AMD or Intel processor for gaming

[Sintezza]

BLA BLA BLA.

 

Till now i did not had any game, that was not playable on my FX8350.

 

And for all the rest of the bloody nonsense i dont give a shit. lol

Im happy with my FX8350, and i can compete up very well with my intel compatitors.

I never noticed any bottleneck

 

Since i do much more then only gaming with my system, the FX8350 was for me obvious the better choice.

For pure allround gaming, an i5 might be a better choice, but it also cost significantly more so yeah.

Most games are GPU bound, so you won´t even see much of a bennefit wenn going with the more expensive i5.

Only a few games, which do show some improvements, like some MMO´s like Skyrim.

But still those games are very well playable on the AMD FX

 

So yeah before you start yelling and sreaming, i never said, that the AMD is better then intel, for gaming.

For pure gaming intel is obvious the better choice offcourse.

But it still highly depends on which kind of games you play, to see exacly the real bennefit for the more expensive intel cpu´s.

 

Also i no where did recommend for "op" to grab a FX8350, cause "op" gave not enough information, for me to recommend a the best cpu for his money.

i just said that the FX8350 and the i5-4690K are both good choices, depending on what games you play.

 

With the information he gave sofar "gaming"

i see that as pure allround gaming, then the i5 might be his better choice.

Since he did not list a specific list of games.

 

Or i might have missed that list somewhere

 

Watch dogs is a diffrent story by the way

[Bloodkil933]

 

Show me video's of gameplay in multiplayer scenario's middle in combat rocking the gpu at 99%. I have provided you earlier a bunch of them all way below 99%

 

 

No it depends on how honest you are about AMD's performance.

 

 

Dropping no evidence to back this up doesnt prove anything.

 

 

It does.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBbbp0X4wHs

 

 

FX 83xx isn't a good choice when they cost the same and the fx 83xx = 6xxx = 4xxx = gaming performance. You might as well say the 4300 is equal to a 8350 unless you're coming again up that a single thread can be executed on an unlimited amount of cores. AMD cpu's aren't close to Intel when you're cpu limited.

Let's deny  real time evidence showing cpu bottlenecks & anandtech.com/vr-zone/pcgameshardware.de/hardwarepal/pclab.pl/sweclockers.com/hardware.info are all wrong because you said it. Not sure how this helps anyone out lying about AMD's performance. You just can't advice people a cpu when you complety throwed the facts out

 

I showed that it wasn't bottlenecking earlier, but apparently it 'proved nothing'. Don't say things like that if you're not actually here to listen.

[thebennyboy]

 

Show me video's of gameplay in multiplayer scenario's middle in combat rocking the gpu at 99%. I have provided you earlier a bunch of them all way below 99%

 

 

No it depends on how honest you are about AMD's performance.

 

 

Dropping no evidence to back this up doesnt prove anything.

 

 

It does.

 

 

FX 83xx isn't a good choice when they cost the same and the fx 83xx = 6xxx = 4xxx = gaming performance. You might as well say the 4300 is equal to a 8350 unless you're coming again up that a single thread can be executed on an unlimited amount of cores. AMD cpu's aren't close to Intel when you're cpu limited.

Let's deny  real time evidence showing cpu bottlenecks & anandtech.com/vr-zone/pcgameshardware.de/hardwarepal/pclab.pl/sweclockers.com/hardware.info are all wrong because you said it. Not sure how this helps anyone out lying about AMD's performance. You just can't advice people a cpu when you complety throwed the facts out

 

 

Please just leave, you're nothing more than a tireless troll with nothing better to do than try to flame everyone who disagrees with you. Should have just left you on ignore list, even that's too good for you. 

[Faa]

*

 

OP asked here which cpu is better, not how playable your 8350 is. You barely know when you're cpu bottlenecked so your claim that you're gpu bound isn't something that I would believe.

I have provided you enough evidence pointing out that every single claim of you was wrong, it's just up to you to accept this and get over it. It's funny you facepalm when you're complety wrong.

 

I showed that it wasn't bottlenecking earlier, but apparently it 'proved nothing'. Don't say things like that if you're not actually here to listen.

You didnt show anything. 

 

Please just leave, you're nothing more than a tireless troll with nothing better to do than try to flame everyone who disagrees with you. Should have just left you on ignore list, even that's too good for you. 

Next time when you quote me, come with proof and not with shitload of insults. 

[Sintezza]

Dude how often should i say again

 

a FX8350 does not bottleneck any GPU.

 

Its just bullshit. your pointing out zero evidence realy.

 

Just show me a scenario, on which a FX8350 cpu took a GPU sofar down, that resulted in an unplayable situation..

 

just show me.

 

I saw alot of those scenario´s / benchmarks in which fps was dropping, in multiplayer, but it did the same on the intels so yeah, this has not realy something to do with the GPU just saying!

FPS droppings in multiplayer is suffering by both intel and AMD, i never saw a scenario, on which the fps drop was so big that it resulted in an unplayable situation, on both  intel or AMD.

 

I´m just getting so annoyed by all the BS thats get spitting arround like this.

 

And please dont come up with techyes movies.

[Bloodkil933]

Dude how often should i say again

 

a FX8350 does not bottleneck any GPU.

 

Its just bullshit. your pointing out zero evidence realy.

 

Just show me a scenario, on which a FX8350 cpu took a GPU sofar down, that resulted in an unplayable situation..

 

just show me.

 

I saw alot of those scenario´s / benchmarks in which fps was dropping, in multiplayer, but it did the same on the intels so yeah, also this has totaly nothing to do with the GPU just saying!

 

I´m just getting so annoyed by all the BS thats get spitting arround like this.

 

And please dont come up with techyes movies.

Don't even try, look what response I got when I tried, I'm just gonna stick to helping the OP and ignoring the trolls.

 

Get whichever you want OP, have a look at benchmarks and see which one performs better for what you play.

[Faa]

a FX8350 does not bottleneck any GPU.

O no shit, because you said it right? You've had real time evidence showing the gpu load which was limited by the CPU performance what else do you need to start believing it? You've got shitload of graphs showing a large gap between the 8350 & i5 proving out that the 8350 was the limiting factor. No it's bullshit because you said it.

Here's an MMO archeage uses the Crysis 3 engine:

That 8350 isn't bottlenecking that 270x because you said it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVa9FtZJh2s

Why is the 4770k doing better with a single 780? 

 

http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-fx-8350-vs-intel-core-i7-3770k-4-8ghz-multi-gpu-gaming-performance/17494.html

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7189/choosing-a-gaming-cpu-september-2013/8

http://pclab.pl/art58123.html

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/screenshots/original/2013/09/SC2HotS-pcgh.png

http://www.hardwarepal.com/best-cpu-gaming-9-processors-8-games-tested/

http://i.imgur.com/4rU8fJF.png

http://hardwarepal.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Battlefield-4-1920-x-1080-Low-settings-GTX-770-vs-7970.jpg

http://cdn.overclock.net/1/1f/500x1000px-LL-1fa7a24a_3350949334973.png

 

FX 9590:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/62166-amd-fx-9590-review-piledriver-5ghz-11.html

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-9590-9370_5.html#sect0

Over 100 graphs showing the i5 doing much better. Does the 8350 bottleneck any GPU? Yes it does. Do Intels bottleneck? Ofc but dramatically lower.

 

 

just show me.

15 fps is playable?

20 fps is playable? Dude isn't even in combat.

[Bloodkil933]

O no shit, because you said it right? You've had real time evidence showing the gpu load which was limited by the CPU performance what else do you need to start believing it? You've got shitload of graphs showing a large gap between the 8350 & i5 proving out that the 8350 was the limiting factor. No it's bullshit because you said it.

Here's an MMO archeage uses the Crysis 3 engine:

That 8350 isn't bottlenecking that 270x because you said it.

Why is the 4770k doing better with a single 780? 

 

http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-fx-8350-vs-intel-core-i7-3770k-4-8ghz-multi-gpu-gaming-performance/17494.html

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7189/choosing-a-gaming-cpu-september-2013/8

http://pclab.pl/art58123.html

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/screenshots/original/2013/09/SC2HotS-pcgh.png

http://www.hardwarepal.com/best-cpu-gaming-9-processors-8-games-tested/

http://i.imgur.com/4rU8fJF.png

http://hardwarepal.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Battlefield-4-1920-x-1080-Low-settings-GTX-770-vs-7970.jpg

http://cdn.overclock.net/1/1f/500x1000px-LL-1fa7a24a_3350949334973.png

 

FX 9590:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/62166-amd-fx-9590-review-piledriver-5ghz-11.html

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-9590-9370_5.html#sect0

Over 100 graphs showing the i5 doing much better. Does the 8350 bottleneck any GPU? Yes it does. Do Intels bottleneck? Ofc but dramatically lower.

Yeah, if you're doing anything CPU intensive that can't use all 8 cores, then yes, you're going to see lower performance in games, but that doesn't mean the GPU is being slowed down, it just means the CPU is doing more of the workload. In games that only use a single thread, you're also going to bottleneck on an Intel CPU.

 

Check on other forums, you will find that 95% of people say the FX-8350 doesn't create a bottleneck.

[Faa]

Yeah, if you're doing anything CPU intensive that can't use all 8 cores, then yes, you're going to see lower performance in games, but that doesn't mean the GPU is being slowed down, it just means the CPU is doing more of the workload.

For godsake how many games can use "8 cores"? 1, 2, 3, 4 thats it? Now you're using a stupid excuse because you literally have nothing left. Archeage uses the Crysis 3 engine and see how hard the 8350 even bottlenecks so your point gets nowhere. Lots of the gpu bound benchmarks I've seen were obviously showing no difference but I can provide proof that its cpu bound

 

Check on other forums, you will find that 95% of people say the FX-8350 doesn't create a bottleneck.

 

And you're one of the 95% of them so that means nothing. You even agreed above that 8350's will bottleneck when a game can't use all 8 cores. 

 

 

Did you also watch the videos by linus showing very little performance difference? Oh you probably didn't even watch it as it proved your point invalid.  

He only showed a little difference in FC3/Crysis 3 that's all because theyre gpu bound. Check the archeage video I included which runs the Crysis 3 engine. The cpu load was cap'ed at 50% perfectly pointing out that it doesnt take advantage of more than 4 cores meaning an i5 would wipe the floor with your fx 4300 with the 2nd fx 4300 as standby. If you wouldn't believe that i5's aren't twice as fast as 4300's you must be the troll here.

 

[Bloodkil933]

 

For godsake how many games can use "8 cores"? 1, 2, 3, 4 thats it? Now you're using a stupid excuse because you literally have nothing left. Archeage uses the Crysis 3 engine and see how hard the 8350 even bottlenecks so your point gets nowhere. Lots of the gpu bound benchmarks I've seen were obviously showing no difference but I can provide proof that its cpu bound

 

 

And you're one of the 95% of them so that means nothing. You even agreed above that 8350's will bottleneck when a game can't use all 8 cores. 

 

 

He only showed a little difference in FC3/Crysis 3 that's all because theyre gpu bound. Check the archeage video I included which runs the Crysis 3 engine. The cpu load was cap'ed at 50% perfectly pointing out that it doesnt take advantage of more than 4 cores meaning an i5 would wipe the floor with your fx 4300 with the 2nd fx 4300 as standby. If you wouldn't believe that i5's aren't twice as fast as 4300's you must be the troll here.

 

 

You just contradicted yourself so hard it's not even funny.

 

An i5 can outperform an i7 in single threaded applications, so an Intel CPU will bottleneck less when fewer cores are used purely because of single core performance, but even then an Intel CPU can still bottleneck, when all the cores of the FX-8350 or even 4 for that matter, you DON'T see bottlenecking.

 

END OF DISCUSSION

[wretchedwilly]

This Video made me cry a little, because I had just went from an old AMD to the intel i5-3570k. This video offers a myriad of benchmarks for different games. 

[Faa]

You just contradicted yourself so hard it's not even funny.

 

An i5 can outperform an i7 in single threaded applications, so an Intel CPU will bottleneck less when fewer cores are used purely because of single core performance, but even then an Intel CPU can still bottleneck, when all the cores of the FX-8350 or even 4 for that matter, you DON'T see bottlenecking.

 

END OF DISCUSSION

A single thread can only be executed on one core or one hardware thread. The i5 doesnt perform better than the i7 in single threaded. The i7 will do slightly better because 2MB of extra cache and a higher clockspeed that's all. The single threaded performance doesnt decrease when you use more cores, this only happens to AMD's bulldozer/piledriver but not to their regular CMP phenoms.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hcuYiqib9I

So if you think if all cores are used are never going to bottleneck, think twice. Parallelism is extremely criticial for performance in games, it will be always shit regardless of how much it is multithreaded - parallelism is not the same as multithreading. You might as well do some research how threads & processes work, move on to multithreading and parallelism coding.

 

 

This Video made me cry a little, because I had just went from an old AMD to the intel i5-3570k. This video offers a myriad of benchmarks for different games. 

Watch the video's I included and the links, AMD is nowhere close to what Teksyndicate soloclaims.

This video is better.

[Bloodkil933]

 

A single thread can only be executed on one core or one hardware thread. The i5 doesnt perform better than the i7 in single threaded. The i7 will do slightly better because 2MB of extra cache and a higher clockspeed that's all. The single threaded performance doesnt decrease when you use more cores, this only happens to AMD's bulldozer/piledriver but not to their regular CMP phenoms.

So if you think if all cores are used are never going to bottleneck, think twice. Parallelism is extremely criticial for performance in games, it will be always shit regardless of how much it is multithreaded - parallelism is not the same as multithreading. You might as well do some research how threads & processes work, move on to multithreading and parallelism coding.

 

 

Watch the video's I included and the links, AMD is nowhere close to what Teksyndicate soloclaims.

This video is better.

 

 

 

You just contradicted yourself so hard it's not even funny.

 

An i5 can outperform an i7 in single threaded applications, so an Intel CPU will bottleneck less when fewer cores are used purely because of single core performance, but even then an Intel CPU can still bottleneck, when all the cores of the FX-8350 or even 4 for that matter, you DON'T see bottlenecking.

 

END OF DISCUSSION

 

Read the last sentence.

[Faa]

Read the last sentence.

The discussion will end whenever you quit your misinformation.