AMD Takes The CPU Performance Crown For The First Time in Almost a Decade.

[Scia]

 Your telling a pro bench marker

 

You're basically telling us you're being unemployed, and since you benchmark now and then you consider it a profession? ^^

[Wolfur]

In the graph above, the AMD processors outperformed their Intel counterparts in every price segment.

FX 9590 @$499 > i7 3930K @$549FX 9370 @$299 > i7 2600K @$329FX 8350 @$199 > i5 2500K @$219FX 6300 @$119 > i3 2100 @$119

I'm going to bet that we're going to start seeing more and more games favor the AMD CPUs in the near future.Crysis 3 & Farcry 3 already support eight cores, BF4 is poised to be optimized even more for 8 cores through Mantle.

Activision & Ubisoft games will also optimize for eight cores.

So for gaming, it would make a hell of a lot of sens eto go for AMD 8 cores now especially if you want to "future proof" if ever such a thing existed.

The fact that they're significantly less expensive than their Intel counterparts & the fact they're all unlocked for overclocking makes an AMD gaming platform very attractive, the $200 you would save by going with an FX 8320 for example instead of a 3770K or a 4770K can go into your graphics, and upgrade you from a 7970 to an R9 290 or from a 770 to a 780 & give you even more & more performance.

For the folks that would wonder about Ivy Bridge & Haswell performance, the performance per clock improvements of both Haswell & Ivy Bridge CPUs are counteracted by their subsequent lower maximum clock speeds, a 2500K for example can be overclocked to 4.8Ghz and on the same cooling on average you're going to get 4.5Ghz out of a 3570K & 4.2Ghz out of a 4670K.

They can say 'thank u' to nvidia for providing amazing multithreaded drivers. Try to peform the very same test again but with Radeon GPU with AMD'S singlethreaded drivers and the graph will get flipped over for amd.

[NJM1112]

They can say thank u o idia for providing amazing multithreaded drivers. You peform the ery sae est again but with Radeon GPU with nglethreaded drivers and the graph will get flipped over for amd.

ENGLISH PLEASE?

(sorry if you don't speak english, It's not listed on your profile)

[NeCrOmAnCiN]

You're basically telling us you're being unemployed, and since you benchmark now and then you consider it a profession? ^^

 

 

Yes Kingpin,  fuuzz and myself are all jobless bums with uber pc's

[it24]

I'm happy for AMD, I feel like they are finally starting to make a comeback. Welcome to the fight AMD.

[Wolfur]

ENGLISH PLEASE?

(sorry if you don't speak english, It's not listed on your profile)

Don't get mad, I fixed typos. Not my fault, its damn mobile I'm sitting on

[Scia]

Don't get mad, I fixed typos. Not my fault, its damn mobile I'm sitting on

 

I love it. Big fingers hitting everything but the spacebar when typing

[Hirad123]

This is an exiting time in the GPU and CPU world...especially for AMD!

[Wolfur]

Also, why no haswell not even ivy bridge? I call b---s---! Haswell is good at multithreaded handling and overall gains sometimes are reaching 20% so nope.AVI to a test where there's newest AMD cpu but not newest intel cpu.

[NJM1112]

Don't get mad, I fixed typos. Not my fault, its damn mobile I'm sitting on

so you speak mobile then? Lol it's k.

[GPUXPert]

i have 8350 with crossfire 7970s. friend has one 7970 and an 3570k, he gets way better frames. Amd cpus are very bad at large multiplayer games like bf3 and bf4. Intel 4770k is what im upgrading to

A few things you need to know, BF3 multiplayer was not multi-core optimized, BF4 multiplayer is VERY multi-core optimized.

Remember that the BF4 BETA is multiplayer only, so the tests by gamegpu were multiplayer only & the 8350 was faster than the 2600K, overclocked to 4.4Ghz it's even faster than the 3930K.

Before you jump the gun & do anything, keep in mind that BF4 does favor the AMD CPUs, so you will get much better performance than with BF3, also keep in mind that the reason BF3 performed poorly on the 8350 is because it would only utilize 30-35% of the CPU, BF4 utilizes 65-70%, with mantle you'll get 100% utilization which will improve performance even more.

All future Activision, Ubisoft & EA (Frostbite 3 + Crytek) games will be optimized for the 8 core AMD CPUs, so you will get better performance than a 4770K.

If you switch to Intel you will lose on the Mantle 8 core optimizations.

[Reuben]

"!=" means "unequal"

My apologies, good sir. I seem to have misread your previous post.

[Kuzma]

More on this in all the threads in my signature

[Reuben]

I raise a question to the community: how would my i7-4770K clocked at 4.1 GHz perform is this test?

[Scia]

I raise a question to the community: how would my i7-4770K clocked at 4.1 GHz perform is this test?

My guess was 1-2 places up in that ranking .

But it's just a guess ^ ^

[Godlygamer23]

If you switch to Intel you will lose on the Mantle 8 core optimizations.

Mantle only affects AMD's GPUs that use GCN. It has nothing to do with the CPU.

[Kuzma]

Mantle only affects AMD's GPUs that use GCN. It has nothing to do with the CPU.

Mantle allows games to take advantage of an unlimited number of cores, did you not watch the AMD stream?

[ALXAndy]

All future CONSOLE ports will be optimized for AMD CPUs, PC exclusives will be optimized for multi core but not necessarily AMD 

 

Yeah man, all TWO of them.

[Godlygamer23]

Mantle allows games to take advantage of an unlimited number of cores, did you not watch the AMD stream?

I didn't watch the whole thing, but I did just look at the Mantle image for Frostbite 3. It specifically mentions utilizing all eight cores. So never mind what I said.

[atrash]

Blows,beat,destroys,defeat,pwn,kicked...these are the most frequent words I always see whenever there is a comparison between Intel and AMD..it sounds like a kid talking while playing COD..smh. Can we all just discuss in a civilized manner without sounding too much like a fanboy? I think OP has done a good job discussing/explaining that particular cpu and its potential while also pointing out areas where it can be considered as a good option cpu other than Intel's offering. And I personally find it all very informative and interesting really.

 

I wished the FX8350 were available at the time when I bought my 2500K. I could use those extra cores for 3D rendering and better multitasking. My oc'd cpu can just barely keep up with me..

[hehehehhehehehe]

4930k or 4960X?

Pretty sure with the IPC improvements their still going to be on top...

[Reuben]

4930k or 4960x?

Prettysure with the IPC improvements their still going to be on top...

It's because the stock clocks are so damn low. The AMD chip comes overclocked to the max, but the Sandy-E chips come with huge amounts of headroom.

[Reuben]

Blows,beat,destroys,defeat,pwn,kicked...these are the most frequent words I always see whenever there is a comparison between Intel and AMD..it sounds like a kid talking while playing COD..smh. Can we all just discuss in a civilized manner without sounding too much like a fanboy? I think OP has done a good job discussing/explaining that particular cpu and its potential while also pointing out areas where it can be considered as a good option cpu other than Intel's offering. And I personally find it all very informative and interesting really.

 

I wished the FX8350 were available at the time when I bought my 2500K. I could use those extra cores for 3D rendering and better multitasking. My oc'd cpu can just barely keep up with me..

The 8350 only beats the 2500K by ~15% in heavily-threaded applications. However, that isn't taking into account overclocking and several other aspects of these processors including board cost and power draw.

[hehehehhehehehe]

It's because the stock clocks are so damn low. The AMD chip comes overclocked to the max, but the Sandy-E chips come with huge amounts of headroom.

that's why I hate comparisons like this.. Overclocking is basically free performance and especially in this case since most 2011 CPUs overclocking like beasts...

[ALXAndy]

4930k or 4960x?

Prettysure with the IPC improvements their still going to be on top...

 

IPC won't count for squat if they are running an engine they don't understand.

 

Take console 'ports' from the Xbox 360 for example. Given that the architecture only supported two physical cores all console games for the 360 were coded to use two cores. So when translated to the PC ? the PC had a higher IPC, so that was what mattered. Note - mattered, past tense.

 

When you have an 8 core AMD APU to code for then what do you think is going to be the easiest platform to translate it to? obviously an 8 core CPU. For the Intel? it will be made to work but I can guarantee you, it won't work as well. Up until now with PC 'ports' developers simply throw brute force at the problem of getting it to work on PCs. Look at the utter shambles that was GTAIV on PC. When they released it they had to lock out a load of settings in the options screen because it ran so poorly that there wasn't even a GPU set up in the world that could run it at those settings. They came out with a statement to say that, and I quote "High end settings are for future hardware".

 

That was their way of saying "Look, we can't get it to run very well on PC no matter how long we try for so here, have this incomplete mess".

 

So what does it mean? basically if you own an Intel CPU now then you are at the sole mercy of the game devs, and let's face it, they don't exactly have a good rep for bringing well optimised console translations to the PC. There are a couple (like DICE, who have coded in multiple GPU and CPU support since day one) but not that many.

 

Console 'ports' are going to be pretty much ready for an AMD 8 core before they are even finished for the console. It's then a case of whether they can be bothered to make it run on Intel hardware.

 

Hint - have they bothered making it run well on all 8 cores of an AMD before now? the answer to that is no.

 

Therefore if you're gaming on a PC and you bought Intel you just took a massive gamble. Nothing for Intel gaming is going to be guaranteed now, and there's pretty much fuck all Intel can do about it due to AMD wooing all of the game devs and getting them on board with Gaming Evolved. That shit went a lot deeper than just paying the devs some cash to slap their logo on it and give it away with a GPU.