AMD Takes The CPU Performance Crown For The First Time in Almost a Decade.

[MbV93]

Let's be real here, you're all getting crazy, this is one benchmark in one game. Yes the AMD processors were high in this benchmark but come on the FX 9590? you know nobody buys this, is super expensive and swallows power, it is a marketing gimmick, and if you were to overclock the intel processors they would win, also Haswell is not there... I'm not dismissing AMD, I have an FX processor myself but you're all acting as if because of this single benchmark AMD is back in the battle and talking about how they will be better than intel and others talking about how AMD is complete shit, Yes they're getting better performance now, they'll most likely get better with Mantle, but many of you are exaggerating this thing.

[acepro71]

^^^

there are intel fans boy too u know dont get me wrong i have used both intel and amd i like them both ... im the middle guy 

 

 

but i agree with u this result will only come in amd optimised games 

[Lord Pantaloons]

there are intel fans boy too u know dont get me wrong i have used both intel and amd i like them both ... im the middle guy 

 

 

but i agree with u this result will only come in amd optimised games 

I never said that there aren't fanboys on both sides

[ALXAndy]

AMD fanboys. As soon as their processors benchmark better in one game (in beta, running at 1050p, and stock Intel vs the 9590), this suddenly means that the market has turned, AMD is now in charge, and they are calling the shots. Yeah right, fanboy.

 

Sigh. If only.

 

 

See that? that was my Intel Xeon E31220. Same as a I5 2400.

 

 

And there's my I7 950 rig I had before it.

 

 

What's that one? oh, that's my Intel Q6600 rig I had before that.

 

 

Oh look ! my Core 2 Duo E4500.

 

 

And that would be my Intel Core 2 Duo Allendale 1.8ghz.

 

Yeah man, total AMD Fanboy me.

[acepro71]

I never said that there aren't fanboys on both sides

sorry  i though u meant that T_T please forgive me 

[Ryan Leech]

i have 8350 with crossfire 7970s. friend has one 7970 and an 3570k, he gets way better frames. Amd cpus are very bad at large multiplayer games like bf3 and bf4. Intel 4770k is what im upgrading to

Do you know how to overclock?

[acepro71]

 

Sigh. If only.

 

 

See that? that was my Intel Xeon E31220. Same as a I5 2400.

 

 

And there's my I7 950 rig I had before it.

 

 

What's that one? oh, that's my Intel Q6600 rig I had before that.

 

 

Oh look ! my Core 2 Duo E4500.

 

 

And that would be my Intel Core 2 Duo Allendale 1.8ghz.

 

Yeah man, total AMD Fanboy me.

 

 

lol

[Reuben]

Let's be real here, you're all getting crazy, this is one benchmark in one game. Yes the AMD processors were high in this benchmark but come on the FX 9590? you know nobody buys this, is super expensive and swallows power, it is a marketing gimmick, and if you were to overclock the intel processors they would win, also Haswell is not there... I'm not dismissing AMD, I have an FX processor myself but you're all acting as if because of this single benchmark AMD is back in the battle and talking about how they will be better than intel and others talking about how AMD is complete shit, Yes they're getting better performance now, they'll most likely get better with Mantle, but many of you are exaggerating this thing.

I completely agree. People are losing their shit because a BETA game running on a 9590 beats a 3970X which runs at a mere 3.6 GHz.

[acepro71]

Apothem, on 04 Oct 2013 - 04:01 AM, said:

i have 8350 with crossfire 7970s. friend has one 7970 and an 3570k, he gets way better frames. Amd cpus are very bad at large multiplayer games like bf3 and bf4. Intel 4770k is what im upgrading to

i have 8350 too i don't  get what ur talking about i don't see much of a difference and yeah my friend has an i5 

[Reuben]

-text-

If you're trying to earn respect around here, posting Alienware systems is a really bad idea.

[ALXAndy]

 

Apothem, on 04 Oct 2013 - 04:01 AM, said:

i have 8350 too i don't  get what ur talking about i don't see much of a difference and yeah my friend has an i5 

 

 

That's because he's talking complete nonsense. Watch this video please.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jV2Voo5h3eU

[Ryan Leech]

1GHz=1GHz? Then why does a 3.8GHz 4670K destroy a 4.2GHz FX-4350? Because Bulldozer cores are weaker than Haswell cores. Per clock, Intel has much stronger cores than AMD.

I would not say stronger cores, AMD's 32nm cores are a lot stronger than Intel's current 22nm cores. Try putting 1.5v through a 22nm Intel chip.

[ALXAndy]

If you're trying to earn respect around here, posting Alienware systems is a really bad idea.

 

Sorry. Being an AMD fanboy has warped my sense of humour.

[Godlygamer23]

I would not say stronger cores, AMD's 32nm cores are a lot stronger than Intel's current 22nm cores. Try putting 1.5v through a 22nm Intel chip.

They mean computationally. Not physically stronger.

[Ryan Leech]

 

Sigh. If only.

 

 

See that? that was my Intel Xeon E31220. Same as a I5 2400.

 

 

And there's my I7 950 rig I had before it.

 

 

What's that one? oh, that's my Intel Q6600 rig I had before that.

 

 

Oh look ! my Core 2 Duo E4500.

 

 

And that would be my Intel Core 2 Duo Allendale 1.8ghz.

 

Yeah man, total AMD Fanboy me.

I've always bought Intel, until my last upgrade, when I bought my 6350. Best decision I made since I bought my E8400.

[maxtuckerpc]

Ok in the past every game was sort of optimized for Intel because they were built for full cores and now games will start letting amd to use their 8 cores that share info with eachother. This is because of the new consoles.

[acepro71]

I would not say stronger cores, AMD's 32nm cores are a lot stronger than Intel's current 22nm cores. Try putting 1.5v through a 22nm Intel chip.

well this guy just made a hell of a point 

[Reuben]

I would not say stronger cores, AMD's 32nm cores are a lot stronger than Intel's current 22nm cores. Try putting 1.5v through a 22nm Intel chip.

That's not what I'm saying, I'm saying that you'll get better single-core compute performance from an Intel processor. Anyone who argues with this doesn't know what they're talking about.

[Ryan Leech]

That's not what I'm saying, I'm saying that you'll get better single-core compute performance from an Intel processor. Anyone who argues with this doesn't know what they're talking about.

That statement is completely true, thank you for rewording what you were trying to say.

[Godlygamer23]

well this guy just made a hell of a point 

If you're being serious, no he didn't.

[Guest]

I only read the first page but I can see this will get a lock in 3...2....1....

 

Rules must be also be established in this sort of discussion. What are you discussing? Performance? Price? Both?

[ALXAndy]

I've always bought Intel, until my last upgrade, when I bought my 6350. Best decision I made since I bought my E8400.

 

The last AMD CPU I had until I bought my 8320 was an Athlon XP 2000+. That was ooo, 2001?

 

Quite simply because after that there weren't really any higher end AMD CPUs worth having. Oh noes? what have I done? quick I better wash my mouth out with soap !! Sarcasm aside, yes, I wanted (well, needed, given the GPUs I run) a CPU that could cope with modern titles. The Intel was a problem because Intel lock their latest CPUs. That's sheer arrogance and what finally pushed me back to AMD.

 

Well, that and the fact that the Intel couldn't even keep Crysis 3 playable with SLI GTX 670s. I was seeing lows like this.

 

 

Which you know? kinda sticks in your throat when you paid £165 for a CPU that can't even run a game that came out eight months after you bought the bloody thing and you can't overclock because Intel want a premium for that.

 

My 8320 absolutely demolishes Intel's IPC in Crysis 3, Far Cry 3 and I will stick my neck out and say - any future title that likes the fact it's been ported to an almost identical CPU structure.

[maxtuckerpc]

I completely agree. People are losing their shit because a BETA game running on a 9590 beats a 3970X which runs at a mere 3.6 GHz.

I completely agree. I use amd in my system and will say that Intel is better than amd in many cases as of now but times are Changing and games and other programs will start to use the fakeish 8cores much more effectively.

[acepro71]

If you're being serious, no he didn't.

yeah i know  

 

 

also this thread is turning into a fight between amd and intel 

 

 

come on guys cool down its not like they are paying u to fight with each other

[Ryan Leech]

 

The last AMD CPU I had until I bought my 8320 was an Athlon XP 2000+. That was ooo, 2001?

 

Quite simply because after that there weren't really any higher end AMD CPUs worth having. Oh noes? what have I done? quick I better wash my mouth out with soap !! Sarcasm aside, yes, I wanted (well, needed, given the GPUs I run) a CPU that could cope with modern titles. The Intel was a problem because Intel lock their latest CPUs. That's sheer arrogance and what finally pushed me back to AMD.

 

Well, that and the fact that the Intel couldn't even keep Crysis 3 playable with SLI GTX 670s. I was seeing lows like this.

 

 

Which you know? kinda sticks in your throat when you paid £165 for a CPU that can't even run a game that came out eight months after you bought the bloody thing and you can't overclock because Intel want a premium for that.

 

My 8320 absolutely demolishes Intel's IPC in Crysis 3, Far Cry 3 and I will stick my neck out and say - any future title that likes the fact it's been ported to an almost identical CPU structure.

Couldn't have said it better myself.