Popped in to say hello

goobee · Post by **goobee** » Fri Mar 31, 2017 4:43 am

Not sure if there's anyone left who knows/knew me.

Post by **Philip** » Fri Mar 31, 2017 9:51 pm

Hello! It's been ages dude, how are you doing ? Did you give up on tweaking

goobee · Post by **goobee** » Sun Apr 02, 2017 3:09 am

Not bad, have not been building much, my main box is several generations old. The new Ryzen processors have peaked my interest, I may be picking a 1700x up mid year. What's happening here?

Chris · Post by **Chris** » Sun Apr 02, 2017 10:21 am

greatings goobee from another long time no here

goobee · Post by **goobee** » Mon Apr 17, 2017 9:24 pm

Hey Chris, how's it going?

Post by **Philip** » Wed Apr 19, 2017 8:40 am

I am glad AMD is finally stepping up to the plate and getting back into the CPU race with the Ryzen processors, many people seem interested.

From what I've seen some of the higher end models have great price/performance ratio (half the price of flagship Intel I7s for similar performance).. The mid-range processors (Intel Core i7-6800K @ 3.40GHz vs. AMD Ryzen 7 1700) seem to be priced similarly though, there is not that much difference.

I am not sure about the motherboard offerings, but definitely AMD is back in the CPU game, and competition is always good for us consumers!

Lefty · Post by **Lefty** » Wed Apr 19, 2017 11:27 am

Hello Goobee!

goobee · Post by **goobee** » Sun Apr 23, 2017 12:44 am

A 1700x or 1800x almost anyone can afford. What Intel wants for their i7 8-core processor line is insane.

Post by **Philip** » Sun Apr 23, 2017 9:55 am

Yeah, the only thing that bugs me is they don't have that much price advantage in those two... AMD 1700x costs ~$400, 1800x is $469 currently. The Intel models are very similarly priced.. i7-6800K is $424, i7-7700K is ~$300-350 depending on speed.

goobee · Post by **goobee** » Sun Apr 23, 2017 5:03 pm

I was thinking more from a physical core comparison. About a grand for Intel to play in that arena. But performance wise comparison, yes the i7-6800K would be correct.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Sun Apr 23, 2017 11:00 pm

Hopefully AMD keeps going in this direction, we need some competition. Id stay with Intel for now but this is a promising step.

goobee · Post by **goobee** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 12:28 am

From the reviews I've read so far, performance is as I expected. Almost as good as Intel but just slightly lagging. Price versus performance is where it beats Intel and that is where the big victory is. You will have to plunk down big money for Intel to get 8/16 cores/threads. What's nice is, unlike Intel who disables hyperthreading on i5 cpus, hyperthreading is available across all Ryzen variants.

The folks who are disappointed with Ryzen performance are the ones with unrealistic expectations. They are bitching about single thread performance. If that's what important to them, then all they need is an unlocked quad core i5

Post by **Philip** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 7:41 am

It's kind of ironic that AMD beats intel in 8+ core high end video-processing CPUs at half the price. Seems like AMD will be challenging Intel's domination in server processors soon with their "Naples" 32-core CPUs as well. I'm glad AMD is coming back to the competition, I was just hoping their low-end CPUs would have a bit more definitive price/performance advantage so that it would be a clear win across the board, I guess it is too much to ask

goobee · Post by **goobee** » Mon Apr 24, 2017 3:25 pm

Intel most likely have had next generation processors ready and have been holding back. There just wasn't any need to due to the lack of competition. Case in point, Intel's previous strategy was "Tick/Tock", now it is "Tick/Tock/Tock".

Additionally, Intel is able to pretty much price their products as high as they want and people pay it.

Free market pricing only works when there isn't a monopoly. AMD took their time making sure they didn't have another "Bulldozer" fiasco and it shows. Once bios/firmware matures, we should see even better benchmarks across the board.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Sat Apr 29, 2017 9:53 am

goobee wrote:Intel most likely have had next generation processors ready and have been holding back. There just wasn't any need to due to the lack of competition. Case in point, Intel's previous strategy was "Tick/Tock", now it is "Tick/Tock/Tock".

The double tock has more been forced on them than anything, they've been trying to maintain their 6-8% improvement per generation though. Their development is pretty open too, they release one generation and start on the next.

My demanding activity is gaming, so I care more about single thread performance. I actually have hyperthreading disabled on my i7 atm. lol

goobee · Post by **goobee** » Sun Apr 30, 2017 6:30 pm

Pricing on the Ryzen is getting better and better. Fry's has them on sale every few weeks, $40 - $50 off with promo codes. I just wish ram wasn't so damn volatile. It seems every time I want to upgrade, ram prices soar.

Post by **Philip** » Mon May 01, 2017 11:30 am

It's volatile storage by definition, excuse the pun

goobee · Post by **goobee** » Mon May 01, 2017 2:24 pm

Philip wrote:It's volatile storage by definition, excuse the pun

The attachment 10516.jpg is no longer available

goobee · Post by **goobee** » Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:44 pm

Nice, AMD Threadripper is out now. I can't justify the cost but if you need computing power, this looks to be the cat's meow.

Post by **Philip** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:38 am

Woa, the number of CPU cores is going to catch up to GPU cores some day.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Fri Aug 11, 2017 9:05 pm

Now game engines just need to support and work well with them.

7thkevin · Post by **7thkevin** » Sat Nov 04, 2017 6:20 am

Ello i pop in once in a while