Amd-Cpu's

[Jamisbrill]

Why are amd cpu's disliked?

-Thanks

[Frosty]

Subpar single core performance relative to power consumption and heat output. (for their desktop cpus anyway). 

[daniellearmouth]

Well, that's actually not as easy a question to answer than one would thing.

 

Now, the simple answer is because compared to Intel, they are weaker performing.

This is true. An FX-8350 will never be as good as an i7, or an FX-6300 will never - unless by sheer core count - beat an i5.

 

However, that isn't as simple as that.

AMD's CPUs are still cheap. You can get an eight core AMD CPU for £120 quite easily. Intel's nearest offering is an i5-4460, and whilst single core performance is considerably better, in multi-threaded tasks, the 8350 can hold its own reasonably well.

And according to RedGamingTech, in different benchmarks, the FX-8350 will outperform the i5-4670K in multithreaded tasks.

 

And that, really, is the point of some AMD CPUs - to be multithreaded on the cheap.

 

And since games are starting to truly take advantage of multiple threads - some games more than four, even - then AMD's eight-core FX CPUs are actually not as bad as some may say despite weaker single-core performance.

[Cryosec]

AMD CPU's use an old architecture (32nm for desktop Bulldozer, aka FX and Opteron).

 

The smaller the number, the more transistors you can fit on the chip. More transistors = lower temps = higher core clock = better performance.

 

The 32nm tech was first developed in 2010, so it's kinda outdated, as Intel uses 14nm tech for their Skylake CPU's (developed in 2012 by Samsung I think, used by Intel for the first time in 2014. Correct me if I'm wrong).

AMD Zen architecture will be 14nm, so I hope it will finally reach somehow Intel's CPU performance.

[Foxtrotdragon]

The biggest issue is their age, their APUs are awesome, but they are apu's designed for cheap machines that's it, the FX series processor is there current prefomance CPU and the last time it was updated was back in 2012 in which it did compete with the I7 of the time (I think it was 2xxx series) losing in most straight up gaming scenarios due to poor core utilization however it reigned supreme in video editing, streaming, recording gameplay etc. this was likely due to how Intel handled their cache system at the time

[Prysin]

19 minutes ago, Foxtrotdragon said:

The biggest issue is their age, their APUs are awesome, but they are apu's designed for cheap machines that's it, the FX series processor is there current prefomance CPU and the last time it was updated was back in 2012 in which it did compete with the I7 of the time (I think it was 2xxx series) losing in most straight up gaming scenarios due to poor core utilization however it reigned supreme in video editing, streaming, recording gameplay etc. this was likely due to how Intel handled their cache system at the time

age means not a damn fucking shit if a product performs.

When will you people realize that the "age" of a product or feature has no correlation what so fucking ever to actual performance.

 

FYI, since you probably know of intels Hyper Threading feature.

Hyper Threading, or SMT, was invented in 1968.... It wasnt put into a consumer product until 2002....

Hyper Threading is fucking ANCIENT...

 

nobody is bitching about that, are they?

 

 

[Nena Trinity]

The FX-8 cores is good at multi-threaded workloads but I most admit the i5-6600K is probably better at both even if the Fx-8350/70 can beat i5-4690K well in Cinebench... (most DX11 games also favors single threaded but most of mine likes more cores it seems so I am happy with FX!)

[Foxtrotdragon]

I'm not saying it's bad by any means, Hell I still run a machine with a fx-8320e, and it runs me great, and I'm constantly going on how it's still a very relevant CPU especially in games running Vulcan or Mantel API and how DX12 should make it a sweet CPU once again. However at the current time, I'm not too inclined to build a new system based off of AMD. Since I can get more prefomance for just a tad bit more.

 

[John Marianos]

Honestly, people need to understand that the cpu you get depends on what you need it for. We use i7 machines at school for film class, and they are great! But in some cases my fx-6300 is just better. Streaming is also very easy for me as it might not be for someone with an i3. But since i'm here. What cpu do you guys recommend for upgrading my gpu? I really want a 980ti, but my fx-6300 might hold me back. I also really don't want to switch to intel unless it wouldn't be that expensive.