AMD 1800X fuck smashing "all" the Intel 5960X records.

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Comparison

I would just keep an eye on this page. The more people that get the CPU and benchmark it proper, the more accurate picture you'll get. I think the gap will close a bit as a few driver/BIOS updates are released. Although it looks like they skimped out on the memory controller which may hurt its chances. :(

Keep in mind that the 6900k/6950x cost $1000/$1700 respectively. So the only Intel CPU that it's really fair to compare the 1800x to (8 core/16 thread) is the 7700k (4 core/8 thread).

IMO if they can close the gap to be much closer to the 7700k it would be a no brainer. It would have basically the same gaming performance and MUCH better productivity performance. :weird:
 
Last edited:
I haven't been following Ryzen closely, but from what I gather, they don't have an IGP onboard?

I understand they kinda took a wash with their whole 'APU' thing that kinda hurt 'em, but especially with the new DX12 advent of being able to combine dissimilar video cards, having inbuilt video helps not only in providing simple graphics for non-demanding installs, but they can provide a boost even for those using discrete gfx cards, too - so IGPs become more important than ever, and that's an area where Kaby Lake actually does have some power.

It just seems a strange decision, esp with them having the ATI people right there. Did they just not have room on the die? Or is it just that there's no graphics on their initial roll-outs and they'll be included in a more fleshed-out lineup to come?
 
Oh, and the CPUs that have been released now are all designed as i7 competitors.. it's Ryzen 5 that's meant to be competing with the i5 lineups, we'll need to wait on them to see how the benchmarks compare at that point.
 
the motherboards have graphics ports but CPU's with APU won't be till later this year.

enthusiasts will want to use a dedicated graphics card, you could always just throw a low cost graphics card into your build for basic video.
 
Dangerdoggie said:
the motherboards have graphics ports but CPU's with APU won't be till later this year.

enthusiasts will want to use a dedicated graphics card, you could always just throw a low cost graphics card into your build for basic video.
Click to expand...

Oh, absolutely.. but OEMs certainly do like having that capability there for one less thing to have to worry about putting together, and something like a NUC is impossible if you have to plug even a half-height card (/on a riser) into a PCIE slot.


And yes, enthusiasts will be using dedicated GPUs, but as I said, DX12 allows them to use multiple cards in the rendering pipeline, so although it's certainly a secondary consideration, the IGP should no longer be considered as just wasted space on the die in that department.
 
Kind of doubt the IGP would remain active once you put in a dedicated graphics card. DX12 is a whole lot of broken promises, typical MS marketing B.S.

The most interesting rumor is Intel licensing graphics tech from AMD for potentially replacing their IGP solution. They really could use some help in that department.
 
lemontw said:
odio has been 'going to build a computer in next 45 days' for 2 years now
Click to expand...

The same thing has happened to me too.

Every time I'm ready to pull the trigger, I suddenly realize that my current computer is still pretty good, despite being 6-7 years old. CPU upgrades just haven't been very exciting in the past 7 years.

Maybe I'll just wait until the GTX 2070 is released.
 
Intel is hinting at dropping "Coffee Lake" later this year which will improve the 7700k even more. If I was building a PC this year I'd wait a few weeks at least to see if drivers/patches/updates close the AMD/Intel gap more. If not, then it'd either be 7700k now or 7740k later this year. :weird:
 
Here: Samsung 960 Pro review: The fastest consumer SSD you can buy | Ars Technica UK

Review-chart-template-final-full-width-3.001-1.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top