[ZoLKoRn] R7 vs i7 - core for core - clock for clock - Page 13 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

[ZoLKoRn] R7 vs i7 - core for core - clock for clock

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #121 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 12:18 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Tsumi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5,435
Rep: 247 (Unique: 174)
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRobot23 View Post

Does it? I mean they also include price and power.
Keep in mind that R5 1500X might cost under 200$...

You're just nitpicking words now. I was talking about in terms of performance, those are the only measurements that matter. Not IPC or clock speed.

Tsumi is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #122 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 12:21 PM
 
IRobot23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsumi View Post

You're just nitpicking words now. I was talking about in terms of performance, those are the only measurements that matter. Not IPC or clock speed.

I am nitpicking words? Sure why dont you compare FX 8350 to i7 6900K.
If you are intel fanboy, thats okay... but you just cant deny that AMD did really great job there and personally I think that R5 1500X (4C/8T) is already i7 7700K killer.
IRobot23 is offline  
post #123 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 12:22 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
PureBlackFire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: New York
Posts: 7,417
Rep: 429 (Unique: 316)
I saw this last week. sure it was posted already.

PureBlackFire is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #124 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 12:22 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Malinkadink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,038
Rep: 108 (Unique: 84)
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRobot23 View Post

I am nitpicking words? Sure why dont you compare FX 8350 to i7 6900K.
If you are intel fanboy, thats okay... but you just cant deny that AMD did really great job there and personally I think that R5 1500X (4C/8T) is already i7 7700K killer.

If it costs $100 less and can clock to 5ghz then yes i can agree with 1500X being a 7700k killer.

Malinkadink is offline  
post #125 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 12:25 PM
 
IRobot23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malinkadink View Post

If it costs $100 less and can clock to 5ghz then yes i can agree with 1500X being a 7700k killer.

R5 1500X might be only around 180$! Also if you are fan of 144Hz as I am you probably know that i7 7700K 5GHz wont give you that in MP games, what will give you 144Hz+ is optimization and moar cores.
I can tell you and every owned of i7 6800K that at 4.4GHz it will just murder i7 7700K 5GHz in BF1 MP.

And thats why I wont agree with reviewers, because they wont show that i7 7700K is loosing it...
You can just check BF1 forum how people are crying, because of their i7 is at 100% load and GPU is under 80%.
IRobot23 is offline  
post #126 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 12:34 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Malinkadink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,038
Rep: 108 (Unique: 84)
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRobot23 View Post

R5 1500X might be only around 180$! Also if you are fan of 144Hz as I am you probably know that i7 7700K 5GHz wont give you that in MP games, what will give you 144Hz+ is optimization and moar cores.
I can tell you and every owned of i7 6800K that at 4.4GHz it will just murder i7 7700K 5GHz in BF1 MP.

And thats why I wont agree with reviewers, because they wont show that i7 7700K is loosing it...
You can just check BF1 forum how people are crying because of their i7 is at 100% load and GPU is under 80%.

BF1 is of little interest to me as i haven't played it since launch and when i did i was content with 100 ish fps in that title. Overwatch is my go to fps and i have no problems averaging over 250 fps on a 7700k + 1080 @1080p. I returned the R7 1700 because it couldn't manage those fps numbers so it wouldn't be good for a 240hz display.

EDIT: Unless i was doing work that actually used all 16 threads all the time and saved me time i just don't see a point in Ryzen right now where gaming is concerned. I would rather get the best performance now than wait for AMDs finewine technology. When the wine has fermented then i'll get on the train again.

Malinkadink is offline  
post #127 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 12:35 PM
^^That's my user name^^
 
KSIMP88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Your moms
Posts: 9,838
Rep: 395 (Unique: 286)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsumi View Post

That's because Ryzen has Broadwell-E solidly beat in performance/$ in multimedia and workstation type work, Broadwell-E only makes sense if you want absolute best workstation performance or need the PCI-E lanes. Gaming is where things get muddy, and the price competitors are the 1700 and 1700x against the 7700k. When the 6 and 4 core Ryzens are released, they will be pitted against i5s and i3s.
Your post makes no sense whatsoever.

Let me simplify my point.

Whoever sells the most CPUs wins.

Doesn't matter how great something is. What matters is will the majority of consumers buy it? You need to create a product that is best for the target consumers. That means a better deal than the competition.



Again. It didn't matter when AMD or Intel has the fastest CPU. What mattered was who had the best deals. That's why Intel won for so long. That i5 was priced just right for it's performance.

Hodor, hodor hodor hodor hodor. Hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor hodor, hodor hodor. Hodor, hodor hodor, hodor hodor hodor hodor. -Hodor


KSIMP88 is offline  
post #128 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 01:06 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Tsumi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5,435
Rep: 247 (Unique: 174)
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRobot23 View Post

I am nitpicking words? Sure why dont you compare FX 8350 to i7 6900K.
If you are intel fanboy, thats okay... but you just cant deny that AMD did really great job there and personally I think that R5 1500X (4C/8T) is already i7 7700K killer.

If Bulldozer came out of the box at 5 ghz and overclocked to 6 ghz on air, no one would have said it was a failure. It failed because it had significantly worse IPC and clock speeds, both stock and overclocked.

Ryzen manages to have IPC almost on par, with stock clock speeds only marginally lower. That's why it's not the failure Bulldozer was. However, its overclocked performance is still significantly behind Intel's overclocked performance, and for overclockers (we are on overclock.net), that is a fail.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KSIMP88 View Post

Let me simplify my point.

Whoever sells the most CPUs wins.

Doesn't matter how great something is. What matters is will the majority of consumers buy it? You need to create a product that is best for the target consumers. That means a better deal than the competition.



Again. It didn't matter when AMD or Intel has the fastest CPU. What mattered was who had the best deals. That's why Intel won for so long. That i5 was priced just right for it's performance.

Brand recognition, product support after the sale, and so on all factor in to what businesses and OEMs buy. Consumers who buy OEM machines are heavily influenced by brand recognition. AMD has a lot of work to do in this regard, as well as working with OEMs to have a broader OEM lineup to attract more attention from consumers.

Tsumi is offline  
post #129 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 01:21 PM
 
IRobot23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 449
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZealotKi11er View Post

I am no fan of AMD or Intel. Reason I still have 3770K is because the how pathetic their CPUs have been. AMD started Zen after SB and IVY so they knew the baseline performance target. The reason for the disappointment is because I was ready to just to Zen but was sadly no target to me and gamers. I never wanted 6900K to begin with and many people dont too. 8-Core are nice if you have a use for me. I refuse to pay $ for ifs in the future. I think 5GHz 7700K is more than 10% faster than 4.6GHz 3770K but still does not give me reason to upgrade.

Every ryzen with lower clock and faster memory will kick as of that i7 3770K.
i7 7700K cost around 360$, with decent MB 570$, and really fast DDR4 2x8GB 3200MHz you are near 680$ ...
i7 6800K cost 440$, with decent MB 690$, Q-CH DDR4 830$...


Around 50% more performance for 20% more price?
IRobot23 is offline  
post #130 of 374 (permalink) Old 03-12-2017, 01:23 PM
MegaTechPC
 
Majin SSJ Eric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Saint Simons Island, GA
Posts: 19,208
Rep: 1092 (Unique: 517)
I'm still not seeing this stomping the 7700K gives Ryzen at max OC in an average of games? 10-15% (and only at 1080p) = "stomping" now? thinking.gif


3DMark11 - P25138
3DMark Firestrike - P20998

Intel Core i7 4930K @ 4.7GHz | Asus Rampage IV Extreme | 2 x EVGA GTX Titan SC (1254MHz) | 16GB Patriot Viper Extreme DDR3 2133MHz (4 x 4GB) | Corsair AX1200 | Silverstone Temjin TJ11 | Corsair Force 3 240GB (System) | 2 x Intel 320 160GB SSD (Dedicated Gaming Drives) | Hitachi Deskstar 1TB (Data) | MS Windows 10 Pro | EK Supreme HF/FC-Titan/Rampage IV Extreme blocks | Hardware Labs GTX 560/240 rads | Alphacool VPP-655 D5 pump | Bitspower mod kit/pump top/fittings/120mm res


Majin SSJ Eric is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off