No 4.8ghz

yeah,
i'm glad that 3700x @ 4.3 almost matches 9900k @ 5.0ghz, but still, no need to upgrade right now, the price just isnt right

What do you do with that setup? Productivity, go for AMD, but if pure gaming then just flip a coin

watch this
youtube.com/watch?v=IDyNDMzIC-Q

Pure gaming, i have a 1920x1080p monitor (i know i know it's shit but it's the best i could get my hands on). I basically just want to play everything at max graphics settings.
Also, hype for cyberpunk 2077. i basically want a super rig to play that game at its best

Attached: 1472505226805.jpg (432x444, 196K)

People here told me Zen 2 could OC to 5.0GHz easily. And I fucking believed it

>I basically just want to play everything at max graphics settings.
You literally NEED a 9700k then

The 7nm EUV process should bring moderate increases in clocks, but this will most drastically impact the base clocks, particularly with low TDP and mobile parts.
The clock issue in the Zen family is related to critical path timing. AMD's XFR scheme allows them to attain almost the maximum possible stable frequency the chip can handle automatically. We're not going to see a departure from this unless Zen 3 has a radical redesign. Zen1 had peak XFR frequency of 4.1ghz and wanted 1.5v to hit it when the 1800X launched. The 2700X improved the situation, but not by a significant enough margin. With the Zen2 parts now we've already seen they're taking up to 1.4v to hit their peak XFR state. Its the same situation all over again.

AMD showed official LN2 runs with hand picked chips and only hit 5.2ghz with over fucking 1.6v. The whole Zen family will never be a great overclocker until this timing/register path is addressed to facilitate it.
Maybe when these are well, well into production well have some 3950Xs that hit 4.85ghz peak.

doesn't the 9700k get annihilated by the 3700x?

So yeah, you can really just flip a coin on this one, the result won't be less credible than the advice you can get from all the shills here,

i believed the "leaks" so called, at least performance is on par with intels 5.0ghz

Attached: ryzen.jpg (1920x1228, 1.59M)

Just get whatever is best bang for the buck. Which is for sure something cheaper than , btw.

A $200 chip will play everything on highest.

9900K is STILL the gaming king, despite what all the shills tell you.

Imagine there are still people here who defend those AutismTV "leaks".

Yeah the clocks are somewhat dissapointing, but are we back in 2004 when Inturd was trying to push the Pentium 4 to 4+ GHz? Clock means fuck all and has for quite a while now. 400MHz G4 Macs were beating 600+MHz Pentium 3s back in the day.

You could build a whole gaming computer for the cost of that chip.

>9900k @ 5.0ghz consuming 240w @ 104c
vs
>3700x @ 4.3ghz consuming 179w @ 79c

9900k performance is ~3% better.
>STILL the gaming king

Why would you pay over $600 for 5 more fps if that? 9900k won't make a single difference with a 1080ti and you'll need at least a 240 AIO to actually cool its "95w TDP" (measured at stock, AMD's TDPs are measured at boost)

>doesn't the 9700k get annihilated by the 3700x?
uh.... no, the 9700k OBLITERATES even a 3900x

>Just get whatever is best bang for the buck.
9400f is budget king, he wants absolute maximum solutions for max fps, which is the 9700k/9900k

same

Whenever i hear 16 cores i phisically and involuntarily began salivating out the mouth

Well he nailed the 3600, 3700x and 3900x, he just listed them as 3300x/3600/3700 and was about 70$, 150$, and 200$ off.

how is intel's IPC higher if they lose at the same clock speed? do you even know what IPC means?

If you shill for intel so hard you could at least tell people to wait for Comet Lake instead of pushing utterly security compromised Coffee Lake on them.

Are you tripfagging so that intel can identify your shill posts to pay you for them?

>uh.... no, the 9700k OBLITERATES even a 3900x
Nah.
>9400f is budget king, he wants absolute maximum solutions for max fps, which is the 9700k/9900k
Obvious Inturd shill detected.

>wait for Comet Lake
when is that even coming out though
>Are you tripfagging so
no it's just a name i forgot to remove form some thread earlier, i'll remove it now if it bothers you so much

i'm waiting but i am not a patient man

>those pipe dream 3600x/3700x numbers
he knew what he was doing.

Adored is such a fucking retard i game glad everyone can finally agree

I just want the marketers to know that AMD is within 5% of Intel and performance goes up dramatically with the upcoming scheduler updates (source: Linus Tech Tips)

Also Intel's "boost" lasts for a few moments whereas AMDs can boost infinitely as long as the power and thermal is within the tolerated range.

>CPUs come with great stock coolers
>motherboards will likely be supported for the next 2+ years
>runs way cooler than any Inturd
you forgot quite a bit

>performance goes up dramatically with the upcoming scheduler updates (source: Linus Tech Tips)

Attached: disdain.jpg (872x901, 59K)

the intel 9900kelvin will be the last great overclocker. intel knows this and that's why they aren't releasing 10nm desktop cpus any time soon.

nothing beats faildozer and celeron d house fires though

7nm++++ will reach 6Ghz

>last great overclocker
That is until they refine 10nm or its successor to the point 14nm was refined

OC'd 9900K gets 30% better gaming performance. And as we know, Zen overclocks like literal ass.

you clearly haven't been paying attention

>And as we know, Zen overclocks like literal ass
lol cope intard

ryzen 3000 is amazing overclocker. PBO up to 4,7ghz

Attached: heavy gustav pepe.jpg (1024x1024, 66K)

10nm is already on its second iteration (10000 series sunny cove parts are shipping to OEMs) and it still has lower clock rates

To what? Reviewers like HU killing their CPU samples while trying even slightest OC on Zen 2?

When did AMD release their actual clock speeds did they ever or are we finding out zen2 clock speed today? Just curious about this and where did the fake clock speed comes from.

photo is random

Attached: 1561878520520.jpg (495x326, 32K)

What a retard. Do you own a cheese grater,too?

>pulling two incorrect statements out of your rectum
shill

AMD should be sued for false advertising. To be honest, their new products are pretty shit and are only being hyped because of their low prices. If intel dropped their prices on the 9700k and the 9900k then it's rip AMD.

The scheduler updates aren't out yet?

Still no 5GHz and inferior IPC.

>Better IPC

Attached: 1548625259215.jpg (640x480, 44K)

>only being hyped because of their low prices
um...thats the point

name a better source?

I'm waiting for Zen5

Going for a 3950x desu. Zen3 should also be a huge update considering Zen+ -> Zen2 was very good. Whenever DDR5 drops I might be tempted to move on from the 3950x, but I'm guessing it's going to be my main CPU for at least 5 years.

Attached: 1562383212789.jpg (850x1202, 116K)

for now, unless more games start taking advantage of the increase core counts

AMDrone here, I can agree to that. Still don't know why people go for it however. A slight fps difference is basically non existent, but doing anything else while encoding or rendering is very noticeable.

>shills btfo

amd doesn't need 5ghz to beat intel ipc

Attached: okay.png (1588x873, 235K)

Intel likely couldn't produce a high clocking large die 10nm part, even if they sold it at a loss. Their foundry is still dragging its ass. Those dual core i3 parts they "released" are still super low volume. They have nothing, and volume ramp up should have allowed them to churn out tens of thousands of wafers by now. They still have nothing. From the economics perspective they won't be selling high perf 10nm silicon for a very long time. Its obviously not going to be profitable for them for many a quarter to come.

It'll take years for 10nm++ to compete with 14nm+++++++

>unless more games start taking advantage of the increase core counts
am I in 2012?

Yeah but it needs 5.0 to beat its single core performance

Seeing intel cope by comparing r5 to i7k L M A O

“i5 9600k still 12% better in gaming!!! Worth the $100 extra!!!”

All intelfags do is play games at their parents house confirmed

>can't read graphs

look at it again

its already too fuckinghot in my room

Attached: fgfhn.png (1326x700, 64K)

>@4.0
Yeah it didnt beat shit the 9900k runs at 5.0ghz

SNAP BACK TO REALITY

Attached: Untitled.png (1274x714, 216K)

>5.0ghz

at what cost? tons of heat and power consumption?

clock for clock amd has the better architecture.
I

OH NO my 144hz monitor can't see 190 fps

why the fuck would I buy the 9900k for $480+ when I can get the 3700x for FAR less. and still get 144fps?????

If I wanted to jerk off to high clock speeds, I'd just buy intel. 12-core for $500, mate. Keep your clock speed wank.

intel still is better, deal with it fanboys

just give me a fucking 8/16 10nm intel cpu

Attached: 2626.jpg (362x358, 65K)

Looks like something weird is going on there

>OH NO my 144hz monitor can't see 190 fps

you need more fps than your monitor has hz, there is always some lost on the way

my r71700 is still going strong, no reason to upgrade in the foreseeable future

why move goalposts though. you claimed amd doesn't need 5 ghz to beat intel's ipc, yet it looks like they could use a couple of megahertz in certain applications.

>at what cost?
like 300w and mandatory xbox heug water loop to keep it at reasonable temps.

>clock for clock amd has the better architecture.
Don't fall for the low brow tactic of arguing to extremes, every arch has its strengths and weaknesses. Zen2 is a massive boon for AMD, its performance is incredibly impressive. Its still nowhere near 1:1 with intel in every metric though. intel still has a slightly wider core that they can leverage. Even on the integer front intel has more wiggle room to yield higher potential execution thoughput with their load stores and shifts. When it comes to any FPU op intel is going to have a slight to very large advantage because all of their AVX512 capable FPUs can execute 2X more ops than Zen2 can peak.

>8/16
manlet
>16/32 chad bangs your gf

Attached: 1562471423332.png (472x636, 320K)

>n certain applications

the 3700x/3900x destroys intel in everything other than gaming

>3700x > 9900k in adobe premiere

they are and they didn t improve shit,the only update that helped amd is the intel security patch

either 8700k or 3700x, both will basically max out a 1080ti, tho the ryzen chip comes with a box cooler that maxes out the chip, whereas the 8700k needs a decent cooler.

The 3700x is pretty weird in price/performance. Worse than both the 3600 and the 3900x

>The 3700x is pretty weird in price/performance

yeah only for gaming though

Attached: ap19.png (1474x876, 630K)

Attached: winrar.png (1278x718, 328K)

Attached: pr.png (1812x1005, 801K)

Holy shit. Where are the premirefags now? Being 5-10% above in gaymen means shit in the real world.

you've never been in ring0, have you, kid?

Attached: hahaha.jpg (480x640, 12K)

? you claimed amd destroys intel in every application except gayming, I replied with an exception.

Attached: 1562522098115.png (1280x720, 573K)

you don't get paid to use winrar.

see

>amd either shits out a bad cpu with terrible ipc and high clockspeeds or a bad cpu with decent ipc but terrible clockspeeds
kek

Attached: waitforryzen4000.jpg (1167x709, 273K)

doesn't matter, it's an application where amd doesn't win, thus proving you wrong, even if it's nitpicking tier.

Essentially, if we're talking about the higher-end SKUs, there is basically none.
Based on my experience, the best case of scenario on 6C CCDs (3600, 3600X and 3900X) is around 4.25GHz, at relatively safe voltage levels.
In case of 3900X, given that you can cool the chip with two of those 6C CCDs. SKUs with 8C CCDs (3700X, 3800X and 3950X) the best case is around 4.15GHz. The 3950X is expected to be thermally limited, as a whole.
The biggest limit is the intensity (heat per area), secondly the voltage you can safely feed to the silicon. For example, the 9900K which has a reputation of being an inferno, has theoretical intensity of ~1.15W/mm2 when operating at 5.0GHz (200W @ 174mm2).
Meanwhile Matisse can easily reach intensity of > 1.5W/mm2 (120W+ @ 74mm2). The second issue is, that beyond ~3.8GHz the V/F curve becomes extremely steep. According to FIT, the safe voltage levels for the silicon are around 1.325V in high-current loads
and up to 1.47V in low-current loads (i.e ST), depending on the silicon characteristics. Because the stock boost operation is already limited by the silicon voltage reliability, the only way to eke out every last bit of all-core performance is using OC-Mode. Like on previous Ryzen generations, entering OC-Mode also means that you will loose the turbo boost (all cores operate at same frequency). On the higher-end SKUs, the single threaded performance penalty will be massive from doing so. For example on 3900X, you'd be trading additional ~100MHz all-core frequency to a loss of up to 450MHz in ST frequency by doing so. Personally, I advice against overclocking the higher-end SKUs at all, and instead increasing the power limits and trying your luck with the "Auto OC" feature (which most likely isn't beneficial).

Attached: whQUAGj.png (1520x855, 114K)

Zen1 voltage curve for comparison

Attached: fmax-vmin.png (1509x905, 55K)

>doesn't matter

it does matter, you man child, I bought a 3700x to make money not sit on Jow Forums posting memes