Who does AMD make sense for?

[Leonard]

AMD makes loads of sense because if they were not around we would be paying much much more for Intel parts and we might still be on Pentium. AMD also shows a PC builder that you don't have to pay much for an excellent build. Many AMD users enjoy and are pleased with their AMD systems. I am personally waiting for the hype of their new APUs for me to make a choice on what to get for my sister's build. She doesn't want to pay much but want a system to do some laboratory sample calculation shit that i have never seen anyone do but that is her job so......

[Faa]

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 and stop using that outdated article

How do you mean? I'm just sticking to the facts and it's not even outdated. Got any other benchmarks that were not GPU bound? If yes provide it and lets talk.

[smjpl]

How do you mean? I'm just sticking to the facts and it's not even outdated. Got any other benchmarks that were not GPU bound? If yes provide it and lets talk.

 

GPU bound applications are a major area though. Why do you want to leave some facts out? Yes if you need single thread horsepower intel is the way to go. If you're on a budget for a gaming system you are much better going with AMD and spending the extra cash on a high end gpu. No?

[deathjester]

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.

 

??? Say what. A MSI z87 that clocks to the moon (they all do), does crossfire and a 4670k are 269.99 at Microcenter. AMD starts at 4 ghz. You aren't getting near 5 and STABLE (and good luck now that they rebranded higher bins 9xxx) without a motherboard that is closer to 200 then 100. 

 

 

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.

 

On a OC your 2500 k is as fast as double in non 8 thread games (especially RTS/MMO's). In 8 thread games you are close to dead even with the 8350 on a OC. Of course the 8350 will beat you a bit in rendering, but it isn't THAT huge. If gaming is your main consideration the Sandy K's are still very good.

 

8320 on a mild overclock on a sub 100 dollar non 990fx Gigabyte with good power phases can make sense and is pretty much the ultimate budget rendering machine. 6300 FX can make sense as a very cheap "next gen"console clone.

 

Past that? Yeah it doesn't make a ton of sense to go AMD. If gaming is your focus, you go I5 > 83xx. If rendering, 83xx>I5. You never go 9xxx or try to oc a 83xx to the moon over I7 and cheap z87 and a evo 212 though. Would just be silly. I7 at stock is like a 5ghz 9xxx and the I7 starts at 3.5 (max turbo ain't all 8 threads) and even the "bad ones" usually do 4.2 ghz.

 

Would I ever pair an expensive motherboard and a dual rad water cooler with an AMD. Hell no. A evo 212 on a 8320 as a rendering machine and cheaper MB and a PSU that doesn't need to be ginormous? Hell yes. That thing is a steal as a rendering machine and will play "next gen" games pretty well, even if it struggles on other game titles.

 

So AMD can be the right choice, depending on games you play and what you do. As an enthusiast choice? No. You can't make it do some things well and you are throwing money away on cooling, PSU, MB price, trying to get the chip to do it.

[Faa]

GPU bound applications are a major area though. Why do you want to leave some facts out? Yes if you need single thread horsepower intel is the way to go. If you're on a budget for a gaming system you are much better going with AMD and spending the extra cash on a high end gpu. No?

Would you agree with me that Crysis 3 is a GPU bound game, right? Add some beast cards in SLI and your scenario changes:

Happens all the time with lots of games, a clear example is BF3 in the beginning it wasn't anything else than a GPU bound game now it's just complety cpu bound. You can't have 120fps all the time at ultra settings because the CPU holds back. It's just simple, you can't add as many cards as you would like to, the CPU has to keep up. Higher gpu loads should result in higher cpu loads as that video proved or have a look at this.

 

 

??? Say what. A MSI z87 that clocks to the moon (they all do), does crossfire and a 4670k are 269.99 at Microcenter. AMD starts at 4 ghz. You aren't getting near 5 and STABLE (and good luck now that they rebranded higher bins 9xxx) without a motherboard that is closer to 200 then 100. 

Meh.. He's been saying that a 8350 with an overclock is faster than an i5@stock, pretty much explains his ignorance really. His main argument is that multithreading bullshit while he doesn't even understand how threads&processes work let alone multithreading. All games currently even WoW thats 10 years old can use more than 20 cores which is according to him "singlethreaded", taskmanager should report the amount of threads a process contains if you're interested. Crysis 3 is atm the best multithreaded game and theoretically a fx 9590 should perform better than an i5 but it's not even close -> http://be.hardware.info/reviews/5109/27/amd-fx-9590--fx-9370-review-amds-rentree-in-de-high-end-markt-benchmarks-hd-7970-crysis-3-1920x1080-high

If Crysis has like 3 threads having as purpose instructing the GPU only how it should render a frame and the rest doing physics etc, an i5 will outperform a 9590 because you can't split one of the 3 threads to a 2nd core. The IPC is like 20% lower and exactly results it in the review I linked. Multithreading isn't going to be the future anyways, probably things like Mantle being much more cpu friendly or eventually HSA.

Lots of those 990FX boards are junk, vcore is much higher on a voltmeter than CPU-z or bios reports or VRM not holding it out in Prime95 resulting in downclocking. Asrock boards are famous for overvolting, overheating VRM etc, overclocking for any average user will be just limited.

 

 

 If rendering, 83xx>I5. 

With Quicksync I5's will destroy 9590's in encoding. With hardware acceleration like shadowplay etc streaming/recording with a 8350 is pointless making it a pointless CPU since it totally has no advantage over an i5.

So AMD can be the right choice, depending on games you play and what you do. As an enthusiast choice? No. You can't make it do some things well and you are throwing money away on cooling, PSU, MB price, trying to get the chip to do it.

 

The 6300 can be a right choice or an APU vs an i3, other than them theyre just a bad choice.

[smjpl]

 

Would you agree with me that Crysis 3 is a GPU bound game, right? Add some beast cards in SLI and your scenario changes

 

You did here the word budget right? Beast SLI isn't something I would associate with budget. This proves my point exactly. You are just spewing nonsense information that isn't relevant. The whole point is budget. Not everyone wants to spend shit loads on a mega gaming machine. AMD is the best choice for that price range as you can spend more on your gpu and have a better gaming experience.

 

I am not saying AMD is better in the situation you specified but that is a different situation. You originally said there is no reason to get AMD. That simply isn't true.

[Faa]

You did here the word budget right? Beast SLI isn't something I would associate with budget. This proves my point exactly. You are just spewing nonsense information that isn't relevant. The whole point is budget. Not everyone wants to spend shit loads on a mega gaming machine. AMD is the best choice for that price range as you can spend more on your gpu and have a better gaming experience.

 

I am not saying AMD is better in the situation you specified but that is a different situation. You originally said there is no reason to get AMD. That simply isn't true.

If you talk about budget talk about performance as well. And it's not only in SLI where Intel is performing massively better. BL2, WoW, Arma 2/3, Dayz, Skyrim, GW2, F1, Shogun, and lots of more games. Overall the i5 is the best cpu for the price/performance, 8350's overclocking option is useless since they don't even match at 5GHz an i5@stock so you save plenty of money going with the cheapest i5 & LGA1150 board.

Another point; If we see in the future 200$ midrange cards performing equally to a 7990 we'll see again scenario's like that "SLI review" where your futured-proofed octacore (best for your budget) isn't pushing the GPU above half of its performance, making that GPU investment a waste.

 

 

GPU bound applications are a major area though. Why do you want to leave some facts out? Yes if you need single thread horsepower intel is the way to go. If you're on a budget for a gaming system you are much better going with AMD and spending the extra cash on a high end gpu. No?

Yeah for a GPU bound game you shouldn't be even considering a 8350/2500K we, 50$ APU's would perform the same as a 1000$ 4960x. That's not even worth it to argue about it. Sadly not all games are GPU bound. In CPU bound games most of the time midrange cards are a waste so dont know why you would cheap on the CPU rather than on the GPU. WoW is a perfect example, a gtx 650 will perform exactly the same as 780's in quad sli in 25m raids due to the game being IPC bound.

[nokturrduk84]

You did here the word budget right? Beast SLI isn't something I would associate with budget. This proves my point exactly. You are just spewing nonsense information that isn't relevant. The whole point is budget. Not everyone wants to spend shit loads on a mega gaming machine. AMD is the best choice for that price range as you can spend more on your gpu and have a better gaming experience.

 

I am not saying AMD is better in the situation you specified but that is a different situation. You originally said there is no reason to get AMD. That simply isn't true.

Yeah, if you want to have inferior CPU which is weaker to Intel for a cheap price, than yes it's good choice

By the way getting GT 210 is also very cheap, getting 1333mhz RAM is also cheap, getting 500gb is also very cheap & then in general you get shit gaming PC, because you cheaped out on components...

[smjpl]

 

If you talk about budget talk about performance as well. And it's not only in SLI where Intel is performing massively better. BL2, WoW, Arma 2/3, Dayz, Skyrim, GW2, F1, Shogun, and lots of more games. Overall the i5 is the best cpu for the price/performance, 8350's overclocking option is useless since they don't even match at 5GHz an i5@stock so you save plenty of money going with the cheapest i5 & LGA1150 board.

Another point; If we see in the future 200$ midrange cards performing equally to a 7990 we'll see again scenario's like that "SLI review" where your futured-proofed octacore (best for your budget) isn't pushing the GPU above half of its performance, making that GPU investment a waste.

 

 

Yeah for a GPU bound game you shouldn't be even considering a 8350/2500K we, 50$ APU's would perform the same as a 1000$ 4960x. That's not even worth it to argue about it. Sadly not all games are GPU bound. In CPU bound games most of the time midrange cards are a waste so dont know why you would cheap on the CPU rather than on the GPU. WoW is a perfect example, a gtx 650 will perform exactly the same as 780's in quad sli in 25m raids due to the game being IPC bound.

 

 

Yes there are some games that aren't going to perform as well (see link) but the fact remains, if you only have £500 to spend on a rig, AMD is the way to go. You can say it is inferior and they should get the intel, save up and then buy a better gpu  but I know a lot of people that still game on really old hardware and are fine with that. It isn't worth spending double the amount (I know intel isn't double but if you want the best cpu/gpu etc).

 

http://www.ocaholic.ch/modules/smartsection/item.php?page=10&itemid=1117 (skyrim does much worse than the intel system but the rest are pretty close though)

[smjpl]

Yeah, if you want to have inferior CPU which is weaker to Intel for a cheap price, than yes it's good choice

By the way getting GT 210 is also very cheap, getting 1333mhz RAM is also cheap, getting 500gb is also very cheap & then in general you get shit gaming PC, because you cheaped out on components...

 

Why am I not surprised that you have a 1000W psu and a gtx 560. Is anything less than a 1000W inferior? lol

[nokturrduk84]

Why am I not surprised that you have a 1000W psu and a gtx 560. Is anything less than a 1000W inferior? lol

I'm getting GTX 780 soon 

Also I plan to add another 780 in future & 3-4 HDDs.

[Jack.EXE]

if your budget is between $70 & $160

                              (Athlon 740)  (FX 8320)

 

AMD is a no-brainer.

 

If your budget is <$70, just get a celeron & be happy (it's all you can do really, AMD does not have any good options for sub 70, well, the A6-6400K maybe, but when it comes to dual core vs dual core, I'd just go intel)

 

 

If your budget is $160 to $220

                   (FX 8320)    (FX 9370)

 

AMD is doable, the extra cores almost negates the need for shadowplay/capture card for streaming, and (when there is NO GPU involved (I'm looking at you quicksync people)) the 8350 can be faster in rendering.

 

 

If your budget is >$220

 

intel is a no-brainer, AMD does not offer anything competitive in this price point. (except maybe the 9370 w/ the free watercooler, it is a good deal, really.)

 

 

There are exceptions, but in general, this is a good guideline to follow.

[Cubit481]

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.

 

No alternative for now as sandy bridge is a great overclocker....but if u plan to do more heavy photoshop or video editing, then u should go for i7 as it being hyper-threaded (4 Cores & 8 Threads) can handle the frames your are processing as well as the frames that are next and ready to be processed....u will be getting far more performance..   

[Cubit481]

Basically FX series processors have great overclocking potential over 3rd gen and more potential over 4th gen intel...if u know how to overclock, buy a FX 8350 and crank it upto 4.8 to 5 Ghz and u will get more than your money's worth...

[smjpl]

I'm getting GTX 780 soon sherlock

Also I plan to add another 780 in future & 3-4 HDDs.

[Patrick3D]

AMD has always been the budget-conscious choice. Usually you can get a higher clock speed or overclock an AMD processor for less $$$ than the Intel equivilent. My first AMD processor was a 133MHz 486 processor back when the fastest 486 processor Intel sold was 100MHz.

[Faa]

Yes there are some games that aren't going to perform as well (see link) but the fact remains, if you only have £500 to spend on a rig, AMD is the way to go. You can say it is inferior and they should get the intel, save up and then buy a better gpu  but I know a lot of people that still game on really old hardware and are fine with that. It isn't worth spending double the amount (I know intel isn't double but if you want the best cpu/gpu etc).

 

http://www.ocaholic.ch/modules/smartsection/item.php?page=10&itemid=1117 (skyrim does much worse than the intel system but the rest are pretty close though)

You didn't say anything different this time really. I had pretty much tons of reasons why 8350's are ripoff. In the 100$ range you have so much more competition, if you're a gamer that usually plays the latest shooter a 6300 would be the best choice or if you're just playin games that don't take any advantage of all those cores you're better off with an i3. If I'll be playing Crysis 3 only I would go with the cheapest CPU even an APU thats like 50eur and get a 780 with that budget.

Cheaping out on the CPU to get a better GPU isn't always a better solution - for instance it would be pointless for lightthreaded cpu intensive games that you get a 8350 with a 280x over an i5 with a gtx 760 because the i5 will perform anytime better with a lower gpu due to the massive IPC.

Argue as much as you want, it just doesn't change the fact than you get much more for your money with an i5.

 

 

If your budget is $160 to $220

                   (FX 8320)    (FX 9370)

 

AMD is doable, the extra cores almost negates the need for shadowplay/capture card for streaming, and (when there is NO GPU involved (I'm looking at you quicksync people)) the 8350 can be faster in rendering.

 

Are you joking orwhat. There's no way you will have more frames when streaming with a 8350@5GHz against an i5 streaming with shadowplay. 600/7000 series have their auxilary video rendering chips (not the GPU - VID usage in GPU-z if you want to monitor it) and theyre way faster than a 3930K@5GHz. 

AMD's 10% multithreading performance isn't worth it over Intel's per core performance that's up to 100%.

[Jack.EXE]

-snip-

 

I spy with my little eye, a blue eyed fanboy!

[Jumper118]

Why am I not surprised that you have a 1000W psu and a gtx 560. Is anything less than a 1000W inferior? lol

make that a gtx 560ti with a 3930k@4.2ghz on a rampage IV extreme, a 1000w psu in a 900d with a h100 in the roof  

I spy with my little eye, a blue eyed fanboy!

indeed. 

[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.

Enough of the AMD vs Intel BS. Depending on what motherboard you have, you can get a 3770 if it's a 1155 gen 2 (z77). If it's gen 1 (z68), go for a 2600k and be done with it. You will save time and money because you dont have to change the motherboard.

 

If you were building a new rig I'd say go AMD, but you already have a good platform.

[Faa]

 

make that a gtx 560ti with a 3930k@4.2ghz on a rampage IV extreme, a 1000w psu in a 900d with a h100 in the roof  

 

indeed. 

 

Yeah it's a semi passive PSU so he bought it so the fan would never kick in, anything wrong with that choice? Your 650W psu is overkill as well for your system so back off.

 

 

I spy with my little eye, a blue eyed fanboy!

Ah says the gamer that calls himself an amd gamer. You're not even aware of 8350's true performance and you're bumming AMD so who's a fanboy here? I'm not an Intel fanboy or AMD, I don't care - I'll buy what gives me the best performance and in this case it's Intel. 2000-2006 before conroe you had no other choice than buying AMD for gaming the days they were aiming for IPC and Intel pure for clocks and now it's complety reversed AMD making the same mistake as Intel did before. CPU monopoly has always been IPC IPC IPC.

[Hacker90]

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.

Hey fanboy, 8350 is for people who stream and are on a budget. U say shadowplay? Well isnt that just an Nvidia feature? What if I am using AMD GPU? And you are comparing the 8350 with an i7. Obviously i7 will kill it as it has epic single core performance. But what happens when u compare it with something like a i7 3820? And stream? Guess what? AMD sits on Intel.....HARD!

And let me tel you how people on a budget build PC's. Say you have 1200$ to spend and just do gaming and record the gameplay edit it in Vegas and upload on youtube.

FX6300 + ASUS 990FX + 8GB ram + Hyper 212X + GTX 770 + 120GB 840 Evo + 1TB WD Black + Corsair RM 650 + NZXT Source 530 + 4 Corsair AF 140's. Then just OC the bi**h to 4.6Ghz and you have an ultimate Gaming machine that no intel build can beat in that price range with such a great choice of components. We can even ditch the RM series and get a Seasonic S12II and get a Cheaper case and an M5A97 board and add a GTX 780. With Nvidia u have shadowplay so u can even stream.

In the same budget you simply CANNOT build an Intel based rig that can do all this. Not only will the 6300 perform better in games than an 8350, u have saved enough cash to get a better GPU. If u went with Intel you would have gotten better frames with the GTX 770 but with that budget u cant even add an 770.

SO yeah! Budget build AMD, TOP end no compromise machine, Intel. Do ever say AMD is of no use or Intel is of no use, They wouldnt be here if they wer of no use!

I would be happy if that got through ur thick skull! 

[Faa]

Hey fanboy, 8350 is for people who stream and are on a budget. U say shadowplay? Well isnt that just an Nvidia feature? What if I am using AMD GPU? And you are comparing the 8350 with an i7. Obviously i7 will kill it as it has epic single core performance. But what happens when u compare it with something like a i7 3820? And stream? Guess what? AMD sits on Intel.....HARD!

 

Stop linking me video's from a reviewer that doesn't know shit. He's the only reviewer saying that AMD is better regardless of price than an i5/i7 that should say enough about his ignorance. 

Read this thread (especially Alatar whos a mod @OCN) -> http://www.overclock.net/t/1353440/teksyndicate-amd-fx-8350-oc-vs-i5-3570k-oc-using-an-evga-gtx-670/0_100#post_19136944

This blog pretty much explains as well why it's full of errors & misinformation -> http://lawlzawu1a.blogspot.be/2013/01/my-thoughts-on-tek-syndicates-fx-8350.html

You don't have to compare a 8350 with an i7, i5@stock is enough to destroy a fx 9590 for gaming. OBS supports Intel quicksync (IGP acceleration) that should blow a 9590 away for streaming.