Prove AMD's Superiority To Me

[Suika]

Alright, alright, it sounds like I'm trolling, but I'm not.

 

I'd like to have a civil discussion with the members of LTT. I don't want to hear the Intel argument, I know this one well and done, I want to hear, from somebody who actually enjoys the FX series, why it's the better option to Intel. I've had the FX-8350 at 4.9GHz, and now I have an i7-4790k, and in terms of just gaming performance, I don't regret my decision. Can anyone make me regret that?

 

If you're here to talk about Intel, please don't. If you're here to flame, please don't. I would like only to see the argument in favor of AMD. Why is the FX-8350 better than an i5-4460?

 

Please consider, I am rather open minded so long as you don't get vicious in how you argue. After all, I used to fanboy AMD pretty hard. Now I hate the FX series with a dying passion.

[Enderman]

The FX83xx is better for people on a really low budget (less than $600) that would like to do video editing or 3d rendering as a hobby as well as gaming.

[Thorium19]

If you can't afford an i7 and want to do twitch streaming or heavily multithreaded work, then the fx line is great for that. On a budget, they're the go to CPUs IMHO.

[Suika]

The FX83xx is better for people on a really low budget (less than $600) that would like to do video editing or 3d rendering as a hobby as well as gaming.

If you can't afford an i7 and want to do twitch streaming or heavily multithreaded work, then the fx line is great for that. On a budget, they're the go to CPUs IMHO.

Actually, I'm quite OK with these arguments. So if the builder is looking to do some heavily threaded work, fully aware that what they're doing would benefit from 8 cores rather than, say, two strong ones, it's worth consideration?

 

Would either of you recommend the FX on a higher budget if the goals where the same?

[Thorium19]

Actually, I'm quite OK with these arguments. So if the builder is looking to do some heavily threaded work, fully aware that what they're doing would benefit from 8 cores rather than, say, two strong ones, it's worth consideration?

 

Would either of you recommend the FX on a higher budget if the goals where the same?

If they could afford an i7, then no, I wouldn't recommend it, but if you need to do those work loads and you can afford an i5, I would go for it.

[Enderman]

Actually, I'm quite OK with these arguments. So if the builder is looking to do some heavily threaded work, fully aware that what they're doing would benefit from 8 cores rather than, say, two strong ones, it's worth consideration?

 

Would either of you recommend the FX on a higher budget if the goals where the same?

1) yes, 8 weaker ones are much better than 2 or 4 strong ones when doing multithreaded stuff.

 

2) no, i would always recommend a $250 4 core 8 thread xeon over any FX CPU if they can afford it (an i7 would be even better, but that goes up to $350)

[Altecice]

 

 

Why is the FX-8350 better than an i5-4460?

 

its not? the vast majority of users use there PC's for light use/Gaming use and they have the same things in common. They don't multithread well. Intel CPU's have much higher IPC so benefit gamers more. If however you need to do rendering stuff then an 8350 is a cheap replacement for an I7 but the I7 will do the job better.

 

There used to be an argument about AMD being (better bang for buck) but its just not the case now. Both the I5 and 8000 series are the same price. No doubt somebody will make the argument that you can just OC the 8350 and match the I5 speeds.... yes you can but good luck doing that on a cheap AM3+ board thats not 990FX chipset (pushing you well over the price of an I5+Simple mobo)

 

Trust me its not worth it. I was an avid AMD fanody until I started looking at the numbers and noticing bottlenecks that were solved by replacing my 8350 @ 5ghz with an I7-4790K but I have no doubt an I5 would have the same impact.

[Suika]

If they could afford an i7, then no, I wouldn't recommend it, but if you need to do those work loads and you can afford an i5, I would go for it.

1) yes, 8 weaker ones are much better than 2 or 4 strong ones when doing multithreaded stuff.

What if the i5-4690k had exact multithreaded performance as the FX-8350, but significantly better singlethreaded performance (like 100% better)? Is it worth considering the i5 for its single threaded performance alone, or considering the price differences, is multithreaded just enough?

[Suika]

its not? the vast majority of users use there PC's for light use/Gaming use and they have the same things in common. They don't multithread well. Intel CPU's have much higher IPC so benefit gamers more. If however you need to do rendering stuff then an 8350 is a cheap replacement for an I7 but the I7 will do the job better.

 

There used to be an argument about AMD being (better bang for buck) but its just not the case now. Both the I5 and 8000 series are the same price. No doubt somebody will make the argument that you can just OC the 8350 and match the I5 speeds.... yes you can but good luck doing that on a cheap AM3+ board thats not 990FX chipset (pushing you well over the price of an I5+Simple mobo)

 

Trust me its not worth it. I was an avid AMD fanody until I started looking at the numbers and noticing bottlenecks that were solved by replacing my 8350 @ 5ghz with an I7-4790K but I have no doubt an I5 would have the same impact.

"...I don't want to hear the Intel argument, I know this one well and done..."

 

"...If you're here to talk about Intel, please don't..."

[CDHoward]

Alright, alright, it sounds like I'm dying pasdiolling, but I'm not.

I'd like to have a civil discussion with the members of LTT. I don't want to hear the Intel argument, I know this one well and done, I want to hear, from somebody who actually enjoys the FX series, why it's the better option to Intel. I've had the FX-8350 at 4.9GHz, and now I have an i7-4790k, and in terms of just gaming performance, I don't regret my decision. Can anyone make me regret that?

If you're here to talk about Intel, please don't. If you're here to flame, please don't. I would like only to see the argument in favor of AMD. Why is the FX-8350 better than an i5-4460?

Please consider, I am rather open minded so long as you don't get vicious in how you argue. After all, I used to fanboy AMD pretty hard. Now I hate the FX series with a dying passion.

To be honest, I think your diatribe is very fair (veers off a bit with the 'I hate FX's with a dying passion', though).

I like my FX 8350. But I know it can't compete with I7's.

But there's one part of all this that's yet to reveal itself: DirectX12, which is coming with Windows 10. All processes will be spread over multiple cores, as opposed to DirectX11 which ran everything on core 0, giving Intel the advantage.

DirectX12/Windows 10 could very well give 8 core FX's a very significant performance boost

[Louie2411]

I own an FX6300 I don't think I could have gotten anything better for the price which was about £75

[Altecice]

To be honest, I think your diatribe is very fair (veers off a bit with the 'I hate FX's with a dying passion', though).

I like my FX 8350. But I know it can't compete with I7's.

But there's one part of all this that's yet to reveal itself: DirectX12, which is coming with Windows 10. All processes will be spread over multiple cores, as opposed to DirectX11 which ran everything on core 0, giving Intel the advantage.

DirectX12/Windows 10 could very well give 8 core FX's a very significant performance boost

 

if AMD is only using core 0 then Intel's will only be using Core 0 (Thread 1 + 2). Both sides will get a boost with DX12.

 

---

 

To OP it seems as if your mind is set on AMD so why even bother making this thread if you wont listen to reason?

[Recon97]

No I won't!

[Suika]

To OP it seems as if your mind is set on AMD so why even bother making this thread if you wont listen to reason?

Did you read the OP lmao?

 

I have an i7-4790k, I would never pick another AMD CPU, I just want to see an argument in favor of AMD considering how many people enjoy the FX series.

[harrynowl]

I could see it being better for someone who isn't interested in gaming but does lots of highly multithreaded work, VM solutions etc.

[PutuLips]

Did you read the OP lmao?

 

I have an i7-4790k, I would never pick another AMD CPU, I just want to see an argument in favor of AMD considering how many people enjoy the FX series.

 

Intel:

• Superior architecture
• Made by a superior company (at least determined by their net worth)
• Superior performance
• Superior power consumption
• Embedded graphics (AMD FX doesn't have embedded, but AMD APUs wipe the floor against Intel HD)
• Superior IPC
• Etc. (superior  )

AMD:

• Cheap. Very, very cheap. FX 8350 about $200 less than an i7 4790 here.
• Seems to be more available worldwide.
• Far fetch: With DX12 just around the corner, AMD FX might perform just near as well as intel i7 CPUs what with the better use of more threads and less CPU power required. Remember, Microsoft is optimizing DirectX for Xbox... Xbox works off of a very similar architecture to AMD.

[CDHoward]

<p>

Intel:

• Superior architecture
• Made by a superior company (at least determined by their net worth)
• Superior performance
• Superior power consumption
• Embedded graphics (AMD FX doesn't have embedded, but AMD APUs wipe the floor against Intel HD)
• Superior IPC
• Etc. (superior )

AMD:

• Cheap. Very, very cheap. FX 8350 about $200 less than an i7 4790 here.
• Seems to be more available worldwide.
• Far fetch: With DX12 just around the corner, AMD FX might perform just near as well as intel i7 CPUs what with the better use of more threads and less CPU power required. Remember, Microsoft is optimizing DirectX for Xbox... Xbox works off of a very similar architecture to AMD.

↑↑That. Except for the Intel Fanboyism/Fangirlism overload.

[Majestic]

I just want to see an argument in favor of AMD considering how many people enjoy the FX series.

 

Dissonance, post-purchase rationalization, fallacies. Take your pick.

[cesrai]

For the Athlon VS the Pentium I would pick the Athlon I would never recommend a dual core to anyone.

[CDHoward]

I'd have an orgasm in my boxer shorts if DirectX12 suddenly gives the 8350 a massive performance boost, taking it above the top end I7's.

This is a very real possibility. The FX may just have been ahead of its time, but now its time is coming

[Faa]

if AMD is only using core 0 then Intel's will only be using Core 0 (Thread 1 + 2). Both sides will get a boost with DX12.

Uh no, if that's true what you've been saying then HT would guarantee adding performance in every game, Hyperthreading on a single core CPU has the same requirements as a dual core meaning a 2nd thread.

 

 

I'd have an orgasm in my boxer shorts if DirectX12 suddenly gives the 8350 a massive performance boost, taking it above the top end I7's.

This is a very real possibility. The FX may just have been ahead of its time, but now its time is coming 

Weren't you getting the same orgasms when AMD announced Mantle? 

[PutuLips]

I'd have an orgasm in my boxer shorts if DirectX12 suddenly gives the 8350 a massive performance boost, taking it above the top end I7's.

This is a very real possibility. The FX may just have been ahead of its time, but now its time is coming

 

Something like the FX8350 might perform as well as an i7 in games -- It has 8 cores whereas the i7 has 4 cores with 8 threads, and more cores should benefit from DX12... But out of games the i7 will still win. That is if DX12 is as good as we've heard.

[CDHoward]

Something like the FX8350 might perform as well as an i7 in games -- It has 8 cores whereas the i7 has 4 cores with 8 threads, and more cores should benefit from DX12... But out of games the i7 will still win. That is if DX12 is as good as we've heard.

Just imagine, though, if the 8350 gains a 50%/70% performance increase, hehe. It'd be just so sexy and mad

[PutuLips]

Just imagine, though, if the 8350 gains a 50%/70% performance increase, hehe. It'd be just so sexy and mad

Indeed. I still think the i7 will still reign above AMD, but AMD might be on the same level as the i5.

[CDHoward]

Indeed. I still think the i7 will still reign above AMD, but AMD might be on the same level as the i5.

Sweetheart (if you're not female, I mean 'mate'. Its just your name: 'Lips'. And you have a female/feminine vibe about you. Absolutely zero offence meant by the way), it ought to do seeing as its much more expensive.

An optimised, overclocked 8350 is already on a par with the I5's, and in fact beats it significantly in productivity.