unseenmorbidity
Golden Member
- Nov 27, 2016
- 1,395
- 967
- 96
This thread is about gaming with ryzen. Not trolling about AMD stocks.So a $648 million stock dump is okay?
This thread is about gaming with ryzen. Not trolling about AMD stocks.So a $648 million stock dump is okay?
Have you thought about possibility that guy/gal bought them when they were 1.84$ each? And now is selling when they are 14-15$ each...So a $648 million stock dump is okay?
I don't want to refer to any specific poster, but I agree, the flooding of this and the VC and G forums with adamant AMD supporters obviously trying to convince readers to purchase their products has just the opposite effect on me, and has made me determined to never buy an AMD product no matter how good the value is.Again? Didn't this already get cleared up in another Ryzen thread. It's ok to prefer one or the other brands but in the end, you can't be taken seriously if you post this over and over again.
I call comparing an OCed vs. a downclocked CPU trolling. Actually the charts only proof the 7700k is in these benches far superior as it wins most of them with 1 hand tied behind it's back. Since the 1800x is OCed the 7700k should be running at least at 4.8 Ghz if not higher meaning 20% faster...
I still haven't decided if I buy 7700k, Ryzen or wait for Skylake-X. But posts like this are for sure pushing me towards Intel. So if you actually are an AMD marketing guy (as I think you are), what you are doing is counter-productive. I'm telling you this because I want AMD to succeed but I', not buying their products out of pity. They need to deliver.
What I mean is that there are 2 distinct arguments here:
1) whether low resolution benchmarks have value.
2) whether low resolution benchmarks can be "extrapolated" into future performance.
The maker of the video invented point #2 whether deliberately or not. They then spent the rest of the video arguing against point #2.
But there is no logical connection to point #1.
Ok. Currently, have a i7 3770k with Fury card and play BF1 at 1440p at 100hz at low/med settings. I'm planning to get a 1080Ti so I can play at Ultra settings at 120hz and been told that I may be cpu limited by the i7 3770k. I was thinking of getting a 1700X but benchmarks and discussion go both ways. 1700X or 7700k?
It's a choice between near-full load on the 7700K, with somewhat faster(<10%) average FPS than the 1700X, but with considerably lower CPU utilization on the latter.Ok. Currently, have a i7 3770k with Fury card and play BF1 at 1440p at 100hz at low/med settings. I'm planning to get a 1080Ti so I can play at Ultra settings at 120hz and been told that I may be cpu limited by the i7 3770k. I was thinking of getting a 1700X but benchmarks and discussion go both ways. 1700X or 7700k?
I don't want to refer to any specific poster, but I agree, the flooding of this and the VC and G forums with adamant AMD supporters obviously trying to convince readers to purchase their products has just the opposite effect on me, and has made me determined to never buy an AMD product no matter how good the value is.
Ironically, the 7700K and 6800K CPU's that AMD spent so much time bashing during their presentations simply don't suffer from these limitations.
So if you are gaming in those scenarios the much cheaper 7700K is probably the better buy, or what you should stay with if you already have one.In the computerbase.de updated benchmark suite, the 1800x is 98.3% as fast as the 7700k at 1080 gaming.
Doesn't seem to suffer, does it? Though after gaming at higher resolutions, I'd never go back to gaming at low graphic settings likes 1080 anyway.
Because gaming is the most common reason for being a hardware enthusiast, and the 7700K is the fastest gaming cpu?Why do we compare the R7 1800X against Core i7 7700K and not against Core i7 6900K ??
I can see the comparison of R7 1700 at $329 vs Core i7 7700K at $349 because of the same price point but really the R7 1800X at $500 should be compared against the Core i7 6850K or 6900K.
Because gaming is the most common reason for being a hardware enthusiast, and the 7700K is the fastest gaming cpu?
No it isn't.Because gaming is the most common reason for being a hardware enthusiast?
Why do we compare the R7 1800X against Core i7 7700K and not against Core i7 6900K ??
I can see the comparison of R7 1700 at $329 vs Core i7 7700K at $349 because of the same price point but really the R7 1800X at $500 should be compared against the Core i7 6850K or 6900K.
No, it is an anti fanboy attitude. No less rational than the horde of AMD fans who refuse to buy intel because of some business practices that happened ten years ago.Saying you Wouldn't buy a companies product ever again because of opinions of others, instead of using your own thoughts and capacity for objectivity is beyond pathetic.
Thats a fanboi attitude right there.
Because the 1800x is at i7-5960x levels, a 2 years + old chip,hedt is expensive because enthusiasts pay crazy amounts of money for just a little bit better so nobody who's serious about hedt platform will choose the 1800x if he can get a faster chip even if it is insanely high priced.Why do we compare the R7 1800X against Core i7 7700K and not against Core i7 6900K ??
Why do we compare the R7 1800X against Core i7 7700K and not against Core i7 6900K ??.
No, it is an anti fanboy attitude. No less rational than the horde of AMD fans who refuse to buy intel because of some business practices that happened ten years ago.
Because the 1800x is at i7-5960x levels, a 2 years + old chip,hedt is expensive because enthusiasts pay crazy amounts of money for just a little bit better so nobody who's serious about hedt platform will choose the 1800x if he can get a faster chip even if it is insanely high priced.
1800x target group is "poor" people who want to belong to hedt but don't have the money for the latest and greatest and those people have the choice between used 5960x (or even older chips,or even multi processor platforms) at similar price to a new 1800x or, new 7700k/1800x.
Also the stilt already confirmed that zen's execution speed of code is pretty underwhelming,not even beating a lynnfield at lower clocks.
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=thread...-draw-call-performance.2499609/#post-38745075
No, it is an anti fanboy attitude. No less rational than the horde of AMD fans who refuse to buy intel because of some business practices that happened ten years ago.
Also the stilt already confirmed that zen's execution speed of code is pretty underwhelming,not even beating a lynnfield at lower clocks.
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=thread...-draw-call-performance.2499609/#post-38745075
Because Ryzen wouldn't look like a fail if they did.