Why bash on people who choose AMD and on a Tight budget?

[Sir Asvald]

The title is kind of weird. BUT, I agree that Intel is more superior in the gaming side. If the person has decided to go with team read, it is his/her choice WITH a Budget. 

 

Why Start GO WITH INTEL!!! They've chosen the desired parts and looked hard for it. 

 

Also they state that they WANT to play moderate gaming settings. 

 

PLUS, this is really annoying.

 

I have X amount of money a video card. "why don't you save an extra 100-150 $/£ or Euros and get X card?"  

 

 

This makes me angry. 

 

PLEASE DON'T START A FLAME WAR!

[TheMidnightNarwhal]

Well usually for the CPU because a similar priced i3 is usually better. No?

[Redsun20]

It is just that Intel does things better than AMD sometimes. I am not trying to take either side, but I just trust Intel more for their good reputation. It's not like AMD is advertizing on TV, so they are not known that well by non-techies

[Fulgrim]

Mainly fanboyism tbh.

 

I myself still recommend AMD, for low-midrange budgets, i'm speaking of ~£700 or less.

 

And the whole "i3 is better than FX" is kinda moot when you factor in that it's only like ~10 - 15% better in single core performance. Those extra cores make up for that lack of single threaded performance, at that price point.

 

 

There is a lot of people, on this forum included who only stick with a certain brand/model and refuse to consider an alternative. For instance, people who say i3 over an FX chip. Or people that say 212 EVO, even if there's a little wiggle room in the OP's budget to get better. And people who always recommend a GTX 970 over an R9 290x. Or throw around the term "upgrade path" even though 99% of people won't be upgrading for another couple years, and by then they'll be better off getting a new rig.

[ADZ_123_!"£]

The only reason we do it is because we want them to save money and get the best system for getting good performance in games.

[Redsun20]

 

PLEASE DON'T START A FLAME WAR!

IF they do, report them for causing unrest on the forums

[Vexzarium]

For most games, even the Pentium-K is a better performer. And if that doesn't have enough threads, an i3 usually is a better choice for gaming. And in regards to the FX-8350 or the like, a few bucks more get's you an i5, which is in an entirely different league all together. This forum is here for a community to work together to help people, and at this time, AMD CPU's are not really a way to save money at all... in the end, you're wasting money. Yes, they are cheaper. But for a few bucks more, you can have significantly better performance. I'll continue to suggest Intel in each price bracket in accordance with someone's budget. At least until AMD releases a better option in each bracket.

 

I do the same exact thing for GPU's. Whichever is best in someone's price range is the one I'm going to suggest. Which is commonly AMD/ATI at this time. At least until you get towards the $400+ mark... then Nvidia takes over my suggestions. And I like the 750ti more than the 260x, so my favor normally goes towards Nvidia in the <$150 range.

 

If someone is absolutely set on a certain brand, I'll make my normal suggestions, but I also accommodate them with additional suggestions within their preferred brands.

[Enderman]

For most games, even the Pentium-K is a better performer. And if that doesn't have enough threads, an i3 usually is a better choice for gaming. And in regards to the FX-8350 or the like, a few bucks more get's you an i5, which is in an entirely different league all together.

This. So much this.

 

Also even though a pentium or i3 is not great for mutlithreaded tasks like rendering, you actually have an upgrade path with intel. If you buy an 8350 there isn't anything better you can get (because nobody should ever buy any FX9xxx processors)

[lani100]

Because AMD cpu's are getting outdated and isn't cheap compared to Intel counterparts especially with the 6/8 cores which require a decent 990/990fx board to not throttle and in that case the AMD isn't cheap any more. for the same money you can get a i5 with a cheaper board which beats the crap out of that AMD counterpart.

 

And for the save xx amount of dollar it's generally better to spend a bit more to go from let's say a GTX960 to a 970.

[KirbyTech]

I will simply recommend the best at that time for the person's budget and needs. Right now that happens to be Intel for most since AMD does not have anything really competitive for gaming.Rendering yes because the 8350 is a great budget rendering machine.

[crystal6tak]

It's generally for the best. Only under certain scenarios do I recommend AMD cpus. And those scenarios are VERY rare.

 

Let me get into detail:

 

Say, the dude wants to to gaming. i3 performs better majority of the time in gaming due to their single thread performance. The amd equivalent to i3 theoretical have more performance and it is seen in a few games. But those games are so much fewer in quantity and the performance increase is barely noticeable. So unless the dude is ONLY playing those games. And. I can't stress this enough. Will NEVER seek for better performance in those games. Then I recommend budget AMD chips. Intel upgrade path is simply superior over AMD's. 4790K crushes 9590. I'm sorry.

 

This leads me to the content creation scenario. Someone doing budget content creation don't care about single thread performance. So amd budget chips would be better. However again, only if the person WILL NEVER upgrade to increase productivity, would an amd budget chip make sense. If he considers upgrading in the future, intel is the way to go. There's really no point in recommending amd budget chips.

 

So you see, generally, in most cases, Intel is the way to go. Only under very certain circumstances does an AMD budget chip make sense.

[Redsun20]

For most games, even the Pentium-K is a better performer.

If someone is absolutely set on a certain brand, I'll make my normal suggestions, but I also accommodate them with additional suggestions within their preferred brands.

The Pentium-K. A beast that cost only 60 bucks. I overclocked mine (as seen in my sig) to 4.4 GHz at 1.275 volts. Not only that, the thing is at 50-54ish MAX in prime95 with a 212 EVO. It is only a dual core, but this chip is really, really, really fantastic

[Castdeath97]

This. So much this.

 

Also even though a pentium or i3 is not great for mutlithreaded tasks like rendering, you actually have an upgrade path with intel. If you buy an 8350 there isn't anything better you can get (because nobody should ever buy any FX9xxx processors)

On the other hand getting into AMD path isn't so expensive versus intel. AMD motherboards seem to offer cheaper prices versus H81 or H97, so it's the end of the world by the time you are going to upgrade.

[Fulgrim]

This. So much this.

 

Also even though a pentium or i3 is not great for mutlithreaded tasks like rendering, you actually have an upgrade path with intel. If you buy an 8350 there isn't anything better you can get (because nobody should ever buy any FX9xxx processors)

But if someone has a really tight budget, and wishes to stream/render from the get-go, then the FX8350 is a viable option still. Regardless of the upgrade path, as not everyone is willing/able to fork out an extra ~£200 for a cpu further down the line.

[JoaoPRSousa]

I luv mah Athlon.

[ComradeBunny]

PLUS, this is really annoying.

 

I have X amount of money a video card. "why don't you save an extra 100-150 $/£ or Euros and get X card?"  

 

 

This makes me angry. 

Lol it makes it sound as though you only get 1 paycheck per year.  Saving more of those federal notes and being patient is the basis of any budget pc build. 

[Megahurt]

 

And the whole "i3 is better than FX" is kinda moot when you factor in that it's only like ~10 - 15% better in single core performance. Those extra cores make up for that lack of single threaded performance, at that price point.

Don't know where you got your 10-15% from, for all I can tell, it's almost double the performance in single threaded situations, more like 80% faster, an fx-8xxx can beat an i5 in multi-threaded applications, but not by much.

[Vexzarium]

The Pentium-K. A beast that cost only 60 bucks. I overclocked mine (as seen in my sig) to 4.4 GHz at 1.275 volts. Not only that, the thing is at 50-54ish MAX in prime95 with a 212 EVO. It is only a dual core, but this chip is really, really, really fantastic

My GF has her Pentium-K @ 4.4ghz, 44 Cache Multiplier. 1.260 Vcore, 1.300 Uncore. Hyper 212 Evo, and stays around 40-50c while gaming. Intel Burn Test ramps temps up a bit more than P95, so she hit around 65c during a 10 pass Max burn.

 

I agree, it is truly an awesome chip. She got her's for $34!

 

Her build: http://pcpartpicker.com/b/BGzMnQ

[Fulgrim]

Don't know where you got your 10-15% from, for all I can tell, it's almost double the performance in single threaded situations, more like 80% faster, an fx-8xxx can beat an i5 in multi-threaded applications, but not by much.

Try playing Battlefield 4 on an i3, then an FX 8350, and report back to me.

[Redsun20]

She got her's for $34!

O dang

[zappian]

Because i3 is the best budget gaming cpu on the market.

[Vexzarium]

O dang

Gotta love those combo deal on Newegg.

 

Pentium-K: $34

ASRock Z97 Anniversary: $55

[Redsun20]

Gotta love those combo deal on Newegg.

Pentium-K: $34

ASRock Z97 Anniversary: $55

ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!!!!???? Less than 100$ for a sick CPU mobo combo? Damn, wish I got that

[Vexzarium]

ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!!!!???? Less than 100$ for a sick CPU mobo combo? Damn, wish I got that

We were deal hunting, trying to get her back to ESO for as little as possible, but still getting 60fps @ 1080p in most games. The Pentium-K was perfect for it's per thread strength and the MMO's it was going to be used for.

 

Also got her a HD-7970(AKA 280x) for $150. . I  :wub:  Newegg.

[Sintezza]

Because those bashers have nothing better to do with their lifes?