Where where you when AMD got BTFO once again?

Isn't this the """"'leak""""" that with FAKE written in huge letters?

100C@stock regardless of cooling, here we go.

>reviewer is against leaks
>still publishes the leak
>while it's obviously Intel marketing and they are playing right into their hands
Kek, dem sweet clicks

Leaks are a great way of marketing.
Intel can fabricate a "leak" and they have no legal responsibility over it, but it will disturb the market and stock because people are idiots.

>AMD BTFOs Intel's 5GHz chips in single core while running at 4.6GHz
That's simply factually incorrect. Do you research and I say this as an AMD fanboy.

REMINDER THAT INTEL PUTS IT'S LOWEST TDP ON SPECS WHILE AMD PUTS IT'S HIGHEST. (not even shitposting)

>higher price
>higher power usage
>still the same architecture

Intel is SCARED! LMAO

Attached: Laughing Whore.jpg (762x900, 161K)

Holy shit Intel just BTFO AMD by releasing skylake again. A 14nm 10c20t CPU running at 5.2ghz is going to be hotter than the fucking sun as well. "105w TDP" LUL.

Intel obviously leaked this theirselves to take steam out of the stories about lineups for AMD processors. Anyways that 10/20 CPU is probably gonna be significantly ahead of AMD in gaming but at the prices Intel is charging it doesn't even seem like better value and it's coming late.

AMD lies out their ass about TDP Intel is just obscene at this point.

>FAKE

Attached: 9.jpg (1200x731, 151K)

Look at the game benchmarks for example, loads that don't use all cores. AMDs chips boost is 4.6GHz while the Intels one is 5GHz, AMD still scores higher FPS.
Nice try faggot.

t. actual Intel user

Attached: file.png (1271x689, 173K)

Spectre and Meltdown included?

>AMD lies out their ass about TDP Intel is just obscene at this point.
Unbiased reviewers lie about TDP? This was already tested, obviously it's without PBO, but PBO is not the advertised turbo clocks. Intel using their lowest and AMD their highest is a fact and has been for a while, it's not fake advertisement, it's just scummy from the Intel side.

Is the water chiller included in the price, or do I buy that seperately?

I like supporting the underdog, so I'll buy Intel this time. Long live Israel, fuck the amd monopoly.

Nah, you're retarded if you think they will actually release anything resembling this "leak" or think their old architecture at the same node will suddenly beat AMD. They won't get close to AMD until at least 2021 if they can pull off a new node and architecture that they have planned.

>game benchmarks
lul

>not understanding that clockspeed is the only reason AMD is forever behind Intcel for gayming

AMD is affected by Meltdown too.

Intel isn't even trying and they still kick AMD

AMD had 10 years to develop Ryzen, 12nm and 12nm+ by Global Foundries and 7nm by TSMC and still they can't built Skylake+++++++++

Sounds good. If not for AMD, this thing would be at least 800 bucks.

>Implying that isn't going to require exotic cooling to keep itself tame

>implying that wouldn't be marginally faster than 9700 and 9900K because it is choking on thermal and memory limitations.

It's not, stop lying. Out of first batch of vulnerabilities amd was affected by 1 variant of spectre.

In 2020 or 2021 year?

Renamed spectre idiot

if it weren't for amd forcing competition that shit would be $1000

>House Fire edition

Attached: 1506392719410.jpg (2048x1370, 546K)

It's been confirmed by independent reviewers. You are the lying one.

At this point it's safe to assume Intel's post-14nm CPUs will be downgrades in performance. Can't milk 14nm forever.

oh god, it's pentium 4 all over again
>inb4 1200w tdp
>inb4 balant paid intel benchmarks within 6 months

Attached: 45856838447.png (800x447, 430K)

14 is the ideal amount of nms to have
AMD is cheaping out by only including half of them

It's fake btw

best post

>you post on the same board as these people

Just wait for intcel 14nm+++++++

these names are starting to get silly

>no source
Only Spectre and Spec Store Bypass work on AMD.

>not shooping the fire blue

>10C/20T @ 2.7-5.0 GHz boost at 65W

Doubt.jpg

it was a bios bug, they fixed it, but a lot of reviewers didn't know the fix was out

GN confirmed it's not a bug and there was no difference between the bioses.

nm (more is better)

This year?

>HQ
Laptop nigger?

>14nm+++
>lol guys amd is kill! xddddd

I hope this is true.
3950X price is too high, if it's true AMD might have to drop it a bit before launch too.

Please Intel, let this meme be more than dreams.

>intelnexus

They are not afraid to call out AMD on their bullshit and I respect that.
Sorry if that hurts you.

Also it is safe up to 3+ but has a 66% chance to burn on 4+, will same happen to Intel?

sure, at 35w as well

It isn't. Currytech are the only site pushing it, which means they probably faked it themselves. Everyone else is saying it's fake. Even Videocardz.

>14nm+++
500w TDP
110C degrees
its not a housefire anymore, it a nuclear reactor

You're one of those people that think clockspeed determines performance, right? lol

the revenge of the pentium D

Good goy.

Attached: IMG_20190710_162029.png (1496x950, 55K)

Don't forget to buy a new socket.

It's even worse when you look at productivity benchmarks.

AMD cheats too, just to a lesser degree. The 3900x can hit 140-150W stock, out of box. Almost 50% over its tdp. Not as bad as intel on avx loads but they've been cheating more with each gen ryzen

Comparing an 8 core CPU to a 12 core one is not fair.
Intel has much higher core to core performance which actually matters in the real world. All of these core-hogging benchmarks represent fringe use-cases.

>14nm
>BTFOd
Intel fangays actually believe this

Attached: 1492890072159.png (380x380, 235K)

Emergency Edition.
Imagine the power consumption and heat.

For real though, when is the next 990k?

10nm team in tears for sure. How are they going to get sunny cove to the clocks needed to surpass this on single core performance?

>14nm+++
Are they going up in size?
I thought smaller was better.

2020

But now AMD have higher IPC, so they still win.

> Intel isn't even trying

They're falling over themselves trying to push out whatever they can on 14nm++++++++++

One core at 5GHz for like 10 seconds, at "65W"

intel should use exponential values for the pluses

we present you our brand new vanilla lake on the 14+32 process

>14nm+++++++++++++++++++++++

Attached: 1548894469228.jpg (346x347, 57K)

"techpress" reporting on fake News
fucking amazing

It blows my mind how many people don't understand this. If I'm comparing an Intel to an AMD, the Intel with a higher clock, but the AMD performing better, I care fuck all about frequency. The only fucking time frequency is relevant is when comparing cpus from the same family/architecture.

REMEMBER WHEN THEY SAID 40% BETTER IPC WITH SUNNY COPE?

NOW THEY THINK INTEL WILL RELEASE 10 CORES FOR $499 KEK THE DELUSION IS REAL

Attached: 1546769966483.jpg (944x703, 279K)

> 10C/20T
> 5.2 GHz
> on 14nm+++

What kind of retard thinks this is a good thing? At this point, it sounds like a goddamn parody. It's going to be the same fucking silicon even slightly more factory overclocked than the housefires they're releasing since years, except with even higher temperatures and a new socket for no fucking reason except Intel jewing even harder.

Attached: my brain is full of fuck.jpg (579x300, 47K)

and how long will it boost to 5.2ghz, 30-40 seconds?

Holy shit. That's why that looked so familiar.

Reminder.
A socket a year keeps the goyim in fear.
Enjoy your 10 core housefire.

Yes there was but it only affects single-core boost.

>inb4 cinebench is a synthetic
Yes, we're comparing the 8-core to the 12-core because they're priced equivalently.

best goy

Different vendors all had different bios versions with various degrees of (in) compatibility
Gn used gigabyte, this is msi.

>3950X price is too high, if it's true AMD might have to drop it a bit before launch too.
What for? It won't even beat 3900x in anything the 9900k doesn't already beat it and Intel still won't have anything that's even close to competing with 3950x at anything less than twice the price in productivity.

>3950X price is too high, if it's true AMD might have to drop it a bit before launch too.

Attached: 1562243155093.jpg (900x900, 83K)

After hardware mitigation that 5.2ghz is more like 4.2 ghz lmaooooooooo

>posting AdoredTV tier fake leaks as news
And so the cycle starts once more.

>Cascade Lake V2

Attached: Cascade Lake.png (1452x892, 1.28M)

remember
>deepens voice
>getting ready to fire sassy shot
>"that's twice as fast as on cascade lake"
>laughter erupts
>leaves stage

Attached: forrest norrod.jpg (819x1024, 75K)

if he only bothered to test one board what's the point in bringing him up

>slide gets posted by an anonymous poster on a japanese forum
>doesn't give any info and doesn't reply to questions
>IT'S TRUE AMD BTFO

The slide doesn't look like anything Intel has shown in the past, from the lithography to the socket name format and the code name.

Also the dollar put after the price instead of before is extremely unusual for a US company, meaning the slide was obviously done by a non US person without verification from intel.
Everything points to an AdoredTV-tier leak.

Intel will certainly btfo amd if they send amd a sample to test.

Attached: Tuesday_Weather_Forecast_7_91731649_ver1.0.jpg (1280x720, 78K)

also
kek

>14+++
is this actually the name Intel went with

Attached: 1504112535868.jpg (423x404, 20K)