Intel vs amd

[jmcphe01]

I have a 6100 fx six core processor with a 970 chipset board would you upgrade to Intels new processor and a z97 board or just stay with what I got

[Recon-UK]

Upgrade, i have the money so...

 

Seems flame baity dis thread.

[DoubleY]

Depends on what you do with your CPU 

[lani100]

I have a 6100 fx six core processor with a 970 chipset board would you upgrade to Intels new processor and a z97 board or just stay with what I got

If you have the money go for it but depending on your use you won't notice much diffrence but I mainly play Bf4 and i did notice a big performance increase when I switched from AMD to Intel.

[Glenwing]

I have a 6100 fx six core processor with a 970 chipset board would you upgrade to Intels new processor and a z97 board or just stay with what I got

Are you having performance problems with it? If no, then stay with it until you do. If yes, then an upgrade might be in order.

[jmcphe01]

I game mostly

[Opcode]

Switching to an Intel based microprocessor is always an upgrade from AMD. It just boils down to can you afford it and is it worth it. You need to specify your other hardware and what you use your machine for. As an example for someone who only plays Minecraft I see no point in switching hardware. If you're compiling 100,000+ lines of code on a daily basis, then yes a i7 would make a world of difference. All you will get is a couple of replies, and then it will turn into a Intel vs AMD debate.

[Recon-UK]

I game mostly

What GPU you running?

[jmcphe01]

R9290

[jmcphe01]

I run a 6100 six core amd processor with a 970 Asus motherboard a r9290 620 watt psu a ssd and a 1tb hdd 16gb 1600 mhz memory with a h110 cooler

[Recon-UK]

An intel chip would gain more FPS, but if you have no problems, what's the point?

[Faceman]

I run a 6100 six core amd processor with a 970 Asus motherboard a r9290 620 watt psu a ssd and a 1tb hdd 16gb 1600 mhz memory with a h110 cooler

You need to step up to an Intel with that powerful of a GPU, your CPU is bottlenecking your video card.

 

As you can see in this graph, the FX processors are not seeing performance gains when moving from 280X to 290X or 770 to 780, which should not be happening.

 

FX processors use an old architecture that was originally designed for servers, and then turned into desktop chips, this was back in 2009.  The AM3/AM3+ is a dying breed.  Even an Intel i3 beats out an FX8320 for gaming.

 

Definitely go for Intel if your main purpose is gaming, The new Devil's Canyon processors are supposed to be very good overclockers, so you can really put that H110 to use.

 

There is nothing wrong with sticking with what you already have, it is not like you are getting unplayable results, but as to the question of which is superior, the answer is Intel.

[Vrbas]

You need to step up to an Intel with that powerful of a GPU, your CPU is bottlenecking your video card.

As you can see in this graph, the FX processors are not seeing performance gains when moving from 280X to 290X or 770 to 780, which should not be happening.

FX processors use an old architecture that was originally designed for servers, and then turned into desktop chips, this was back in 2009. The AM3/AM3+ is a dying breed. Even an Intel i3 beats out an FX8320 for gaming.

Definitely go for Intel if your main purpose is gaming, The new Devil's Canyon processors are supposed to be very good overclockers, so you can really put that H110 to use.

There is nothing wrong with sticking with what you already have, it is not like you are getting unplayable results, but as to the question of which is superior, the answer is Intel.

That graph just isn't right... It shows the 4670 bottle necking the 290 and 780 also unless overclocked. If that's true why would you buy into another bottleneck?

Also the i3 only beats the fx at single threaded tasks...

[jdsb52]

OP is starting another AMD vs Intel war thread lool, im going from a FX8120 to devils canyon i7, mine is struggling with Unreal 4, Marvelous Desginer etc etc

[i_build_nanosuits]

That graph just isn't right... It shows the 4670 bottle necking the 290 and 780 also unless overclocked. If that's true why would you buy into another bottleneck?

Also the i3 only beats the fx at single threaded tasks...

that's exactly what i was about to say, what about the 4670K bottlenecking the 780 as well! unvalid benchmarking...

 

And yes the core i3 beats the FX at anything that use 2 heavy threads or less...beyond that the i3 is a no match for the FX...just look at cinebench results

from this forum, do you see a core i3 up there? certainly not..http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/62476-post-your-cinebench-r15-scores-and-new-r115-scores-now-included/

 

Now, i can tell you this OP...you have an awesome GPU and your CPU for most games will be fine unless you play CPU intensive games like online stuff, BF4 online defenetly a slight CPU bottleneck from the bulldozer 6 core on a 290 no denying that...crysis 3 same thing, anything that use less than 3 threads (WoW, skyrim, planetside...all thos old tech single-threaded games and most indi games) defenetly bottleneck there too...but if you play mostly modern games on single player compaign, then no they should all not be CPU bottlenecked (racing games, sports games, simulation and action games, hitman, max payne, batman, tomb raider all that good stuff) no significant CPU bottleneck...now the choice is yours...i would consider upgrading for an FX-6300 if i where you for cheap...you could sell the 6100 online and get a good deal for a FX-6300 and you would notice a good 15% boost in CPU performance, lower power consumption and heat output etc...without the need for a new motherboard or any other extra parts...i doubt that your current 970 board would support an 8 core FX, only 2 boards can do this and they are: gigabyte 970A-UD3p and ASUS m5A97 EVO.

so what are the games you play on this machine?

[Sintezza]

You need to step up to an Intel with that powerful of a GPU, your CPU is bottlenecking your video card.

 

As you can see in this graph, the FX processors are not seeing performance gains when moving from 280X to 290X or 770 to 780, which should not be happening.

 

FX processors use an old architecture that was originally designed for servers, and then turned into desktop chips, this was back in 2009.  The AM3/AM3+ is a dying breed.  Even an Intel i3 beats out an FX8320 for gaming.

 

Definitely go for Intel if your main purpose is gaming, The new Devil's Canyon processors are supposed to be very good overclockers, so you can really put that H110 to use.

 

There is nothing wrong with sticking with what you already have, it is not like you are getting unplayable results, but as to the question of which is superior, the answer is Intel.

 

So basicly the GTX770 does a better job in BF4 then the R9-290? yeah right, this benchmark is very trust worthy.. not

 

FX6100 is not a bad cpu at all for gaming, only single threaded they are a bit of a mess. But in BF it will just fine. But it could slightly bottleneck your 290. The problem for you, is that you on a 970 chipsetboard, i dont know which board you have, but most of them are not realy designed for a FX 8 core cpu, so if you would decide to upgrade to a FX8350 then you probably need a new mobo aswell.

And then its just the question, do you like to stay amd or jump intel, that up to you, but both the i5-4670K / i7-4770K as the FX8350 will do a great job in BF4. or just wait for the k parts of the haswell refresh, the 4690K and the 4790K.

 

In the end its just what you are willing to pay, but if its just BF4 mainly, i dont realy see a reason to upgrade, unless you feel bottlenecked. just check how much load the gpu gets wenn playing, if it is at 100% you not realy bottlenecked.

 

Those new Z97 Asus maximus VII boards are realy nice. in my opinnion. ☺

[Faa]

That graph just isn't right... It shows the 4670 bottle necking the 290 and 780 also unless overclocked. If that's true why would you buy into another bottleneck?

Why its not?

It points a few things out;

- Nvidia is much more efficient with the information coming from the cpu as we see the gtx 770 outperforming a 290x in a cpu bound situation. When both of them would be at 99% ofc the 290x would outperform it

- AMD was bottlenecking a 280x as we notice a 20 fps difference against the 4670k & 280x. If you bottleneck a 280x, you'd bottleneck a 290x as well with no performance gain which is perfectly like it should.

- AMD doesnt take again advantage of a higher card - no difference between the 770 & 780 - I've posted a few video's here pointing out that 8350's were bottlenecking a 780

I don't use SLI anymore for BF4, in the beginning a 780 was capable of 80 fps and now after a halfyear theyre pushing easily 120-150 fps out (I have video's recorded to prove this). 8xxx cpu's perform exactly the same as 6xxx cpu's in BF4 - that game doesn't take any advantage of 8 cores (here a thread analyze: http://i.imgur.com/30hjjLS.png)

 

 

So basicly the GTX770 does a better job in BF4 then the R9-290? yeah right, this benchmark is very trust worthy.. not 

Reversing this logic; a 780 is zero better than a gtx 650 with a pentium 2 50MHz. If you'd google benchmarks of those cards they all are tested at 99%, nobody would test gpu's when the cpu is the bottleneck and thats what theyve done. 

 

 

And then its just the question, do you like to stay amd or jump intel, that up to you, but both the i5-4670K / i7-4770K as the FX8350 will do a great job in BF4. or just wait for the k parts of the haswell refresh, the 4690K and the 4790K.

The question is if he cpu's or gpu limited. If he's gpu limited -> gpu upgrade. If he's cpu limited a 8350 isn't an upgrade, 20% IPC at best and 2 useless cores that wont make a difference.

@Op you're better off figuring out if you're gpu or cpu limited and upgrade the part thats limiting you.

[Sintezza]

 

Why its not?

It points a few things out;

- Nvidia is much more efficient with the information coming from the cpu as we see the gtx 770 outperforming a 290x in a cpu bound situation. When both of them would be at 99% ofc the 290x would outperform it

- AMD was bottlenecking a 280x as we notice a 20 fps difference against the 4670k & 280x. If you bottleneck a 280x, you'd bottleneck a 290x as well with no performance gain which is perfectly like it should.

- AMD doesnt take again advantage of a higher card - no difference between the 770 & 780 - I've posted a few video's here pointing out that 8350's were bottlenecking a 780

I don't use SLI anymore for BF4, in the beginning a 780 was capable of 80 fps and now after a halfyear theyre pushing easily 120-150 fps out (I have video's recorded to prove this). 8xxx cpu's perform exactly the same as 6xxx cpu's in BF4 - that game doesn't take any advantage of 8 cores (here a thread analyze: http://i.imgur.com/30hjjLS.png)

 

 

Reversing this logic; a 780 is zero better than a gtx 650 with a pentium 2 50MHz. If you'd google benchmarks of those cards they all are tested at 99%, nobody would test gpu's when the cpu is the bottleneck and thats what theyve done. 

 

 

The question is if he cpu's or gpu limited. If he's gpu limited -> gpu upgrade. If he's cpu limited a 8350 isn't an upgrade, 20% IPC at best and 2 useless cores that wont make a difference.

@Op you're better off figuring out if you're gpu or cpu limited and upgrade the part thats limiting you.

 

 

Dude realy you talk totaly bullshit

Nvidia is more efficient? lol in what then ? GTX770 beats a R9-290X whahah never dude. just STFU

[i_build_nanosuits]

Dude realy you talk totaly bullshit

please just STFU

+1

it has been proved that even an A10 APU won't bottleneck a GTX 780 in BF4, also the video you showed with ''suposedly'' a single GTX 780 performing at 120 to 150FPS in BF4 was most likely

made up because when i check core i7-4770K + GTX 780 BF4 ULTRA 1080p VIDEOS on youtube, NOBODY gets more than average 75 to 80FPS...and this is NORMAL because that's the performance

of a FULLY LOADED GTX 780 IN BF4! How do i know that? BECAUSE I OWN ONE and i can check at my GPU USAGE in afterburner and realise that my card is loaded at 99% ALL THE TIME !

SO, Stop thinking that we are dumb and that we will swallow all the BS that you pretend has being fact kid!

[Sintezza]

+1

it has been proved that even an A10 APU won't bottleneck a GTX 780 in BF4, also the video you showed with ''suposedly'' a single GTX 780 performing at 120 to 150FPS in BF4 was most likely

made up because when i check core i7-4770K + GTX 780 BF4 ULTRA 1080p VIDEOS on youtube, NOBODY gets more than average 75 to 80FPS...and this is NORMAL because that's the performance

of a FULLY LOADED GTX 780 IN BF4! Stop thinking that we are dumb and that we will swallow all the BS that you pretend has being fact kid!

 

Lol the graph thats posted here shows that the 290X is gotten beaten by the GTX770 by allmost 10 fps on the same cpu, i have realy no idea what that Faa dude is lurking about That graph is just totaly bullshit.

the GTX770 can hardly compete with the 280X toxic.

 

sorry i have to correct my self, the GTX770 gets asskicked by the 280X toxic

[i_build_nanosuits]

+1

it has been proved that even an A10 APU won't bottleneck a GTX 780 in BF4, also the video you showed with ''suposedly'' a single GTX 780 performing at 120 to 150FPS in BF4 was most likely

made up because when i check core i7-4770K + GTX 780 BF4 ULTRA 1080p VIDEOS on youtube, NOBODY gets more than average 75 to 80FPS...and this is NORMAL because that's the performance

of a FULLY LOADED GTX 780 IN BF4! How do i know that? BECAUSE I OWN ONE and i can check at my GPU USAGE in afterburner and realise that my card is loaded at 99% ALL THE TIME !

Here i quote my message again because i edited it some more and the page 2 went on...

[Faa]

Dude realy you talk totaly bullshit

Nvidia is more efficient? lol in what then ? GTX770 beats a R9-290X whahah never dude. just STFU

Learn to read; those cards were tested in a CPU BOUND scenario, NOT in a gpu bound scenario. 770's cant outperform 290's when both of them are at 99% and as we see in that graphs none of them were at their max load meaning it was cpu bound. All your cpu does in a game is sending information out to your gpu and your gpu starts rendering frames, this pointed out that nvidia didn't need that much information as AMD from the cpu to push a frame out. Maybe you should google a bit what gpu or cpu bound means and what your cpu does in a game.

 

 

Here i quote my message again because i edited it some more and the page 2 went on...

 

I agree this Faa user has been driving me nuts with false claims and falsified graphs and videos and benchmarks lately i'm reporting him all day long and i can't wait to see him out of here, someone will do something about it soon i'm sure!

 

Made up?

My settings at 0:41

We all know your 8350 is bottlenecking your 780 since we see a good 70% difference

[i_build_nanosuits]

yeah yeah again the same made up video, link me a SINGLE video of ANY OTHER user on youtube with similar specs (SINGLE GTX 780) reaching upward or 100FPS constantly...ONE! go ahead! you won't cause i watched most of them and it's always the same, 60 to 85FPS...go ahead!

 

CHECK THIS OUT OKAY:

 

SEE, this guys is not EVEN using FULL ULTRA SETTINGS (ONLY 2xMSAA FOR GOD SAKES!!!) with his i7-4770K + GTX 780 SC SUPERCLOCKED yes he his recording with shadowplay cost him about a constant 3FPS yes, but it's nowhere near 150FPS my man !

 

 

 

want some more? HERE, another user, AGAIN NOT EVEN FULL ULTRA (AND AGAIN 2xMSAA ONLY)

 

 

WANT SOME MORE, HERE AGAIN :

 

 

I could go on all day they are all the same, so please STOP THINKING WE ARE DUMB MORONS KID !!!!!

[deathjester]

I have a 6100 fx six core processor with a 970 chipset board would you upgrade to Intels new processor and a z97 board or just stay with what I got

 

Depends what you play. If you are mostly into console ports and shooters? Wait on actual benchmarks of a game like Watch Dog's. I think the I7 recommendation is absolute BS. 

 

If you are planning to play WildStar with 40 man raids and play WoW or something? Yeah, Intel is quite a bit ahead. All depends on what you play. Most single player games like Tomb Raider for instance? Might as well be a GPU benchmark. 

 

Here are some games things where a OC Intel would benefit you and actually be worth upgrading for. WoW (big raids only), SWTOR (same), Guild Wars 2 (hardest game on CPU I ever played in world pvp), Day-Z, Rust, RTS (overblown AMD is not as bad as they say, and people that prefer Intel are like hardcore RTS players playing at extremely high FPS), Flight Simulator (yup people still play this),  Dolphin emulator. 

 

If none of the above interest you, and you mainly play single player games and shooters and have no FPS issues in those shooters? Don't worry about it. Intel is better in games, but in many there is no difference, in many it is minimal. We all like different game genres and many are not close to being CPU bound. Some where the Intel is better, is mainly past 60 FPS so do you have a monitor that will display past that? If not? You aren't going to see much benefit. 

[Faa]

yeah yeah again the same made up video, link me a SINGLE video of ANY OTHER user on youtube with similar specs (SINGLE GTX 780) reaching upward or 100FPS constantly...ONE! go ahead! you won't cause i watched most of them and it's always the same, 60 to 85FPS...go ahead!

 

CHECK THIS OUT OKAY:

 

SEE, this guys is not EVEN using FULL ULTRA SETTINGS (ONLY 2xMSAA FOR GOD SAKES!!!) with his i7-4770K + GTX 780 SC SUPERCLOCKED yes he his recording with shadowplay cost him about a constant 3FPS yes, but it's nowhere near 150FPS my man !

 

I could go on all day they are all the same, so please 

Theyre from october/november. I used to get 150 fps with 2 gpu's at 99% thats why I originally bought a 2nd 780 for to have 120 fps, now I'm doing it with 2 gpu's each at 50% and not using SLI anymore for BF4.

I'm not sure how you manage to make a fool out of yourself claiming I made my video's up blablabla, I've used Playclaw 5 http://www.playclaw.com/download.php

My vram usage was at 1800MB yours was just at 1300MB, your gpu didnt fluctuate a degree at all that just instantly means there wasn't that much load applied to your gpu. Straight evidence in your face you deny it and you start out to rage like a kid when you cant prove yourself right.