Amd Cpu comparation

[Dabombinable]

3 minutes ago, belfouf said:

everybody doesn't have 400-800€ to put in a Intel CPU + motherboard, and AMD multicore is good, good enough for 80% of people using a computer. computing is not about gaming and 120fps @4K.... why sould my father use a i7 6700K computer at 1300€ to browse internet use excel word and photo editing while a 600€ amd does exactly the same performances ?

IT costs far less than that to match an FX 83**, even in Australia. And it can be done wioth less power, heat and a cheaper motherboard+cooler. BTW, your forgetting about the i5 range.

 

Edit: Note that the i5 are perfectly fine with their stock coolers, with minimal noise at full load https://www.computeralliance.com.au/cpus/!manufacturer/intel

[Electronics Wizardy]

Just now, belfouf said:

while a 600€ amd does exactly the same performances ?

The thing its that it isn't the same performance. Its much worse.

 

Here is the 8350 and the 6600. The 6600 wins in 90%+ of tests.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/697?vs=1646

[belfouf]

Just now, Dabombinable said:

IT costs far less than that to match an FX 83**, even in Australia. And it can be done wioth less power, heat and a cheaper motherboard+cooler. BTW, your forgetting about the i5 range.

I can't say for Australia but in France FX are a given, they're like 140€ for 8320, which is TWICE cheaper than a i5 6600K. I own both, went from 8320 to i5 6600k OC@4,6  well guess what, FX was quicker in photo editing and office software while i5 is much faster in games

[Dabombinable]

2 minutes ago, belfouf said:

I can't say for Australia but in France FX are a given, they're like 140€ for 8320, which is TWICE cheaper than a i5 6600K. I own both, went from 8320 to i5 6600k OC@4,6  well guess what, FX was quicker in photo editing and office software while i5 is much faster in games

Here is how much a 4790K cost me last year, brand new:

If you actually look, its quite easy to find an excellent deal on current and last gen CPU.

[belfouf]

1 minute ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

The thing its that it isn't the same performance. Its much worse.

 

Here is the 8350 and the 6600. The 6600 wins in 90%+ of tests.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/697?vs=1646

I owned both, just did my upgrade this summer from FX8320E to i5 6600K. I was expecting a gap in performances. I was disappointed to conclude that my FX was more performant in photo editing and Microsoft Office, Photoshop and all, faster boot. I was in another hand really pleasd with DDR4, fps and strengh of single core of Intel

[Dabombinable]

Just now, belfouf said:

I owned both, just did my upgrade this summer from FX8320E to i5 6600K. I was expecting a gap in performances. I was disappointed to conclude that my FX was more performant in photo editing and Microsoft Office, Photoshop and all, faster boot. I was in another hand really pleasd with DDR4, fps and strengh of single core of Intel

A Pentium III 1GHz runs MS office fine, even with PC133 SDRAM.....

[belfouf]

2 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

Here is how much a 4790K cost me last year, brand new:

If you actually look, its quite easy to find an excellent deal on current and last gen CPU.

please let me say that I believe that Intel has more efficient energy/single core/multicore management for the same amount of core than AMD. ok ? then, is the price. AMD is more efficient/dollar/daily use (why do you have an i7 ? do you use it at 100% of its power capacity daily ?)

[SpaceGhostC2C]

1 hour ago, belfouf said:

 

yes, the 8370e won't be able to overclock over it's turbo frequencey but will consume less electricity. they're both good and if you are looking for office work get the E. If you want to play games get the FX 8350 or better, a high end i5.

 

Actually, I got an 8370E to run at 4.4 annd 4.5 without issues. At 4.4 it uses a lower voltage than a 9370 I undervolted as much as I could  

3 minutes ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

The thing its that it isn't the same performance. Its much worse.

 

Here is the 8350 and the 6600. The 6600 wins in 90%+ of tests.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/697?vs=1646

It is the same performance, because of the case use he described in the 600 EUR example. You are comparing benchmarks. He's talking about browsing and office. For browsing and office it's exactly the same performance because both systems will be mostly idling, and typing a formula and instantly seeing the result in the cell is the same as typing a formula and instantly seeing the result in the cell  The only difference is which system is more overkill.

[belfouf]

1 minute ago, Dabombinable said:

A Pentium III 1GHz runs MS office fine, even with PC133 SDRAM.....

edit : runs MS Word 93 fine.

 

welcome to 2016, the way you and I use MS office seems to be different.

[Dabombinable]

Just now, belfouf said:

please let me say that I believe that Intel has more efficient energy/single core/multicore management for the same amount of core than AMD. ok ? then, is the price. AMD is more efficient/dollar/daily use (why do you have an i7 ? do you use it at 100% of its power capacity daily ?)

Yes I actually can make full use of this i7, even in games. And when an FX 8350 is barely ahead of an i5 6500 in a few tasks, and trails behind it in all others.....while consuming far more power, needing a better cooler and motherboard....

[belfouf]

1 minute ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

Actually, I got an 8370E to run at 4.4 annd 4.5 without issues. At 4.4 it uses a lower voltage than a 9370 I undervolted as much as I could  

GG, my old FX8320E could not go stable over 4,1 Ghz (100Mhz above turbo clock)

[Dabombinable]

3 minutes ago, belfouf said:

edit : runs MS Word 93 fine.

 

welcome to 2016, the way you and I use MS office seems to be different.

Office 2010. Windows XP Pro. Point is, anything made in the last 15 years has no problems with office (unless its a Celeron D-those are outright shit)

[SpaceGhostC2C]

3 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

A Pentium III 1GHz runs MS office fine, even with PC133 SDRAM.....

I also experienced an i5-4570 system being overall less snappy than an FX system in daily office applications, while being slightly faster on relatively intensive numerical calculations. I blamed it on a combination of it running on the iGPU and a HDD, and didn't think too much about it.

[belfouf]

1 minute ago, Dabombinable said:

Yes I actually can make full use of this i7, even in games. And when an FX 8350 is barely ahead of an i5 6500 in a few tasks, and trails behind it in all others.....while consuming far more power, needing a better cooler and motherboard....

agreed for better cooler needed, that's a valid point. For the rest.... no, FX is much more suited when you want to save money

[Dabombinable]

Just now, SpaceGhostC2C said:

I also experienced an i5-4570 system being overall less snappy than an FX system in daily office applications, while being slightly faster on relatively intensive numerical calculations. I blamed it on a combination of it running on the iGPU and a HDD, and didn't think too much about it.

I'll put it this way-even inside a SATA II laptop with a Phenom II N970, SSD make a massive difference in how well everything (except games) runs over even a 7200RPM HDD that can sustain 120MB/sec.

1 minute ago, belfouf said:

agreed for better cooler needed, that's a valid point. For the rest.... no, FX is much more suited when you want to save money

Good luck doing more than running an FX 8350 at stock on a 4 phase motherboard.....

[belfouf]

1 minute ago, Dabombinable said:

Office 2010. Windows XP Pro. Point is, anything made in the last 15 years has no problems with office (unless its a Celeron D-those are outright shit)

then we both agree on the point that Intel is for high end users, looking for intensive CPU using applications. for 80% of human using a computer, AMD is powerful enough

[belfouf]

1 minute ago, Dabombinable said:

Good luck doing more than running an FX 8350 at stock on a 4 phase motherboard.....

I said the same above, I'm not a fanboy and I own an Intel.

[Dabombinable]

3 minutes ago, belfouf said:

then we both agree on the point that Intel is for high end users, looking for intensive CPU using applications. for 80% of human using a computer, AMD is powerful enough

Even at the low end:

 

[belfouf]

Just now, Dabombinable said:

Even at the low end:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5ejBlynOV8

are you trying to tell me, who said intel was better for games and amd better for office, than intel is better for games ?

[Dabombinable]

Just now, belfouf said:

are you trying to tell me, who said intel was better for games and amd better for office, than intel is better for games ?

Here you go, every day use, productivity and gaming (also, note the efficiency):

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10543/the-skylake-core-i3-51w-cpu-review-i3-6320-6300-6100-tested

 

[belfouf]

3 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

Here you go, every day use, productivity and gaming (also, note the efficiency):

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10543/the-skylake-core-i3-51w-cpu-review-i3-6320-6300-6100-tested

 

it's getting boring.

yes, as I said already, intel is more powerful in single thread. No, it doesn't make a difference in real life office use

no, as I said, amd is more powerful on FX in multi thread than i3/i5 and it does a positive difference in office use, yes, i7 is even better than 8 cores amd

[Dabombinable]

Just now, belfouf said:

it's getting boring.

yes, as I said already, intel is more powerful in single thread.

no, as I said, amd is more powerful on FX in multi thread than i3/i5

Lol. Read through the article and don't use "its getting boring" as an excuse to ignore the evidence.

[belfouf]

Just now, Dabombinable said:

Lol. Read through the article and don't use "its getting boring" as an excuse to ignore the evidence.

I told you several times I own both processors.... and obviously you don't

[SpaceGhostC2C]

 

10 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

I'll put it this way-even inside a SATA II laptop with a Phenom II N970, SSD make a massive difference in how well everything (except games) runs over even a 7200RPM HDD that can sustain 120MB/sec.

Yes. Although I also think the domain server arrangement for windows in my workplace makes a bigger impact than everything else  

[DarkScott]

Okay people now calm down. I am just looking a gaming cpu for now, to run smothly something like Crysis 3 or GTA V.

 

Should I get FX or I5 ?