does AMD CPU really perform that bad?

[LordMustangGT]

mmm so much hate, love it, hahaha  i'll take my 9590 allll day over intel. Intels are soooo slow

[nokturrduk84]

install windows 8 from USB to SSD takes like 8 minutes nowadays, i'm fine with it as well

Mine takes exactly 4 minutes

[ComradeHX]

All games(unless I'm missing a shitty console port) can use full power of 1-2 core while not as many games can use full power of 8 cores.

That's why AMD's "moar core iz bettah" approach fail to work sometimes.

I installed windows 8.1 onto a samsung 840 evo.

Don't recall how many minutes; but I went to the bathroom when it started, and when I got back it was done.

Usually I had to sleep an hour or two before it's done. SSD is important piece of hardware.

[Wilhave]

From a 9590 owner, don't get it if you're just gaming and stay with Intel. I don't game much but do a lot of CAD and 3d rendering and to gain any significant performance increase I would have to jump to the LGA2011 or 2011-E CPU.

 

 

Your CPU is great for gaming, no need to go to 220w TDP FX CPU, that perform worse, gives more heat and asks for really good cooling.

As far as AMD puts out more heat, my 9590 has never gone past 55c on an h100. I have seen i7's in the high 40s to the high 60s with the h100, so no it doesn't produce more heat than Intel (could be different on air cooler though)

[i_build_nanosuits]

As far as AMD puts out more heat, my 9590 has never gone past 55c on an h100. I have seen i7's in the high 40s to the high 60s with the h100, so no it doesn't produce more heat than Intel (could be different on air cooler though)

the architecture is different and the intel cpu does get hotter inside the core themselves but the global heat output from the cpu is much less because it uses a lot less watts..it's physics.

AMD cpu's are much bigger and more efficient at dissipating the heat that's why they get lower core temps.

[D3MON]

intel beat amd in single core performance like amd did to intel in 2005, but amd are still great of anything that uses more than 1 core (in which case anything over a pentium-k is a waste of money and stupid), morons and fanboys like to quote how bad the 9590 is for its price which it is, but they think all amd's are like that, these same people complain about how expensive a k6000 is....
they dont get that its there for bragging rights and not meant to be taken seriously, i guess they'd also complain that a veyrons too fast and the costs of fuel and tires are stupid.

amd users get 6300's and 8320, because for the price they cant be beaten in overall performance (in cpu tasks obviously), in single threaded gaming anything over a pentium k is stupid and in well made games its the graphics card that makes the difference.

for a given price usually you can go with a cheaper amd cpu and buy a better graphics card for gaming, like getting an 8320/r9-290 instead of a 4670k/280x, it does depend on the game and budget though. the aforementioned amd cpus are the only cpu's amd make that id reccommend and 7850k for apu's if you need those extra HSA enabled abilities once programmers learn to use the additional power.

intels power efficiency might be better in situations where you have one of those laptop thingy's we had years ago. so if you dont have a phone and want to carry a laptop yeah go intel, amd has some newer kabini stuff but i havent cared to search about laptops in years.

[Tr3vor]

AMD has higher GHZ so they're actually better than intel. Even has moar cores too.

[Rubenis]

AMD has higher GHZ so they're actually better than intel. Even has moar cores too.

Either best sarcasm or biggest stupidity.

[Tr3vor]

Either best sarcasm or biggest stupidity.

 

Best sarcasm

[The Crazed Child]

mmm so much hate, love it, hahaha  i'll take my 9590 allll day over intel. Intels are soooo slow

cool story bro

[FizzyFantom]

In short, no. AMD doesn't perform badly and it isn't "just crap". I think I've seen this lie enough times by now, AMD actually offers great performance for the price. It is true that Intel CPUs perform better in single threaded performance, which would include gaming, but that doesn't mean AMD CPUs are bad, they just aren't the best. The AM3+ platform is pretty old now and hasn't seen an architechture update in years, but they still perform very well. AMD FX CPUs really pull ahead in rendering and encoding tasks, having more cores they tend to outperform Intel CPUs here and at a lower cost.

In summary, AMD CPUs don't perform badly. Please stop with the fanboyism.

[Rubenis]

Best sarcasm

Best comment today then...

[Admiaczking]

Get a 9370

[Le Lion de Barreras]

In short, no. AMD doesn't perform badly and it isn't "just crap". I think I've seen this lie enough times by now, AMD actually offers great performance for the price. It is true that Intel CPUs perform better in single threaded performance, which would include gaming, but that doesn't mean AMD CPUs are bad, they just aren't the best. The AM3+ platform is pretty old now and hasn't seen an architechture update in years, but they still perform very well. AMD FX CPUs really pull ahead in rendering and encoding tasks, having more cores they tend to outperform Intel CPUs here and at a lower cost.

In summary, AMD CPUs don't perform badly. Please stop with the fanboyism.

 This. 

Intel may dominate AMD in most benchmarks but when it's comes to gaming both platforms will get 60+ FPS if your GPU can manage. And honestly AMD is great for budgets when you want the most bang for your buck. And maybe someone can tell me if this but has anyone ever noticed a difference in real world scenarios usage from switching from an FX to an Intel?

[7850OC]

In essence my question comes from the fact that I need to change MB and CPU soon since my MB has for a long time been on the way of daying...

 

atm I have a Intel i7 3770k OCed to 4,4 Ghz

 

And since I had enough quite recently on NVIDIA and switched to AMD R9 290x and Im loving it I was compemplating on getting a full AMD rig then when I made the change on CPU.

 

The problem is that looking at numbers from different bechmarks the AMD processors are not doing that well (I am looking at the AMD FX-9590 and I primarily play MMOs, Wildstar in particular).

 

So my question is will AMD CPUs perform that bad compared to Intels options and what Intel models would you then (if) recommend in about the same price class or below the FX-9590?

 

Keeping in mind that I mostly play games and MMOs are a big favorite time-sink for me (so if an Intel I would guess a i5).

 

Cheers

 

Intel Core i7 3770K  vs AMD FX 8320 (i like the new 95w 8320E and 8370E)  :lol:

 

but yea  :blush: numbers looks blue (i will still grab the FX lol)

[seiny]

But there's nothing wrong with your 3770k it's like + - 5% less performance than a 4770k

 

Do not get rid of it!

[i_build_nanosuits]

... And maybe someone can tell me if this but has anyone ever noticed a difference in real world scenarios usage from switching from an FX to an Intel?

i did, but i run an high end overclocked gpu...for anything mid range or low end (gtx 760, r9 280...) theres not much difference in MOST games...