What do AMD CPUs have over Intel?

[i_build_nanosuits]

Has anyone seen Tech Yes City's video ?

 

 

are these results conclusive? 

 

 

I did and yes it's atm the best video.

i'M SORRY but NO these aren't any conclusive they are complete bull made out of brian's ass...i dismissed pretty much every of his results with my FX-8320 and posted videos and screenshots to him in an attempt to make him remove this bullshitiness videos from his channel in vain but cleary it 100% numbers pulled out of one's ass...he claims he got as low as 39FPS in BF4 with an FX and a GTX 780 wich is RIDICULOUS i played BF4 on highest possible settings and never got anything bellow 60FPS...he also claims that the intel CPU scores better in unigine valley wich is a GPU benchmark that use like 10% of available CPU ressources basicaly the CPU is at sleep almost and the GPU is working at 100%...he should have got the same results no matter the CPU used from the pentium 3 and up, literally...ALSO he got much higher numbers when STREAMING with an i5 oover the FX 8 core CPU wich everyone who tried this will realise it's impossible. it's all proven bullshit and i've ran many of the games he ''used'' for benchmarking and i got much better results across the board than what he claims. Also do you realise how he won't show the actual testing at any time neither do we can see the rigs used for testing or anything like that? it's all cheap excels graphs that takes 4 minutes to make with number pulled out of his a$$...an ignorant guy surrounded with boxes (probably most of these boxes bought on ebay INCLUDING the FX box that he toss early on to convince you to trust him) that's all it is really.

9FPS on crysis 3 with an FX-8320 and an overclocked GTX 780 at 1080P ? yeah sure...why not! i even got 3FPS playing warcraft 3 the other day it's the reason i upgraded my CPU! 100% bullshit.

[patrickjp93]

why people wanna waste endless hours on discussing this I don't understand 

Intel chips: faster,lower power consumption, expensive

AMD: slower, cheaper,high power consumption

it really is that simple 

It's not that simple. On what tasks? Why? 

 

Also, AMD chips are less efficient but have higher clock rates. Saying one is faster than the other is not qualitatively correct without context.

[Legitsu]

a fx-83XXX Is always going to be slower then a i7 4770 and thats all there is to it 

intel chips are faster

amd chips are slower

and thats all there is to it 

context doesn't matter workload doesn't matter the AMD chips are always slower clock for clock core for core 

[Phillyphries]

Legitsu, on 08 Jul 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:Legitsu, on 08 Jul 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:

a fx-83XXX Is always going to be slower then a i7 4770 and thats all there is to it 

intel chips are faster

amd chips are slower

and thats all there is to it 

context doesn't matter workload doesn't matter the AMD chips are always slower clock for clock core for core 

 

i7 4770 = $310

FX 8350 = $180

 

And the performance difference isn't THAT different.

[Legitsu]

i7 4770 = $310

FX 8350 = $180

 

And the performance difference isn't THAT different.

I agree but but speed is speed the  previous 10 pages are from fanboys attempting to claim that the AMD chips offer the same level of performance .. they don't  Intel chips are a step faster then AMD period end of discussion ect ect 

and you are also forgetting the price of AMD's higher end motherboards if you want to get a FX83xx to overclock to within striking distance of the of the i7 then you need a ~130.00 motherboard 

with intel I can just buy a 99.00 Z97 OR 65.00 H97 board and still get BETTER performance then your 220W 4.5Ghz 8350 and thats not even talking about overclocking because lets face it you don't need a 8 thread cpu to play battlecod a low end i5 will more then do the job

 

amd doesn't have the price advantage they once did 

[Phillyphries]

I agree but but speed is speed the  previous 10 pages are from fanboys attempting to claim that the AMD chips offer the same level of performance .. they don't  Intel chips are a step faster then AMD period end of discussion ect ect 

 

Yep. For $130 more it better be somewhat faster, or that's a huge disappointment tbh lol.

[Legitsu]

Yep. For $130 more it better be somewhat faster, or that's a huge disappointment tbh lol.

again you don't need to buy a z97 board with intel a 4770 will work on a 59.00 b85 board

so the price difference is actually only about 50 bucks 

now if intel would quit intentionally blocking overclocking on b85/h97 AMD would be in a world of shit because they have no chipset at that price point that can support overclocking the power vampire 

that is the 8350

[Phillyphries]

again you don't need to buy a z97 board with intel a 4770 will work on a 59.00 b85 board

so the price difference is actually only about 50 bucks 

now if intel would quit intentionally blocking overclocking on b85/h97 AMD would be in a world of shit because they have no chipset at that price point that can support overclocking the power vampire 

that is the 8350

 

If you like to buy cheap motherboards, then fair enough.

[vitor_cut]

again you don't need to buy a z97 board with intel a 4770 will work on a 59.00 b85 board

so the price difference is actually only about 50 bucks 

now if intel would quit intentionally blocking overclocking on b85/h97 AMD would be in a world of shit because they have no chipset at that price point that can support overclocking the power vampire 

that is the 8350

you can overclock a fx-83XX with a 80$ board( am3+ 970 chipset), i have the asrock extreme3 in my secundary rig and i has able to push my fx-8350 to 4.6 ghz, and the gigabyte is beter even better

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128651

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157394

 

 

we all know that the intel cpus are better and faster, but i can not accept when some people says that the amd cpu is a pile of **** when for the price is a very good cpu .thats all

[Legitsu]

you can overclock a fx-83XX with a 80$ board( am3+ 970 chipset)

yea and the VRM's will pop like popcorn also the 970 is 2 generations out of date 

[Phillyphries]

Legitsu, on 08 Jul 2014 - 08:52 AM, said:

yea and the VRM's will pop like popcorn also the 970 is 2 generations out of date 

 

I've never heard of any problems with overclocking a fx-8350 on a supported 970 board.

 

Also since you can't overclock intel CPUs on lower end motherboards, (for good reason too, the B85 is cheap because there are a lot of features that it doesn't come with, hence why it's appropriate for office users, not people who want to game or overclock) then why would you even bring that up. 970 motherboards are just as cheap and can push the fx-8350 to a good speed. So yeah, that kind of makes the price-to-performance difference greater

[Faa]

i'M SORRY but NO these aren't any conclusive they are complete bull made out of brian's ass...i dismissed pretty much every of his results with my FX-8320 and posted videos and screenshots to him in an attempt to make him remove this bullshitiness videos from his channel in vain but cleary it 100% numbers pulled out of one's ass...he claims he got as low as 39FPS in BF4 with an FX and a GTX 780 wich is RIDICULOUS i played BF4 on highest possible settings and never got anything bellow 60FPS...he also claims that the intel CPU scores better in unigine valley wich is a GPU benchmark that use like 10% of available CPU ressources basicaly the CPU is at sleep almost and the GPU is working at 100%...he should have got the same results no matter the CPU used from the pentium 3 and up, literally...ALSO he got much higher numbers when STREAMING with an i5 oover the FX 8 core CPU wich everyone who tried this will realise it's impossible. it's all proven bullshit and i've ran many of the games he ''used'' for benchmarking and i got much better results across the board than what he claims. Also do you realise how he won't show the actual testing at any time neither do we can see the rigs used for testing or anything like that? it's all cheap excels graphs that takes 4 minutes to make with number pulled out of his a$$...an ignorant guy surrounded with boxes (probably most of these boxes bought on ebay INCLUDING the FX box that he toss early on to convince you to trust him) that's all it is really.

9FPS on crysis 3 with an FX-8320 and an overclocked GTX 780 at 1080P ? yeah sure...why not! i even got 3FPS playing warcraft 3 the other day it's the reason i upgraded my CPU! 100% bullshit.

1) Unigine valley has some scenes that are cpu bound. http://i.imgur.com/vV6eKDY.jpg & http://i.imgur.com/XXksO4G.jpg

If you haven't noticed it, during every transition phase the gpu loads are starting low. Score gets ruined again. He should have used Unigine heaven instead of Valley and everyone should ignore unigine cpu tests >.>

2) About the streaming benchmarks, it's done wrong like every reviewer does this. You don't run around, you stand still and you don't move your mouse and start streaming. Take the same position as for the other CPU and same method. Running around just ruins the accuracy, if you want to simulate cpu bound scenario's get 4 cards in SLI or use 720p resolutions instead but with BF4's 200 fps cap its useless to do 720p. Same goes for that Crysis 3, the first level I still have plenty of stutters my fps dipping almost to zero. You shouldn't do Crysis 3 benchmarks because it's gpu bound to the floor. Everyone can confirm theyre gpu bound.

3) About the minimums again, walking around = retarded.

Forget HT, just a plain quadcore run Cinebench it nearly scales 100% everytime you assing another core for its process. With AMD take a module give that thing a thread you get something but give the same module another thread the performance gain is nowhere close to 100%. That could probably be the reason a why Intel sometimes has a huge gap. Rumors like the Windows 7 scheduler wasnt properly optimized either. You're ruling this theory out if you have lets say just 2 threads if you assign one to module#0 and module#1 they should scale nearly 100% as well. Why do we still see benchmarks often pointing it out? You'll never have a perfect explanation for this besides it depends on the workload.

What kinda other benchmarks do we have on youtube? Teksyndicate? Full of errors, showing a 350% difference in Far Cry 3 with a 7850 all settings max'ed out in 1080p - NASA found out that their 8350's have some kind of magic overclocking boost to your gpu bumping it up to 5000GHz. Linustechtips? Well he's not supposed to post benchmarks like a mmo where AMD gets 15 fps and Intel 30 fps, he'd be criticized to hell. Nicolas orsomething? Dude doesnt realize that he had Vsync on in Skyrim and pure cpu benchmarks like Cinebench? I'm not interested in multithreaded performance as a gamer. Do we have any better video than Brain has? No. Atleast he knows the difference between being cpu & gpu bound.

[Legitsu]

I've never heard of any problems with overclocking a fx-8350 on a supported 970 board.

 

Also since you can't overclock intel CPUs on lower end motherboards, (for good reason too, the B85 is cheap because there are a lot of features that it doesn't come with, hence why it's appropriate for office users, not people who want to game or overclock) then why would you even bring that up. 970 motherboards are just as cheap and can push the fx-8350 to a good speed. So yeah, that kind of makes the price-to-performance difference greater

you don't seem to understand just how much of a performace gap there is between amd and intel

 

it doesn't matter how much you push the 8350 a lowly i5 from intel is a better choice(yes gasp at gaming loads a STOCK- i5 is faster then amd's top end part)

 

 and to push a 8350 to striking distance of a STOCK i5 You would need it to be ~4.8Ghz you try that on a cheap board and thats a recipe for melted vrms 

 

the B85 boards have everything you need so you don't get SLI or mssd who cares .. I don't 

get a i5 get a good gpu and call it a day O yea and you still have the option to go up to a i7 if you need more

 

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/11/06/amd-fx-8350-review/

AMD are `good enough` for most stuff but a match for intel no .. not  even close they even admitted to that 

[thebennyboy]

1) Unigine valley has some scenes that are cpu bound. http://i.imgur.com/vV6eKDY.jpg & http://i.imgur.com/XXksO4G.jpg

If you haven't noticed it, during every transition phase the gpu loads are starting low. Score gets ruined again. He should have used Unigine heaven instead of Valley and everyone should ignore unigine cpu tests >.>

2) About the streaming benchmarks, it's done wrong like every reviewer does this. You don't run around, you stand still and you don't move your mouse and start streaming. Take the same position as for the other CPU and same method. Running around just ruins the accuracy, if you want to simulate cpu bound scenario's get 4 cards in SLI or use 720p resolutions instead but with BF4's 200 fps cap its useless to do 720p. Same goes for that Crysis 3, the first level I still have plenty of stutters my fps dipping almost to zero. You shouldn't do Crysis 3 benchmarks because it's gpu bound to the floor. Everyone can confirm theyre gpu bound.

3) About the minimums again, walking around = retarded.

Forget HT, just a plain quadcore run Cinebench it nearly scales 100% everytime you assing another core for its process. With AMD take a module give that thing a thread you get something but give the same module another thread the performance gain is nowhere close to 100%. That could probably be the reason a why Intel sometimes has a huge gap. Rumors like the Windows 7 scheduler wasnt properly optimized either. You're ruling this theory out if you have lets say just 2 threads if you assign one to module#0 and module#1 they should scale nearly 100% as well. Why do we still see benchmarks often pointing it out? You'll never have a perfect explanation for this besides it depends on the workload.

What kinda other benchmarks do we have on youtube? Teksyndicate? Full of errors, showing a 350% difference in Far Cry 3 with a 7850 all settings max'ed out in 1080p - NASA found out that their 8350's have some kind of magic overclocking boost to your gpu bumping it up to 5000GHz. Linustechtips? Well he's not supposed to post benchmarks like a mmo where AMD gets 15 fps and Intel 30 fps, he'd be criticized to hell. Nicolas orsomething? Dude doesnt realize that he had Vsync on in Skyrim and pure cpu benchmarks like Cinebench? I'm not interested in multithreaded performance as a gamer. Do we have any better video than Brain has? No. Atleast he knows the difference between being cpu & gpu bound.

 

You've been talking out of your ass ever since you joined this thread... You should just leave. Teksyndicates benchmark comparison carries far more weight than some random video with figures that look like they are were pulled from thin air. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about, or you're nothing more than some insufferable troll. He also says Mantle puts less load on the CPU which is load of rubbish, it actually spreads the load as it is more optimised and makes use of all the cores.

 

 

AMD are `good enough` for most stuff but a match for intel no .. not  even close they even admitted to that 

 

Not wrong, but not right either. Performance wise, yes Intel are better but AMD is FAR better value for money and can even be overclocked to perform just as good, if not better than some of the Intel chips. For me PERSONALLY amd is great for my needs, can be overclocked to give outstanding performance and as said before can match some of Intel's more expensive chips. Overall better performance = Intel, Overall better value for money = AMD.

[Faa]

You've been talking out of your ass ever since you joined this thread... You should just leave. Teksyndicates benchmark comparison carries far more weight than some random video with figures that look like they are were pulled from thin air. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about, or you're nothing more than some insufferable troll.

I have proven you wrong, it's up to you now to accept the facts or come up with proper evidence which you can't since I complety sticked to the facts. Put as much effort as you want, you're not getting any further than twisting the facts and insulting me.

You must be bugsbunny to think an octacore in 2018 thats currently struggling with a 2008 CPU in terms of single core performance or apparently being outperformed by a nehalem at 4GHz is futureproof. Tell us a story about how it is like living in your own delusional world with your amdhomies smoking green all day long?

[thebennyboy]

I have proven you wrong, it's up to you now to accept the facts or come up with proper evidence which you can't since I complety sticked to the facts. Put as much effort as you want, you're not getting any further than twisting the facts and insulting me.

You must be bugsbunny to think an octacore in 2018 thats currently struggling with a 2008 CPU in terms of single core performance or apparently being outperformed by a nehalem at 4GHz is futureproof. Tell us a story about how it is like living in your own delusional world with your amdhomies smoking green all day long?

 

You clearly don't read the evidence i added to several of my posts, even quoting a whole post regarding AMD and Intel and you still had issues accepting it. You still waiting for your paycheck from Intel?

[Demonking]

I have proven you wrong, it's up to you now to accept the facts or come up with proper evidence which you can't since I complety sticked to the facts. Put as much effort as you want, you're not getting any further than twisting the facts and insulting me.

You must be bugsbunny to think an octacore in 2018 thats currently struggling with a 2008 CPU in terms of single core performance or apparently being outperformed by a nehalem at 4GHz is futureproof. Tell us a story about how it is like living in your own delusional world with your amdhomies smoking green all day long?

it sounds like he agree that a 83** series beat Intel 3570K in far cry 3 if so LMAO 

[Legitsu]

Not wrong, but not right either. Performance wise, yes Intel are better but AMD is FAR better value for money and can even be overclocked to perform just as good, if not better than some of the Intel chips. For me PERSONALLY amd is great for my needs, can be overclocked to give outstanding performance and as said before can match some of Intel's more expensive chips. Overall better performance = Intel, Overall better value for money = AMD.

uh no it can't lol a FX 3850 running at 4.8Ghz is getting `walked` by a 3.4Ghz i5 in both benchmarks I linked 

in encode tests that can use all 8 threads maby .. at gaming loads nope not a snowballs chance in hell 

[Faa]

You clearly don't read the evidence i added to several of my posts, even quoting a whole post regarding AMD and Intel and you still had issues accepting it. You still waiting for your paycheck from Intel?

 

 

The 8350 is more future-proof than a i7 4-core processor 

Since you said it's more futureproof you automatically claimed it's better as well or how else would it be more futureproof? You have been proved wrong by multiple people here. Posting that techfan@ic's arcticle that apparently is flawed to fuck who thinks a 8350 can't process more than 4 threads at the same time doesn't give you any evidence, I didn't see any other link from you.

Give up or else you're just trolling

[Faa]

it sounds like he agree that a 83** series beat Intel 3570K in far cry 3 if so LMAO 

 

Yeah we should ask techfan@ic for an article why 8350's are 4 times faster.

 

uh no it can't lol a FX 3850 running at 4.8Ghz is getting `walked` by a 3.4Ghz i5 in both benchmarks I linked 

in encode tests that can use all 8 threads maby .. at gaming loads nope not a snowballs chance in hell 

He claimed that the 8350 walks over the 4770k.

[Demonking]

 

 

Since you said it's more futureproof you automatically claimed it's better as well or how else would it be more futureproof? You have been proved wrong by multiple people here. Posting that techfan@ic's arcticle that apparently is flawed to fuck who thinks a 8350 can't process more than 4 threads at the same time doesn't give you any evidence, I didn't see any other link from you.

Give up or else you're just trolling

 

Are you serious did he really say a 8350 a 2012 CPU is more future proof than an I7 which he means all i7's including i7 4820k he's losing it o_o haswell I3 beats that CPU in some games let alone a I7 he needs to stop.

[Opsilon]

The FX 8350 vs the 4770k rendered a 4K video in only 65% the time with the same RAM in the same channel mode at the same speeds, and neither chip was overclocked. I know I've seen that video and it surprised me, but when I went diving into the x86 manuals of both companies, I did find Intel had an achilles heel: its rendering instructions on the Haswell architecture. Most of them are 3 cycles where most of AMD's equivalents are 2 cycles or even 1. I was admittedly floored.

Wait, what? an 8350 does the job in 65% of the 4770k time, pls give me hat source, because i have never ever seen that one, like ever. i ma literally searching right now, and the only thing i can find is that an 8350 is faster than a 3570k when rendering

 

 

and a but ton of reviews show that it can beat the i5 but not the i7, i have saw a few months ago the 3d cad design and 3d modeling, now that is where AMD really did well, almost as good as a 4770k, but a lot cheaper, not to mention considering current prices...

Oh yeah, Photoshop heavy editing works great as well

 

http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/core-i7-4770k-review,15.html this one is also interesting

 

Now i am not bashing the 8350 at this but at the 65% of the time you better have a good backup, because i can't really find it 

[thebennyboy]

I'm leaving this now. Even when you provide valid evidence you get flamed and trolled. I believe what i believe and posted my reasoning, that's me done.

[thebennyboy]

Are you serious did he really say a 8350 a 2012 CPU is more future proof than an I7 which he means all i7's including i7 4820k he's losing it o_o haswell I3 beats that CPU in some games let alone a I7 he needs to stop.

 

No i didn't, please check this previous post and what i quoted: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/176283-what-do-amd-cpus-have-over-intel/?p=2376926

[Demonking]

I'm leaving this now. Even when you provide valid evidence you get flamed and trolled. I believe what i believe and posted my reasoning, that's me done.

No you posted delusions whoever thinks an 8350 is more future proof than an I7 especially haswell I7's & ivy bridge E is delusional period