AMD Hate?

[Dabombinable]

So you're saying my games would load up even faster than they are now? Hell, I might buy an INTEL then lol.

 

But, I would need to upgrade my mobo

Well what graphics card do you have? It might not even be worth the upgrade.

[Bingbing10]

to be fair i have an 8350 and its not a bad little cpu for the price i paid for it at the time compared to a new I5 4690k , including the price of the mobo i was about 120 pounds better off. Today my PC still holds up really well and i can play basically all games and high to max settings and everything is running smoothly. 

But ... looking forward from here i would go intel since there is nothing on the CPU side that is really exciting from them and as soon as Intel start releasing more affordable 8 core cpus then i cant see AMD really being any competition. 

Yet i still think my 8350 is a good CPU and does the job for me:)

[d4jsp]

Well what graphics card do you have? It might not even be worth the upgrade.

7850 or 7870 cannot remember lol

[Dabombinable]

7850 or 7870 cannot remember lol

Probably not worth the upgrade then, your CPU is OK up to the 280/280X.

[Opcode]

No, they didn't. On the same manufacturing process a Phenom II would still be faster.

I'd like to see evidence to said claims as we know Carrizo is beating Sandy Bridge.

 

You can pick your warrior from the list here. Seems like the Phenom II N970 is the closest thing to compare to.

[GMS12121]

Its just fanboyism. AMD is budget/cheap and cheerful, but with older and disputably slower technology. Intel is "higher end" and newer technology but with a price premium to match.

[Dabombinable]

I'd like to see evidence to said claims as we know Carrizo is beating Sandy Bridge.

 

You can pick your warrior from the list here.

The IPC is still pretty close, and do not forget that the Phenom II are made on a larger manufacturing process so they don't have that benefit. Architecturally Carizo is still slower-the manufacturing process is what makes up the difference.

[Opcode]

The IPC is still pretty close, and do not forget that the Phenom II are made on a larger manufacturing process so they don't have that benefit. Architecturally Carizo is still slower-the manufacturing process is what makes up the difference.

So when is AMD going to be making Phenom II's on 28nm? You're missing the whole point that Excavator is dusting K10.

[Dabombinable]

So when is AMD going to be making Phenom II's on 28nm? You're missing the whole point that Excavator is dusting K10.

My point still stands-even though they aren't being made architecturally the Phenom II's are still better than Excavator CPU's.

[Opcode]

My point still stands-even though they aren't being made architecturally the Phenom II's are still better than Excavator CPU's.

Phenom II is still far worse than Excavator. Even on 28nm it wouldn't stand a chance against Excavator. Maybe you're not familiar with the negative sides of K10 (it has frequency walls). K10 was abandoned for good reason. K15 was a from scratch design because the company had to, not because they wanted to.

[Dabombinable]

Phenom II is still far worse than Excavator. Even on 28nm it wouldn't stand a chance against Excavator. Maybe you're not familiar with the negative side of K10 (it has frequency walls). K10 was abandoned for good reason. K15 was a from scratch design because the company had to, not because they wanted to.

Frequency isn't everything. You should know by now.

[Opcode]

Frequency isn't everything. You should know by now.

It's not but it is at the same time. If you can clock a chip higher meanwhile staying within a specified TDP then surely that's worth it (it does translate to performance). IPC wouldn't be anything without clocks. Carrizo is a prime example as to where it beats Sandy Bridge with higher clocks. People don't care how you got there when the performance is justified in the end. Carrizo still likely has lower IPC than Sandy Bridge but I would recommend Carrizo over Sandy Bridge all day long (it's still faster in both ST and MT). Not to mention the iGPU completely wrecks anything Intel was integrating during that era.

[ANewFace]

People don't really hate AMD, they hate their CPUs nowadays. Because their top teir FX 9590 is starting to loose out to some i3s in games

[Dabombinable]

It's not but it is at the same time. If you can clock a chip higher meanwhile staying within a specified TDP then surely that's worth it (it does translate to performance). IPC wouldn't be anything without clocks. Carrizo is a prime example as to where it beats Sandy Bridge with higher clocks. People don't care how you got there when the performance is justified in the end. Carrizo still likely has lower IPC than Sandy Bridge but I would recommend Carrizo over Sandy Bridge all day long (it's still faster in both ST and MT). Not to mention the iGPU completely wrecks anything Intel was integrating during that era.

How about you do comparisons with CPU's that are of the same age as the Carizo based CPU's. They are still getting flogged especially with Iris Pro available.

[Opcode]

How about you do comparisons with CPU's that are of the same age as the Carizo based CPU's. They are still getting flogged especially with Iris Pro available.

How do you turn an AMD vs AMD debate into a AMD vs Intel debate?

[Dabombinable]

How do you turn an AMD vs AMD debate into a AMD vs Intel debate?

You changed it, Sandybridge:

 

It's not but it is at the same time. If you can clock a chip higher meanwhile staying within a specified TDP then surely that's worth it (it does translate to performance). IPC wouldn't be anything without clocks. Carrizo is a prime example as to where it beats Sandy Bridge with higher clocks. People don't care how you got there when the performance is justified in the end. Carrizo still likely has lower IPC than Sandy Bridge but I would recommend Carrizo over Sandy Bridge all day long (it's still faster in both ST and MT). Not to mention the iGPU completely wrecks anything Intel was integrating during that era.

[Opcode]

You changed it, Sandybridge:

As a point of reference that clocks are just as important as IPC. The only reason IPC is more important is due to frequency limits.

[mr moose]

Its just fanboyism. AMD is budget/cheap and cheerful, but with older and disputably slower technology. Intel is "higher end" and newer technology but with a price premium to match.

 

There is no price premium for intel,  the 4460 is $1 more than the 8350.  $1 is hardly a premium for a CPU with many more advantages than not.

[Dabombinable]

As a point of reference that clocks are just as important as IPC. The only reason IPC is more important is due to frequency limits.

Frequency only goes so far as you need to increase the processors heat output with higher frequencies. Which has not worked out that well at all for AMD.

[Opcode]

Frequency only goes so far as you need to increase the processors heat output with higher frequencies. Which has not worked out that well at all for AMD.

Until Carrizo.   A respectable clock at a respectable TDP.

[d4jsp]

Hey you turds

 

READ MY POST AND POST:

 

Someone give me benchmarks for proof that intel increases games FPS's as compared to amd chips.

 

Or a video by linus is fine too   Thanks! on the verge of switching to intel ~ ty ty (using fx 6300 atm)

[Dabombinable]

Hey you turds

 

READ MY POST AND POST:

 

Someone give me benchmarks for proof that intel increases games FPS's as compared to amd chips.

 

Or a video by linus is fine too   Thanks! on the verge of switching to intel ~ ty ty (using fx 6300 atm)

Not with that attitude no.

[ThE_MarD]

Heyyo,

 

Hey you turds

 

READ MY POST AND POST:

 

Someone give me benchmarks for proof that intel increases games FPS's as compared to amd chips.

 

Or a video by linus is fine too   Thanks! on the verge of switching to intel ~ ty ty (using fx 6300 atm)

Just... read the thread. Especially the first page... right here:

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/386395-amd-hate/#entry5215299

It's all there in painful detail levels... read it all please and then draw a conclusion yourself from all that research.

As for this thread? It's definitely due to their CPUs. The last time AMD held a solid spot on the enthusiast CPU crown was afaik the AMD Athlon 64 and Athlon FX series when they had a vastly superior IPC compared to Intel's Pentium 4 and Pentium D... ironically, the exact opposite of what we see today. People bashed Intel for the shitty Pentium 4's heat and power consumption so they then setup a blog stating they realized how bad the Pentium was doing compared to the Athlon and how they were going to redesign their CPUs... and out came the majestic Core series. Conroe came out the gates screaming performance bliss with the Intel Core2Duo E6600... and damn that was a good CPU... ever since then? I'm pretty sure AMD have been lagging behind and have been focusing more on core count than instructions per cycle... which further worked in Intel's favor as it became apparent that games for the longest time failed to properly utilize anything more than 4 cores/threads efficiently. It's only with DirectX 11 that we've seen this start to change... but by then? AMD still lagged hard on the IPC... here's hoping their new CPUs slated for 2016 change their luck because I'd be nice if they kicked Intel down a few knotches so that the new enthusiast Intel CPUs wouldn't be so damn expensive... much like AMD is poised on doing with the Fury and Fury X GPUs as long as they deliver what the leaks give rumors to.

Intelligence aside? There's more Intel/NVIDIA fanboys than anything on here lol. They definitely outnumber the AMD fanboys.

For my story?

I myself use Intel and NVIDIA... BUT, back in the day? I was all about the AMD & ATi (RIP). Essentially? I went to Intel due to that aforementioned Intel Core2Duo E6600 and then the bonnerific Intel Core2Quad Q6600... and then I jumped ship to NVIDIA after my ATi X850 Pro GPU died and my warranty replacement was an ATI X1900 which SERIOUSLY SUCKED SHIT IN COMPARIOSON!!! So I was pissed and demanded store credit at FutureShop and bought an NVIDIA 8800 GT and man that thing gave me a serious boner... it was so much better than my ATi X1900 and even the X850 Pro. I've been using NVIDIA ever since tbh. That's just my personal experience though and won't reflect everyone. I always buy the best price to performance ratio and tbh? I tend to buy used to optimize the deal... usually when my enthusiast friends upgrade to the shiniest stuff? I'll upgrade. That? and the Dogecoin market crash was seriously good for me on discounted upgrades... which of course sucks for the people who bought into it who probably didn't break even... but hey, that's the risk with an emerging currency market.

There's still a chance I'll buy AMD again in the future... but they have to seriously nail down the price to performance and thermals, especially on the GPU... and I don't care that HBM is faster than GDDR5... I'd end up holding off until an 8GB HBM variant released. Sure, DirectX 12 is around the corner... but how well do we know the VRAM sharing will work? I wouldn't buy two Fury's when it's not even a true guarantee right meow... especially since NVIDIA and AMD have yet to release a DirectX 12 driver that supports more than a Single-GPU in DirectX 12 mode. 1920x1080 with my current monitor and 2GB NVIDIA GTX 680 SLI setup is feeling the VRAM squeeze... my next build would definitely be for 4K potential and 4GB is barely cutting it right meow on GTA V or Middle-Earth: Shadow of Mordor... textures and resolutions keep going up...

[d4jsp]

Not with that attitude no.

 

Be nice and stop flaming.

 

 

Heyyo,

 

Just... read the thread. Especially the first page... right here:

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/386395-amd-hate/#entry5215299

It's all there in painful detail levels... read it all please and then draw a conclusion yourself from all that research.

As for this thread? It's definitely due to their CPUs. The last time AMD held a solid spot on the enthusiast CPU crown was afaik the AMD Athlon 64 and Athlon FX series when they had a vastly superior IPC compared to Intel's Pentium 4 and Pentium D... ironically, the exact opposite of what we see today. People bashed Intel for the shitty Pentium 4's heat and power consumption so they then setup a blog stating they realized how bad the Pentium was doing compared to the Athlon and how they were going to redesign their CPUs... and out came the majestic Core series. Conroe came out the gates screaming performance bliss with the Intel Core2Duo E6600... and damn that was a good CPU... ever since then? I'm pretty sure AMD have been lagging behind and have been focusing more on core count than instructions per cycle... which further worked in Intel's favor as it became apparent that games for the longest time failed to properly utilize anything more than 4 cores/threads efficiently. It's only with DirectX 11 that we've seen this start to change... but by then? AMD still lagged hard on the IPC... here's hoping their new CPUs slated for 2016 change their luck because I'd be nice if they kicked Intel down a few knotches so that the new enthusiast Intel CPUs wouldn't be so damn expensive... much like AMD is poised on doing with the Fury and Fury X GPUs as long as they deliver what the leaks give rumors to.

Intelligence aside? There's more Intel/NVIDIA fanboys than anything on here lol. They definitely outnumber the AMD fanboys.

For my story?

I myself use Intel and NVIDIA... BUT, back in the day? I was all about the AMD & ATi (RIP). Essentially? I went to Intel due to that aforementioned Intel Core2Duo E6600 and then the bonnerific Intel Core2Quad Q6600... and then I jumped ship to NVIDIA after my ATi X850 Pro GPU died and my warranty replacement was an ATI X1900 which SERIOUSLY SUCKED SHIT IN COMPARIOSON!!! So I was pissed and demanded store credit at FutureShop and bought an NVIDIA 8800 GT and man that thing gave me a serious boner... it was so much better than my ATi X1900 and even the X850 Pro. I've been using NVIDIA ever since tbh. That's just my personal experience though and won't reflect everyone. I always buy the best price to performance ratio and tbh? I tend to buy used to optimize the deal... usually when my enthusiast friends upgrade to the shiniest stuff? I'll upgrade. That? and the Dogecoin market crash was seriously good for me on discounted upgrades... which of course sucks for the people who bought into it who probably didn't break even... but hey, that's the risk with an emerging currency market.

There's still a chance I'll buy AMD again in the future... but they have to seriously nail down the price to performance and thermals, especially on the GPU... and I don't care that HBM is faster than GDDR5... I'd end up holding off until an 8GB HBM variant released. Sure, DirectX 12 is around the corner... but how well do we know the VRAM sharing will work? I wouldn't buy two Fury's when it's not even a true guarantee right meow... especially since NVIDIA and AMD have yet to release a DirectX 12 driver that supports more than a Single-GPU in DirectX 12 mode. 1920x1080 with my current monitor and 2GB NVIDIA GTX 680 SLI setup is feeling the VRAM squeeze... my next build would definitely be for 4K potential and 4GB is barely cutting it right meow on GTA V or Middle-Earth: Shadow of Mordor... textures and resolutions keep going up...

 

 

Now.. This is what I wanted <3 Thank you!!

[Whoopsie988]

AMD hasn't released any new and innovative CPUs for years and keep rebranding GPUs whilst Intel is releasing CPU after CPU that are constantly getting better and Nvidia does the same. I really want AMD to do well as I've always liked an underdog but it looks like the decisions that a 5 year old could say are a bad move are sending them to their grave.