AMD Hate?

[KemoKa]

i3 has better hyperthreading utilization is why.  At least isn't as weird as AMD's.  Their multicores are true physical cores, but work oddly.  The 8 cores for example are 8 physical cores 2 per module 4 modules.  So, Windows will recognize them as 4 cores because it thinks the modules=the physical cores, and will state the 8 physical cores as virtual or logical cores.  

That's a weird thing with the mobile APUs, they say quad-core, but that's quad-integer-core. it's actually a dual floating-point core.

*sigh*...

 

[KemoKa]

True partially split cores you mean. An integer core isn't a full processing core by any definition.

Does this have anything to do with AMD's track record of not being that great when compared to Intel? I mean, what with the 8-cores being 8 integer cores. I remember when their multi-core CPUs were amazing.

[FaZe Booce]

Why? Not liking a companies products doesn't make you a fan boy/girl.

Saying every AMD product is shit is straight up ignorant.

[itachipirate]

People mindlessly go "Duhhh ok what Intel got? Haswell? OK What AMD got... Piledriver? Hay wait haswell better... AMD BAD" not considering that AMD hasn't made a new CPU in several years. For their time they were good processors. People say "AMD CPUs are bad" when really they should say "AMD hasn't made new CPUs in a while to compete with Intel" considering that these CPUs that are several years old perform so well in certain workloads, and are so low in price people should be amazed that what AMD has made is still relevant so many years after it's time.

 

The only thing I can really see as being bad as far as AMD CPUs go is the FX-9xxx series. Those were bad in every way. For everything. AMD really should've worked on a new CPU architecture a long time ago, but they've been focused mostly on APUs

[Dabombinable]

Does this have anything to do with AMD's track record of not being that great when compared to Intel? I mean, what with the 8-cores being 8 integer cores. I remember when their multi-core CPUs were amazing.

Yep. Before CMT AMD was competing with Intel. Afterwards Intel improved and AMD stagnated.

[FaZe Booce]

People mindlessly go "Duhhh ok what Intel got? Haswell? OK What AMD got... Piledriver? Hay wait haswell better... AMD BAD" not considering that AMD hasn't made a new CPU in several years. For their time they were good processors. People say "AMD CPUs are bad" when really they should say "AMD hasn't made new CPUs in a while to compete with Intel" considering that these CPUs that are several years old perform so well in certain workloads, and are so low in price people should be amazed that what AMD has made is still relevant so many years after it's time.

 

The only thing I can really see as being bad as far as AMD CPUs go is the FX-9xxx series. Those were bad in every way. For everything. AMD really should've worked on a new CPU architecture a long time ago, but they've been focused mostly on APUs

The A10 7870k came out a few weeks ago.

[itachipirate]

The A10 7870k came out a few weeks ago.

That's an APU, it's meant to be an extreme budget option

[KemoKa]

Yep. Before CMT AMD was competing with Intel. Afterwards Intel improved and AMD stagnated.

You know, I feel kinda stupid for not putting these twos and twos together right now, and I have only one thought going through my head...

AMD. What. The. Hell.

[Razzaa]

Saying every AMD product is shit is straight up ignorant.

He/she didn't say that though. He/she said AMD CPU's and GPU's are shit. Maybe that is what he/she experienced. Still doesn't make someone a fan boy/girl. It's just their opinion. There are a bunch of products I think are shit, doesn't make me a fanboy or ignorant lol

[KemoKa]

The A10 7870k came out a few weeks ago.

yep, and what architecture is it using, hmm?

ahh, right. it's identical to the 7850K, which came out about a year ago.

this is why people are fed up with AMD. They just upped the clocks a bit.

[Mightyinvader]

I'm gonna build a pretty beast computer in the fall after my summer job and frankly with the 390 just being a rebrand ill be going nvidia and intel. But amd is still needed for competition and innovation

[Dabombinable]

If you mean the 8 cores they are 8 physical cores though they just put them in modules, so they aren't utilized the same way an 8 core without modules would be.  However, the 8 physical cores are also a lot smaller than a traditional physical core.  Why?  To fit them into the modules.  They also share a decoder in the modules, and with only 1 decoder per module you can see why they are so slow in single core/thread applications.

They are 8 physical integer cores, so they are unable to be actually utilized as 8 full cores. At times if your watching you'll see 1 'core' pause while the other core in the module is completing its task. AMD literally took a standard CPU, redesigned the integer unit so it was effectively split in 2 and called it a day.

[FaZe Booce]

yep, and what architecture is it using, hmm?

ahh, right. it's identical to the 7850K, which came out about a year ago.

this is why people are fed up with AMD. They just upped the clocks a bit.

Very true. I was just pointing out that they finally got off their ass and did something.

[FaZe Booce]

He/she didn't say that though. He/she said AMD CPU's and GPU's are shit. Maybe that is what he/she experienced. Still doesn't make someone a fan boy/girl. It's just their opinion. There are a bunch of products I think are shit, doesn't make me a fanboy or ignorant lol

Not all are bad. Their heat output and power consumption isn't the best but (lots of) their shit is the best price/performance

[KemoKa]

Very true. I was just pointing out that they finally got off their ass and did something.

Did they, though? because this is exactly what they did between Trinity and Richland.

[FaZe Booce]

Did they, though? because this is exactly what they did between Trinity and Richland.

I didn't say they made something new. They don't really do that often

[KemoKa]

I didn't say they made something new. They don't really do that often

I know, right? My point was that overclocking an APU is something you can do in your spare time at your desk in about 5 minutes. No getting off the ass involved at all. AMD just had to raise two multipliers and two voltages and they released it as a new processor.

[Dabombinable]

I know, right? My point was that overclocking an APU is something you can do in your spare time at your desk in about 5 minutes. No getting off the ass involved at all. AMD just had to raise two multipliers and two voltages and they released it as a new processor.

Eg. FX 8320 and the highly binned 9*** series.

[KemoKa]

Well, in gaming you won't see a benefit with these.  If you have enthusiast interest in OCs and/or are developing or even doing content creation the higher clock speeds actually help.  We've been over why that will help those three areas, and why it would be bad for any other reason.   Buying them for a student to replace something or a gamer, per say, would be a pointless replacement.  I think the problem is more so people buying for gaming and students thinking that these "replacements" are going to benefit them when they won't.

I see your point, as test platforms for coding, they're certainly not bad. However, if you have an enthusiasm for overclocking, you can get a cheap Z87 motherboard and a G3258. If you are a content creator you need a Xeon or an i7, and if you're gaming you only need something in between those two tiers. Believe me, if developers saw a value in something like HSA and implemented it into newer iterations of programs, I would be all for that, I would be really enthusiastic about that. However, that's not really what's happened. AMD used to be really good for things like rendering. For really heavily multithreaded programs that don't require a lot of complicated processing, the 8-cores eat up that stuff like nobody's business. I remember when they used to be facemeltingly awesome. But Skylake is just around the corner, if they make even an incremental step in performance, then AMD chips will make even less sense because tons of people will buy those. it will make older Intel parts even more inexpensive, thus rendering the price-to-performance argument even less of an argument than it already has been brought down to by Devil's Canyon. AMD needs to release something truly ground-breaking if they are to capture the market again.

[Sauron]

The facts are as follows:

 

AMD hasn't made significant advancements in desktop cpus for the last 4 years. Current FX cpus suffer from a relatively low IPC, meaning their single core performance is way behind intel's. These chips also draw a lot of power for what they offer. It is getting harder and harder to recommend an FX cpu for anyone, although there are still exceptions where the extra cores make a difference.

 

Their APU lineup, however, is still offering excellent price/performance ratios and are great for builders on a VERY tight budget, along with the athlon II series holding its own against intel's similarly priced pentiums (albeit at a higher power consumption).

 

AMD's gpus are still great for their price, and performancewise nvidia hasn't had a significant advantage up to a couple of months ago when the titan X (which makes no sense, especially now with the 980ti) launched. Unfortunately it seems the 300 series will be a vast rebrand of the 200 series (with some exceptions), meaning nvidia may have a better offering as they would offer the same or better performance at a much lower power consumption.

[Helly]

Wow i read quite a bit of bullshit here.

 

Let me tell you this, Intel stuff has a lot of problems as well. I speak from experience. But let me clear something up here from a post on the first page from Tedster. In his post its mentioned an FX8350 is useless or a bottleneck for any GPU above 270x or a 760(ti). This is completely WRONG. I have used an 8350 with 2 7970 Ghz editions for years now (thats basically a 280x, higher end then 270x/760(ti) in case you're wondering). There was NEVER any bottleneck. Why am i so sure? Well last week i upgraded to x99 with a 5960x and my games don't run significantly better. Sure they run a little better but thats only because the CPU is obviously better (it should be for a $1000 CPU).

 

More from the same post, 15-20 fps in games when the action starts? NEVER had that happen... and don't tell me that's because i had xfire running. at best that should give me 30-40 fps if that statement was true. Which it is not because in every game i played the last 2/3 years i never once went below 40fps. That is including some of the games that post mentioned (RTS, emulators, a few MMO's). Terrible minimum framerates in starcraft, skyrim, civ 5, assassins creed, etc...? bullshit, i never went below 60 on all of those (well except skyrim but that's with mods).

 

An 8350 is FINE for gaming, there's mobo's out there with USB3.0 so that's at least something new. I'll admit that the mobo's are behind but that's because the CPU's don't support newer stuff. PCIe 3.0 is not really needed as GPU these days still don't fully use 2.0 16x. Maybe a titan X or 980ti does... no idea.

 

I am no fanboy of anything, i've just had bad experiences with both nvidia and intel hardware. Want to know them? Sure here it comes.

 

Nvidia's drivers work mostly shit, they never do what i want and what i want to do i often can't find. Sure it's been years since i've used them but you guys still bitch about AMD drivers not working.. so why can't i?

 

The intel problems i've had are far worse, annoying and just plain weird and stupid.

 

Before my 8350 i had a x38 with a q6600. I also bought 2 150GB WD raptors. Every time i tried to install windows on those raptors (which were in RAID-0) i got a BSOD. I simply could not install windows on those drives. I had 2 500GB drives (also raid-0) next to those. To get the fucking thing installed i had to install windows on those drives, create an image and put that image on the raptors to get the system to run as i wanted. It worked to after that, without a single problem ever. Until i had to update the raid driver from intel (which turned out the be the whole problem). BSOD again. Still don't know why this happened.

 

More recent problem? Sure here's a problem with my x99. I have a rocketRAID card in my system. This system won't boot AT ALL with that card in it. Took me 2 days to figure out it was that card. Since i had all my data on the drivers connected to it... that is a big fucking problem. I remove the card from the system and it works, without a problem. I installed windows on my SSD and everything worked. Just for fun i installed the raid card again without my HD's connected....... IT WORKED. The system now ignores the raid cards bios (i don't see the cards bios screen AT ALL during boot) and it detects it when it boots into windows and everything works. However if i edit a single thing in the bios and reboot, the cards bios shows up and the system refuses the boot. It just hangs and does nothing. Until i shut off the system, take out the card. Turn the system on and boot into windows. Turn off the system again and reinsert the card. Then it again ignores the card and boots fine....

 

I've had 4 AMD systems in my life and NEVER encountered ANY problems remotely like this or anything this annoying. So yeah i'm rooting for AMD the be awesome again... can you really blame me for that? Also people that say that AMD is so slow and everything they make is crap and that's why the buy Intel/Nvidia, BUT they still want AMD around for the competition really need to STFU. Because if the whole world buys Intel/Nvidia there will be no AMD. AMD is not a charity, they need to sell stuff.... so buy it. Because i for 1 am not looking forward to a $2000 I5 with a $1000 Nvidia xx70 card... are you?

 

#longpostmasterrace

[MEC-777]

It's mostly fanboyism/entitlement and lack(ignorance) of the proper context of AMD's situation. That and the AMD/Nvidia double standard - AMD can do no right and Nvidia can do no wrong - mentality that has no basis in facts. 

 

Frankly, it's becoming very annoying.  

[Bensemus]

snip

You have anecdotal evidence which doesn't mean much to anyone but your self. The raid issues are there but they aren't really reverent to whether you should recommend Intel or AMD. Faceman has a wall of text that shows why AMD cpus are falling behind and no longer being recommended.

[Thony]

I only "hate" them because i want them to shine and kick Intels ass but they cant deliver (in CPU market).

They just dont have the technology

In GPU department i hate them for rebranding so much.

[KemoKa]

 

I've had 4 AMD systems in my life and NEVER encountered ANY problems remotely like this or anything this annoying. So yeah i'm rooting for AMD the be awesome again... can you really blame me for that? Also people that say that AMD is so slow and everything they make is crap and that's why the buy Intel/Nvidia, BUT they still want AMD around for the competition really need to STFU. Because if the whole world buys Intel/Nvidia there will be no AMD. AMD is not a charity, they need to sell stuff.... so buy it. Because i for 1 am not looking forward to a $2000 I5 with a $1000 Nvidia xx70 card... are you?

 

#longpostmasterrace

Let me make this perfectly clear: AMD CPUs are NOT bad parts. They're totally fine parts, in fact they can be face-meltingly awesome in quite a few aspects. I've heard of the open-source community loving to use the 8-cores and Linux devs are all over the 8-cores, because Linux absolutely flys on those processors.

And of course we want AMD to be around. They provide good competition that the market needs to stay competitive and prices low. That said, AMD has really started losing the plot over the years. They've sat on a server-optimized architecture pretending like it's suitable in the high-end consumer market, and in some cases it is on a budget, but some of us have shit to do, and with processors from intel that pull less than half the power of AMD's flagship absolutely demolishing it in most applications, it's gonna take some real, proper new technology from AMD. They picked their poison, and the huge losses they suffered by sticking with bulldozer are hindering their abilities in both the GPU market and the CPU market to put the R&D into making a part that does not consist of small integer integer cores. Those processors are built to handle heavily multithreaded workloads and nothing else, it was the pretense of the entire architecture. Since Bulldozer first launched they released the piledriver x86 chips twice, two series of APUs twice and a series of GPU architectures three damn times. Sure, maybe they don't have a lot of money, but it's getting old, and let's be honest, antitrust laws in the US would stop a monopoly as obvious as Intel almost instantly and we'd have someone like Samsung, Qualcomm, Mediatek, Nvidia or ARM taking up the slack almost overnight.