AMD faces class action suit over Bulldozer missrepresentation

[s3ns3]

So if AMD dies off, Intel cannot be taken to the court?

what for? 

[CTR640]

what for? 

For monopoly. But I have no idea how the laws work in US. Europe is a boring shithole.

And now the question, what will happen if AMD goes bankrupt?

[s3ns3]

For monopoly. But I have no idea how the laws work in US. Europe is a boring shithole.

And now the question, what will happen if AMD goes bankrupt?

what do you think it would happen?

[Fetzie]

Being a monopoly isn't illegal. Abusing your position as market leader or monopoly is illegal. If all your compeition dies off because you're simply the best the market has to offer, you can't be blamed for it.

 

Intel is already abusing their position in the market.

 

Removing the stock heatsink from consumer grade CPUs, keeping the price of the CPU the same, and then charging 30 bucks extra for the cooler (even though the socket mount is identical all the way back to LGA 1155)?

Putting the high-end iGPUs only on CPUs that will NEVER be used without a dedicated GPU?

How about their graphics drivers that are worse than ATI's drivers from 10 years ago? I have NEVER been able to update an Intel graphics driver without first booting to safe mode and running DDU.

what do you think it would happen?

Intel would be forced to licence x86 to another CPU designer, who would also get to use the AMD64 licence. Maybe IBM would want to get a foot back out of the server room? I don't see Qualcomm or Samsung going x86 and nobody else has the funds to run CPU R&D.

[Guest]

I will provide you with my advice coming from me using AMD and Intel hardware for gaming, coding, streaming, 3D modelling, Video editing, Audio production and server roles.

 

You go Intel if you have cash to spend and want the highest IPC you can get for mostly single threaded applications.

You go AMD, if you are on a budget, don't care if you don't have the highest IPC so long as your experience is not degraded. (don't care if it is solid 60FPS so long as it is 30-60 FPS on average). You also go AMD if you are doing multi-threaded applications or applications that can make use of Multi-cores. there is a difference between Multi-threaded and Multi-core. You can be Multi-threaded on a single core that has Hyperthreading making that one core have 2 threads. Server roles that are 64-bit make an excellent example of this. Look at most enterprise grade servers. They are Dual and Quad socket (2 or 4 processors) servers with hundred of Gigabytes of RAM. That is an example of something that makes use of multiple cores. Otherwise, what is the point of more than one core if a program is only going to use one core but 2 threads? These days most games still only make use of at most 2 cores.

 

For the time being, it is more cost effective to stick with AMD. Especially since you will have to buy a new motherboard. When I went from my FX 8120 to my I7-4770k, I had to buy the processor and the motherboard. It ran me around $500 total. A decent change for you would be to swap your A10 for an 860K. Still the same socket but without the APU. it is a decent Quad core gaming CPU using the FM2+ socket. You can also overclock it to hell and back. Stick a decent cooler on it and you are golden. What you might want to wait for is the release of the AMD Zen chips.

 

when streaming, I found my FX chip served me better than my intel chip. the same goes for 3D modelling, and video editing. I used programs that could make use of more than one core.

running Linux is a good way to do that. Under Linux, if I wanted to I could recompile a program specifically for my hardware.

 

FYI, an FX 8320 is 8 cores. Not 6 cores. That is the 6000 series.

 

Also, it is 8 cores. not 8 semi cores equalling 4 full cores. That is Intel math. several years ago CPUs did not have an FPU built in. They were called Co-Processors. And yet, Intel and AMD made CPUs that were considered "full" CPUs. There is no black and white definition of what makes up a "Core". there have been other processors designed in the same manner and they were also considered to be a full processor.

OK...so you're saying that I should either wait for the zen chips or I should go with the 860k. I was looking for a CPU that could game and stream/record well. Like...really well. According to Tek Syndicate, a game could be played at around 60fps and be able to stream using xsplit using the 8350. So I really need advice. Should I get a 4 core Athlon (never really researched Athlons...not sure how good they are) or go with the 8 semi core FX 8320? I want to be able to game at 1080p60 and record at 720p60 or stream at 720p60

[Guest]

You do not go with an FX 8XXX if you want to save money.  You do the 4440 and a H81 (stock cooling).

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-4440 3.1GHz Quad-Core Processor  ($179.99 @ SuperBiiz)

Motherboard: MSI H81M-P33 Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard  ($42.89 @ OutletPC)  <Note: no Front USB 3.0 header

Total: $222.88

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-11-10 00:16 EST-0500

 

or the 4460 and a H97:

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-4460 3.2GHz Quad-Core Processor  ($172.89 @ OutletPC)

Motherboard: ASRock H97M Anniversary Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard  ($67.89 @ OutletPC)

Total: $240.78

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-11-10 00:17 EST-0500

 

This is the FX 8XXX counter, no cooler so no big overclcock:

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD FX-8320 3.5GHz 8-Core Processor  ($139.89 @ OutletPC)

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3 R5 ATX AM3+ Motherboard  ($94.99 @ SuperBiiz)

Total: $234.88

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-11-10 00:19 EST-0500

 

With Intel, you can use Quicksync and OBS to stream/record video.  It uses the iGPU on the CPU.  ...or you can use the Evolved thingy that AMD has.  Or you can just use the i5 for a guaranteed 720p@30fps stream, as long as your internet connection is good enough.

We have an Intel fanboy...watch out

[JebKerman]

We have an Intel fanboy...watch out

you mean someone that knows a better deal when they see one. (also, you will be hounded for using fanboy as a derogatory term)

[Guest]

you mean someone that knows a better deal when they see one. (also, you will be hounded for using fanboy as a derogatory term)

Yes, but if you are smart, you will go with AMD because I specifically asked for a BUDGET BUILD. It will either be an i7 or FX...I do not go for i5s

[JebKerman]

Yes, but if you are smart, you will go with AMD because I specifically asked for a BUDGET BUILD. It will either be an i7 or FX...I do not go for i5s

i5's are generally better than FX, at all tasks, and are we completely forgetting Xeons (especially LGA1150 ones) 

[Guest]

i5's are generally better than FX, at all tasks, and are we completely forgetting Xeons (especially LGA1150 ones) 

yes, but FX 8000 series are generally 8 cores and are better for recording/streaming and rendering videos

[Dabombinable]

Yes, but if you are smart, you will go with AMD because I specifically asked for a BUDGET BUILD. It will either be an i7 or FX...I do not go for i5s

Lol, i5 spank anything from the FX line when it comes to games, and the i3 do a very good job as well-and I'm in Australia and if I was building a new computer, just look at the price differences: http://www.computeralliance.com.au/pc-components/cpus

 

And when you factor in the cost of a decent AM3+ motherboard and a decent cooler for at the very least a small overclock, there is only a very specific use case scenario where you'd choose an FX 8320 or 8350-and the i5 would still be a good choice. Also note that the i5 6400 is cheaper than my i5 4440 was at the start of 2014.

 

 

yes, but FX 8000 series are generally 8 cores and are better for recording/streaming and rendering videos

4 modules 8 integer core/ALU, and integer cores do not function in the same way as the cores in every other CPU that isn't in AMD's FX or APU line.

[JebKerman]

yes, but FX 8000 series are generally 8 cores and are better for recording/streaming and rendering videos

Rendering, yes. FX8350 is about 10-20% faster

 

Streaming/Recording, I think the i5 actually wins, it's faster, and still has enough cores to stream.

[Dabombinable]

Rendering, yes. FX8350 is about 10-20% faster

 

Streaming/Recording, I think the i5 actually wins, it's faster, and still has enough cores to stream.

And lets be honest, the 10-20% advantage over an i5 in multi-threaded tasks isn't worth the problems you'd have with everything else.

[stconquest]

@jkeasley

 

You bet your ass I am an Intel fanboy.  I have done the AMD Phenom II X6 thing, water cooled with big OC.  That was over four years ago and it could not even keep up with the i7 920.  The Phenom II X6 is just about as fast as the FX line and it had 6 "real" cores.

 

Moving to an i5 3570K (re-purposed my AMD rig), man... what a nice change. 

 

I had fun with my X6 though... I am an AMD fanboy as well... well as much as I am a fanboy of anything.

 

Sub $500 build's with an 860K are usually the only time I will push for an AMD CPU.

[CTR640]

I pick what's the best and coolest. I have had bad experience with heat in the past. I hope AMD will win this shit and get their heatproblems fixed with ZEN.

And eletricity is also getting expensive in this terrible shithole of Europe. You can literally save costs by buying AMD 290X to get your home warm and comfy.

[Guest]

@jkeasley

 

You bet your ass I am an Intel fanboy.  I have done the AMD Phenom II X6 thing, water cooled with big OC.  That was over four years ago and it could not even keep up with the i7 920.  The Phenom II X6 is just about as fast as the FX line and it had 6 "real" cores.

 

Moving to an i5 3570K (re-purposed my AMD rig), man... what a nice change. 

 

I had fun with my X6 though... I am an AMD fanboy as well... well as much as I am a fanboy of anything.

 

Sub $500 build's with an 860K are usually the only time I will push for an AMD CPU.

I think you should think more about what is realistic, not just Intel. For example: budget gaming build $800 AUD - FX 6300 great CPU for gaming

[Guest]

Lol, i5 spank anything from the FX line when it comes to games, and the i3 do a very good job as well-and I'm in Australia and if I was building a new computer, just look at the price differences: http://www.computeralliance.com.au/pc-components/cpus

 

And when you factor in the cost of a decent AM3+ motherboard and a decent cooler for at the very least a small overclock, there is only a very specific use case scenario where you'd choose an FX 8320 or 8350-and the i5 would still be a good choice. Also note that the i5 6400 is cheaper than my i5 4440 was at the start of 2014.

 

 

4 modules 8 integer core/ALU, and integer cores do not function in the same way as the cores in every other CPU that isn't in AMD's FX or APU line.

Not everyone overclocks though...so why would someone like me need a "decent cooler"??

[Guest]

@jkeasley

 

You bet your ass I am an Intel fanboy.  I have done the AMD Phenom II X6 thing, water cooled with big OC.  That was over four years ago and it could not even keep up with the i7 920.  The Phenom II X6 is just about as fast as the FX line and it had 6 "real" cores.

 

Moving to an i5 3570K (re-purposed my AMD rig), man... what a nice change. 

 

I had fun with my X6 though... I am an AMD fanboy as well... well as much as I am a fanboy of anything.

 

Sub $500 build's with an 860K are usually the only time I will push for an AMD CPU.

Also, if you remember Linus' 4K AMD build, he put in the 6350. That is a fine CPU and to be able to play 4K games, the 8320 should work extremely well for me

[LAwLz]

yes, but FX 8000 series are generally 8 cores and are better for recording/streaming and rendering videos

Well, with Intel you get QuickSync. If you got a fairly recent AMD or Nvidia card then you can use the GPU for recording as well. If you are just going to stream then I don't recommend doing it on the CPU these days.

For encoding videos for archival purposes the 6600K actually seems better as well. If you look at Anandtech's benchmark you can see that the 8350 gets 17.5 FPS transcoding a 4K video, and the 6600K gets almost 23 FPS. The i5 is 30% better at video encoding.

 

Since the 6600K is kind of expensive I also checked the 8350 vs the 4690K and the i5 comes out on top yet again, although they are pretty close (11% difference).

 

 

So no, AMD is so far behind IPC that their 4GHz 8 core CPU is slightly behind Intel's quad core at 3.5GHz. The HandBrake test is also a best case scenario for the AMD chip. In other tests which can't utilize all 8 cores at near 100% all the time the gaps becomes even larger. In Google's Octane v2 test (a browser based benchmark) the 4690K is 44% faster. That's before you add any overclock as well (which would make the Intel CPU win even more).

 

The FX8350 is ~40 dollars cheaper so it might be worth buying if you just can't afford the higher price AND is mostly going to use it for video encoding (read: not streaming).

For anything else you will be better off with a different CPU.

 

The ONLY thing the 8350 is better at is the price.

[stconquest]

I think you should think more about what is realistic, not just Intel. For example: budget gaming build $800 AUD - FX 6300 great CPU for gaming  LOL?

 

...and you should start a thread for a build in "New Builds and Planning"... but you know, what do you care that this is going off-topic.

[Dabombinable]

Not everyone overclocks though...so why would someone like me need a "decent cooler"??

If you want any semblence of decent performance you need to overclock.

[TechGod]

If you want any semblence of decent performance you need to overclock.

HAHAHA!!!!!!!! No. Just get out. 

[Dabombinable]

HAHAHA!!!!!!!! No. Just get out. 

Check the before and after benchmarks-games and synthetics.

[TechGod]

Check the before and after benchmarks-games and synthetics.

So a 6700K is too slow and you need to overclock it to get good performance? What a terribad product. /s

[Dabombinable]

So a 6700K is too slow and you need to overclock it to get good performance? What a terribad product. /s

Lol, they never need to be overclocked since they already perform so well. Same as any of the CPU from Sandybridge and onward.