d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > Computers & IT > Ryzen Still Isn't Attractive? > Price Decrease When?
Prev12345Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 16,621
Joined: Jan 7 2017
Gold: 90.58
Jul 30 2017 04:25pm
Quote (DCSS @ Jul 30 2017 02:23pm)
yeah that old p3 core that's been pushed to its absolute limit over the last 20 years, and already plateau'd at sandy bridge is going to win in the long run against a brand new arch with at least another decade of big improvements and optimizations to the core and process to come


i'm sitting here on my i7 2600k that i got off ebay 2 months ago for 100$, just laughing my ass off at these r3 benchmarks lmao

This post was edited by JohnMiller92 on Jul 30 2017 04:25pm
Member
Posts: 10,281
Joined: Jan 7 2015
Gold: Locked
Warn: 60%
Jul 30 2017 04:28pm
Quote (JohnMiller92 @ Jul 30 2017 06:25pm)
i'm sitting here on my i7 2600k that i got off ebay 2 months ago for 100$, just laughing my ass off at these r3 benchmarks lmao


buying used is a better value than buying new?

Member
Posts: 16,621
Joined: Jan 7 2017
Gold: 90.58
Jul 30 2017 04:29pm
Quote (DCSS @ Jul 30 2017 02:28pm)
buying used is a better value than buying new?

https://cdn.drawception.com/images/panels/2015/7-24/DxEzsjy9qM-1.png


much better value for your money compared to r3s, and these i7 2600s will last a long timmmeee

only thing from amd that is worth wild is the r5 1600

This post was edited by JohnMiller92 on Jul 30 2017 04:29pm
Member
Posts: 10,281
Joined: Jan 7 2015
Gold: Locked
Warn: 60%
Jul 30 2017 04:34pm
Quote (JohnMiller92 @ Jul 30 2017 06:29pm)
much better value for your money compared to r3s, and these i7 2600s will last a long timmmeee

only thing from amd that is worth wild is the r5 1600


Assuming you don't want any feature that came out after 2011, it's fine.
i would drive a used car too

This post was edited by DCSS on Jul 30 2017 04:34pm
Member
Posts: 10,281
Joined: Jan 7 2015
Gold: Locked
Warn: 60%
Jul 30 2017 04:38pm
q6600 still the price/perf king lmao
gonna make AMD go bankrupt
Member
Posts: 20,978
Joined: Apr 19 2006
Gold: 85.00
Jul 30 2017 05:12pm
Quote (DCSS @ Jul 30 2017 05:11pm)
i already did.. you don't listen..
it would take much more work to get it optimized on weaker hardware.
now you tell me why they would foot that bill if they didn't think the game was going to be a smash hit on PC?


lol you have no logic do you
7870 and 670 are the cards needed right now on pc for xbox one ports
you telling me why that should possibly change in the future titles?

wouldnt it be simpler to start with them and work up since those are the equivalents
console hardware isnt going to change

jesus christ its like talking to a wall like the other topic when you assumptions on anti competition laws
Member
Posts: 10,281
Joined: Jan 7 2015
Gold: Locked
Warn: 60%
Jul 30 2017 06:32pm
Quote (yupitsmeh @ Jul 30 2017 07:12pm)
lol you have no logic do you
7870 and 670 are the cards needed right now on pc for xbox one ports
you telling me why that should possibly change in the future titles?

wouldnt it be simpler to start with them and work up since those are the equivalents
console hardware isnt going to change

jesus christ its like talking to a wall like the other topic when you assumptions on anti competition laws


Why shouldn't it, if they aren't willing to continue to optimize for 670/7870 levels of performance? Maybe pc port sales aren't enough to justify the cost. It's cheaper for them to do it this way.

It is called cutting corners to increase or maintain profit, it's why Intel switched from solder to TIM with ivy bridge and then from copper to full aluminum heatsinks with skylake. If you project that cutting costs by x amount will yield greater savings even factoring in the projected decrease in sales, you do it. That's just the smart thing to do.

Quote (yupitsmeh @ Jul 30 2017 07:12pm)
jesus christ its like talking to a wall like the other topic when you assumptions on anti competition laws


admittedly i was being a pedant there but the fact remains that anti-competition laws aren't what's stopping intel from offering better products that could potentially put AMD out of business. This happens all the time and it's called survival of the fittest, the heart of capitalism, indeed it's what competition is all about. When you're ahead of the competition you are not being anti-competitive if you choose to not sit on your laurels as Intel did for all of this decade, but you will be subject to anti monopoly laws and harsh regulations if your competitors go out of business so it is not on your best interest to do that. You simply used the wrong term to describe the reason Intel's is intent on keeping AMD around and used an irrelevant example of actual anti-competitive practices they have done in the past that have no bearing.

What they did then with OEM's during the athlon x2 days was almost the exact opposite. Intel had the inferior product and was trying to make up for that by paying off OEMs to use their shit instead rather than offering a superior item. Before Ryzen, Intel had the superior product and simply chose not to innovate further, there was nothing telling them they couldn't, and even if they had, and AMD died, they would have won fair and square. At that point facing harsh government price regulation and possibly having their company split in order to prevent a monopoly, but not in the name of anti-competition.

This post was edited by DCSS on Jul 30 2017 06:54pm
Member
Posts: 20,978
Joined: Apr 19 2006
Gold: 85.00
Jul 30 2017 07:12pm
Quote (DCSS @ Jul 30 2017 07:32pm)
Why shouldn't it, if they aren't willing to continue to optimize for 670/7870 levels of performance? Maybe pc port sales aren't enough to justify the cost. It's cheaper for them to do it this way.

It is called cutting corners to increase or maintain profit, it's why Intel switched from solder to TIM with ivy bridge and then from copper to full aluminum heatsinks with skylake. If you project that cutting costs by x amount will yield greater savings even factoring in the projected decrease in sales, you do it. That's just the smart thing to do.



admittedly i was being a pedant there but the fact remains that anti-competition laws aren't what's stopping intel from offering better products that could potentially put AMD out of business. This happens all the time and it's called survival of the fittest, the heart of capitalism, indeed it's what competition is all about. When you're ahead of the competition you are not being anti-competitive if you choose to not sit on your laurels as Intel did for all of this decade, but you will be subject to anti monopoly laws and harsh regulations if your competitors go out of business so it is not on your best interest to do that. You simply used the wrong term to describe the reason Intel's is intent on keeping AMD around and used an irrelevant example of actual anti-competitive practices they have done in the past that have no bearing.

What they did then with OEM's during the athlon x2 days was almost the exact opposite. Intel had the inferior product and was trying to make up for that by paying off OEMs to use their shit instead rather than offering a superior item. Before Ryzen, Intel had the superior product and simply chose not to innovate further, there was nothing telling them they couldn't, and even if they had, and AMD died, they would have won fair and square. At that point facing harsh government price regulation and possibly having their company split in order to prevent a monopoly, but not in the name of anti-competition.


so console components stay the same but lets using highend components while porting it over lol and have to take more work optimizing it all around instead of letting the newer better products brute force them better with their hardware

and worded it wrong i gave you a link to what happens when you have to follow monopoly laws especially in the EU

also
business partnerships lol
made to not sell the competition I can list many but I'll start with coke and mcdonalds

This post was edited by yupitsmeh on Jul 30 2017 07:13pm
Member
Posts: 10,281
Joined: Jan 7 2015
Gold: Locked
Warn: 60%
Jul 30 2017 07:18pm
Quote (yupitsmeh @ Jul 30 2017 09:12pm)
so console components stay the same but lets using highend components while porting it over


Yes, because it will take less optimizing to hit the target fps when you've got more processing power. I didn't really understand the rest of the sentence so I left it out.
7870/670 are faster than current console gpu's fyi
and cpu's are a bigger factor here all-around, you got a lot fewer cores ur trying to optimize for when ur porting to pc. There's really no desktop equivalent to that jaguar chip.

This post was edited by DCSS on Jul 30 2017 07:19pm
Member
Posts: 20,978
Joined: Apr 19 2006
Gold: 85.00
Jul 30 2017 07:19pm
lol double post

This post was edited by yupitsmeh on Jul 30 2017 07:21pm
Go Back To Computers & IT Topic List
Prev12345Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll