AMD a Decent Option Again?

[MeesterJackson]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20140820105340_AMD_to_Cut_Prices_on_FX_9000_Other_FX_Processors_New_Prices_Revealed.html

 

With all these price drops (and the newer interesting 8370 as I'm assuming it's higher binned than the 8350 therefore it'd be easier to hit 5GHz with it than the 8350), is AMD a decent option to go with now? 

 

The 8350 when overclocked can sort of clash with an i5, and the 9590 in some applications is nearly as good as the i7-4770k at stock speeds. 

 

So if you were looking to build a new PC today, would you still take Intel, or would you not mind some minor performance hits with AMD for at lot less? 

 

(My only complaint is why the hell are all the CPU's dropping, but the motherboards aren't? Holy crap the ROG board from ASUS is STILL 220 dollars!)

 

Just wanted to hear some options. 

[eLucid]

That depends on what your definition of "decent" is. Intel will always have much better architecture.

[Sauron]

Amd cpus have always been viable, although they don't accomodate everybody's needs. It all comes down to what you want. Personally I refuse to go under 4690k performance if I have the money for it, but if I didn't have that money I'd certainly consider amd.

[MeesterJackson]

That depends on what your definition of "decent" is. Intel will always have much better architecture.

How do you know this? You never know when AMD might just make a comeback. 

[Sauron]

That depends on what your definition of "decent" is. Intel will always have much better architecture.

 

"Always" is a big word to be tossing around cpu manifacturers. Back in the athlon 64 days it certainly seemed the other way around.

[MeesterJackson]

Amd cpus have always been viable, although they don't accomodate everybody's needs. It all comes down to what you want. Personally I refuse to go under 4690k performance if I have the money for it, but if I didn't have that money I'd certainly consider amd.

So what about the 9370 and 9590? Those beat the i5 if I remember correctly. 

[eLucid]

How do you know this? You never know when AMD might just make a comeback. 

It's really hard to foresee such radical changes. AMD was king from 1999-2004. AMD has stated in the past that they're no longer competing with Intel.

[MeesterJackson]

It's really hard to foresee such radical changes. AMD was king from 1999-2004. AMD has stated in the past that they're no longer competing with Intel.

When was this? 

[eLucid]

When was this? 

About two years ago...

 

Here you go

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-intel-cpu-apu-processors,15741.html

Edited September 1, 2014 by eLucid

[TymmVonD]

It's really hard to foresee such radical changes. AMD was king from 1999-2004. AMD has stated in the past that they're no longer competing with Intel.

That's bad for all of us. Hope AMDs investors didn't hear that one.

[eLucid]

That's bad for all of us. Hope AMDs investors didn't hear that one.

I agree. Monopolies suck big time!

[TheKDub]

Intel + Nvidia all the way.

[MeesterJackson]

About two years ago...

Here you go

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-intel-cpu-apu-processors,15741.html

That'll probably change when there's a new CEO lol.

Intel + AMD all the way.

...?

[Fulgrim]

...?

Intel CPU + AMD GPU.

 

Since AMD acquired ATi.

[GloriousPain]

About two years ago...

 

Here you go

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-intel-cpu-apu-processors,15741.html

That's them saying they're not planning on releasing many processors for the next while they didn't plan on releasing a new architecture till 2015 but that's been pushed back to 2016..

[Sauron]

So what about the 9370 and 9590? Those beat the i5 if I remember correctly. 

 

Yes, at the cost of a 220 watt tdp... and when I get a cpu that retails at over 250$ I kind of expect it to support pretty much any technology I might need, and at the moment amd's chipset isn't really providing that (no pcie 3.0, no sata express or m.2 etc) which is fine for lower end products but not for high performance chips imo. Overall I look at the 9590 as something you'd get as an upgrade to something like a quad core phenom ii, where you already have a suitable motherboard and the 8350 isn't enough to justify the upgrade.

[GloriousPain]

And AMD options have always been viable options price:performance is very high specially if look at 8120 or 8320 

[MeesterJackson]

Intel CPU + AMD GPU.

Since AMD acquired ATi.

That's only because Nvidia needs to stop thinking that their the "premium GPU company" and need to lower their damn prices.

And AMD options have always been viable options price:performance is very high specially if look at 8120 or 8320

For budget builds...anything higher than 1000 dollars (sometimes even 800 dollars) and I immediately recommend Intel.

[GloriousPain]

For budget builds...anything higher than 1000 dollars (sometimes even 800 dollars) and I immediately recommend Intel. 

Yeah so what? Most builds don't break 1000 Dollars;  I wouldn't call a say $900 build to be a budget build... I wouldn't recommend AMD in $1000+ builds either... but you're acting like they're not even relevant if the 8370 makes them an option again in your words shouldn't that mean the 8320 kept them an option the whole time? Same Architecture Same Core count both are unlocked just the 8320 is cheaper...

[LordMustangGT]

I would definitely recommend a AMD cpu. If you wand bang for the buck, I personally think AMD is the way to go. Yes, I do have a 9590, I don't see any power hit on my bill. The thing cooks threw everything I can throw at it. Yes, a 4770k or 4790k is a lil faster, but it just depends on what your doing with your computer. My roommate has a 6300FX and it does everything just as fast pretty much. We both just use our computers for gaming, and internet pretty much, and once in awhile make a video with our gopro footage. But we would of spent a few hundred  bucks more on a intel system. I took that money and got a nice GPU, well worth it.

[TheKDub]

That's only because Nvidia needs to stop thinking that their the "premium GPU company" and need to lower their damn prices. 

 

Intel CPU + AMD GPU.

 

Since AMD acquired ATi.

 

Shit sorry, meant to say Intel + Nvidia not Intel + AMD.

[MeesterJackson]

Yeah so what? Most builds don't break 1000 Dollars; I wouldn't call a say $900 build to be a budget build... I wouldn't recommend AMD in $1000+ builds either... but you're acting like they're not even relevant if the 8370 makes them an option again in your words shouldn't that mean the 8320 kept them an option the whole time? Same Architecture Same Core count both are unlocked just the 8320 is cheaper...

Budget doesn't necessarily mean cheap....your "budget" is how much you have to spend. It doesn't mean you're poor or cheap and your computer will always be under or nowhere near 1000 dollars.

Also maybe not at the start, but that's the beauty of PC building, upgrades. Most computer's through upgrades probably hit if not push past 1000 dollars all the time.

That's because AMD haven't been very relevant in terms of CPU's since like last year. Intel is typically what I tell people to push for. i5's and Intel Xeon's (E3 series) are way better than AMD CPU's at the moment. The FX line up was in 2012. That is nearing 3 years. It's kind of dead. Actually, ever since the new unlocked Pentium CPU from Intel that can be overclocked to 4.5Ghz+ with not very expensive cooling, in gaming AMD got less relevant.

Shit sorry, meant to say Intel + Nvidia not Intel + AMD.

Why? The price to performance ratio with that is ridiculous, the only reason I'd still buy Nvidia (which is what I'm going to do) is for rendering with Adobe products...and I personally like PhysX.

[TheKDub]

Why? The price to performance ratio with that is ridiculous, the only reason I'd still buy Nvidia (which is what I'm going to do) is for rendering with Adobe products...and I personally like PhysX.

 

I just personally prefer NVidia as most AMD cards tend to draw a ton of power, and give off quite a bit of heat. (Which is not good in my case as I live on the upper west side of the house and the air conditioning in my room is very poor)

 

Also with the 800/900 series coming out soon prices are going to go down which may cause nvidia to be just as cheap or cheaper than amd.

[i_build_nanosuits]

Dont be mistaken the cores on AMD cpu's are very slow regarldess of the clock speed and in applications that require fast core processing (IE video games) the AMD chips lag behind quite a lot even at 5ghz. (take it from a guy who upgraded from a very good FX-8320 that was clocked at 4.6ghz daily and still was getting the GTX 780 bottlenecked by tha slow monsta)

 

For video editing, 3d rendering, encoding, compression...things of that nature, the FX was a beast for the price...if you mainly do gaming IMHO even a core i3 can be a better pick depending on the games you play.

[MeesterJackson]

I just personally prefer NVidia as most AMD cards tend to draw a ton of power, and give off quite a bit of heat. (Which is not good in my case as I live on the upper west side of the house and the air conditioning in my room is very poor)

 

Also with the 800/900 series coming out soon prices are going to go down which may cause nvidia to be just as cheap or cheaper than amd.

Well if the rumors are true that the 870/970 will be as powerful as the 780 most likely costing 400ish dollars, and the 880/980 more powerful than the 780 Ti by a bit and costing around 450-550 dollars, then yes, they would be a great option then.