Mild Criticism of LTT Tests

[The Sloth]

Just now, App4that said:

I litteraly linked you the video. My 4790k at it's stock frequency beats the 1800x. 

also beats my 5820k, lets see your 4790k beating my 6 core cpu in editing or rendering or streaming. 

[Nexxus]

1 minute ago, nerdslayer1 said:

also beats my 5820k, lets see your 4790k beating my 6 core cpu in editing or rendering or streaming. 

it wont, but that's not the issue with linus's testing or this thread. 

[App4that]

Just now, nerdslayer1 said:

also beats my 5820k, lets see your 4790k beating my 6 core cpu in editing or rendering or streaming. 

Seriously? 

 

We're talking about gaming. Broadwell-E can do both gaming and production, Ryzen ONLY does production. That's why Broadwell-E costs more...

[The Sloth]

1 minute ago, Nexxus said:

considering its unable to hold its own against a chip that 2...going on 3 years old I would say its performing pretty bad. 

CPU market is not exactly moving fast sadly, i expected this from  ryzen nothing more also optimization will set in soon hopefully. 

 

[The Sloth]

1 minute ago, App4that said:

Seriously? 

 

We're talking about gaming. Broadwell-E can do both gaming and production, Ryzen ONLY does production. That's why Broadwell-E costs more...

 

 

that's the point, 1800x is a cheaper version of 6900k that doesn't sacrifice too much and gives a good performance per dollar value.  

[divito]

The other aspect is that this is without drivers, game patches, firmware updates, etc... Not sure it's fair to expect the world of AMD instantly. 

[App4that]

Just now, nerdslayer1 said:

that's the point, ryzen is a cheaper version of 6900k that doesn't sacrifice too much and gives a good performance per dollar value.  

NO! It sacrifices gaming. How is this difficult to understand? Unless you need Ryzen to be what the hype said it was.

[Nexxus]

1 minute ago, nerdslayer1 said:

snip

 

 

The state of CPU advancement or its optimisation are not relevant to this thread.  If you want to defend ryzen there are a ton of places you can go do it.

[SilentXer0]

it seems it's a mixed bag on the reviews

 

some have the 1700 oc'd to 3.9 beating a 7700k @ 5ghz in a couple games

 

 

[App4that]

Just now, divito said:

The other aspect is that this is without drivers, game patches, firmware updates, etc... Not sure it's fair to expect the world of AMD instantly. 

How about Intel? Nvidia? Will you offer them the same courtesy? 

[App4that]

1 minute ago, SilentXer0 said:

it seems it's a mixed bag on the reviews

 

some have the 1700 oc'd to 3.9 beating a 7700k @ 5ghz in a couple games

 

That review was shown to be false. 

[SilentXer0]

Just now, App4that said:

That review was shown to be false. 

i wasn't aware of that, can i get a link?

[The Sloth]

 

1 minute ago, Nexxus said:

The state of CPU advancement or its optimisation are not relevant to this thread.  If you want to defend ryzen there are a ton of places you can go do it.

 

not defending i am just saying you are caught up with the hype, i don't blame you its entirely AMD's shitty overhyped marketing fault. 

[App4that]

Just now, SilentXer0 said:

i wasn't aware of that, can i get a link?

 

[divito]

Just now, App4that said:

How about Intel? Nvidia? Will you offer them the same courtesy? 

Why not? Any new release from any company deserves fleshing out time.

The other problem with the OP's interpretation is considering Ryzen as simply a gamer's chip, and utilizing those benchmarks. I'm not sure that there were actually serious people thinking it would be a gaming haven of a chip. If you're looking into single-threaded or those types of gaming applications, Intel clearly still has an advantage. If your use case is different, Ryzen and its value are something to consider.

[Nexxus]

Just now, nerdslayer1 said:

 

not defending i am just saying you are caught up with the hype, i don't blame you its entirely AMD's shitty overhyped marketing fault. 

 

No, im not I was telling people in a facebook group to wait for independent reviews rather than that AMD was spouting before preordering, if anything I was the polar opposite. I'm caught up with liuns's testing being bad. the way he tests results in a gpu bottleneck which makes no damn sense for a review on a cpu.

[App4that]

1 minute ago, nerdslayer1 said:

 

not defending i am just saying you are caught up with the hype, i don't blame you its entirely AMD's shitty overhyped marketing fault. 

You're defending AMD, when they flat out lied about the gaming performance, the video I posted show proof of this. 

 

Ryzen is not a good value when a cheaper CPU offers better gaming performance. 

[The Sloth]

3 minutes ago, App4that said:

You're defending AMD, when they flat out lied about the gaming performance, the video I posted show proof of this. 

 

Ryzen is not a good value when a cheaper CPU offers better gaming performance. 

 

 

most people do other things than gaming fyi and most games like overwatch and many other games that most of us plays also 

this shows that the chip are not that bad for the price, remember that the 1700 is a 8core cpu so it will beat a 7700k in video editing and streaming. 

[App4that]

Just now, nerdslayer1 said:

most people do other things than gaming fyi and most games like overwatch and many other games that most of us plays also 

this shows that the chip are not that bad for the price, remember that the 1700 is a 8core cpu so it will beat a 7700k in video editing and streaming. 

You missed that video STILL being in question. Joker might not be doing it intentionally, but he's been called out.

 

Going to post this again, PLEASE watch it. 

 

 

[LAwLz]

7 hours ago, nerdslayer1 said:

most people do other things than gaming fyi and most games like overwatch and many other games that most of us plays also 

Overwatch runs on a potato.

Saying that Ryzen does gaming decently is fair to say, but when you start trying to justify a more expensive part being ~30% behind the cheaper part then you need more than "it is alright".

Like Gamers Nexus said, it doesn't make sense to pay more for something that performs worse.

 

7 hours ago, nerdslayer1 said:

this shows that the chip are not that bad for the price, remember that the 1700 is a 8core cpu so it will beat a 7700k in video editing and streaming. 

That video is an outlier. It is pretty amazing that I have to explain this (but I knew I would), but if multiple reviews says one thing, and then you have this single review saying the opposite, then that review should be ignored. You don't base your opinions about a product on results that goes against the vast majority.

 

 

 

But this thread isn't about how Ryzen performs. It is about LTT's inability to do proper testing. My guess is that AMD asked them to do 4K benchmarks and they went "sure!" like a parrot without thinking about it.

The more reviews I see from LTT, the more convinced I am that they are just parroting what the reviewers' guide tells them to say.

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

4 hours ago, LAwLz said:

but when you start trying to justify a more expensive part being ~30% behind the cheaper part then you need more than "it is alright".

Of course the 8-core is aimed more at content creation and multiple simultaneous workloads.  We'll only know about Ryzen's gaming potential when the R5 and the R3 CPUs are released.  Those will have fewer cores and most likely higher clockspeeds which (thanks to lazy devs) is still the most important thing for games. 

Until the R5 and R3 are released, everyone who does any gaming benchmarks or relies on those is comparing apples and oranges.

 

AMD knew damn well that everyone would be doing gaming benchmarks as soon as the first Ryzen chips were available, so they fudged the methodology to give them the advantage.  If only they had released all CPUs at the same time, none of this discussion would have been necessary.

 

On topic : This is also what bothered me the most.  This is an apples vs oranges comparison.  LTT should have used their regular testing methodology and clarified what the R7 family is aimed at whilst pointing out that the R5 and R3 are still to come and are likely to be more gamer-oriented. 

 

 

[Yoinkerman]

Tbh I'd be surprised if they tested physical versions of the Intel chips they listed instead of their normal "disable cores/ht and call it a different chip"