Why The Hate On AMD (Prosessors)

[cmdrhomer]

Intel i7 or Xeon series all the way for me!

 

I would never go for an AMD ever again....they just overheat soo damn much..and they're still using pins (old tech)

 

They r indeed cheap, but even if its cheap, I'd rather go for an i5 then.

[FusionBlitzx]

Not everyone has lots of money to spend so AMD then is very attractive. sure it uses more power but the difference is way to minimal to make a difference on your power bill. Their cores are weaker and they fall behind in single threaded apps but they are still very good CPU's. I've had a 8350 and it was great for it's price so I don't see why people hate on it. 

[bry.yyyy]

i don't think and is a bad processor AMD Is For People How Want To Build A budget PC Like 700 $

Intel is For People How Have A Lot Money Because Intel Is Expensive

I Have Radeon HD 5570 2GB I Pay Just 55 $ And The Performer Look Nice For Gaming

[bluedyguard]

Intel i7 or Xeon series all the way for me!

 

I would never go for an AMD ever again....they just overheat soo damn much..and they're still using pins (old tech)

 

They r indeed cheap, but even if its cheap, I'd rather go for an i5 then.

 

Intel processors also use pins but they are on the motherboard. This was Intel's way of saying: "Fuck you" to the board partners.

[cmdrhomer]

 

Intel processors also use pins but they are on the motherboard. This was Intel's way of saying: "Fuck you" to the board partners.

Motherboards r still cheaper to replace

[Degraximus]

what the fuck does that mean? 20 years for what? Them to still compare the exact same as they do now?

Oh sorry. to make up for the price difference.

No he calculated that it would take about 20 years to make up the difference from an 80+ Bronze PSU and an 80+ Platinum PSU in power savings.

I can calculate it right now.

FX 8350:

Idle-95W

Under load-160W

i5:

Idle-96W

Under load-118W

Let's say that you use a PC for 12 hours a day. You game for 6 and you browse the web for 6. Browsing the web doesn't take to much power so we'll call that idle.

FX 8350=30KW/h a day.(or half a day since I chose 12 hours)

i5=25.68KW/h a day.

In a year that equals 10950KW/h for the FX 8350 and 9373.2KW/h for the i5.

My electric bill varies from 13KW/h in the winter to 16KW/h in the summer. So I'll just use 14.5 as an average.

FX= $1587.75 a year.

i5= $1359.144 a year.

^I think I need to divide by 100 though.

O__O Crap I just proved my self wrong. hahahaahaha

Still, intel runs cooler and needs 1/2 the cores to do the same stuff.

The fact that it runs cooler is indeed good, since you can OC it better with a crappy cooler.

And yeah you do need to divide by 100

[Syntaxvgm]

Threads like this are really starting to piss me off, people still hate Vishera for some unknown reason, Understandably it has a lower IPC than Intel, but as Logan showed, the 8320/8350's were and still are VERY good value for money.

 

Any day of the week i'd recommend an AMD 8320 to someone wanting to game and to just overclock it. And before anyone brands me as a fanboy which seems to be a common thing at the moment, the Intel CPU's are better, but I would argue not for gaming, any game which can fully utilise those 8 cores will see fairly similar performance to an Intel machine.

Well I think my problem with Vishera is it's just a bulldozer revision. Piledriver to be exact.

I understand why. The R&D for bulldozer was a major investment. They had to use it for a while. But bulldozer is just terrible. It was so disappointing that many executives left AMD when it was released.

The processors have 2 cores per module, sharing cache and instruction scheduling.

Bulldozer was designed for higher clock rates rather than more efficiency. This means like the Pentium 4 "Prescott", which I like to call Pentium 4.5, it has a long pipeline, and the performance gains are inconsistent for higher clock rates, or even in some cases are performance losses due to the latency. It has slow L2 and L3 cache, much slower than the previous AMD Phenom Thuban series, even though larger.

This latency allows it to reach higher clock rates, but compared to a thuban phenom, can take up to 50% longer or more to access the cache, which really hurts performance.

The Amount of L3 cache is ridiculous and unnecessary, especially given the slow access, might even make it worse, if not more expensive. It is arguable this extra cache helps the Opteron Line for server applications, but not for consumer workloads. (Note most options are based on the Piledriver Bulldozer revision. )

To put this in perspective, you only need to clock a Sandy Bridge intel to about 60% of the clock rate of a Bulldozer Cpu to match it's performance.

That's bad. Even worse, while in some tests the well known Phenom 1100T, a 6 core Thuban Cpu, lost to the 8 core FX-8150, the top of the line first gen bulldozers.

The 1100T actually beat the FX8150 in a lot of tests, despite having 2 less cores and a slightly lower clockrate. In fact in a lot of tests, to beat a Thuban Phenom you'd have to overclock the 8150 well beyond the Thuban Phenom.

So to summarize, though horrible design, the hope of beating competition by strapping as many cores together at the highest clock rate possible resulted in an Arhetecture that has many design issues, and suffers a performance that doesn't benefit from its high clockrates. They produced an Architecture that struggled to overcome even their own previous Phenom line at a lower clock rate and less cores. Its physical cores fail to match intel hyperthreading because of scheduling problems and the shared design, especially in windows.

This is why I don't like it.

I'm waiting for a late 2015-early 2016 new architecture from AMD. One of the designers that did major work on the Athlon design is back for this one. Rumor is they will have their own version of hyperthreading and hopefully, a focus on efficiency not cores and clock rate dropping their self-categorized "CMT" architecture . I can't wait for AMD to return to match and/or beat intel.

Edit- didn't realize that designer has confirmed this.

[patrickjp93]

i don't think and is a bad processor AMD Is For People How Want To Build A budget PC Like 700 $

Intel is For People How Have A Lot Money Because Intel Is Expensive

I Have Radeon HD 5570 2GB I Pay Just 55 $ And The Performer Look Nice For Gaming

Hey, with the Pentium G3258 I can build a plenty powerful budget PC for less than what I'd spend on an AMD machine with equal potential.

 http://pcpartpicker.com/user/patrickjp93/saved/PnqhP6

vs.

http://pcpartpicker.com/user/patrickjp93/saved/4FrmP6

[patrickjp93]

@Syntaxvgm

Exactly. I'm actually rooting for AMD. If they can produce a $200 or even $250 chip which goes toe to toe with the 4790k (priced at $329.99 on Amazon U.S.), I will happily switch and make Intel start producing chips at a reasonable price point again. AMD should have stayed a private company...shareholders are just too shortsighted to let an architecture mature. R&D on electrical engineering does not happen quickly like it used to.

 

HSA, after companies adopt it more and produce software (benchmarks anyone?) for it, then it may come to pass that the A10 7850k was actually a superior chip when everything is said and done. Now, it's not on the current software which is based purely on the CPU side, but that isn't to say those 8 R7 cores are meaningless if software evolves fast enough.

[Syntaxvgm]

@Syntaxvgm

Exactly. I'm actually rooting for AMD. If they can produce a $200 or even $250 chip which goes toe to toe with the 4790k (priced at $329.99 on Amazon U.S.), I will happily switch and make Intel start producing chips at a reasonable price point again. AMD should have stayed a private company...shareholders are just too shortsighted to let an architecture mature. R&D on electrical engineering does not happen quickly like it used to.

I mean yah. Intel has been riding on revisions of the same arch since the initial i series.

[patrickjp93]

I mean yah. Intel has been riding on revisions of the same arch since the initial i series.

I wouldn't quite say that... The IPC from Sandy to Ivy to Haswell has gotten better and better. And the power usage coming down across the board is obviously aimed toward the mobile market instead of the desktop market, but that doesn't mean Intel is sitting on its laurels. Once power consumption comes down it gives them good headroom to refine IPC again and add some clock rate boosts.

[patrickjp93]

Motherboards r still cheaper to replace

Tell that to the Asus Rampage boards

[Syntaxvgm]

I wouldn't quite say that... The IPC from Sandy to Ivy to Haswell has gotten better and better. And the power usage coming down across the board is obviously aimed toward the mobile market instead of the desktop market, but that doesn't mean Intel is sitting on its laurels. Once power consumption comes down it gives them good headroom to refine IPC again and add some clock rate boosts.

Id say that between the first and 4th gen i series for the desktop there is only a 25% increase of speed at the same clockrate. Now given at stock newer i7's and i5's are much higher clocked, that is a big increase, but moore's law is certainly dead, and AMD has had plenty of time to catch up. Not only that, but anyone still using something like an i7-920 is still good to go with an overclock. 

Laptops, whole different story. 

[patrickjp93]

Laptops, whole different story. 

Exactly, and that's where a lot of the market forces have gone recently. The Macbook Pro Retina 15" I bought to build my Master's Thesis on (otherwise I never would have bought it) has Intel's top Iris Pro CPU on it, and it could almost directly compete with the 4690k at stock speeds. Once that market cools off (and when the U.S. economy bounces back) the desktop market will take back off.

[Syntaxvgm]

Exactly, and that's where a lot of the market forces have gone recently. The Macbook Pro Retina 15" I bought to build my Master's Thesis on (otherwise I never would have bought it) has Intel's top Iris Pro CPU on it, and it could almost directly compete with the 4690k at stock speeds. Once that market cools off (and when the U.S. economy bounces back) the desktop market will take back off.

I wouldn't quiet agree with that, but I've never tested. Are you talking about he 8 thread i7 vs the 4690k? Then in a well optimized multithreaded workload I guess in those cases that would be right. Thread for thread...idk I've never looked it up. I mean I would think it would be much more efficient than something like a sandy i5 vs a haswell one? What I do know is the dual core i5 in the macbook air 2012 was like 1.8ghz, and now it's down to 1.4ghz, and is claimed to be the same performance. So it is  possible based on that given the i5 is a sandy. Or did the desktop haswells not get the efficiency increases the laptop line got?

[patrickjp93]

I wouldn't quiet agree with that, but I've never tested. Are you talking about he 8 thread i7 vs the 4690k? Then in a well optimized multithreaded workload I guess in those cases that would be right. Thread for thread...idk I've never looked it up. I mean I would think it would be much more efficient than something like a sandy i5 vs a haswell one? What I do know is the dual core i5 in the macbook air 2012 was like 1.8ghz, and now it's down to 1.4ghz, and is claimed to be the same performance. So it is  possible based on that given the i5 is a sandy. Or did the desktop haswells not get the efficiency increases the laptop line got?

http://ark.intel.com/products/76088/Intel-Core-i7-4960HQ-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_80-GHz <-chip in my MBP Retina.

vs the I5 4690k, I'd honestly take the laptop chip. I wish I could have delayed my Dad's upgrade until Skylake. Iris Pro 6200 with 128 iGPU cores and unified memory... That would have lasted him 20 years.

[GamerDude]

I've been using Intel and AMD CPU's over the years, right now I have:

Intel LGA2011 i7 3960X

Intel LGA775 C2Q X9650

AMD AM3+ FX8350

AMD AM3 X6 1100T

AMD AM2 X2 5200+

 

I usually buy the best either company has to offer and use them for years. The AM3 X6 1100T was a recent build, I'd gotten it simply because I was in the mood for a 4th gaming rig, and was impressed by the performance of the FX8350. I'd gotten the X6 1100T (my 2nd choice) as the deal I had for an LGA1337 CPU fell thru.....and I wasn't in the mood to wait for another i7 to show up at the price I'd wanted. 

 

Anyone who hates on AMD CPU's (and GPU's) are basically either fanboys, or simply misinformed. As some had stated, AMD wins for price/performance for both their CPU's and GPU's. I'm happy to give my support to AMD because I think their presence on both the CPU and GPU fronts have kept price reasonable.....especially true with regards to their GPU's. Competition is good and benefits both us (the consumers) and the industry as a whole.

[Cwazywazy]

I do honestly prefer Intel/Nvidia but I have an AMD/Radeon setup simply because of the cost/performance. (Also because the CPU and motherboard were a Christmas present and it was still far better than the P4 I had at the time.)

[cmdrhomer]

Tell that to the Asus Rampage boards

The thing is, I dont use ROG motherboards.... I either stick with Asus Deluxe or WS motherboards or Gigabyte's Ultra Durable motherboards.... and NO MSI shitty motherboards

Im just tired of gaming / overclocking motherboards... there's always a flaw...

[patrickjp93]

The thing is, I dont use ROG motherboards.... I either stick with Asus Deluxe or WS motherboards or Gigabyte's Ultra Durable motherboards.... and NO MSI shitty motherboards

Im just tired of gaming / overclocking motherboards... there's always a flaw...

I've never had bad luck with MSI. The new gaming series is the first I've heard so much bad news about.

[i_build_nanosuits]

I've never had bad luck with MSI. The new gaming series is the first I've heard so much bad news about.

what about the MSI Z87 gaming series? are those any good? cause honestly i just bought one and i'm very happy with it as long as it last...will it last ?

[patrickjp93]

what about the MSI Z87 gaming series? are those any good? cause honestly i just bought one and i'm very happy with it as long as it last...will it last ?

Given it's military class 4 construction (I double checked and the DOD certified it. It's not a gimmick) it should last fine. Though the Gaming 7 and 9 AC have had a lot of problems in the first release.

[i_build_nanosuits]

Given it's military class 4 construction (I double checked and the DOD certified it. It's not a gimmick) it should last fine. Though the Gaming 7 and 9 AC have had a lot of problems in the first revision.

that is good to know thanks man, cause i really like this board i have, i love the bios and the features on it the fan controls are just fine and everything i love the look of it and it run my i7 @ 4.4ghz without any issues...i just hope it last a couple more years!

[Faa]

what about the MSI Z87 gaming series? are those any good? cause honestly i just bought one and i'm very happy with it as long as it last...will it last ?

Just don't bother with this brand flaming. MSI/Asrock/Asus/Gigabyte are all equally reliable, brands like biostar ECS whatever you have they lost their reputation a long time ago but EVGA is making a comeback. One day you hear people whining about Asus boards, the other day its all about MSI, then Gigabyte etc etc but in the end it just means nothing

[patrickjp93]

that is good to know thanks man, cause i really like this board i have, i love the bios and the features on it the fan controls are just fine and everything i love the look of it and it run my i7 @ 4.4ghz without any issues...i just hope it last a couple more years!

Let's hope it lasts my Dad 11 years like his old build. http://pcpartpicker.com/user/patrickjp93/saved/gGFXsY