 (ZERO) security issues and vulnerabilities
>can BTFO and do BTFO everyone on 4gag

Normies also don't care about NUCs.

It's not Intel's business to optimize for AMD, it's shitty practice, but use of that compiler isn't quite as widespread as people would like you to believe.

The funny part is that Ryzen beats the i7/i9 despite compiler cheating.

Imagine how fast that thing would be if the compiler did not make things intentionally slower for AMD cpus.

Because none of that shit tested was compiled with that compiler maybe?

$800

not that user but unless they drop the prices by 150-200usd no point in going for intel besides pcie 4 on am4

This is me for reals.
AMD GIBE 16CORE.

There's a difference between "not optimizing" and specifically putting a CPU ID check to disable all optimization code.
One is legal, the other is not.

They're both legal.
Intel just had to place a notice on their website saying that it doesn't optimize for anything other than Intel.

>They're both legal.
t. Intel

theguardian.com/technology/2009/may/13/intel-european-commission

anandtech.com/show/3839/intel-settles-with-the-ftc

>Intel reworked their compiler to put AMD CPUs at a disadvantage. For a time Intel’s compiler would not enable SSE/SSE2 codepaths on non-Intel CPUs, our assumption is that this is the specific complaint. To our knowledge this has been resolved for quite some time now.

>False advertising. This includes hiding the compiler changes from developers, misrepresenting benchmark results (such as BAPCo Sysmark) that changed due to those compiler changes, and general misrepresentation of benchmarks as being “real world” when they are not.

>0 security issues and vulnerabilities
lmao, no one actually believes this if they have more than two braincells to rub together.

when that gn faggot post results showing the 3800x matching the 9700k in f1 2018 i'll be impressed, until then i'm sceptical about this magical cpu.

Yeah it's too based to pass up
>Best single threaded performance out of the box AND best multi threaded performance by leaps and bounds
Jesus Christ.

Yep.
And all they had to do in the end was add a notice on the website and compiler documentation that it doesn't optimize for anything other than Intel.
They did not have to change their compiler.

You can't false advertise.
You can make a compiler that puts your competitors at a disadvantage.

Which ryzen are gamers getting

>They did not have to change their compiler
>To our knowledge this has been resolved for quite some time now
What

You can see the notice here: software.intel.com/en-us/articles/optimization-notice#opt-en
Again, the compiler did not change after the FTC lawsuit.

None. Miners are already hoarding every engineering sample they can get their hands on. Only thing you'll see on 7/7 is Out of stock

>miners
>hoarding CPUs
lol. You're retarded.

this desu

That's why most games these days don't use their shitty compiler, except old Blizzard shit

3800x for me

>compiler
>games
what are you talking about?
games dont use any sort of compiler for the fucking cpus
if anything they use rendners and graphic APIs and half of them favor multiple cores

That's true, but the point was that the compiler did not change and what Intel did with their software was not illegal.

You too, are retarded.

A lot of math and scientific computing libraries still do, especially Intel provided ones, which are still excellent

It was illegal, they got fined, didn't pay anything because they're filthy kikes.

No, what they did with their software not illegal.
That they previously stipulated it optimized for x86 (which includes non-Intel x86 ISA CPUs) was false advertising, which is illegal.

The software didn't change because it didn't need to, only the advertising changed and with an extra requirement that they place a notice on their website and in the compiler documentation.

>To our knowledge this has been resolved for quite some time now
At least now they have a notice for their practices.

Can't wait until Threadpipper comes out

BIG

Attached: 1548621048677.jpg (960x643, 67K)

Soon

Thiccripper

dude I got 3 cores 3reeeeee!! 12 is like fuckin overkilllz

no, it's not in the market.

Rape

Attached: c970d3145c972d38c26c942358e28390529f0f45_00.gif (320x240, 585K)

>memory latency 84/90ns
wat
my ryzen+ measured 65 in windows 10, and something around 52-54 in the bootable memtest thing

I wanted 12 cores at a cheaper price. This thing will be sold for atleast € 599 due to all the bullshit taxes over here. Guess my 2500K is going to keep trucking till Zen2+ next year

500 more likely

That's score not ns I believe.

How much did 12 fast cores cost two years ago (including a mobo)?

Yeah they did mention that the latency has been improved with Zen 2 in a slide so

>the 3800x will be able to do so
>if not it will be close to 5ghz
Source: your ass

Fx 9590 lol

lmao because only a gaming benchmark for a single game is a valid proof of performance.

This. Only gaming benchmarks for multiple games at 720p low settings is a valid proof of performance, unironically. And then 1080p/1440p on high settings so we scratch our heads as to why that doesn't line up with the first results.

Nah bro we need 240p gaymen for that extra FPS

fuck you goy