richlind33: I'm curious because clock speed still trumps cores/threads when it comes to gaming. If Ryzen can reach 5GHz, or close to it, it'll rip Intel a new arsehole because gaming performance is the only significant advantage Intel has to justify it's insane pricing.
Gede: Clock speed is not everything. There is also IPC (Instructions Per clock Cycle). A CPU does not need a fast clock if it can perform more instructions in each clock cycle, and we have been seeing more improvements in that department.
If you check out top performing CPUs that cost many thousands of dollars you will see that they don't excel on the MHz race.
Personally I don't expect to see 5GHz as a regular working frequency in the following years.
Certainly if you do more than game, but it remains the 2nd biggest factor effecting gaming performance on average, behind which GPU you're using.
I'd probably shell out for an i9 if Intel wasn't gimping it's processors because Rampage Extreme is a mobo to die for. But what a dick move substituting toothpaste for solder! It's pretty much shit compared to Sandy Bridge, like just about everything else they've done since. Which leaves me choosing between an i7 8700K, or Ryzen 1700 or 1800x. Ryzen looks more promising down the road but I need something now, so I may have to hold my nose and stay with Intel for a few more years, which is disappointing.
Ganni1987: I saw this one but it seems to be only 1 model so far, and it's more likely being targeted for laptops. If Ryzen APU's prove to be a success (in my opinion they will), Intel might have to adapt their next lineup, just as they did with i3 quad core.
DreamedArtist: I love having selection and seeing this is good for everyone when AMD and INTEL can work together and maybe have a baby and create something beastly someday for us. but for now this is a good first step in something good.
The last thing I want to see is Intel and AMD getting friendly because more likely than not it'll mean collusion.
