And people were saying AMD CPUs are bad?

[Bananasplit_00]

i was going to say something but then i read the thread and there was no reason to wright anything here really. 

[DXMember]

I said developers are bad

[MilfShake]

Where the cinebench results at bro?

 

Why you posting all GPU heavy tasks?

[harrynowl]

3 hours ago, Bajantechnician said:

lower phase count mobos will fry with the cpu

Technically the power draw will over-current weak power phases. And if it's garbage like MSI which use NIKOS components that don't have OCP then they go up in blue smoke. 

[Nena Trinity]

My FX-8370 & 880K runs all games fine except for DayZ...  

[DragonTamer1]

12 minutes ago, Nena360 said:

My FX-8370 & 880K runs all games fine except for DayZ...  

My friend has an 8350 and runs things relatively fine, except for Arma... but nothing can run Arma...

 

His 8350 is about the same performance as my 2500k.

[Nena Trinity]

26 minutes ago, DragonTamer1 said:

My friend has an 8350 and runs things relatively fine, except for Arma... but nothing can run Arma...

 

His 8350 is about the same performance as my 2500k.

I guess that makes sense...

[i_build_nanosuits]

that thread reminds me of my first posts in here...

[Bajantechnician]

7 hours ago, harrynowl said:

Technically the power draw will over-current weak power phases. And if it's garbage like MSI which use NIKOS components that don't have OCP then they go up in blue smoke. 

i happen to have msi lol

[chamath]

On 26/05/2016 at 9:47 AM, dfg666 said:

Yea right... Games are now using more than 4 logical cores. A 4 year old CPU holding up against the "latest" from Intel, tell me again LTT users, why the fuck was I recommended an i5 by majority of tech websites 3 years ago when I could've gotten an 8350?

http://wccftech.com/fx-8370-i5-6400-gaming-comparison/

 

 

 As far as I know, when you are benchmarking CPU using a game, you should try to avoid GPU bottleneck as far as possible. Digital foundry has vary good videos regarding CPU benchmark.

 

[harrynowl]

2 hours ago, Bajantechnician said:

i happen to have msi lol

 

[sgloux3470]

On 5/26/2016 at 10:23 PM, Ryan_Vickers said:

Why were you recommended the i5?  Because every other test out there will show the intel CPUs having much better single-threaded and total performance, especially when factoring in power consumption and heat.  These results are highly suspicious to me

 

The results aren't suspicious.  The game is GPU limited and so the results are based on the variance within GPU results.

 

As long as the CPU isn't holding the GPU back, the results will be neck and neck.  This is true of most mid range GPU's, most games with multithreading and GPU bound scenarios like 4K or other similarly high resolutions.  

 

Intel CPU's are still faster and significantly better in ~20% of games but something like the 8350 is a perfectly competent CPU.

[vanished]

1 minute ago, sgloux3470 said:

 

The results aren't suspicious.  The game is GPU limited and so the results are based on the variance within GPU results.

 

As long as the CPU isn't holding the GPU back, the results will be neck and neck.  This is true of most mid range GPU's, most games with multithreading and GPU bound scenarios like 4K or other similarly high resolutions.  

 

Intel CPU's are still faster and significantly better in ~20% of games but something like the 8350 is a perfectly competent CPU.

Yup.  I think we all eventually realized this but the initial shock of seeing AMD do well caused confusion and clouded our reasoning

[Bajantechnician]

4 hours ago, harrynowl said:

 

X99 series

[harrynowl]

3 minutes ago, Bajantechnician said:

X99 series

Better but not great  

[Sintezza]

3 hours ago, harrynowl said:

Better but not great  

(offtopic)

 

Lol yeah if you think about the fact that you pay allmost $500,- for a X99 godlike gaming.

And all you basicly get is a mediocre vrm.

With 6 true phases dedicated to cpu comming from an ISL6388 6+1 phase digital controlled pwm.

They used 6x ISL6617 phase doublers to create 12 pwm phases.

And then i´m not even going to start about the aditional parts use in their vrm design like the hi / low side fets, output caps, inductors etc etc.

Its very similar to the their Mpower board, but at a much higher price premium.

That is unacceptable to me.

Its even way more expensive then a Asus RVE i mean come on.

 

 

 

 

[hex4]

Oh look, fanboy needs to bring it up years after the fact of it being terrible

 

FX 9590 though, best joke of the century

[typographie]

22 hours ago, Coaxialgamer said:

these results don't make sense . Why would the 9590 perform the same or better than the 5960x in any case ?

At least in the first chart, for The Division, the GPU they used was able to get them to about 90 FPS average and about 75 FPS minimum at their settings, with probably some variance of a few frames. All that benchmark tells us is that the game has fairly minor CPU demands, at least it did during their testing sequence. All of the CPUs are hitting about the same limit because that limit is the best they GPU can do, and none of the CPUs they tested were slow enough to restrict their GPU very much.

 

That said, there's nothing magical about the 5960X. If you aren't doing something that scales well with 16 logical cores, it's no faster than most other Haswell chips at the same clock speed. And it's worth pointing out, it's got a pretty low default clock speed and was probably not overclocked in that benchmark.

[Sintezza]

On 26-5-2016 at 4:27 PM, harrynowl said:

Well lets say in a theoretical scenario the CPU limits you to 80FPS. If you have a GPU that can do 45FPS at 4K then you won't hit your CPU limit and are thus GPU bound.

 

However if at 1080P your GPU can get 140FPS then you are CPU bound to 80FPS. 

 

Given that there's still not a single card (some come close now) that will hold over 60FPS in 4K gaming you're almost always GPU bound. Whereas most decent GPUs are capable of 1080p gaming at very high framerates these days.

 

That's what I mean.

(ontopic)

 

Pretty much this.

It realy depends on the games you play and how you play them basicly.

How higher you go up in resolution, how more gpu bound you will get.

Since the load on the cpu theoreticly doesnt change much as you go up in resolution.

 

Intel cpu´s in particular have a much better per core performance an ipc.

And there for they are in a huge favor wenn it comes to gaming at lower resolutions like 1080p.

Of course it still depends from game to game, and what exact graphics cards you use.

But still i think most people know where i´m getting at.

Its basicly beating a dead Horse.

 

And for the people who believe that DX12 might be the revival of the AMD FX cpu´s.

All i can say about this, that as far as i have seen the Ashes of singularity beta cpu benchmarks.

That game still showed to be pretty cpu demending at 1080p, no matter dx11 or dx12.

So it will still be highly depending from game to game again.

[Prysin]

13 hours ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

that thread reminds me of my first posts in here...

lets dig it up, shall we?

not sure how this thread reminds you of it. But ok

[harrynowl]

55 minutes ago, Sintezza said:

(offtopic)

 

Lol yeah if you think about the fact that you pay allmost $500,- for a X99 godlike gaming.

And all you basicly get is a mediocre vrm.

With 6 true phases dedicated to cpu comming from an ISL6388 6+1 phase digital controlled pwm.

They used 6x ISL6617 phase doublers to create 12 pwm phases.

And then i´m not even going to start about the aditional parts use in their vrm design like the hi / low side fets, output caps, inductors etc etc.

Its very similar to the their Mpower board, but at a much higher price premium.

That is unacceptable to me.

Its even way more expensive then a Asus RVE i mean come on.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, they're crap and overpriced. I used an XPOWER which was decent but it had some problems I didn't like. RVE way to go for sure if you must throw money at the wall.

[harrynowl]

24 minutes ago, Prysin said:

lets dig it up, shall we?

not sure how this thread reminds you of it. But ok

He used to be VERY pro-amd. Pretty much every thread was him recommending FX8320 with 970-UD3P and posting BF4 benchmarks. 

 

Good times  

[Prysin]

4 minutes ago, harrynowl said:

He used to be VERY pro-amd. Pretty much every thread was him recommending FX8320 with 970-UD3P and posting BF4 benchmarks. 

 

Good times  

and now he is just blind.

[harrynowl]

1 minute ago, Prysin said:

and now he is just blind.

I'll leave that one between you two. 

[vanished]

Alright back on topic if we could