cpu help!

[zombiepixel]

so i just want to know can this cpu 

AMD 760K Richland Quad-Core 3.8GHz  

be able to compete against an i5 4670k? 

[Owen]

No, 4670k is betterz by far

[zombiepixel]

No, 4670k is betterz by far

why?

[TheSLSAMG]

why?

In terms of processing power, AMD Quad Core CPUs just cannot keep up with Intel. It's all because Intel use a much more efficient architecture than AMD, leaving them behind.

 

In terms of power, the 760K is beaten by most i3s.

[Guest Emrye]

why?

Intel has MUCH better single-threaded performance. You'll notice your PC being a lot snappier in everyday use along with CPU-heavy games like Minecraft.

 

It also uses less power, I dunno if that matters to you or not.

[Guest]

so i just want to know can this cpu 

AMD 760K Richland Quad-Core 3.8GHz  

be able to compete against an i5 4670k? 

 

You seem to be stuck in the mindset that all quad core CPUs are the same.

 

Since you have trouble understanding IPC and single-threaded performance, let's put it this way: The Athlon X4 760K is a little bit slower than the i3-4130.

 

Pentium G3420 < Athlon X4 760K < i3-4130.

 

Another way to think about it is regarding the X4 760K as actually a dual-core processor with four threads, like the i3-4130. This is because AMD's architecture is different; each core is similar to an Intel core, except AMD puts two integer units in one core and calls each integer unit a "core". This is a problem because there are different types of CPU tasks and integer is only one of them, so in 99% of tasks the X4 760K acts like a dual-core processor with two threads.

 

 

EDIT: I think you're trolling because the rest of your posts imply that you would be in possession of such common knowledge.

[zombiepixel]

You seem to be stuck in the mindset that all quad core CPUs are the same.

 

Since you have trouble understanding IPC and single-threaded performance, let's put it this way: The Athlon X4 760K is a little bit slower than the i3-4130.

 

Pentium G3420 < Athlon X4 760K < i3-4130.

 

Another way to think about it is regarding the X4 760K as actually a dual-core processor with four threads, like the i3-4130. This is because AMD's architecture is different; each core is similar to an Intel core, except AMD puts two integer units in one core and calls each integer unit a "core". This is a problem because there are different types of CPU tasks and integer is only one of them, so in 99% of tasks the X4 760K acts like a dual-core processor with two threads.

 

 

EDIT: I think you're trolling because the rest of your posts imply that you would be in possession of such common knowledge.

lol! no i actually dont know jack shit about how to compare proccessors. i know theres cores and then there clock speeds and wattage usage

[Guest]

lol! no i actually dont know jack shit about how to compare proccessors. i know theres cores and then there clock speeds and wattage usage

 

Name:     FX-8150     |     X4 760K     |     i3-4130     |     i5-4670K

 

Process & architecture:     32nm Bulldozer     |     32nm Piledriver     |     22nm Haswell     |     22nm Haswell

 

Cores:    4 modules / 8 threads     |     2 modules / 4 threads     |     2 cores / 4 threads     |     4 cores / 4 threads

 

Socket:     AM3+     |     FM2     |     LGA1150     |     LGA1150

 

Rough IPC estimate % of Piledriver:     ~80%     |     100%     |     ~120-130%?     |     ~120-130%

 

Hard to estimate IPC based on AMD's theoretical figures and varying benchmark data, but it gives you a rough idea of what to expect from the X4 760K. Of course the FX 8150 is just there for comparison to Bull-sh*t-dozer.