Are there any gaming benchmarks yet? Please post them all here so we can make an informed opinion

PUBG doesn't matter

Because it's an immensely popular game and they were careful enough to even pick the same character model for the test so it's very stupid to say it's shady, it would be shady if the scenes were different.

go to /v/ dumbass

lmao it's shady as fuck because there is NO way to make things consistent across both runs.

It's shady as fuck because there is only a 2fps difference and a 0.1ms frametime difference

It's just a shit way to showcase your supposed superior gaming performance

If you're confident in your CPU being able to beat intel, run it through some actual fucking known game benchmarks so it can be compared to other CPUs out there, but no instead we got some bullshit PUBG "bench" which can't be easily replicated, and barely showed any advantage to AMD even under their shitty testing.

because the performance was pretty shitty on that game before

It is two "players" on different machines running directly parallel to each other a metre or two apart simultaneously.
There is no PUBG benchmark but it is a popular game which Zen has run poorly in all released variants.

Very popular game in which amds performance just sucked. Also according to their own benchmark they improved their performance by 22%. So anyone previously unhappy about zens performance in pubg will love this.

>run it through some actual fucking known game benchmarks
They did, are you a retard?

Lets see it compared to a 2700x on the same gamer version then.

It's not a real fucking test and anyone who thinks otherwise is a moron.

Where?

PUBG aint it you dumb bitch.

This happens every time AMD releases a new product. Their benchmarking is laughably rigged.

Nah, the mere fact that it runs comparable to an 9900k in pubg is way more impressive than a gay number from a synthetic benchmark.

>i-its only real if you test against your own product!
cope

yeah fuck trying to make comprehensive comparisons accurately.

Just throw out random scenarios where the AMD CPU wins, it's clearly the best choice to show off how good it is.

Fuck off, if you want to convince me it's better, run it through GTA5's benchmark, run it through any number of games with BUILT IN benchmarking utilities.

But no, we got PUBG. Such a fucking joke.

This is why you never trust AMD, just like with the Radeon VII launch, they claimed it was 5-10% better than an RTX 2080, when in reality it's 5-10% slower than the RTX 2080. But going by AMD's official benchmarks, the Radeon VII is the clear winner.

They always do this, and it's embarrassing you retards believe them.

>I didn't watch the presentation and don't understand what happened or why and therefore everyone else is an idiot
Intellectual heavyweight here.

>they didn't run it through actual benchmarks because it would prove how shit it really is

okay...

>the same gamer version

It is as "real" as any benchmark from the product manufacturer can get. Sure, there are a few variables present that can influence performance by a bit, but amd is showcasing a +20% improvement. A 3% variance in performance is in this context not that relevant. Also benchmarks can artificially favor one architecture over another, and since people want to play the actual game and not run the benchmark all day long it's a valid method for showing large scale improvements.

Games have built in benchmarking tools, like the most recent tomb raider, or GTA5, or assassins creed.

These are controlled IN GAME scenarios that will playout identically on every computer you run it on. That is a MUCH more accurate benchmark than PUBG and just running around in the same area hoping it's identical to the other.

>That is a MUCH more accurate benchmark than PUBG and just running around in the same area hoping it's identical to the other.
Not really, a camera moving around a scene is the same as you running around a scene, results will be almost as consistent as a benchmark as long as you are consistent between tests, PUBG doesn't actually have any high variability between instances.

>gaming
Go back.

See again.

>defending this "benchmark"

jesus, amd shills will resort to anything

Preorder your shitty ryzen 3700x and cry tears of shame when actual benchmarks come out showing it's clearly getting cucked by intels 9th gen chips for gaming performance.

>Fuck off, if you want to convince me it's better, run it through GTA5's benchmark, run it through any number of games with BUILT IN benchmarking utilities.
AMD did show that they have a 11% increase in performance in gta v. It's in the second image in this thread. Obviously amd wants to showcase where it's architecture has improved the most, so pubg. God are you butthurt.

Every company compares their products favoreably. Intel does it too, nvidia just made a mess with their rtx series last year...god it's like I'm talking to a child honestly.

And about believing. I'm fairly certain that amd has achieved a 20% uplift in pubg. The data companies are releasing is most often correct, just cherry-picked. Lying on the big stage has some problematic side effects.

You can keep posting it, that doesn't make it true.

AMD simply aren't truthful with their benchmarking, and you'd have to be a true grade A cuck to trust them at this point.

It's a presentation, not an official benchmark, are you retarded?

what ever,no different for old ryzen.
and more and more intels cpus going win,wait end of year.

tdp is just that high what is should be with more cores or clocks...none upgrade.!!!

looks same effect ike gpu sector, fury,vega and radeon vii...no different
well radeon vii was 7nm gpu, but not belive it! so lausy efficiency,and still slow!

ok, cputdp also same...there is anyhting new,just different name....i wonder how long amd can sell product with no profit..well looks that no longer...sooner or later its eat hole company and debt givens not tolerance more...end of 2020 is my guess.

hmm. i try really see different from ryzen 2000 series,but no....oh yeah... more cores..but is it only trend or commercial way.
you dont need more than total max 6 cores for gaming,even 4-core is enough. easily.
more than that is waist of cash, no matter how much its cost.

and,i still see not any goodies from amd 32-core cpu...erhh i mean where to use thouse??!! tell me..

200-cores cpu.... so what!

no help gaming,apzz or rendering...useless.

another hand, real pro rendering use always intels cpus...why??

well,buy them amd fans, you keep amd up and pay them callary...youself you give so little back.
except red fine main...lol

>slides are benchmark results

huh, really makes you think

Slides are a tool used for communication in which in this case a multi billion dollar company presents their in-house benchmark results. They are not independent but you can bet your ass that amd is not to retarded to release benchmarks that are way off from what 50 independent sources are going to release in less than two weeks.

>Lying on the big stage has some problematic side effects
it clearly doesn't

pic related from their RVII launch.

Attached: 2019-06-01 14_12_47.png (1170x866, 239K)

They probably did try these benchmarks, but Intel won, so they didn't show them. However AMD is not dumb, they probably used this data to determine their pricing.

When more benchmarks come out, I expect top-end Intel chips will beat top-end AMD chips at gaming and single thread performance, but every AMD chip will beat Intel in its price class.

The gigantic disparity in framerates between the two sets tells you that the test was completely different from what you posted, the right one was obviously in 4k and the very source you posted confirms the fact that the VII is faster, by an even larger margin than what AMD said.

Why did you think your misleading pic would even work when anyone could check it for themselves?

Attached: far-cry-5-3840-2160[1].png (500x570, 39K)

>When more benchmarks come out, I expect top-end Intel chips will beat top-end AMD chips at gaming and single thread performance, but every AMD chip will beat Intel in its price class.
That's what I expect as well, and more or less what we already had with the 2000 series, the 3000 series will just be pushing intel much harder.

Yeah because they're abusing the fact it's got 16GB of HBM2 when nothing else does in the consumer space.

Of course it wins at 4k.

>they're abusing the fact that the GPU is better
alright bud

It's clearly not better in anything besides pure vRAM capacity or bandwidth scenarios.
Which is shockingly few situations, they show the Radeon VII winning in all the scenarios they show off, and as reality shows, the Radeon VII loses against the 2080 overall.

Even at 4k overall it loses by 10%. Despite AMD assuring us during the launch event that it was on par, or better than a 2080.

But no, AMD surely wouldn't cherry pick benchmarks.

Attached: 2019-06-01 14_20_05.png (1033x1565, 276K)

>they're abusing the fact that the product is superior for this use case
I forgot that people only spend $700 on a GPU to play CS at 480p.

>take benchmarks
>post on Jow Forums
wow can't catch me with my NDA then!
why don't they do this?

see
It's clearly worse outside of the AMDrones demented "reality"

There is no universal use case benchmark. You're just testing which CPU is better for that benchmark. In this case we can establish that PUBG performance is pretty even. That's useful information for PUBG only.

>AMD surely wouldn't cherry pick benchmarks.
Who even said that? They obviously will pick the most favorable comparisons for marketing material, jesus fuck do you think you are unveiling a great secret here? I don't even own or care about AMD GPUs but you're just plain moronic and trying to mislead people with posts like these

>gets caught lying about AMD lying about benchmarks when other source shows the GPU is in fact faster in the same benchmark AMD did, by a wider margin than AMD stated
>B-BUT CHERRYPICKS!
lol

>AMD clearly BTFO by 2080
>AMD claims throughout the entire RVII launch that the 2080 is worse

Ahh yes, clearly AMD are the ones we can trust.

Do you enjoy being lied to?

Even if you don't think the radeon VII launch was full of bullshit and lies (it was). Even at BEST, they're highly misleading by only posting benchmarks they were winning with. When in the real world, most games are clearly performing better on the 2080.

Clearly they didn't lie about it like you tried to imply

Lmao, it's HIGHLY misleading at best since in most situations, the 2080 IS better performing, it's only at 4k when the R7 actually showed itself as being decent, and in almost every other game, even at 4k it can't outperform the 2080.

Yes, they picked results that made them look better, that's basic marketing.
Did they lie? Clearly not if third party benchmarks confirmed it.

and yet with Zen2 we take their benchmarks at face value and intel is gonna be BTFO

wewlads. You just can't talk to an AMDshill.

>e-sports
It's over.

>and yet with Zen2 we take their benchmarks at face value
If we followed your Far Cry 5 logic then Zen2 is supposedly even better than what they showed since their VII estimate was conservative compared to actual benchmarks.

We already know the current Ryzen generation is better than Intel so Zen2 will most likely just continue the trend unless there's some fatal flaw we don't know about yet, which is unlikely.

cant trust the corporate pr - we have to wait whole month for embargo lift to see independently conducted real tests

>still trying to twist that what they showed (61 vs 62) versus what was measured (63 vs 68) was somehow misleading
lol dude you're really reaching here, it makes you look deranged

>If we followed your Far Cry 5 logic then Zen2 is supposedly even better than what they showed since their VII estimate was conservative compared to actual benchmarks.
or you know, the more likely answer, the system AMD used for their presentation wasn't as powerful as the testbed used by techpowerup for their reviews.

Faster RAM, faster OC'd CPU, etc.

You're a retard because those systems clearly don't have the same hardware specs.

Shockingly enough, RAM and the CPU have an impact on FPS as well.

see

So you are saying they didn't cherrypick a perfect setup to make them look unrealistically good, you are contradicting yourself now.

Why bother? Intel has been king of gaming for the last decade due to singe thread performance. Zen throwing even more cores at the problem wont solve that. Especially for applications such as VR where single core is even more important when pushing two 1440x1600 displays at 144hz. You just cannot distribute that across many cores and expect the same results.

They cherry picked 4k because it's the only way to make it look good. And that was clearly my point from the beginning. >Yeah because they're abusing the fact it's got 16GB of HBM2 when nothing else does in the consumer space.

Your point was that they "lied" about it and then you were proven wrong by simply posting the results you cropped out of your intentionally misleading picture, you are accusing AMD of doing what you are doing now.

The question that will forever trigger Jow Forums.

I can't wait until Zen 3 comes out and Intel, despite being a dumpster fire, STILL has the advantage.

>gaming
Doesn't matter ©

Ahh sorry, they were HIGHLY misleading to the point of it almost being a lie

better?

>THEY LIED ON STAGE!!!
>actually no they didn't
>OK... BUT THEY CHERRYPICKED!!!
lul

Who cares if they mislead the consumers, fuck them

lmao, imagine actually defending this shitty indian company.

That doesn't make any sense since the benchmark has an even more favorable result than what they said, you are suffering from some crazy delusion here.

this pasta tastes like crap.
0/10, not going to save it.

Who cares if they mislead the consumers, fuck them
lmao, imagine actually defending this shitty indian company.

Attached: 1544667387109.png (813x1402, 324K)

again see
Just because a bench rig has faster RAM and a faster OC, doesn't magically mean it's more favorable, it's just more expensive.

You can clearly tell this is the case since the 2080 didn't hit 61fps, it hit 63.

And again, it's not like AMD were advertising the fact they were comparing 4k FPS, they were perfectly happy to leave that minor detail out of the slide.

Again see Keep on running on circles and moving goalposts.

>No fortnite in the listing
Based

>jesus, amd shills will resort to anything
>Preorder your shitty ryzen 3700x and cry tears of shame when actual benchmarks come out showing it's clearly getting cucked by intels 9th gen chips for gaming performance.

Attached: 1491958654249.png (653x726, 84K)

I didn't say the cherry picked a perfect setup, I said they cherry picked using 4k as it's an obvious bias towards the R7 with it's HBM2.

Keep being retarded and pretending you're actually making an argument here.

>ok so the VII is better with both bad and good components and their setup wasn't very favorable to them at all actually but THIS PIC DIDN'T SAY 4K SO THEY LIED!!

Attached: 1558012141512.png (1920x827, 328K)

League is just as bad.

This but unironically.

In what world would a VII and 2080 run Far Cry 5 at 60 FPS at a resolution lower than 4k? It's automatically implicit and you are a moron.

>I have evidence AMD is highly misleading with their presentations and slides
>I choose to ignore this evidence because lol yolo

I mean i guess

This entire thread is retarded if they trust ANYTHING AMD showed off at computex.

So you agree with user only contest his wording of the argument? Had AMD shown their CPU trying to push 144hz, 165hz, or even 240hz they would of been btfo by intel.

>>I have evidence AMD is highly misleading with their presentations and slides
You didn't actually post anything yet and if your best example was something that made the VII look worse than it actually was then I doubt you have anything actually worthwhile to post.

go fuck yourself

Who 'we'? Cunt

>So you agree with user
Making fun of delusional retardation and goalpost moving is far from agreeing.

How about fucking Arma3. That turd runs like a turd on my 2700x

If you don't think it's misleading for AMD to show the R7 is within 1-2 fps of the RTX 2080, despite the RTX 2080 being clearly ahead in almost all scenarios in the real world, even at 4k, then I just can't help you, you're already a full blown AMD cuck and deserve whatever lies they tell you.

>this is what nvidiot arrrteeexxxx geeefuck shills actually believe

>If you don't think it's misleading for AMD to show the R7 is within 1-2 fps of the RTX 2080
Yeah I guess it's a bit misleading since it's actually 5.2 fps ahead Did they cherrypick a real benchmark? Yes.
Did they lie like you claimed they did? Clearly not, why were you so desperate to spread misinformation if the RTX 2080 is better anyway? Are you paid to do so or are you really just very personally invested in consumer hardware?

>it's just marketing bro, us true AMD fans already know the Radeon VII is worse than the RTX 2080, the slides are just for marketing purposes

the state of amdshills.

Imagine being so much of a braindead GAMER that you can't process that maybe high-end GPUs running a game at 60 FPS means the resolution must be set very high or something, do you even have anything showing they claimed it wasn't 4k?

>This but unironically.

Attached: 1539398556114.png (500x600, 197K)

To be fair, Arma3 runs like a turd on pretty much anything.

Do you seriously believe the 9900k is not going to btfo of the 3700x in games?
Hard mode: OC'd

Runs well on my 4790k overclocked to 5.0