I was never deluded in any way and Intel's price on the 6950X remains a solid $1.6k at newegg because of the nonthreatening nature of it.
I was never deluded in any way and Intel's price on the 6950X remains a solid $1.6k at newegg because of the nonthreatening nature of it.In that case you deluded yourself because that was never going to happen.
Did you really expect a brand new revolutionary architecture to come out and work flawlessly on day one?Don't get me wrong Ryzen is a fantastic CPU - but if you look at reviews,it does have weaknesses relative to some Intel CPUs,and AMD has not denied it one bit. They even said they sent out kits to improve performance and they were honest enough to say they could not give a time frame. AMD said that. So I really don't understand why these people are getting so worked up since it does not do as well as the competition in certain cases - surely if you are the biggest AMD fan in the world you would want to highlight it so AMD will try and work on improving performance.
It was like with my last card - it was a Nvidia one and it had issues,which I was candid about elsewhere and people started thinking I was some AMD fanboi since I just honestly spoke my mind.
You can't win - one day you are insinuated to be an AMD fanboi,an Intel one,etc.
I posted the Legit reviews comment about the patches which gave the 30 day time-frame for the first tranche of Windows updates with the R5 1600X reviews.
Its even funnier since they probably think anybody who has any negative to say about Ryzen is probably the famous lot who retreated for a while from here,ie,the same lot I actually tried to counter at times when they went into overdrive even in the blasted Ryzen thread. But what they don't understand is that they will drive everybody away who does not toe their line 100% which means when the Blue team release their new CPUs,the other lot will jump back here and ram it down their throat too,and there will be nobody in-between left.
I was never deluded in any way and Intel's price on the 6950X remains a solid $1.6k at newegg because of the nonthreatening nature of it.
where?R7-1700 now on eBay for $279.99
The whole argument about low res testing being irrelevant is a bad one. It translates over directly to high refresh gaming.
no, it's pointless.... Why would you benchmark 720p to extrapolate 1080p performance when you could just test 1080p?!
I didn't say that... I refuted another person's argument.That's not why historically people benchmark at low resolutions. If you think this is the case you are fundamentally misunderstanding the nature and purpose of these tests. And if the benchmarker makes these claims they are simply jumping to conclusions whilst following in the testing methodology of greater mortals.
The low res' tests are analogous to "synthetic" benchmarks. You can argue until the cows come home about how much "real world" value they have, but to pretend they have no value at all is stupid.
yah, they ignorantly and incorrectly assumed it correlated to performance in future games.
Explain the value...
I didn't say that... I refuted another person's argument.
The whole argument about low res testing being irrelevant is a bad one. It translates over directly to high refresh gaming.
You just have shown complete incompetence with this question. You do not understand the context?
The number there is the average from all of threads used in the game. Which means. Each, of the 16 Threads are loaded in between 20 and 40%
Afterburner does not show you how much each core is being used, it shows you how often each core is being used.Crysis3 can use all 16cores on ryzen.
What do you mean with "sum of 0 and 1 is greater than 100" this is not possible,maximum for a dual core is 50% on each core wich would be 100% total.TheElf, just to clarify, if the sum of 0 and 1 is greater than 100, so average is above 50, and the same applies for each core and corresponding thread...?
I'm only asking because that is clearly the case in the above video. PS, I know the answer.