AMD CPU's

[FuriousGamer]

"because its intel" is not a valid reason

oh, and about that "better temps", remember the pentium 4?

That was 15 years ago lol.

[PlayStation 2]

That was 15 years ago lol.

it doesn't matter

the fx-8350 doesn't require an aftermarket cooler to keep itself decently running

the i7-4790k does

 

your argument was?

[FuriousGamer]

it doesn't matter

the fx-8350 doesn't require an aftermarket cooler to keep itself decently running

the i7-4790k does

 

your argument was?

I totally disagree the 4790k doesnt at all.

[PlayStation 2]

I totally disagree the 4790k doesnt at all.

I've heard multiple instances on this forum about the 4790k's heatsink not being able to handle the heat output of it correctly

and i've heard some temperature problems with them, something that i can't say for the 8320/50/70/9590

[FaZe Booce]

Athlon 860K is close to the G3258 or the i3

 

but that is all

 

 

what is the budget???

it costs more for the same performance or sometimes worse performance.

[Emanuel_M]

I've heard multiple instances on this forum about the 4790k's heatsink not being able to handle the heat output of it correctly

and i've heard some temperature problems with them, something that i can't say for the 8320/50/70/9590

well only becuase the heatsink base is smaller than the size of the cpu die.

[Emanuel_M]

it costs more for the same performance or sometimes worse performance.

how did you get your brain cells back, tell me, I need it. /s

[Jacktastic-Mofo]

4790K stock cooler touches 105*C and shuts down

8370 doesn't do that.

Proof? 

[Clyne]

Its been proven that amd is more hot than an intel cpu at idle and at full workload.

Have fun with Netburst compared to K7/K8.

[ApolloX75]

Heh. Was waiting for this.

"because its intel" is not a valid reason

oh, and about that "better temps", remember the pentium 4?

 

 

Have fun with Netburst compared to K7/K8.

 

[Clyne]

 

That tells you something right now....

[ApolloX75]

That tells you something right now...

 

I avoided Pentium 4 like the plague. Still have my Athlon XPs and I'll never get rid of them. I have an old Toshiba laptop that has a P4 desktop CPU in it. Even brand new it had about a half hour worth of battery and hit 100C easy under no load whatsoever. Not worth the "benefit" of hyperthreading.

[Clyne]

I avoided Pentium 4 like the plague. Still have my Athlon XPs and I'll never get rid of them. I have an old Toshiba laptop that has a P4 desktop CPU in it. Even brand new it had about a half hour worth of battery and hit 100C easy under no load whatsoever. Not worth the "benefit" of hyperthreading.

I had a Sony laptop with a Athlon XP CPU....ran fine, better than my Pentium M laptop at the time.

Too bad my dad threw away the 486 PCs.

[FuriousGamer]

I've heard multiple instances on this forum about the 4790k's heatsink not being able to handle the heat output of it correctly

and i've heard some temperature problems with them, something that i can't say for the 8320/50/70/9590

Well with my experience I noticed Intel cpus are way better than amd.

[-rascal-]

 

 

You have to understand

• TDP is a measurement of heat generated measured in Watts. The symbol used to represent this is 'Q' (at least, in the Engineering and physics domain).
• Temperature =/= heat, because Q = mc(T_f - T_s), and S_gen = Q/T

Intel Processors have a much higher acceptable operating temperature compared to AMD Processors. Intel chips can operate in temperatures of 80*C+ before throttling, while more recent AMD processors can only reach ~70*C before the microprocessor throttles, or thermal shutdown kicks in.

 

Whether an Intel Processor, or AMD Processor operates cooler (temperature) is relative -- it depends on the heatsink / cooler being used on the chip. AMD chips tend to produce more heat, but it does not necessarily mean it runs hotter. Again, going back to where I previously mentioned regarding to Heat and Temperature.

 

Linus' video on testing stock coolers on Intel and AMD processors (yes, Luke was able to mount the stock AMD processor onto an Intel CPU / motherboard).

 

In terms of gaming, I completely agree with you, as of now, an Intel Processor is the best choice. I will NOT recommend an AMD FX Processor for this case. In many performance computing scenarios, the enthusiast X79 / X99 platform is also preferred / commonly recommended. In workloads that takes advantage of the extra cores / threads, the AMD FX Processors is able to stand its own ground.

 

For an example, for the "Design of Digital and VSLI Systems" related projects that I am doing, I REALLY benefit from the extra cores, since the programs (Xilinx, MATLAB, etc) take advantage of the extra cores & threads. On a system with a i5-4670, it takes nearly 30 minutes to compile the entire VHDL project, while the time is significantly reduced on my FX-8350 system. I may probably have to get a new system based on the X99 platform to see any large signifcant improvements.

[sgtheadhole]

Mind you AMD's latest CPU's released at the end of 2011/start of 2012 and have not changed since

 

Intel year on year has a new CPU release

 

 

Comparing a NEW intel cpu to a 2012 (new AMD CPU), your not gonna find many good points for AMD, but they still do compete in their areas

 

For budget builds... some "new" amd cpus will do

 

otherwise

 

Phenom II X6 Black editions at the at the right price perform great, on par or better than the FX's (single thread + multithread)

Phenom II X2 550 Black Edition unlocks to a X4, can be had for $30AUD/25USD on ebay (a lil OC and its agreat budget gaming chip)

 

Older Intel chips like the Sandy Bridge, or even Westmeres(32nm 6C/12T) (i7 980X,990X, Xeon X5650/70, LGA1366Mobo hard to find) (for the right price 2ndhand)

[Nishizumi]

For now, you can get similar performance, but not matching. We'll have to wait for Zen and Zen+ since Bulldozer is an ancient architecture.