Scallywag Swagger profile
Scallywag Swagger's Avatar

Scallywag Swagger profile

2
Dave James Avatar
Dave James responded to Scallywag Swagger's comment in
5 Months ago
Intel Core i7 8700K review: Coffee Lake beats Ryzen, but proves games don't care for coresIntel Core i7 8700K review: Coffee Lake beats Ryzen, but proves games don't care for cores
Scallywag Swagger Avatar

Actually, No sir, no it did not. I don't use Ryzen Master, as it's garbage (IMO). Here's what I use: https://www.grainger.com/product/20E890?cm_mmc=PPC:+Google+PLA&s_kwcid=AL!2966!3!166587239686!!!g!82166490957!&ef_id=WdTObwAAAGhYtSAP:20171115192233:s&kwid=productads-adid^166587239686-device^c-plaid^82166490957-sku^20E890-adType^PLA


Got anything else you'd like to add? Some might say 'silicon lottery' but you'd have to lose that lottery pretty badly to get such badly results. Really badly, actually.

Reply
Dave James Avatar

No it did not... what?


I was explaining where the figures we provide came from, and that we are not 'lying bastards.'


The Wattage figures we show (and the ones we show in all of our testing) are for peak platform power. The total AM4 testing platform, supplied by AMD for the purposes of the 1800X review, ran to a maximum of 204W drawn from the wall. They're captured in the same way for all our platform power testing and are used to show the difference between different systems.


And the thermal figures we show came from the original Ryzen Master Utility (again supplied by AMD).


There's no bias, no blatant lies, and no corporate shilling. Why would there be? What would be the point?

sign in to comment
Dave James Avatar
Dave James responded to Scallywag Swagger's comment in
6 Months ago
Intel Core i7 8700K review: Coffee Lake beats Ryzen, but proves games don't care for coresIntel Core i7 8700K review: Coffee Lake beats Ryzen, but proves games don't care for cores
Scallywag Swagger Avatar
You lying bastards! Ryzen 7 1800X - even overclocked to 4GHz! - DOES NOT consume 200W+. I've got pictures to PROVE it. More than that, that number is 64W over the maximum calculable value for a 4.0GHZ OC. Do the math: OC Wattage = TDP * (OC MHz/Stock MHz)*(OC Voltage/Stock Voltage)^2 = ~140W . Reality? My tests show 132W peak, all cores+all threads+all memory maxed out usage. I don't know where you are getting your numbers, but you're obviously telling blatant lies. Whoever wrote this article should be fired after immediately printing a retraction apologizing for your blatant corporate shilling and telling obvious and easily disproven lies. IN ADDITION, no one out there except you guys are getting idle temps for a Ryzen 7 1800X (even on really shoddy air cooling) at 61*C and load temps at 83*C. Literally, you guys are the only ones. My own 1800X on air idled at 36*C and load temps @ 73*C after an hour of Prime95 and AIDA64. Again, I don't know where in the hell you got your information, but it clearly was pulled straight out of your asses. And yes, I'd be just as pissed off if you misrepresented anything Intel did as well - which I am, because you have by misrepresenting the competition, you jackasses - because it's absolutely abhorrent to mislead the public the way you have here. You owe everyone an apology for 1 of only 2 reasons for such a heinous oversight: Incompetence on your part, or outright lying in favor of Intel because you were paid to. There really aren't any other explanations.Reply
Dave James Avatar

The other explanation could be that we use platform power draw to measure that side of things. And the thermal information came from AMD's Ryzen Master utility.


Thanks for reading.

sign in to comment