Who does AMD make sense for?

[ObeseWalrus]

I'm talking about the high end stuffs, like the 8350.

 

Are we gonna see more of it or does Intel have control of the more high end market?

 

Does it make sense for me?

 

I have a 2500k and I am very happy with it and would love to hear about the alternatives for me. I am doing gaming and light editing in Premiere and some light Photoshop once in a while.

[miyabwah]

they're mainly for people on budgets. Intel takes the crown for high end enthusiast-level stuffs.

the gpus USED to be for people on budgets, *cough*litecoin miners*cough* but now NVIDIA just watches the money roll in.

[Markyod]

Makes sense for anyone who doesn't want to pay almost twice the price for similar performance.

[Shd0w2]

i like amd just cause, yolo.

[ObeseWalrus]

they're mainly for people on budgets. Intel takes the crown for high end enthusiast-level stuffs.

the gpus USED to be for people on budgets, *cough*litecoin miners*cough* but now NVIDIA just watches the money roll in.

Yeah i guessed so.

[jscho]

People on a budget or someone who doesn't need a graphics card (APUs). AMD CPUs (and GPUs I suppose, but CPUs more-so) have a very good price/performance ratio. AMD makes sense for gaming. They make absolute sense for gaming. Anything higher, like regular video work, Intel is the way to go.

[Guest]

I'm talking about the high end stuffs, like the 8350.

 

Are we gonna see more of it or does Intel have control of the more high end market?

 

Does it make sense for me?

 

I have a 2500k and I am very happy with it and would love to hear about the alternatives for me. I am doing gaming and light editing in Premiere and some light Photoshop once in a while.

just wait AMD will be back it'll be 2002 all voer again 

[TechFan@ic]

Well it's not really complicated if you want the highest possible performance throughput AMD is your best choice, if you want the highest single threaded performance Intel would be your best choice.

mm² for mm² & $ for $ AMD will give you more total performance, mm² for mm² Intel will give you more single-thread performance and lower power consumption.
http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/48571-intel-amd-architectural-discussion-how-far-ahead-is-intel/
 

[DudeWazap]

AMD is best for price to performance.

[CoolBeans]

There is no point in upgrading your 2500k, and yes, intel has higher end

[EMPthePanda]

AMD has great potential if your on a budget, after around a $750 build I would switch over to the intel side, I'm actually in favor of there graphics cards over Nvidia, they seem to have a better price to performance.

[sperkowsky]

8350s are pretty much unmatched at the price range on the intel side when it comes to streaming and rendering and overall multitasking so that's why I stick to it

[venturizhou]

I like AMD for having fun with overclocking on a budget. The pricepoint to get into a Haswell K chip + Z87 motherboard can easily be $300 so realistically if we want a "balanced" system we are looking at roughly $1000+. My builds usually are initially around $700. I acknowledge that Intel is far superior in power consumption and the x86 side. I just enjoy cheaper overclocking fun. Kaveri Co-Processing sounds exciting as well.

 

Also competition is good! So supporting the underdog 

[GamerDude]

Well, I have an FX8350 + Asus CVF + 2x GTX670 setup and it's been great....for both gaming and video encoding. I could have gotten an i5/i7 3xxx setup back then when I'd gotten my 8350, but I did not want to have so many Intel rigs (already have two) so the 8350 was an experiment and I can honestly say I wasn't disappointed with it. It's my daily 'driver' and the rig I'd used for converting  my BR movies in HD rips. Very big fan of their GPU's though....

[Jack.EXE]

it makes sense for those who use a "parallel" computing style (basically, multi-tasking of multi-threaded apps)

 

when all 8 threads are being used, it gets less bogged down than the i7 (it's still a quad core, even if they are good at juggleing)

 

VMs also are a case where it makes sense, for example, say you run a base OS (such as fedora) and then run two side by side OSes in VMs(perhaps Win7 & Ubuntu), with 4 cores each.

 

again, that's doable, where as on the i7, it will bog down & chug when those VMs are loaded up.

 

 

now, there are cases where the intels make more sense. in apps where the thread count is <4, you will not see any benefit from more cores, and instead IPC is what is important.

[mr moose]

The 8350 is on par with a 4670k for cheaper. Plus has the advantage of having double the cores so multithreaded tasks which are becoming more common will run better on the AMD platform.

 

The only reason to go Intel is if your going for super high end and need a 4770k or above.

these guys say different, they say the 8350 is about on par with the 4570s.

 

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-4670K-vs-AMD-FX-8350

 

http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/446/AMD_FX-Series_FX-8350_vs_Intel_Core_i5_i5-4670K.html

 

http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/453/AMD_FX-Series_FX-8350_vs_Intel_Core_i5_i5-4570S.html

 

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-4570S-vs-AMD-FX-8350

 

Which would indicate that the i5 would just pip it at the post if you weren't considering overclocking, or have I missed something?

 

I have been looking to build an intermediate system for my son recently and I am not interested in overclocking,  In Australia the 8350 and the 4570s are the same price and it's $15 more for the 4670k.  So for a system that will be used prominently for games would not the 4570s be better?

[Kamina]

I need all the threads.

[samuel]

I recommend AMD CPUs (especially FX 6300) for those people who would be happy with Intel I3 level of performance! (Especially those Pentium 4 LOL and WOW players which are a lot around me.) FX 8320 would be better than cheapest locked multi I5 IF you do more than gaming and browseing WEB. (There is still some price difference in favor of AMD.) However...FX 8350...don't buy it, unless you already have a motherboard for it. (And a good one too.) At this point, you are an enthuziast, and Intel 4570K is for you! One more tip: if you can find a cheap 2500k, buy it over everything else above. In your case, stick with it!

EDIT: You WILL want to switch to Kaveri or watever folows after it IF you make money using premiere and photoshop. But wait until OpenCL 2.0 support. 

[mr moose]

Overclocking is always a concideration. At stock clocks the 8350 is about 4570s levels of performance but 8 threads instead of 4. If gaming is the main use of the system then the 8350 is going to be better than the 4670k going into the future, more games are becoming multithreaded and this puts the 8350 ahead of the i5's. Games from the last 5 years or so do tend to favor intels single threaded performance though.

 

You also should take into consideration the cost of motherboards, 990fx boards are usually abit cheaper than their intel z87 counterparts.

cheers for that.

[EpicGeekonFire]

I'm talking about the high end stuffs, like the 8350.

 

Are we gonna see more of it or does Intel have control of the more high end market?

 

Does it make sense for me?

 

I have a 2500k and I am very happy with it and would love to hear about the alternatives for me. I am doing gaming and light editing in Premiere and some light Photoshop once in a while.

For people who game and stream at the same damn time -.-

[MasterJV]

AMD is for people on a budget or need lots of cores. Intel is for people who need lower power consumption and single threaded performance(Dolphin, Planetside,ECT.) I play lots of emulators so I go Intel, but people who do lots of rendering and play modern games(bf4, AC4, ECT) should go AMD because of their great BangForYourBuck.

[Mentalguy]

I'm talking about the high end stuffs, like the 8350.

 

Are we gonna see more of it or does Intel have control of the more high end market?

 

Does it make sense for me?

 

I have a 2500k and I am very happy with it and would love to hear about the alternatives for me. I am doing gaming and light editing in Premiere and some light Photoshop once in a while.

If you are needing more power, a 2600k would be great.

[Faa]

Nothing. Theyre not even close to Intel.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-fx-8350-vs-intel-core-i7-3770k-4-8ghz-multi-gpu-gaming-performance/17494.html

"Future games 8 cores support blabla" <-> Mantle thats supposed to very cpu friendly is contradicting this.

[bob345]

Nothing. Theyre not even close to Intel.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-fx-8350-vs-intel-core-i7-3770k-4-8ghz-multi-gpu-gaming-performance/17494.html

"Future games 8 cores support blabla" <-> Mantle thats supposed to very cpu friendly is contradicting this.

could you stop being an intel fanboy for once? and stop using that outdated article

[That Norwegian Guy]

AMD is king of taking shortcuts and warping marketing to their advantage to make it look like they are keeping up. The 8350 is a 'fake' 8-core, they still market it as 8-core. It has 8 integer cores but only 4 floating point units. Their last FX chips were 32nm process node which is technologically inferior to Intel's 22nm at the time.

 

Their chipsets are also technologically much less advanced with far fewer features (lacking things to compare to Intel's Rapid Storage/ Rapid Start, fewer ports and less general bandwith allocations etc.) than comparative Intel chipsets, and they allow motherboard partners to use cheaper hardware on the entry level which invariably leads to higher black numbers/ RMA rate, but has a positive effect on perceived value to the customer.

 

The 8350 is cheaper, but it's cheaper for a reason.

 

So to summarize, AMD makes sense to people who ignore anything but staying relevant on raw performance and also want value, and don't really care about value-add features, hardware longevity or a refined ecosystem.