:drool:
Oh baby, now this should really get AMD going again since the majority of people will probably be using these.
hopefully better than non k series i5, but that's asking a lot.
[QUOTE=Terabit;51967240]hopefully better than non k series i5, but that's asking a lot.[/QUOTE]
It really isn't asking a lot. Most of those aren't great. I mean in terms of keeping the status quo and just going with what everyone has done for a thousand years, sure, but they don't offer much in terms of multithreading, without compromising on costs [i]a lot[/i].
[QUOTE=Terabit;51967240]hopefully better than non k series i5, but that's asking a lot.[/QUOTE]
To be honest, i thought the deneb / FX6,8 options for AMD back in the early 2010s where a great option compared to i5's.
After playing a little bit with the Ryzen 1700X, I find it to be a fantastic processor. I have no doubt thhe R5 series CPUs will be great contenders to the i5 k and non-k variants.
[QUOTE=Richard Simmons;51968083]To be honest, i thought the deneb / FX6,8 options for AMD back in the early 2010s where a great option compared to i5's.
After playing a little bit with the Ryzen 1700X, I find it to be a fantastic processor. I have no doubt thhe R5 series CPUs will be great contenders to the i5 k and non-k variants.[/QUOTE]
It depends on what you use them for though. For me, I do a lot of development and virtualization, and I have to pay a premium with Intel to get a processor that owns on that front. But the FX 8350 I have does a fantastic job with it's 8 CMT cores, even better so than the work PC I have which is an i7, that can barely even handle running 3 Windows Server VMs at the same time. Granted, it's not a great i7 either, but it's a lot more expensive than my trusty FX 8350.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
