AMD or intel which build?

[Izaya Orihara]

Asus (unless MSI jumped on too) is the only one who made their non z boards overclockable. 

Gigabyte did and so did Asrock. (Unless those were specific boards.) 

[Izaya Orihara]

I call that destroy when it's also for much less money.

How exactly is the Xeon cheaper than the FX 8320...

[Archangel1994]

How exactly is the Xeon cheaper than the FX 8320...

I'm talking FX-8320 is cheaper than the i5

[nokturrduk84]

You need to tone down your hostility. AMD is not shite, it's just less than intel on a core-for-core basis. If you OC it (which you should do anyway if you're buying AMD) then its performance is not at all lesser to the intel option. Primary does not mean it should be the only function you should look at. If he makes videos (then he obviously needs to render them otherwise they look like shite) then the FX destroys the I5. 

 

Undo the calamity that is your mammaries. No need for hostility like this -,-

Omfg, you're such a hardcore fanboy...

Okay, I was lazy to list reasons why OP should go Intel, but if there still are some doubts, let's clear some things:

• Intel got newer technology than AMD. They are already moving to 14nm, while AMD is still on ancient 32nm. In general, Intel is far ahead.
• Thx to older technology of AMD, their CPUs got horrible memory controller, which results in worse performance of same RAMs comparing to intel. Can provide proof links if needed.
• Thx to older technology of AMD cpus, they bottleneck high-end GPUs, while Intel i5/7 doesn't at all. Can provide also links.
• Intel i5 destroys in games that FX cpu. Hell even i3 destroys it in most games. Have a look: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-4340-4330-4130_5.html#sect0
• Intel i5 in rendering isn't that bad, as this Archangel1994 fanboy says. Besides AMD still sucks in rendering comparing to i7, which destroys it in every game, in every benchmark, all day, every day!
• AMD cpus are hotter than intel & need expansive coolers & motherboard to overclock it & it still can't compete normally with Intel.

[Archangel1994]

 

Omfg, you're such a hardcore fanboy.

Okay, I was lazy to list reasons why OP should go Intel, but if there still are some doubts, let's clear some things:

• Intel got newer technology than AMD. They are already moving to 14nm, while AMD is still on ancient 32nm. In general, Intel is far ahead!
• Thx to older technology of AMD, their CPUs got horrible memory controller, which results in worse performance of same RAMs comparing to intel. Can provide proof links if needed.
• Thx to older technology of AMD cpus, they bottleneck high-end GPUs, while Intel i5/7 doesn't at all.
• Intel i5 destroys in games that FX cpu. Hell even i3 destroys it in most games. Have a look: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-4340-4330-4130_5.html#sect0
• Intel i5 in rendering isn't that bad, as this Archangel1994 fanboys says. Besides AMD still sucks in rendering comparing to i7, which destroys it in every game, in every benchmark, all day, every day!

 

Not wasting my breath against this sort of condescending and hostility.

 

This is just downright disrespectful and has no reason at all.

 

If I were an AMD hardcore fanboy, would I be using an I5?

[Izaya Orihara]

I'm talking FX-8320 is cheaper than the i5

I meant the Xeon beaing about 20% faster than the FX8320. 

[Archangel1994]

I meant the Xeon beaing about 20% faster than the FX8320. 

Oooooooooh