Intel is still king baby

Attached: cZWuVhX.png (956x990, 104K)

Attached: ExuYYof.png (947x975, 120K)

> 720p
> 1080ti
> 90fps
What the fuck is wrong with this game ffs?

damn, can't wait for the 3950X, the 12-core zen2 is already competing with Intel's 18-core.

Ubisoft

.

Attached: Capture1.png (380x214, 58K)

Using games as a CPU benchmark is the most retarded shit imaginable. Games are a fucking awful metric and it all depends on the spaghetti code of some dumbass pajeet from EA or Ubisoft.

So the take away is that AMD is steadily closing the gap, but still half price. Cool.

Attached: traytray.jpg (224x225, 13K)

Which one murders WoW? That's the only one I care about.

AMD faster than Intel 7980Xe 18 core HEDT. That's something...

Any CPU made in the last 5 years

>using slower RAM with intel
g*rmans

While intel still has good cpus. you faggots need to stop shilling every 5 minutes. Why cant we have a normal discussion about the new cpus?

I for one am dissapointed with the new Zen2 chips. 7nm vs 14nm and they barely came out on top while losing in some. sure its better value and i dont have to upgrade my mobo or ram to use them. but i was hoping for a bit more. Im still going to buy a 3700x or a 3800x. but thats because my 1600x isnt cutting it anymore. Still tho dissapointed, and the price is close to 9900k making the 9900k look better and better for pure gayming.

Also the fact that we dont know if the 3700x=3800x but with lower clocks. Hopefully they can OC to 4.6-4.7ghz.

My 2600 gets well over 60fps at all times and usually well over 100fps at max settings now with the new DX12 renderer. Before they added that, I saw drops to the mid-40s in some places, like the balcony outside of the Horde base in Dazar'alor. Any of these new chips should crush it.

That wasn't true until literally a few months back, because the game was stuck on DX11 and could only effectively use a single CPU core. Even an Intel chip at 5GHz could see dips below 60fps. The difference the new multi-core rendering and DX12 made was remarkable.

And it uses less energy.

Ubisofts spaghetti code comes from eastern yurop. EAs from asia.

Pajeets only work on mobile.

Are we just gonna ignore that even the threadripper 2950X is fucking killing the game at 90FPS when it's not even for gaymen?

Intel shills desperate AF.

while true it's simply an area a large percent of people care about, their PC is just for gaming and web browsing and rendering and other workloads are irrelevant to them

Only following Intel spec. If Intel says faster RAM isn't supported, then it isn't.

>ram doesn't matter on intel
>reee intel has slower ram
intelfags are truly desperate

Attached: 1540301705459.jpg (626x657, 81K)

its technicality that anyone who isn't either clueless or shilling ignores

>Intel with shit ram and locked a low frequency

Oh nonononono amdbros it was suppose to be our time. We will keep posting synthetic benchmarks

Attached: download.png (213x237, 9K)

>8700k
is it the new 2600k?

GO BACK TO /V/ CONSUMERIST SHILL!!!!!!!!

Attached: 18519485.jpg (160x210, 7K)

>locked
how so

The performance lead compared to AMD in the scrambling to 6 core era isn't even close to sandy bridge vs AMD FX, it's already about to be obsolete when AMD drops that dodecacore for only $500.

>3.6 GHz
>2666 memory

Can't wait for the real benchmarks.

Attached: 1562359947191.jpg (500x505, 67K)

Bruh intel's lost, it's over, there barely even is a performance gain in the 720p desperation benchmarks and 14nm uses double the power.

>baseclock = tested clock speed
Literally "n-n-no there has to be something up with this test!"

it's not fair unless intel is OC'd on LN2 to 7GHz and AMD is forced to run at the lowest possible clocks!

thanks, saving this. also worth noting: 9900k boosts to 5ghz and has barely any OC headroom (is already a spaceheater kek). the 3900x isn't even AMDs fastest chip and the 3950x will most likely be hitting 5ghz

it's over

you forgot about the 9900kfc model, which has 5.0 ghz on all cores, and can deepfry sum chikinz

the real kicker here is the fact that most of the intel wins are older games that were developed pre-ryzen.

Imagine what happens when the consoles have the same architecture as AMD's desktop CPU's.

>my $800 purchase is justified
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Attached: proxy.duckduckgo.png (633x900, 162K)

Kek I'd be defending the 9900K too if I bought a fucking $500 housefire 8 core that's getting btfo by a 65w 8 core in 2 days.

r u retard
>While intel still has good cpus. you faggots need to stop shilling every 5 minutes. Why cant we have a normal discussion about the new cpus?
>I for one am dissapointed with the new Zen2 chips. 7nm vs 14nm and they barely came out on top
plis good sir, needfully account for the security vulnerabilities that enhance the supreme bestest IPC experience

>I for one am dissapointed with the new Zen2 chips. 7nm vs 14nm and they barely came out on top

This is a hilarious sentiment. doing the same performance with half the power cost is remarkable already.

The sad part is AMD could easily put out a 125w or even a 220W chip to bury Intel if things got desperate, but they're not desperate because Intel is still using 14nm in the current year.

You don't need Intel unless you're participating in a virginal dick measuring contest.

Also why have the hebrew dickshits been using the Core branding since 2006? Because they don't want normies differentiating between generations. They know how ignorant their customer base is.

pretty much. but hopefully they'd use new branding on their 10nm CPU's (when they eventually get there)

Pretty much.

Like one user said: Intel fanboys are muscle car enthusiasts who want the fastest, while AMD fanboys are more akin to JDM fans who like tuning more.

>Intel fanboys are muscle car enthusiasts who want the fastest
Maybe nowdays with your average new muscle car and vintage muscle car being worth over 50K, but back in the good old days, people like muscle cars because they were quiet mass produced and cheap, a young boomer could afford it in their 20s because you could get a 289 mustang for 18,000 in todays money., the same old school logic applies to ryzen, except ryzen is like a muscle car that's super fuel efficient.

>3200 memory for zen2
>2667 memory for 9900k
>2400 memory for 7700k
What the fuck is this shit?
I bet they're also using some ancient data without 30+ security patches for intlel.

because that's the officially supported speed going over those specified speeds is considered overclocking.

memory for zen2
memory for 9900k
memory for 7700k
And the poozens still get BTFO, imagine that.

>in games that aren't relevant anymore.

The next console gen is going to kill all of you. Most of the games they lose in are games that were developed before ryzen.

HAHAHAHAHAH OH NO NO NO SOPA DE MACACO

I CAN'T HEAR YOU OVER THE SOUND OF POOZENS GETTING BTFO BY A 2.5 YEAR OLD 7700K LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOO

>imagine still playing these old games while all AMDbros are chillin with the nextgen games.

This IS the definition of Cope.

Stock settings benchmark. There will be a time for OC benchmark later on. And yes, XMP profiles are overclocks

>Far Cry 5
Source & UE3 or GTFO

>Retard that doesn't know about boost clock

because hes a intelfag on extreme cope ahead of zen launch

why would he cope? Except for a few odd titles, the vast majority of games run better on intel. Intel won. again.

Attached: mad.jpg (300x377, 71K)

I TRIED SO HARD AND GOT SO FAR BUT IN THE END IT DOESNT EVEN MATTER

youtube.com/watch?v=QeYEsaydrtI

Attached: amdfan.png (1297x941, 1.49M)

>Intel is still king baby
King of housefires maybe.

All three of those games were released in late 2017 to late 2018, thus putting their development cycles before Ryzen's (Zen) release. They are never optimized for the specific architecture.

But really. If you look at the AC: Odyssey benchmark, it's all you need to say that Intel will be in alot of trouble. Console Ports are going to be targeted towards Zen2 in development.

>B-but the PS4 and Xbox One
That's an old Jaguar core, still based on an older AMD architecture, Jaguar is monolithic so no complexities.

yeah, like the custom radeon 7850 in current gen consoles made the radeon the king of ports, lmao.
intel and amd cpus are currently neck and neck in terms of ipc. Billion dollar question: what makes the difference when cpus have identic ipcs?

Intel uses way slower RAM, this isn't a fair comparison.

look at:

I'm getting a 3800x and 5700 XT and there's nothing you can do to stop me.

kekd.

SHITel btfo

Attached: 1528292848450.jpg (811x1024, 223K)

>Billion dollar question: what makes the difference when cpus have identic ipcs?
Cores and cache at a high level.

>muh brand recognition.
Last time this happened, Pentium was demoted to b-tier brand.

wrong. The answer is frequency.
Well, cache will help a bit, but definitely not the miracle amdrones expect out of them

...for kids younger than 15

>My Ferrari won by 1ns over your corolla
Kek

>Well, cache will help a bit,
Cache can make or break certain workloads - if you have to go off and hit system ram because the task can't fit into L3 performance is going to tank. Its why Intel's HEDT parts have shitloads of cache even on the lower core count.

In of itself cache isn't a magic bullet for (high) performance but it sure can bring performance down.

wut

now switch on the mitigations :^)

>I for one am dissapointed with the new Zen2 chips. 7nm vs 14nm
The comparison based on nm alone is unfair, Intel's process is more advanced, their 10nm node is expected to be comparable to TSMC's 7nm. It's amazing how well Intel performs given how much less cache they have.

Considering that Intel's 14nm still BTFOs AMD, 10nm will probably be TSMC 5nm territory

Don't worry AMD Unboxed will pull through for AMDrones

>AyyMD with 7nm still can't totally beat 14nm++++++ Intel processors

JUST

They'll probably need Zen 5 to fully beat Intel

10nm is actually slower than 14nm retard.

Yeah but Intel can't even ship a proper 10nm while amd can easily utilize the latest and greatest nodes from any semiconductor manufacturing company.

With Ubuntu host and 1 VirtualBox guest at a time what is my best bet on a build. Currently using i3-8130u laptop and do the above but it's slow. Nearest I can come up with is getting celeron/A6 level performance out of either. I only plan on having 1 guest operating at a time.

Attached: filterSalesmanTalksToPothead.png (500x444, 85K)

Yawn.. Wake me up when any poozen beats my 2600k

Yea but i don't want to buy a cpu with lots of security vulns in it

It's tested on vanilla settings that means probably no all core boost to 4.7 on Intel also it probably means amd is running all cores around 4ghz

That is not a fair comparison.
3950x while has better binning will still pour a lot of heat and you will not probably be able to hold 4.6 on all 16 cores unless you are using some exotic cooling . People brag about amd 105w mark but to run a chip with 12-16c 4.6 GHz on all cores is impossible with this whattage.
We all benefits from a cpu that has better ipc with lower frequencies, and lower demands for power. The thing that worries me more is how much the abysmal multidie latency on Zen 2 will impact performance. The huge l3 cache is a trade-off, but still, it's not inclusive and it seen it don't add much extra performance, but purely counteracts the increased latency from the external io chip

By 2022 Intel will be shipping their 7nm which is actually a smaller node, physical size than amd 7nm. There are parallel teams working both 10nm and 7nm

There are entries for both 95w tdp mode and "motherboard enhanced tdp" setting, 3,6ghz is just base clock as reported by manufacturer, + behind it means there is some kind of boost. 2667mhz ram is standard for current gen cores, anything higher than that is considered overclock, thats why they were tested on 2667mhz. Ryzen+ had default ram at 2667 and was tested at 2667, same with older intel cpus that were tested with default non oc ram. But yeah, blame amd or "germans."

just buy whatever works well retards

Attached: lelbron4.png (405x396, 265K)

>laptop
Please stop. At least get a quad-core and devote 2 cores to it. If you're stuck on dual-core, at least devote two cores to it, just not at 100% speeds.

A raspberry pi 4 "works" but no one in their right mind would reccomend it on this board.

>in three years Intel might have a product that's better than what AMD's releasing this month
I'd hope so

intel is still king at consuming more power and running hotter, thanks for the info op!

Attached: benchmark.png (476x415, 25K)