Regarding the RX 480 AOTS benchmark at Computex

[Demonking]

are they still using intel CPU's in their test Face palm. This confirms it FX sucks AMD won't use it in their own GPU test so if AMD don't use it themselves why are people still recommending them for consumers makes no sense. 

[Fulgrim]

4 minutes ago, Demonking said:

are they still using intel CPU's in their test Face palm. This confirms it FX sucks AMD won't use it in their own GPU test so if AMD don't use it themselves why are people still recommending them for consumers makes no sense. 

Firstly, FX was found to be lacking years ago. Secondly, is this a recent discovery for you?

[Unhelpful]

2 minutes ago, Fulgrim said:

 

No, but it is kind of shocking that they're using a direct competitors product. Even if you have an inferior product, you never want to admit it.

[Demonking]

5 minutes ago, Fulgrim said:

Firstly, FX was found to be lacking years ago. Secondly, is this a recent discovery for you?

obviously no it just more proof & people still recommend them CPU's have you been in the cpu section, people still to this day think they're good.

[Demonking]

1 minute ago, JoeyDM said:

No, but it is kind of shocking that they're using a direct competitors product. Even if you have an inferior product, you never want to admit it.

Thank you. If you have no faith in your own product why should we as consumers. 

[Fulgrim]

13 minutes ago, JoeyDM said:

No, but it is kind of shocking that they're using a direct competitors product. Even if you have an inferior product, you never want to admit it.

Not shocking at all. It's mainly because they're comparing the performance of graphics cards here, not cpu performance. Using different processors is an extra, unnecessary variable to prove something which we already know.  

 

12 minutes ago, Demonking said:

obviously no it just more proof & people still recommend them CPU's have to been in the cpu section, people still to this day think they're good.

If someone's wanting to spend ~£600 on a rendering machine, i'd still recommend an FX8350. Or for a really low budget gaming rig, an Anthlon x4 860k.

 

 

And wanting/trying to compare something like an i5 6600k / 5930k / 5820k to a much cheaper & older FX8350 is flat out retarded. The FX series of chips is severely outdated, this is a well known fact. But at the time of release, the FX8350 was a great choice for anyone going for a rendering/livestreaming rig, on a low budget.  And for those that got an FX 8350 instead of an i5, will get a significant boost with DirectX 12 due to better multicore utilization, than what an i5 would.

[Unhelpful]

1 minute ago, Fulgrim said:

 

..... Think for a second. It isn't shocking that somebody would use an Intel CPU to bench a card. It makes perfect sense. It is surprising that AMD would admit utter defeat by not using their own products for benchmarks. Using different CPU's is necessary, but that point is only valid if they ALSO use their own.

[Demonking]

7 minutes ago, Fulgrim said:

Not shocking at all. It's mainly because they're comparing the performance of graphics cards here, not cpu performance. Using different processors is an extra, unnecessary variable to prove something which we already know.  

 

If someone's wanting to spend ~£600 on a rendering machine, i'd still recommend an FX8350. Or for a really low budget gaming rig, an Anthlon x4 860k.

 

 

And wanting/trying to compare something like an i5 6600k / 5930k / 5820k to a much cheaper & older FX8350 is flat out retarded. The FX series of chips is severely outdated, this is a well known fact. But at the time of release, the FX8350 was a great choice for anyone going for a rendering/livestreaming rig, on a low budget.  But for those that got an FX 8350 instead of an i5, will get a significant boost with DirectX 12 due to better multicore utilization, than what an i5 would.

all i hear is damage control cause in that case they could've used an 4790k or 4690k hell even an 3570k, 8350 came out around that time. also AoTs is a DX12 game so they could've used FX to showcase its power, but they didn't cause they know its trash. 

[Fulgrim]

12 minutes ago, JoeyDM said:

..... Think for a second. It isn't shocking that somebody would use an Intel CPU to bench a card. It makes perfect sense. It is surprising that AMD would admit utter defeat by not using their own products for benchmarks. Using different CPU's is necessary, but that point is only valid if they ALSO use their own.

It's not shocking at all. I can kind of understand wanting to see how FX chips benefit from DirectX 12, with the new cards. But it's not that big of a deal. FX is over and done with, they're promoting their new products, not their old shit. And the fact is, that the majority of PC gamers will have an Intel quad core. Look at the Steam hardware survey...

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

 

8 minutes ago, Demonking said:

all i hear is damage control cause in that case they could've used an 4790k or 4690k hell even an 3570k, 8350 came out around that time. also AoTs is a DX12 game so they could've used FX to showcase its power, but they didn't cause they know its trash. 

You're a fucking tool if they're gonna focus on promoting their old FX chips. And it's already been shown that DirectX 12 will provide a boost for those that can't afford to upgrade.

http://www.computerbase.de/2016-03/hitman-benchmarks-directx-12/2/

[Morgan MLGman]

48 minutes ago, Demonking said:

are they still using intel CPU's in their test Face palm. This confirms it FX sucks AMD won't use it in their own GPU test so if AMD don't use it themselves why are people still recommending them for consumers makes no sense. 

That statement makes no sense.

1. They actually did use a Zen 8 cored/ 16 threaded CPU at Computex afaik

2. They want to show maximum performance with their new GPU, and that can be achieved only by using a 6700K.

3. Why would they use such an old CPU in the first place?

4. FX-series isn't meant for highest-end users and everyone knows this. It had/still has some uses.

5. DX12 really improves gaming experience for those with FX-8 cores that can't afford to upgrade atm, I've got one, tested in DX11 and DX12 and there is a noticeable improvement when switching to the more advanced API

[Demonking]

49 minutes ago, Fulgrim said:

It's not shocking at all. I can kind of understand wanting to see how FX chips benefit from DirectX 12, with the new cards. But it's not that big of a deal. FX is over and done with, they're promoting their new products, not their old shit. And the fact is, that the majority of PC gamers will have an Intel quad core. Look at the Steam hardware survey...

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

 

You're a fucking tool if they're gonna focus on promoting their old FX chips. And it's already been shown that DirectX 12 will provide a boost for those that can't afford to upgrade.

http://www.computerbase.de/2016-03/hitman-benchmarks-directx-12/2/

I'm a tool for stating a fact. It doesn't matter if its old its their product which they're still selling and just released a new version of fx not that along ago and they should be using it in a DX12 game to ahow it still good and can compete, but they know this and people are still recommending them like they are a good cpu if its so good amd should be using it. This is embarrassing no matter how you try to spin it cause if this was any other company you would be saying its an embarrassment as well.

[Fulgrim]

1 minute ago, Demonking said:

I'm a tool for stating a fact. It doesn't matter if its old its their product which they're still selling and just released a new version of fx not that along ago and they should be using it in a DX12 game to ahow it still good and can compete, but they know this and people are still recommending them like they are a good cpu if its so good amd should be using it. This is embarrassing no matter how you try to spin it cause if this was any other company you would be saying its an embarrassment as well.

The FX chips fit a small niche, as i state earlier. Something like a £600 rendering/streaming rig. But aside from that, FX chips are not worth recommending nowadays. And by new FX, are you referring to their APU's, or the "E" revisions they did  - the FX8320E & FX8370E?

[Demonking]

45 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

That statement makes no sense.

1. They actually did use a Zen 8 cored/ 16 threaded CPU at Computex afaik

2. They want to show maximum performance with their new GPU, and that can be achieved only by using a 6700K.

3. Why would they use such an old CPU in the first place?

4. FX-series isn't meant for highest-end users and everyone knows this. It had/still has some uses.

5. DX12 really improves gaming experience for those with FX-8 cores that can't afford to upgrade atm, I've got one, tested in DX11 and DX12 and there is a noticeable improvement when switching to the more advanced API

If they used it then why are they using an i7 like i said it doesn't matter its their product and a company should have faith in it stop trying to damage control its embarrassing for AMD to use its competitor cpu while still selling FX. Also you are 1 of the FX supporters im surprised you aren't mad about this.

[Trixanity]

4 minutes ago, Demonking said:

I'm a tool for stating a fact. It doesn't matter if its old its their product which they're still selling and just released a new version of fx not that along ago and they should be using it in a DX12 game to ahow it still good and can compete, but they know this and people are still recommending them like they are a good cpu if its so good amd should be using it. This is embarrassing no matter how you try to spin it cause if this was any other company you would be saying its an embarrassment as well.

Vishera is four years old and has not received any maintenance: it's dead. It has ceased to live. AMD has let it die, why won't you? 

Do you also want them to throw in some Athlon64 benchmarks for good measure? Maybe some Pentium 4 just to spice things up? 

 

It's an irrelevant product that's just waiting to be replaced. It's not representative of modern CPU performance. Intel is the only one with a high performance CPU available. That's why it's used even though it's an awful position to be in; having to use a competitor's product to properly show off your own. It would be worse to try and shove inferior products in there ruining everything by bottlenecking their GPUs and that would actually be much more embarrassing; that they can't swallow their pride and use a product that performs as it should. I also think AMD would prefer if we forget about Bulldozer.

[Energycore]

1 hour ago, Demonking said:

are they still using intel CPU's in their test Face palm. This confirms it FX sucks AMD won't use it in their own GPU test so if AMD don't use it themselves why are people still recommending them for consumers makes no sense. 

Because they're cheap

Well, $100 dollar FX-8300 was cheap. A real contender against the i3-6100. Every other FX is a bad value.

[Demonking]

8 minutes ago, Fulgrim said:

The FX chips fit a small niche, as i state earlier. Something like a £600 rendering/streaming rig. But aside from that, FX chips are not worth recommending nowadays. And by new FX, are you referring to their APU's, or the "E" revisions they did  - the FX8320E & FX8370E?

I'm going to leave it at this before an admin gets on us. If i was the engineer behind FX i would be embarrassed by this. If i was AMD  would still use fx to this day to show i had faith in my product from 4 years ago showing it still can compete.

[That Norwegian Guy]

7 hours ago, ivan134 said:

Dumb. How is number of people who play it relevant to testing the dx 12 support of cards? Would number of people playing it change the benchmark scores? If you think this is an outlier, you are welcome to go test Hitman, Quantum Break and Total War: Warhammer to see whether Nvidia sucks or not at asynchronous compute. People said Aots was one game and we should wait. We got 3 more and people are still saying wait. Don't worry we have Deus Ex, BF1, Mass Effect Andromeda, Battlezone and Watch Dogs 2 still coming up. How many more exactly do you need again?

AoTS is the only natively developed DX12 title. Hitman, QB and TW: Warhammer included DX12 support mid-development and aren't developed ground up to use it.

[Morgan MLGman]

21 minutes ago, Demonking said:

If they used it then why are they using an i7 like i said it doesn't matter its their product and a company should have faith in it stop trying to damage control its embarrassing for AMD to use its competitor cpu while still selling FX. Also you are 1 of the FX supporters im surprised you aren't mad about this.

But they know it's outdated, they're selling it because people are still buying those CPUs, they never said they're the best and they know that to maintain highest level of performance, they need an i7, most likely a 6700k.

It's not like I'm an FX supporter, I always claimed only that these CPUs aren't as bad as people make them to be, which is very true. They offer good value for money in some usage scenarios, for instance, I stream some games, and so far, I've been able to stream The Witcher 3 or Rise of the Tomb Raider with that CPU, imagine doing that on an i3, which is what I could've gotten from the Intel side for the same price here in Poland.

With that being said, they don't offer top performance for games and don't give maximum possible FPS, AMD is aware of this, also, to minimize CPU overhead so their new RX 480 works as well as possible, they used a high-end i7 with very high IPC and single-threaded performance.

[Mr.Meerkat]

1 hour ago, Fulgrim said:

You're a fucking tool if they're gonna focus on promoting their old FX chips. And it's already been shown that DirectX 12 will provide a boost for those that can't afford to upgrade.

http://www.computerbase.de/2016-03/hitman-benchmarks-directx-12/2/

8350 almost (important word here) the same frame rate as a 6700k is pretty fucking fantastic no? 

 

12 minutes ago, Demonking said:

I'm going to leave it at this before an admin gets on us. If i was the engineer behind FX i would be embarrassed by this. If i was AMD  would still use fx to this day to show i had faith in my product from 4 years ago showing it still can compete.

So from what I can see, you wanted AMD to use i7 920 and i5 2500k/3750k for showing the benchies? That sounds stupid. Zen isn't out and although they could have maybe used it but there's no point in it as it's not 'fully ready' yet.

[Citadelen]

31 minutes ago, Demonking said:

-snip-

Can you just stop?

AMD knows that at the high end their CPUs don't currently stack up, thus they use an Intel CPU in their test. They want to eliminate any potential bottlenecks, besides if they used an FX-9590 for example they'd be ridiculed.

 

[Demonking]

1 minute ago, Citadelen said:

Can you just stop?

AMD knows that at the high end their CPUs don't currently stack up, thus they use an Intel CPU in their test. They want to eliminate any potential bottlenecks, besides if they used an FX-9590 for example they'd be ridiculed.

 

I did if you look above  would know that. This doesn't change the fact that it is embarrassing.

[ivan134]

14 minutes ago, Demonking said:

I did if you look above  would know that. This doesn't change the fact that it is embarrassing.

Again are you just learning this now? You still havent said what exactly you want them to do. Did you just crawl out of a rock and realize their CPUs are garbage? You're beating a dead horse.

[Demonking]

2 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

Again are you just learning this now? You still havent said what exactly you want them to do. Did you just crawl out of a rock and realize their CPUs are garbage? You're beating a dead horse.

tell that to the people in the cpu section of the forums who keep recommending them. 

[ivan134]

 

1 minute ago, Demonking said:

tell that to the people in the cpu section of the forums who keep recommending them. 

I am talking about you saying using Intel CPUs is embarassing, not people recommending AMD CPUs.

[Demonking]

5 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

 

I am talking about you saying using Intel CPUs is embarassing, not people recommending AMD CPUs.

because AMD makes their own CPU's which compete with intel, so by using their competition product instead of their own to test another of their own product that just shows they have no faith in said product, but expect people to buy it. how is this so hard to understand.