2 hours ago, Milfeulle said:
My monitor have g-sync so I have no choice but use Nvidia video card. The same goes to AMD free sync. I’m waiting on Intel 8700k Cannonlake Q2 2017 and 1080 TI in 5 days.
There will be no Cannonlake/Coffee lake on desktop until 2018, q2 2017 is only for laptop cpu.
Btw what they released atm are the high-end workstations cpus, directly competing with 1000+ $ 6900K: with better performances (single theaded and multithreaded) at half the price (basically with almost the same money you can buy a 4 cores 8 threads @4.5 from intel which for workloads can’t stand a chance) and less tdp.
For true gaming cpus we need to wait April when the 6cores@4ghz ryzen x1600 will be released to compete against the intel 7700k which, atm against his direct rival in price (ryzen 7 1700), have better single thread performance. Don’t worry btw: the 1600x will be priced at 250$, less than any discount Intel can do on a 7700k.
New Apu and the low ends 4cores cpus,will be released in 2h of the 2017.
2 hours ago, Gizmomac said:
I have a 1080 I don’t need G-sync because its always over 60FPS ”)
Ok if I’d change to 144hz I would go with Gsync for sure.
still I think G-sync is very overpriced.
Unless you are a pro from csgo I don’t see why not getting gsync or freesync. They basically allows you to put everything on max settings at every resolutions you want until your fps stays in the range supported by the module installed. You will get no tearing, no stutter, no laggy graphics in exchange of a basically non existant input lag.
The old speech about @60 or @144 is dead unless, as I said, you are playing at csgo. Gaming at 1080 resolution with gazilions of fps is dead. (unless, like me, you are playing on a 42inch old glorius plasma)
And it will also double as a room heater!
24 minutes ago, Scar6 said:
And it will also double as a room heater!
It needs less power then any Intel cpu: stop spreading BS.
Intel 6900k 140w TDP @ 1000$
specs: https://ark.intel.com/products/94196/Intel-Core-i7-6900K-Processor-20M-Cache-up-to-3_70-GHz
price: https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i7-6900K-Processor-FC-LGA14A-BX80671I76900K/dp/B01FJLAIG0
AMD Ryzen 7 1800x 95w TDP @ 500$
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1v44wWAOHn8&t=1032s
^this^ guy above beats Intel counterpart in every task. It’s a fact.
Even the lower priced 1700x 95w @400$ beats the 6900k pretty much in every case scenario.
TBH so far everyone knows that the 1000$+ price tag on intel stuff is 80% marketing and 20% value. I prefer realistic prices rly, after all im not going to hack MI6, some work + gaming is enough for me and pretty much anyone else. I’m glad they did this, just so we as consumers get some reasonable items on the market from time to time.
6 minutes ago, ORCA1911 said:
TBH so far everyone knows that the 1000$+ price tag on intel stuff is 80% marketing and 20% value. I prefer realistic prices rly, after all im not going to hack MI6, some work + gaming is enough for me and pretty much anyone else. I’m glad they did this, just so we as consumers get some reasonable items on the market from time to time.
Indeed no one needs such performing 8core for gaming and low to middle encoding stuffs. Those series 7 are meant for workstations.
Cpus for gaming will be released before spring end at a price around 250$ and less, with only 65w tdp _and comparable clock to clock performance with an 7700k intel (_which if people don’t get it: is the top performing single threaded cpu atm and will be like that 'til 2018).
Btw you cannot convince people taken into marketing stuffs, even if you give them facts. So keep holding up, press release trying to convincing you that those new cpu are not whorth at any level, will appear at the end of this month.
Just now, Spongejohn said:
Cpu for gamings will be released before spring end at a price around 250$ and less, with only 65w tdp and comparable clock to clock performance with an 7700k intel.
By that time Intel already rolled out Cannonlake 8700k in Q2 2017. Also AMD requires AMD motherboard… I would like to see how much performance difference between 1700 and 7700k. 7700k only sells for $299 in Microcenter at all time.
5 minutes ago, Milfeulle said:
By that time Intel already rolled out Cannonlake 8700k in Q2 2017. Also AMD requires AMD motherboard… I would like to see how much performance difference between 1700 and 7700k. 7700k only sells for $299 in Microcenter at all time.
Maybe you don’t get it:
There will be no desktop cannon lake or coffee lake cpu during all 2017. They will release only the laptop low power cpus.
1700 ryzen is not the counterpart of 7700k , it’s priced against the 6800k: totally different cpu.
7700k counterparts are still not released yet, and they will costs from 250 to 200 $.
Just now, Spongejohn said:
Maybe you don’t get it:
There will be no desktop cannon lake or coffee lake cpu during all 2017. They will release only the laptop low power cpus.
1700 ryzen is not the counterpart of 7700k , it’s priced against the 6800k: totally different cpu.
7700k counterparts are still not released yet, and they will costs from 250 to 200 $.
I see. Thanks for the info, I’m stuck on an Intel motherboard for now, unless CPU makes a noticeable difference on game performance, I won’t consider getting a new one anytime soon. Video card is still the main factor.
Still the mainstream computer of today lingers at something like a random 2/3/4gen i5/vishera cpu, 8 gigs 1333/1600mhz ddr3 ram and a 2/3gig graphics card of any decent make. I still cant find any reason to buy anything of the newer tech unless i go apechit on some video/audio editing or similar heavy duty stuff.
Just now, ORCA1911 said:
Still the mainstream computer of today lingers at something like a random 2/3/4gen i5/vishera cpu, 8 gigs 1333/1600mhz ddr3 ram and a 2/3gig graphics card of any decent make. I still cant find any reason to buy anything of the newer tech unless i go apechit on some video/audio editing or similar heavy duty stuff.
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey
78.5% Intel CPU and 58.73% Nvidia GPU 23.41% AMD GPU, let’s see in a few month if AMD rises.
God how i hate every aspect of steam other than selling… but in any case, let’s see indeed.
Well, since AMD went to rest Intel owned a monopoly, so they did whatever they want with their prices since there was no alternative.
Now AMD gave them a kick in the butt, see what they will do. I will definitely rather grab an AMD next than Intel considering the value for money, the heck why the fuck would I pay 1000 dollars for a processor, just because Intel is like “Haha where else can you go”, now I say “AMD you scrubs”. It’s just like with youtube, they screw with their creators just because there is no alternative.
Even tho the costly processors were meant for workstations and all, a thousand bux is helluva lot moneyz. I’m just glad the prices are going to get lower since this charade went on long enough.
Workstations CPUs are one thing but workstation graphic cards are also important, did you see the price on the M6000? Who knows how Vega is going to compete with Nvidia now. You must say that this new line-up came out after Kabylake(3rd January this year but still) and Pascal(May, last year.) were released so they kinda had a time advantage, it always depends, so technically, Ryzen and Vega would be supposed to compete with the next models from Intel and Nvidia, right?
nice to hear, amd has something new, but in the end, i would not buy bleeding edge stuff, just because marketing tells me to, but because i have a certain budget, and need “stuff”. 
–
history blah, tldr.
just a bit of history, because i find it interesting to remember both companies closely related hate-love-relationship, and just find it interesting (and re-researched it just so i dont share bs)
the reason intel had to share technology with amd in the early 80s, was because of ibm’s policy of having to have two sources for the processors they wanted to use in products, even if they had decided to use intels 8086 chips, which came in 81 with the ibm pc, it could not be produced by intel alone. they forced intel into a deal with amd, and until the 90s, intel delayed it but finally had to agree on sharing all architectures until the pentium era (not cool intel! not cool!). only since then amd started to have success with their own architectures, until then, their biggest strength was, that it was a very dedicated company, who pioneered in giving shares to their workers (cool amd!) and also had some experience with x86, as they had already reverse engineered the 8080 (not so cool amd…, but impressive.)
the reason why intel had a quasi monopoly is, because it was founded in the late 60s by the guy who co-invented the integrated circuit itself, especially based on silicon chips, robert noyce, and therefore a huge advantage in knowledge how to create them. besides that, moores law gave them a healthy “self measurement”, ensuring they actually innovate even without competitors, which probably lead to them being elected by ibm to start the “pc”. from then on, it was more a war of architecture, less of cpu power until the pentium (80586) era.
so in the end, we can thank ibm and legal trust laws for intel not having a monopoly right now. both companies however came from the same source, as noyce and moore (the one with the law) had both worked in fairchild semiconductors before they left to create intel, same as the group of engineers who founded AMD a year later with the help of jerry sanders. both were already players, when the game started.
there were however many, many other players in this game, who were real enemies of intel and amd together, especially motorola, whose risc processors outshined intel in floating point operations - and who was in the game until apple decided to go x86 aswell, basicly making intel cpu chipset the norm. so i do not see them as arch enemies, more like two giants who tolerate each other, because they need each other to survive and thrive, and basicly innovate on the same architectural principles. success is just a question, whether they have the correct tools for the current need. both cant make magicly create something superb that is really cheaper than the other can.
In architecture, ARM e.g. still is used a lot aswell, as it is a risc processor, reducing power need, so also especially in supercomputing, raspberry pis, or handhelds, mainly in linux and apple land, and microsoft has announced, that win10 will get to arm aswell. That might trigger events in the aftermath, that will change computing a lot more, than ryzen ”). (love the thread title btw.)
–
Spongy , I do not concurr.
On 24.2.2017 at 7:58 PM, Spongejohn said:
That’s not how things works.
On 24.2.2017 at 4:34 PM, xKostyan said:
Is it a Man or a Woman?
Kosty - that is not good a comment.
Why?
Let me tell you 1st - fact, 2nd - personal experience
ad #1 : facts:
a) While 99% of all human being - all over the earth, from Eskimo to Aboriginees to Arabs, Europeans, North Americans, Africans and Jews - are roughly 50% male and 50% female, the 1 % are human beings from birth - innocent without any guilt - are so called “Intersexual” persons, and c. 4% are persons that choose to be other than their sex (male or female) because of embryonic development (hormone concentrations, developmental aberrations, etc.pp.).
b) shape of body and form and development over time (like tendency to have belly) are mostly inherited by genetic factors - not by behavior or food style!
c) this high ranked industrial female AMD engineer that did the presentation should get proper respect. Or would you like to be presented new technologies by stupid model-actors , because they are 100% perfect in outer apearance? I*'d say let the people that did this represent and prensent it - indifferent of their beauty, eappearance or gender!
d) She is female - no one would otherwise put on these stupid not comfortable high heeled shoes!
#2 : personal experience:
What would you say if one of your daughters - one time admit to you she was homosexual and liked to libve with another woman? What if this child of yours woulöd be one of your sons?
Man - this is real world, it happens and is not bad! Please show some tolerance and civilized behavior towards other people that do not look like Model-persons or the actors in movies.
22 hours ago, ORCA1911 said:
TBH so far everyone knows that the 1000$+ price tag on intel stuff is 80% marketing and 20% value. I prefer realistic prices rly, after all im not going to hack MI6, some work + gaming is enough for me and pretty much anyone else. I’m glad they did this, just so we as consumers get some reasonable items on the market from time to time.
Man - these were times when AMD had Intel at their hook with the super-Athlon and Opterons.
I’d like to see AMD rise again and deliver better CPU for a reasonable price.
Though I admit that Intel did great job over time but a real Rivel would suit them all-too good, also!!!
P.S. Only fear from me is that Intel will come out with the next 1nm CPU-line in couple months and destroy financial base of AMD with their 14nm Ryzen line… Hopefully not happening!