AMD Cpu for gaming

[Faa]

Its the difference beetween a bmw and a ford. The ford is a nice car, meets your needs and gets the job done. The BMW is a AMAZING car. Its perfect in every way and has all the extra features you need. It all comes down to if you can afford the BMW. Of course the BMW is better. BMW=Intel, Ford=AMD

While costing the same so your point is invalid. The single threaded performance/fps goes all the way up to 100%. There's just no point getting a 8320 for pure gaming, just none. Like I've asked many times, come with evidence that the 8320 justifies its 50% higher pricetag. We've been waiting for this since the beginning of when bulldozer was released.

[Totally-A-Hero]

While costing the same so your point is invalid. The single threaded performance/fps goes all the way up to 100%. There's just no point getting a 8320 for pure gaming, just none. Like I've asked many times, come with evidence that the 8320 justifies its 50% higher pricetag. We've been waiting for this since the beginning of when bulldozer was released.

They cost the same now? Do you mind linking?

[Andrievski]

While costing the same so your point is invalid. The single threaded performance/fps goes all the way up to 100%. There's just no point getting a 8320 for pure gaming, just none. Like I've asked many times, come with evidence that the 8320 justifies its 50% higher pricetag. We've been waiting for this since the beginning of when bulldozer was released.

I never saw Intel and AMD costing the same.

[Faceman]

In order for the FX8 to even reach the stock i5 performance, it must be overclocked to 4.8Ghz, and even then, it bottle necks high end GPUs.  In order to hit 4.8Ghz, you need a more expensive motherboard for VRM, and more expensive cooling.  Even an FX8 OC'd to 4.8Ghz still falls behind a stock i5.

 

PCPartPicker part list: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/2X7XLk
Price breakdown by merchant: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/2X7XLk/by_merchant/

CPU: AMD FX-8320 3.5GHz 8-Core Processor  ($148.97 @ OutletPC)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler  ($29.98 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: Asus M5A99FX PRO R2.0 ATX AM3+ Motherboard  ($114.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $293.94
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-09-09 15:33 EDT-0400

Vs.

PCPartPicker part list: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/LjPJmG
Price breakdown by merchant: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/LjPJmG/by_merchant/

CPU: Intel Core i5-4690K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor  ($209.99 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: MSI Z97 PC MATE ATX LGA1150 Motherboard  ($89.98 @ OutletPC)
Total: $299.97
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-09-09 15:39 EDT-0400

 

The Intel i5-4690k + MSI Z97 Guard can be had for $300 on TigerDirect.  Or i5-4690k + Asus Z97-AR for $290 in-store at Microcenter.

 

The Intel doesn't come with an aftermarket cooler, but you don't need one like you do with the FX.  You get much better performance, and an upgrade path with the Intel.  You can move to an i7, or Broadwell.  You also get the option to go SLI/Xfire because the CPU can handle the multiple GPUs.  The FX can't even handle a single high end GPU properly.  You are always going to be wondering, "Will this game play properly?" if you buy an FX.  With Intel, you are covered.

 

There is absolutely zero reason whatsoever to buy an FX8 over an i5 if you live in the U.S. and your purpose is gaming.

[Andrievski]

So you pay the same price for AMD and Intel but you get better Performance from Intel Cpu's.

But now comes a new Question, Why do people think AMD Cpu's are better?

(A guy that is working whit me says that not one Intel Cpu can beat AMD Cpu's)

[Faceman]

So you pay the same price for AMD and Intel but you get better Performance from Intel Cpu's.

But now comes a new Question, Why do people think AMD Cpu's are better?

(A guy that is working whit me says that not one Intel Cpu can beat AMD Cpu's)

He is probably looking at Passmark scores or CPUBenchmark.com which mean jack shit in the real world and for gaming.  The only area where an AMD beats an i5 is for video editing and rendering, and its not by too much.

[Faa]

I never saw Intel and AMD costing the same.

I never saw a 40$ motherboard that was capable of pushing a 8350 to its limits.

 

 

They cost the same now? Do you mind linking?

8320 costs 150$

i5 4430 costs 180$

cheapest board for 8320 70$

cheapest board for i5 4430 40$

Costing the same.

[nokturrduk84]

So you pay the same price for AMD and Intel but you get better Performance from Intel Cpu's.

But now comes a new Question, Why do people think AMD Cpu's are better?

(A guy that is working whit me says that not one Intel Cpu can beat AMD Cpu's)

Cause many people are deceived with number of cores. They think the more cores the CPU has more powerful is, however it's not about cores, but architecture & Intel is far ahead with this comparing to Intel. Hell, they are moving already to 14nm, while AMD is still stuck on 32nm.

That guy has no clue in PC techs. Don't listen to him.

[Andrievski]

He is probably looking at Passmark scores or CPUBenchmark.com which mean jack shit in the real world and for gaming. The only area where an AMD beats an i5 is for video editing and rendering, and its not by too much.

And an I7 beats the AMD Cpu im Video rendering and editing right?

He says because AMD Cpu's have higher Clock Speed and when you OC them they are faster and stronger.

He told me they don't heat up that much.

It's eaysier to cool them....^^

[GloriousPain]

No it's AMD's fault that theyre so massively behind Intel in terms of IPC.

How does this prove anything?  If anything the test is intel optimized; It's obviously single core and it's running at much lower than stock speeds; I never said shit about AMD having strong single core performance or really high IPC; and I was speaking with i5 inmind like the 4570 due to similar pricing... and AMDs cpus are all unlocked unlike the similarly priced i5s and I blamed programming because well if using all 8 cores of an OC'ed 8320 vs a locked i5 with half the cores just doing simple math even if at same clock  lets take 8150's 63 and the i5-4440's 112 double the 63 and get 126 and overclock it beyond the i5s core= obviously higher than 112 using your resources...

 

 

You recommended the 8320 so many times and every time it was just some salestalk. The 8320 should be theoretically 33% faster than the 6300, link me atleast 5 benchmarks each from a different game where this difference is present. A 6300 is all you need from AMD's side, anything up you should be looking at the i5's because they do add atleast a noticeable gain and offer a better value for gaming. Locked i5's cost as much as 8320's so don't moan about its fictive price/performance. You shouldn't be recommending a CPU that only performs 3% better with a 50% higher pricetag or else I'll be recommending a 4770k over a i5 and afterwards praise the i7's "amazing price/performance".

the 6300 should be weaker but as I had said previously programming particularly in games rarely uses the extra cores so that'd be difficult and why must I prove my statements to you; who died and made you all high and mighty? I'll take the salesmen talk line as a complement as I do sell computer parts and used to sell cars with my grandfather... And yeah a 6300 maybe all you need but we all know everyone wants more; that's why I recommend the 8320 you get more for as cheap as possible (other than the 8120 or 8150 but those usually come with worst mobos) 

 

 

What things? Jay's "test", actually he just took an average of all results from reviewers is completely flawed. A 4770k consumes like 30-40W more at 4.2GHz which is their average clock than stock, so ask yourself where that 80W bump came from. A 8350 pulling 100W more doesn't make much sense when he says the difference when overclocked will be bigger between Intel & AMD. Most reviews you see are testing it with a ridiculous 1000W PSU orsomething, obviously the psu Intel cpu's would run at a lower AC/DC efficiency than with AMD which is why the gap is smaller. Test both cpu's at the same AC/DC efficiency, the gap will be bigger. 

Also Jay is quite dumb, lets say we have a scenario of something like this here with two 7970's;

What you notice is; a 100% difference in terms of FPS so assuming the gpu loads on AMD were around 50/50% and 99%/99% on Intel. Which system would consume more? The Intel. Why? AMD bottlenecked the GPU's so therefore the GPU's consumed half as much. So that's mainly why power consumption can mean in the end completely nothing. Besides since when does a higher power consumption only affect your bills? You'll need better cooling, a board with better VRM, perhaps a new case with better airflow, it's going to be harder to keep it quiet etc. Don't tell me that Haswell CPU's run warmer, yes they do but they transfer tons of less heat to your cooler which is why you don't need a shitload of cooling capacity for Haswell. 

Jayz test is fair as he is using averages so it avoid the bias of the websites he was using unless they were somehow all biased in the same direction and the graph speaks of fps not powerconsumption and again your comparing amd to i7s which is a different ball park i never said i7s I said to some intel chips by which I had meant of similar pricings I know on newegg and other such sites the pricing is similar to i5s most of which are locked but also here locally where I am (which I do not disclose for personal reasons) there's a local computer shop called Tony's pc puzzle pieces that actually has 8320s for around the same price as some i3s with even i5-4440 being $30 bucks more ($139 for 8320 vs $179 for i5-4430) now I know which one I'ma buy unless there's some crazy stupid sale or bargain online...

[Faceman]

And an I7 beats the AMD Cpu im Video rendering and editing right?

He says because AMD Cpu's have higher Clock Speed and when you OC them they are faster and stronger.

He told me they don't heat up that much.

It's eaysier to cool them....^^

Yes, i7 will destroy anything AMD has to offer.

Clock speed and cores aren't the end-all-be-all of a processor's performance.  It is architecture.  The FX is an ancient processor that was first introduced as a server chip back in 2009.  Intel is releasing new stuff at least once a year.

 

Your friend doesn't know what he is talking about.

[Faceman]

Load of bull$%^&

No.

[Faceman]

I'm out.  Can't do this anymore.

 

Hard enough trying to help people who come to this forum for advice get over their own misconceptions, but then having to argue with other forum members who don't know what they're talking about and spouting BS doesn't make it worthwhile.

[Andrievski]

Cause many people are deceived with number of cores. They think the more cores the CPU has more powerful is, however it's not about cores, but architecture & Intel is far ahead with this comparing to Intel. Hell, they are moving already to 14nm, while AMD is still stuck on 32nm.

That guy has no clue in PC techs. Don't listen to him.

He is visiting an IT School or something lile that. Sry but LOL to this, visiting IT Schools and thinking AMD is better.

He thinks his higher Clock speed and more cores are more powerfull then Intel.

But the problem is, i told him that doesn't have to mean that AMD Cpu's are better.

But anyway, does Intel get a bit more power because of Windows?

They are more configured for Windows.

(Please corect me if i am wrong)

[D3MON]

The amount of fail trolling in this thread is hilarious and despairing, I'm starting to wonder how some know which end to wipe (both camps). this is just a role reversal of 2005 with intels multi threaded cpus with poor IPC, get over it.
people argue a 4430 can outperform an overclockable 8320 in threaded tasks, then completely ignore the fact that in single threaded tasks a pentium k will beat the 4430.
all im going to say is my board and cpu cost the same as an i5 alone and performs better in well threaded tasks and as for those single threaded games i have more money to put into a higher end graphics card, works for me, but i don't play mmo's. as for the "intel is the premium product" BS, just because amd doesnt have a £600 cpu doesnt mean they're inferior, it means they dont have a £600 cpu, ford dont have an aston martin rival because they aim for the mass media market alone (and they own aston martin). if for a given price amd was much worse, noone would ever debate it and the company would be gone, much like arguing htc vs samsung vs sony...if one was truly better all around, there wouldnt be anyone else, take your rose tinted glasses off.
if you're going to spend more why not get a 99x system? oh wait cus you dont need the extra cpu performance....fine get an i3 or 6300, if you need single core performance dont get anything higher than a pentium-k and overclock the crap out of it., a 4690k is twice as powerful but 3x the price.
on the other hand if you really do need the best gaming AND rending machine you MUST get a 5820k (maybe the 8 core?) and a titan black or 2, becasue its the only way to do both workloads in 1 machine in a professional sense which could pay for itself, but thats not gaming and daily use.
you should base your purchases on your needs, not what idiots on a forum say and the few cherry picked benchmarks they come up with.

[Andrievski]

I'm out. Can't do this anymore.

Hard enough trying to help people who come to this forum for advice get over their own misconceptions, but then having to argue with other forum members who don't know what they're talking about and spouting BS doesn't make it worthwhile.

Thank you so much for your help, now i am a bit smarter.^^

[Sintezza]

just this ....

 

[Andrievski]

The amount of fail trolling in this thread is hilarious and despairing, I'm starting to wonder how some know which end to wipe (both camps)

people argue a 4430 can outperform an overclockable 8320 in threaded tasks, then completely ignore the fact that in single threaded tasks a pentium k will beat the 4430.

all im going to say is my board and cpu cost the same as an i5 alone and performs better in well threaded tasks and as for those single threaded games i have more money to put into a higher end graphics card, and as for the "intel is the premium product" brainwashing, if you're going to spend more why not get a 99x system? oh wait cus you dont need the extra cpu performance....fine get an i3 or 6300, if you need single core performance dont get anything higher than a pentium-k, a 4690k is twice as powerful but 3x the price.

you should base your purchases on your needs, not what idiots on a forum say and the few cherry picked benchmarks they come up with.

People don't buy the X79/X99 because there is too the i7 which is doing a good job.

If you just game, get the i5.

If you need more Cores for a bit video render and editing there is the i7. If you need more Cores then get the X79 or the X99 LGA 2011 and LGA 2011-E Cpu's.

[Totally-A-Hero]

Well with the Z97 board drop its change the game apperantly its not even viable to buy a fx chip higher than a 63000. So i5 gets my vote this time around. You wont be dissapointed OP they are great chips!

[D3MON]

People don't buy the X79/X99 because there is too the i7 which is doing a good job.

If you just game, get the i5.

If you need more Cores for a bit video render and editing there is the i7. If you need more Cores then get the X79 or the X99 LGA 2011 and LGA 2011-E Cpu's.

i'd of bought an x79 (second hand) so your right although im not sensing any point being made, i maintain its...

daily use-celeron or AM1 (where price matters most)

single threaded gaming and mmo's and retro rig-pentium k+cheap GPU).  (where power and single threaded performance matters)

budget badly threaded gaming rig-pentium-k+good gpu (same as above)

budget well threaded gaming rig-fx6300+great gpu(where price and performance matters)

medium budget well threaded gaming light editing, fx8320+great gpu

high budget gaming editing rig i7-E+titan black or 2...

high end workstation-dual xeons and a quadro.

no doubt somone will call me a fanboy despite the fact ive recommended intel chips, what they fail to realise is there is a very viable option for some amd cpu's where an amd cpu will allow you to get a better gpu nullifying the single threaded performance deficit, at the same time in the 8320 scenario like I am in ive got a cpu board and gpu which allows me to game and transcode faster than if i had of gone intel with some locked down i5 and 7790 but this only applies to my situation and budget, for another £200 id of bought a second hand 3930k+board (or be looking at an r9-280x.)-edit ok i just tried to get an intel cpu and board for £170 that will have the same features and performance as my combo and im struggling, i5-4430 wont keep up and only leaves £39 for a board which doesn't have the same features (6x sata3, crossfire, sli, overclockable, usb3). ideas?

edit-edit got one

http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/part/msi-motherboard-z87g41pcmate

goes over budget a bit by£10, you're limited in overclocking on the i5 and doesnt have sli but y'know, sacrifices...

[Andrievski]

i'd of bought an x79 (second hand) so your right although im not sensing any point being made, i maintain its...

daily use-celeron or AM1 (where price matters most)

single threaded gaming and mmo's and retro rig-pentium k+cheap GPU). (where power and single threaded performance matters)

budget badly threaded gaming rig-pentium-k+good gpu (same as above)

budget well threaded gaming rig-fx6300+great gpu(where price and performance matters)

medium budget well threaded gaming light editing, fx8320+great gpu

high budget gaming editing rig i7-E+titan black or 2...

high end workstation-dual xeons and a quadro.

no doubt somone will call me a fanboy despite the fact ive recommended intel chips, what they fail to realise is there is a very viable option for some amd cpu's where an amd cpu will allow you to get a better gpu nullifying the single threaded performance deficit, at the same time in the 8320 scenario like I am in ive got a cpu board and gpu which allows me to game and transcode faster than if i had of gone intel with some locked down i5 and 7790 but this only applies to my situation and budget, for another £200 id of bought a second hand 3930k+board (or be looking at an r9-280x.)-edit ok i just tried to get an intel cpu and board for £170 that will have the same features and performance as my combo and im struggling, i5-4430 wont keep up and only leaves £39 for a board which doesn't have the same features (6x sata3, crossfire, sli, overclockable, usb3). ideas?

We all are Fanboys in some ways.^^

AMD is more Budget based, so you don't have enough money but want something good for low Price, choose an AMD Cpu.(And Gpu, the R9 series is good)

If you have more money to give out on PC Parts there is Intel whit the i5 and i7 and if you need much Cores you can get, there is the X79 and X99 LGA 2011-E Cpu's.

I am interested in what AMD will bring in the future, or will AMD beat Intel in Cpu's one day?(Would be interesting)

[nokturrduk84]

He is visiting an IT School or something lile that. Sry but LOL to this, visiting IT Schools and thinking AMD is better.

He thinks his higher Clock speed and more cores are more powerfull then Intel.

But the problem is, i told him that doesn't have to mean that AMD Cpu's are better.

But anyway, does Intel get a bit more power because of Windows?

They are more configured for Windows.

(Please corect me if i am wrong)

Generally Intel CPUs are better in performance. They have newer technology & feel better in games than AMD cpus. If your friend still thinks AMD is better, it means he's just a blind fanboy of AMD & you can ignore him when he starts talking about these things. If you want better, pay little more for premium & get Intel, if you want inferior & cheap than get AMD.

[D3MON]

wow^ yep that friends a total AMD fanboy, noone else is here obviously.... we all know "intel feel better in games"

We all are Fanboys in some ways.^^

AMD is more Budget based, so you don't have enough money but want something good for low Price, choose an AMD Cpu.

If you have more money to give out on PC Parts there is Intel whit the i5 and i7 and if you need much Cores you can get, there is the X79 and X99 LGA 2011-E Cpu's.

I am interested in what AMD will bring in the future, or will AMD beat Intel in Cpu's one day?(Would be interesting)

[virtual high-5] the same was said only 10 years ago, except back then games and apps really were only single threaded, some of us users have moved on since then, some dev's havent, cest la vie.

[Andrievski]

Generally Intel CPUs are better in performance. They have newer technology & feel better in games than AMD cpus. If your friend still thinks AMD is better, it means he's just a blind fanboy of AMD & you can ignore him when he starts talking about these things.

I always start to laugh, but maybe AMD beats Intel one day.

Would be very very very interesting.

[nokturrduk84]

I always start to laugh, but maybe AMD beats Intel one day.

Would be very very very interesting.

Maybe one day, but not now