Why does Ryzen 7 1800X performs so poorly in games?

[ecmaster76]

Seriously need more clarification lol

it's only on the front page

http://m.hardocp.com/news/2017/03/09/new_geforce_driver_delivers_huge_boost_to_dx12_games

they released a new geforce driver to improve dx12 performance. Drivers run on the cpu so some of the performance gains could be derived from more efficient CPU optimizations. Said optimizations may have disproportionately favored AMD in two DX12 games they had been lagging in prior.

 

[Presbytier]

it's only on the front page

http://m.hardocp.com/news/2017/03/09/new_geforce_driver_delivers_huge_boost_to_dx12_games

they released a new geforce driver to improve dx12 performance. Drivers run on the cpu so some of the performance gains could be derived from more efficient CPU optimizations. Said optimizations may have disproportionately favored AMD in two DX12 games they had been lagging in prior.

Except no other review with the 1080ti even comes close to showing that it's the opposite

 

[ZeroBarrier]

And so does not the cpu manufacturer. They need to work together in order to achieve optimisation. Especially when you are not monopolising the market like Intel does. Just wait and see and give them a chance. Premature judgement helps no one since it is mostly bullshit.

Please stop apologizing for a company you do not own or work for; you look like a tool when you do. AMD could have worked more closely with board manufacturers and developers before release. But they instead rushed their release or decided to screw everyone else and then play the blame game by blaming every single other component; board bios, developers, operating system and funniest of all the even blame their "competitor".

Get fucking real, they have no one but themselves to blame. AMD seems to have an uncanny ability to fuck up their releases in one major way or another. Teething issues aside, we all expected them from brand spanking new and unproven hardware; but lets cut the bullshit out and not make excuses for a company in it for profits and not for our benefit or for feels.

 

[Gideon]

Please stop apologizing for a company you do not own or work for; you look like a tool when you do. AMD could have worked more closely with board manufacturers and developers before release. But they instead rushed their release or decided to screw everyone else and then play the blame game by blaming every single other component; board bios, developers, operating system and funniest of all the even blame their "competitor".

Get fucking real, they have no one but themselves to blame. AMD seems to have an uncanny ability to fuck up their releases in one major way or another. Teething issues aside, we all expected them from brand spanking new and unproven hardware; but lets cut the bullshit out and not make excuses for a company in it for profits and not for our benefit or for feels.

Would you like a torch with that burn them at the stake speech?

 

[razor1]

it's only on the front page

http://m.hardocp.com/news/2017/03/09/new_geforce_driver_delivers_huge_boost_to_dx12_games

they released a new geforce driver to improve dx12 performance. Drivers run on the cpu so some of the performance gains could be derived from more efficient CPU optimizations. Said optimizations may have disproportionately favored AMD in two DX12 games they had been lagging in prior.

I think you should watch Linus's tech 1080ti review, they have a Ryzen test system against a Intel 7700 system both with 1080ti, and that is not what it comes out, the Intel systems scale better. Min Frames are better for Ryzen though. So no I don't think that is the case.



Granted they are testing at GPU limited settings but you can see the 7700 system has a lead in a few titles that can be considered outside of margin of error. So that goes to speak when not GPU bound you will see it will still have an advantage.

 

[Gideon]

I think you should watch Linus's tech 1080ti review, they have a Ryzen test system against a Intel 7700 system both with 1080ti, and that is not what it comes out, the Intel systems scale better. Min Frames are better for Ryzen though. So no I don't think that is the case.



Granted they are testing at GPU limited settings but you can see the 7700 system has a lead in a few titles that can be considered outside of margin of error. So that goes to speak when not GPU bound you will see it will still have an advantage.

Thats looking damn good for Ryzen, which makes you think maybe Nvidia tweaked something in their driver that works well with it. To me that just tells me the Ryzen is the better choice over the 7700k with those numbers.

 

[razor1]

err did ya watch the entire video the 7700 when GPU bound most of the time is 10% faster in some games. These are GPU bound tests, we shouldn't see that kind of difference ever.

Pretty much the new drivers aren't really giving Ryzen any benefit.

 

[Gideon]

I dont think you watched the video man. Most of the test was within a few fps of each other and a Ryzen won by a landslide in minimum frames on GTA V at 4K, unless you like 17 fps at 4K. The Ryzen actually gained frames in DX 12 in Deus Ex but was behind in DX 11.

 

[legcramp]

Was the clockspeed stock on both chips?

 

[Gideon]

Was the clockspeed stock on both chips?

Both at stock speeds.

 

[Presbytier]

I dont think you watched the video man. Most of the test was within a few fps of each other and a Ryzen won by a landslide in minimum frames on GTA V at 4K, unless you like 17 fps at 4K. The Ryzen actually gained frames in DX 12 in Deus Ex but was behind in DX 11.

Minimum frame times are pointless without a framrate analysis. It coul literally be 12 frames out of a hundred, which is why it should never be presented on its own.

Was the clockspeed stock on both chips?

Doesn't matter if it's stock or overclock. I doubt one chip was stock and one OC.

 

[razor1]

I dont think you watched the video man. Most of the test was within a few fps of each other and a Ryzen won by a landslide in minimum frames on GTA V at 4K, unless you like 17 fps at 4K. The Ryzen actually gained frames in DX 12 in Deus Ex but was behind in DX 11.

Min frames don't show us exactly what is going on, because the games that should have better frame rates that are made with better multi core processing is not showing up in that degree. You can't just say its due to graphics drivers in that case.

 

[cybereality]

Hmm.. looking like the 1080 Ti likes Ryzen quite a bit. I think I see the letters "t" and "i" in my future...

 

[Presbytier]

Hmm.. looking like the 1080 Ti likes Ryzen quite a bit. I think I see the letters "t" and "i" in my future...

Ummm the CPU here barely matters these are GPU limited situations at these resolutions. I mean I got no problem with you having Ryzen or buying a Ti, but please lets not confuse facts with wish fulfilment here.

 

[cybereality]

Ummm the CPU here barely matters these are GPU limited situations at these resolutions. I mean I got no problem with you having Ryzen or buying a Ti, but please lets not confuse facts with wish fulfilment here.

No, that's not true. Look at this review showing Ryzen paired with the 1080Ti well above the 7700K in both min and avg performance.
http://www.eteknix.com/nvidia-gtx-1080-ti-cpu-showdown-i7-7700k-vs-ryzen-r7-1800x-vs-i7-5820k/4/

 

[ZeroBarrier]

No, that's not true. Look at this review showing Ryzen paired with the 1080Ti well above the 7700K in both min and avg performance.
http://www.eteknix.com/nvidia-gtx-1080-ti-cpu-showdown-i7-7700k-vs-ryzen-r7-1800x-vs-i7-5820k/4/

Not a single other website or review is showing the numbers like this one website I've never heard of. I wonder why that is... Anyone lese ever heard of this site and their credibility before these miraculous benchmarks?

Reminds me of these bullshit thread started about the world record in CPUz benchmark, when CPUz clearly stated the benchmark is fucking broken on Ryzen. World record idiocity is more like it.

 

[cybereality]

No, I haven't been to that site before but I also don't automatically assume a review is bogus just because it doesn't agree with my choice of hardware.

 

[Presbytier]

Wow that was so insightful. Your a troll man, seen your posts on the Intel side and your a obvious troll. You got no clue so it must be fake benchmarks argument, even tho Razor1 posted up a site that tested as well and showed Ryzen doing quite well with a 1080ti as well. Here is a thought, your a very insecure person and feel the need to rage against anyone that does not think your choice of a 7700k is the best for gaming. You offer nothing of worth to any conversation I have seen you on over here, so why dont you do us a favor and stay on the blue side, I hear they have punch and cookies.

No, I haven't been to that site before but I also don't automatically assume a review is bogus just because it doesn't agree with my choice of hardware.

I do think a review should be taken with a considerable grain of salt when it literally goes against the grain. No other benchmark has shown the 1800X beating the 7700k with the Ti; in fact what we see is nearly neck and neck at higher resolutions, which is to be expected, and the 7700k usually edging it out sometimes by a significant amount at lower resolutions like 1080. As I have said before min avg are pretty usual without actual frame time analysis from FCAT. They literally tell you nothing without that. Here is what is puzzling me though is this idea a graphics card wich uses the exact same Pascal architecture as all the other Pascal cards would magically favor one CPU over another that no other card has done at this point. What is happening is people are finally seeing more 4k Ryzen benchmarks, as that is how you test the GPU you make it the bottleneck, and are simply misenterpriting the results to be the smoking gun they hope it is. Ryzen so far is probably fine at higher resolutions, these graphs prove that, but it still lags considerable at 1080 high refresh rate gaming.

 

[Peter2k]

No, that's not true. Look at this review showing Ryzen paired with the 1080Ti well above the 7700K in both min and avg performance.
http://www.eteknix.com/nvidia-gtx-1080-ti-cpu-showdown-i7-7700k-vs-ryzen-r7-1800x-vs-i7-5820k/4/

how is a Ryzen 1800x with stock clocks faster then a 1800x @4.1 Ghz?

also a bit cherry picking with the deus ex test

 

[Gideon]

Not really from what I have seen at 1080p it has been behind in a few titles but 10 to 15 fps is just not a huge deal when your up over 100 most times anyway. Both Ryzen and the 7700k work just fine for games and those that cant use more cores will favor the 7700k. But this idea that their is some huge defecit at 1080p on Ryzen is silly.

 

[cybereality]

also a bit cherry picking with the deus ex test

I wasn't talking about just Deus Ex, if you look at all the pages on that link the 1800X is competing well.

 

[ZeroBarrier]

Wow that was so insightful. Your a troll man, seen your posts on the Intel side and your a obvious troll. You got no clue so it must be fake benchmarks argument, even tho Razor1 posted up a site that tested as well and showed Ryzen doing quite well with a 1080ti as well. Here is a thought, your a very insecure person and feel the need to rage against anyone that does not think your choice of a 7700k is the best for gaming. You offer nothing of worth to any conversation I have seen you on over here, so why dont you do us a favor and stay on the blue side, I hear they have punch and cookies.

My posts provides a world of insight more than yours did, which is in fact trolling (talk about the pot calling the kettle black). I bring up a very valid point. This is an unknown website, and their benchmarks should be questioned when it goes against every other benchmark done by other very well known and trusted websites. Stop getting mad and defending Ryzen; which youareobviously as towards.

No, I haven't been to that site before but I also don't automatically assume a review is bogus just because it doesn't agree with my choice of hardware.

Well you should automatically question benchmarks from unknown websites that aren't as well trusted as others such as [H]ardocp and other similar ones. Especially when their results go against those of we'll known and trusted sites. It should be raising a massive red flag and you choose to ignore it.

I don't have a choice of hardware. I've built both AMD and Intel systems. My preferred hardware is the one that provides the best performance that I am looking for; regardless of the label. Remember that the next time you mouth off bullshit like, "doesn't agree with your choice of hardware".

 

[OrangeKhrush]

My posts provides a world of insight more than yours did, which is in fact trolling (talk about the pot calling the kettle black). I bring up a very valid point. This is an unknown website, and their benchmarks should be questioned when it goes against every other benchmark done by other very well known and trusted websites. Stop getting mad and defending Ryzen; which youareobviously as towards.



Well you should automatically question benchmarks from unknown websites that aren't as well trusted as others such as [H]ardocp and other similar ones. Especially when their results go against those of we'll known and trusted sites. It should be raising a massive red flag and you choose to ignore it.

I don't have a choice of hardware. I've built both AMD and Intel systems. My preferred hardware is the one that provides the best performance that I am looking for; regardless of the label. Remember that the next time you mouth off bullshit like, "doesn't agree with your choice of hardware".

How do you decide what a good review is and what isn't? if it suits your personal opinion and you can wing it without working level knowledge of Ryzen CPU's?

The best reviews and most thorough reviews of Ryzen came from "non" major review sites. Just because a site has [H] or Anandtech or Tomshardware doesn't make it the defacto bible of things.

Having worked on a lot of ryzen builds I can say that performance is there if you are prepared to put the time into it and fine tune, unfortunately there are still bugs but that is something you have to accept with way to early adoption, is it critical no but given what I saw from a few board vendors in house testing results to final review, there is a lot of horsepower still to come. No two boards are the same, it is the lottery at this point, I can take two Tomahawks and one will do 2600+ the other cannot get past 2400 even then it is sketchy, again early adoption is a crapshoot.

 

[ZeroBarrier]

How do you decide what a good review is and what isn't? if it suits your personal opinion and you can wing it without working level knowledge of Ryzen CPU's?

The best reviews and most thorough reviews of Ryzen came from "non" major review sites. Just because a site has [H] or Anandtech or Tomshardware doesn't make it the defacto bible of things.

Having worked on a lot of ryzen builds I can say that performance is there if you are prepared to put the time into it and fine tune, unfortunately there are still bugs but that is something you have to accept with way to early adoption, is it critical no but given what I saw from a few board vendors in house testing results to final review, there is a lot of horsepower still to come. No two boards are the same, it is the lottery at this point, I can take two Tomahawks and one will do 2600+ the other cannot get past 2400 even then it is sketchy, again early adoption is a crapshoot.

Let's all ignnore that their results go against every benchmark done by more well known and reputable websites then.

That's it guys, you heard it here first; Ryzen paired with 1080Ti is the way to go for gaming. It completely trounses even a 7700K; you can see it with your own eyes in that one specific site. Don't bother checking other sites, all of which will tell you something differently.

Right?

 

[OrangeKhrush]

Let's all ignnore that their results go against every benchmark done by more well known and reputable websites then.

That's it guys, you heard it here first; Ryzen paired with 1080Ti is the way to go for gaming. It completely trounses even a 7700K; you can see it with your own eyes in that one specific site. Don't bother checking other sites, all of which will tell you something differently.

Right?

I don't think any of the benches show it completely trouncing anything, it does show improvements and bare in mind that most of those improvements may be stability updates. In the inhouse (motherboard Vendor testing) testing we saw at locked similar clocks around 3.5Ghz that the Ryzen uArch is very effective at low clocks and that most of the difference lies in AMD not being able to achieve the 30-35% higher clock speed.

Then the last issue is the major one, the fact that windows 10 doesn't recognize how a Ryzen CPU operates, the fact that it schedules loads like it is a single core processor, the fact it doesn't address cache properly is all performance related problems yet despite them it is inside 15% of a Kabylake high clock CPU.

I don't care if it is faster than a 7700K, what I have found in a week is that these CPU's destroy any FX part, and they can support dual high end graphics cards without hitch and stutter. For a multi use user these are monster value parts, in anything non gaming they just decimate anything in their price range.

I have seen that Ryzen still has performance left on the table to tap into, and I am hearing a major windows patch is due soon, Ashes of the Singluarity has patch soon and I am sure just about every steam game will have some sort of Ryzen patch coming to help fix errors as unlike you or any reviewer the game devs want ryzen users to buy their games.

 

[Peter2k]

I wasn't talking about just Deus Ex, if you look at all the pages on that link the 1800X is competing well.

You linked to Deus Ex, which is also the only test showing an overclocked 1800x to be slower than a stock one

so I'd call that test a bit wonky
especially considering Nvidia's new driver with dx12 performance enhancements

also I'm sure you know how Ryzen needs some time to mature

it's a great chip
especially the 1700 considering that Ryzen seems to be binned not by clocks but by voltage (according to Kyle)

and I look forward to upgrading to either Ryzen or coffee lake 6 core i7 (if it does come out, and if it does fit in the same socket again)

 

[ZeroBarrier]

Guru3d:
Rise of the Tomb Raider GTX 1080 @1080p:
7700K: 132 FPS
1800X: 114 FPS

Unknown website
Rise of the Tomb Raider GTX 1080Ti @1080p:
7700K:159 FPS
1800X: 174 FPS

This unknown website will have you believe that just adding a 1080Ti the 7700K jumps 27 FPS, but the 1800X jumps 60 FPS. Mind you I'm not quoting the overclocked 1800X (they conveniently didn't overclock the 7700K of course) result of 182 FPS, a fucking 68 FPS jump; how fucking gullible do you have to be to believe a single thing on that page?

 

[JustReason]

Guru3d:
Rise of the Tomb Raider GTX 1080 @1080p:
7700K: 132 FPS
1800X: 114 FPS

Unknown website
Rise of the Tomb Raider GTX 1080Ti @1080p:
7700K:159 FPS
1800X: 174 FPS

This unknown website will have you believe that just adding a 1080Ti the 7700K jumps 27 FPS, but the 1800X jumps 60 FPS. Mind you I'm not quoting the overclocked 1800X (they conveniently didn't overclock the 7700K of course) result of 182 FPS, a fucking 68 FPS jump; how fucking gullible do you have to be to believe a single thing on that page?

Why do you use the Guru as gospel? Why not another? And besides most rational people know that test done at the release of a given product on any given day can fluctuate and the hardware used, all of it, can make a considerable difference. I saw many a 9590 review done where it wasn't even stable when they tried to lock it to 5.0Ghz and released the reviews. My 8350 scored higher @4.6ghz in many of their tests. How accurate do think those were?

 

[Revdarian]

/popcorn.

So, People are trying to dismiss Ryzen because in certain games it is 10% slower than the 7700k?, tell me again, when doing heavy encoding/compiling with all threads blazing, how behind is the 7700k of the Ryzen?

Don't try to use excuses as "Well, it isn't meant to compete in that!", as that is only a copout.

/popcorn

(Also, try gaming while streaming or similar heavy cpu workloads, Ryzen isn't the best at all, but it is pretty darn balanced, wether people accept it or not)

 

[Peter2k]

/popcorn.

So, People are trying to dismiss Ryzen because in certain games it is 10% slower than the 7700k?, tell me again, when doing heavy encoding/compiling with all threads blazing, how behind is the 7700k of the Ryzen?

Don't try to use excuses as "Well, it isn't meant to compete in that!", as that is only a copout.

/popcorn

(Also, try gaming while streaming or similar heavy cpu workloads, Ryzen isn't the best at all, but it is pretty darn balanced, wether people accept it or not)

the i7 performs well enough
you're comparing a gaming CPU with a "workstation" CPU

if one actually NEEDs a lot of cores to stay productive then one should be using at least a 6900k
it's tax deductible

 

[juanrga]

I do think a review should be taken with a considerable grain of salt when it literally goes against the grain. No other benchmark has shown the 1800X beating the 7700k with the Ti; in fact what we see is nearly neck and neck at higher resolutions, which is to be expected, and the 7700k usually edging it out sometimes by a significant amount at lower resolutions like 1080. As I have said before min avg are pretty usual without actual frame time analysis from FCAT. They literally tell you nothing without that. Here is what is puzzling me though is this idea a graphics card wich uses the exact same Pascal architecture as all the other Pascal cards would magically favor one CPU over another that no other card has done at this point. What is happening is people are finally seeing more 4k Ryzen benchmarks, as that is how you test the GPU you make it the bottleneck, and are simply misenterpriting the results to be the smoking gun they hope it is. Ryzen so far is probably fine at higher resolutions, these graphs prove that, but it still lags considerable at 1080 high refresh rate gaming.

Well said. I have a scientific background and one of basic rules is that results must be reproducible. It doesn't matter if someone claims to have measured some property; it is not accepted unless the measurement is reproduced by others. The same principles apply here if we want to know hoe the 1800X really games. And the fact is that there a broad consensus among all main reviews sites. Anandtech has just updated their review and they recommend the 1800X as a workstation CPU, but not as a gaming CPU.

It reminds me when people started mentioning the weird Joker Productions review, who still pretends that 99% load on the GPU is not a bottleneck but a problem with v-sync. A certain reddit user summarized ithis brilliantly:

aka: Joker got the biased results we wanted out of hundreds of other reviewers and that is why we like him and are throwing GN and others under the bus

 

[Revdarian]

the i7 performs well enough
you're comparing a gaming CPU with a "workstation" CPU

if one actually NEEDs a lot of cores to stay productive then one should be using at least a 6900k
it's tax deductible

But see, you guys are doing the opposite thing, hence the /popcorn and the whooshing sound that passed over your head.

 

[juanrga]

It seems we are watching different movies. This is the resume of the movie I am watching:

1) AMD advertised the 1800X as a gaming CPU and gave us demos of it matching or even beating a 7700k on games.

2) Reviews have shown that the 1800X is fine as a workstation CPU, but there are better CPUs for gaming. There are a broad consensus among review sites.

3) Reviews have shown that the 1800X has problems to play games (therein the title for this thread) and is about 20% worse than a 6900k on average.

4) Certain people don't accept 2 and 3 and insist on linking to a pair of unknown/wrong reviews/youtubers that pretend that the 1800X play games so well or even better than a 7770k.

 

[OrangeKhrush]

From hands on consensus Ryzen games just fine, if you get it to work, but i believe the motherboard vendors are confident by mid to late april of having final revisions and mass roll out stocks.

Windows 10 scheduler is ready mid april, if you own a ryzen just stick it out for a month odd and things will be better for you in the long run.

 

[Peter2k]

But see, you guys are doing the opposite thing, hence the /popcorn and the whooshing sound that passed over your head.

Ehh

I know my workload and buy accordingly
and I'm quite happy having only 4 Kaby cores as long as they clock stupidly high

so one page on the internet no one knows claims big gains compared to a 7700k while gaming
all the other reviews say otherwise

while the whole platform is still on wonky bios and Windows support


AMD is a company like any other, in it to make money
People need to chill out over this

From hands on consensus Ryzen games just fine, if you get it to work, but i believe the motherboard vendors are confident by mid to late april of having final revisions and mass roll out stocks.

Windows 10 scheduler is ready mid april, if you own a ryzen just stick it out for a month odd and things will be better for you in the long run.

I'd think having the IPC of Broadwell and that many cores plus the low price (compared) makes for a good all around cpu
given just a bit of maturity

I'm just surprised I'm seeing so many CH6 from asus bricking

my Asus boards were all rather stable and forgiving
even when updating the bios from within Windows

guess it was all just not quite ready yet

 

[JustReason]

Ehh

I know my workload and buy accordingly
and I'm quite happy having only 4 Kaby cores as long as they clock stupidly high

so one page on the internet no one knows claims big gains compared to a 7700k while gaming
all the other reviews say otherwise

while the whole platform is still on wonky bios and Windows support


AMD is a company like any other, in it to make money
People need to chill out over this






I'd think having the IPC of Broadwell and that many cores plus the low price (compared) makes for a good all around cpu
given just a bit of maturity

I'm just surprised I'm seeing so many CH6 from asus bricking

my Asus boards were all rather stable and forgiving
even when updating the bios from within Windows

guess it was all just not quite ready yet

that review does plenty of reviews just they seem to come out later than the others. Their findings do seem inconsistent, but I have no reason to doubt their findings as of yet. But with any review i look at context and only take a more overall approach. Anyone using anysite as the only correct one is full of it.

 

[cybereality]

Yeah, I'm not saying I am taking any one review as truth, especially if it's not a major trusted site. However, I don't think the results were falsified and don't have any reason to believe that. There are lots of factors that could affect performance in the system and it's possible some configs work better than others.

Once there are a number of reviews with similar systems available, we can look at say 5 reviews or more and see if they agree.

 

[Presbytier]

Yeah, I'm not saying I am taking any one review as truth, especially if it's not a major trusted site. However, I don't think the results were falsified and don't have any reason to believe that. There are lots of factors that could affect performance in the system and it's possible some configs work better than others.

Once there are a number of reviews with similar systems available, we can look at say 5 reviews or more and see if they agree.

Its the mass disparity that makes it suspect though and right now those numbers should be ignored unless a bunch of other people magically start getting them.

 

[legcramp]

It seems we are watching different movies. This is the resume of the movie I am watching:

1) AMD advertised the 1800X as a gaming CPU and gave us demos of it matching or even beating a 7700k on games.

2) Reviews have shown that the 1800X is fine as a workstation CPU, but there are better CPUs for gaming. There are a broad consensus among review sites.

3) Reviews have shown that the 1800X has problems to play games (therein the title for this thread) and is about 20% worse than a 6900k on average.

4) Certain people don't accept 2 and 3 and insist on linking to a pair of unknown/wrong reviews/youtubers that pretend that the 1800X play games so well or even better than a 7770k.

More like:

1) 1800X is a gaming CPU because it plays the majority of games perfectly and it hold its own on games or even beat the 7700K depending on the games.

2) Reviews has shown Ryzen is the best workstation cpu at its price-point and obliterates anything in that price-point and also doubles as a pretty damn good gaming CPU. If you're a gamer primarily, the 7700K is obviously the better CPU at the moment but if you do other stuff that takes advantage of the extra cores and also game, Ryzen is obviously the better choice.

3) Techpowerup tested a crap-ton of games.... Ryzen vs 6900K and it performed (13-14%?) worse at 1080p on average and a whopping 4% at 1440p at gaming on average. And yes obviously if you're a high-refresh rate gamer then you're going 7700K at the moment.

4) Certain people..... like Intel fanboys or just certain 6600K-7700K owners gets their panties in a bunch because they are trying to justify their purchases or just can't imagine there is any sort of competition in that price-range. Trolls be putting anything Ryzen related down and talking smack all day long because they either have no life or can't sleep at night because their Intel CPU is not the best at everything at their price-point.

Ryzen is a pretty damn good all-around chip, yes even at gaming. Yes, 7700K is a better gaming cpu and also fantastic chip all-around also that does get out-classed by a competitively priced chip with double the cores when doing stuff that takes advantage of it.


I also noticed some of the main trolls have been doing less trolling but are replaced by other new trolls that aren't as worthy at trolling as they were though.. try harder guys it's more entertaining that way but meh..

 

[razor1]

More like:

1) 1800X is a gaming CPU because it plays the majority of games perfectly and it hold its own on games or even beat the 7700K depending on the games.

2) Reviews has shown Ryzen is the best workstation cpu at its price-point and obliterates anything in that price-point and also doubles as a pretty damn good gaming CPU. If you're a gamer primarily, the 7700K is obviously the better CPU at the moment but if you do other stuff that takes advantage of the extra cores and also game, Ryzen is obviously the better choice.

3) Techpowerup tested a crap-ton of games.... Ryzen vs 6900K and it performed (13-14%?) worse at 1080p on average and a whopping 4% at 1440p at gaming on average. And yes obviously if you're a high-refresh rate gamer then you're going 7700K at the moment.

4) Certain people..... like Intel fanboys or just certain 6600K-7700K owners gets their panties in a bunch because they are trying to justify their purchases or just can't imagine there is any sort of competition in that price-range. Trolls be putting anything Ryzen related down and talking smack all day long because they either have no life or can't sleep at night because their Intel CPU is not the best at everything at their price-point.

Ryzen is a pretty damn good all-around chip, yes even at gaming. Yes, 7700K is a better gaming cpu and also fantastic chip all-around also that does get out-classed by a competitively priced chip with double the cores when doing stuff that takes advantage of it.


I also noticed some of the main trolls have been doing less trolling but are replaced by other new trolls that aren't as worthy at trolling as they were though.. meh

Look you want to game get Intel, you want a so so workstation without the cost, get AMD, if you want a full fledged workstation, get Intel, if you want to stream while gaming and its a hobby get AMD, if you want to stream and do professional broadcasting, get Intel and a broadcast card and another system for recording, See the difference?

AMD didn't make their platform for a full workstation build, cause well they would have had to increase prices, something they didn't want to do.

And this is not how AMD wanted to play this out, they wanted to get the enthusiast market and gamers using their chips (and the added bonus of having workstation features so encompassed everyone), but can't do it at least not yet, and with their CCX issues, where most of the performance problems are stemming from, will not be able to convince the majority of gamers to choose their CPU's for "future proofing" cause that won't change in the future either.

And stop being so damn sensitive about hardware, this is the first time I have ever heard reviewers getting death threats, stupid people, can't control their emotions, its damn product not your child.

If these Fan Boys feel that way, they should give 75% of what they make to AMD...... stupid idiots.

PS that is not geared towards you (rant).......