Why do people supporting AMD still use such arguments?
Because it's a valid argument.
The $1000 Intel CPUs are not targeted at gamers. They fall behind much cheaper consumer chips like the 7700K, which didn't shock anyone a few weeks back.
Because tons of gamers buy them. Why you ask? Because a majority of gamers ALSO do other things with their PC's, things that need beefy CPU's.
While Ryzen looks like a very good, highly optimized chip and a great choice
Yes, it is. More on that below.
I think many here are so overwhelmed that they struggle in admitting that Intel CPUs are still leading in some applications.
I disagree. The users here are simply trying to point out how solid an entry Ryzen is. It is very competitive in both performance and price.
We're getting to the point when people start to blame software developers for bad design, because a good one would have supported more cores...
And that is a valid argument at any time, not just when talking about Ryzen.
I've even seen comments like "future patches for games will improve Ryzen performance". They just won't (not significantly, anyway).
That is just wrong altogether. New generations of technologies always need a bit of time for tweaking and optimizations regardless of who is making it.
Ok here's the deal. In the 35+ years since I first built a PC I've built literally 10's of thousands of them. I used AMD chips only when requested by the client/customer. There were times when I actively promoted them, but ONLY when they were competitive and using their chips made sense from a performance/cost point of view(Hell, at one point I promoted Cyrix CPU's because they performed better and ran cooler than anything AMD/Intel offered in that price point).
For the past 10 years, Intel has been the best deal in town bang-for-buck, full stop. Nothing AMD has offered since the release of Core2 has been a performance competitor to Intel's offerings. Ryzen has just changed that. The numbers prove that Ryzen is very performance competitive and at a price point that is likewise competitive. And AMD is just getting started with this generation of CPU's.
I am most certainly an Intel guy, but history has taught me to be objective. Have always admired AMD for regularly bringing kick-ass stuff to market. So yes, I am absolutely delighted that AMD has brought Ryzen to the table! It will force Intel to actually compete again instead of releasing the incremental stuff they've been releasing the past few years. The tech industry just got interesting, fun and exciting again and my guess is that it will stay that way for a while. Here's my logic as to why; AMD has only just released the FIRST set of this new generation of tech. They still have their mainstream CPU's to release. I'm betting AMD also has a few higher performance CPU's offering waiting in the wings[1900x, 2000x anyone?]. Then there's the Vega GPU line they're about to release.
The testing and benchmarks done by everyone who has the chips PROVE Ryzen is an excellent all-around performer. And bang for buck, AMD is now the best option. Intel still has it's performance Kings but in every test except memory bandwidth, Ryzen is competing well with Intel's best offerings. So unless you're blind and in need of glasses, can't read or can't tell the difference between your bum and a hole in the ground, you can not deny the achievement AMD made with Ryzen.
We geeks are going to have a lot of fun over the next few years!
Note to TPU editors; The fact that you've had a delay in receiving your Ryzen samples, you actually have a bit of an advantage. You've seen everyone else's article's and can now test aspects of the technology that have been brought to light, such as overclocking and the memory clocks struggles. Try doing something different and covering points of view that others have missed. Just an idea..
.
