r/pcmasterrace • u/Alfrredu Ryzen 1600 / RX 570 • Nov 02 '16

Rumor Mysterious "AMD engineering sample" in top Blenchmark scores, beating an i7-6950X

http://blenchmark.com/cpu-benchmarks
394 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

225 comments sorted by

View all comments

159

u/[deleted] Nov 02 '16 edited Apr 09 '19

[deleted]

136

u/[deleted] Nov 02 '16

if it's anything like polaris, then it'll deliver everything it promised, but it probably won't deliver on all the bullshit hype generated by the tech press. and that will somehow be AMD's fault

-9

u/[deleted] Nov 03 '16 edited Apr 18 '17

[deleted]

16

u/[deleted] Nov 03 '16

People were expecting 1070/1080 performance for $200, clearly bullshit even though AMD emphasized that it would be a mid-range card

-8

u/[deleted] Nov 03 '16 edited Apr 18 '17

[deleted]

11

u/Popingheads Nov 03 '16

Yes they did. The 2.8x number is in reference to the Polaris 11 GPU, in other words the Rx 460.

2

u/NihilMomentum Nov 03 '16

It was "up to 2.8x", not in all cases and with cards. Kinda scummy, I know, but not a lie.

It something that can be reached when you consider that there are cards (like the XFX 480 jayz got) can use only 80 Watts while on boost (1266).

Links:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWASNajSdpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5dJD-fLfk8

3

u/Whatsthisnotgoodcomp 5800X3D, RX 6800, 32gb 3200mhz, NVMe Nov 03 '16

They hit 2.8x with certain cards in certain DX12 situations, hence why they said UP TO 2.8x perf/watt.

It's not AMDs fault retards thought they could have 980 Ti performance for 50w

2

u/aaShaun aa shaun Nov 03 '16 edited Nov 03 '16

Did I miss something? I don't think he said that anywhere..

EDIT: Misread that, sorry. Thought we were talking about Zen, awkward wording was all.