-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
SOLVED AMD is heading in the right direction
- Thread starter wrsj77
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2012
- Location
- Wichita, KS
Ya.. this thread is only going one place :/
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2009
We are not. I'm not an Intel fan but i buy what is faster and Intel is. I'm at work and i cant look at youtube right now but all the latest reviews ( trustable test source ) ive read proved that Intel is faster at gaming currently.
Price wize, a 3570k is neck to neck with an 8 core AMD and in only a few games the 8 core AMD is ahead. Also, a 3570k is way more power efficient. My HTPC ( 2500k + P8Z77-m Pro ) pump ~55w idling when an 8 core AMD idle at ~75w ... This is alot more !
The only spot where AMD really lead are in the IGPU market ... Intel Igpu are far behind. My mother have a 3870k
Price wize, a 3570k is neck to neck with an 8 core AMD and in only a few games the 8 core AMD is ahead. Also, a 3570k is way more power efficient. My HTPC ( 2500k + P8Z77-m Pro ) pump ~55w idling when an 8 core AMD idle at ~75w ... This is alot more !
The only spot where AMD really lead are in the IGPU market ... Intel Igpu are far behind. My mother have a 3870k
- Thread Starter
- #6
well when you get a chance watch this video these are real test, but I figured I would at least post this because like the guy says in the video a lot of benchmarks are compared in 1 or 2 games. In this video the 8350 beats the 17 and 15 in metro 2033. The only game the 17 and 15 seems to beat the 8350 in is in crisis, so unless all you do is play crisis then go ahead and have fun with you intel chips lolWe are not. I'm not an Intel fan but i buy what is faster and Intel is. I'm at work and i cant look at youtube right now but all the latest reviews ( trustable test source ) ive read proved that Intel is faster at gaming currently.
Price wize, a 3570k is neck to neck with an 8 core AMD and in only a few games the 8 core AMD is ahead. Also, a 3570k is way more power efficient. My HTPC ( 2500k + P8Z77-m Pro ) pump ~55w idling when an 8 core AMD idle at ~75w ... This is alot more !
The only spot where AMD really lead are in the IGPU market ... Intel Igpu are far behind. My mother have a 3870k
- Thread Starter
- #7
so besides not even watching, you bring up power consumption well my 125w fx4170 is idling at around 39watts,but anyhow who builds a high performance machine and worries about power consumption ? seems like a contradiction to me, but I am a newbie to building so.....We are not. I'm not an Intel fan but i buy what is faster and Intel is. I'm at work and i cant look at youtube right now but all the latest reviews ( trustable test source ) ive read proved that Intel is faster at gaming currently.
Price wize, a 3570k is neck to neck with an 8 core AMD and in only a few games the 8 core AMD is ahead. Also, a 3570k is way more power efficient. My HTPC ( 2500k + P8Z77-m Pro ) pump ~55w idling when an 8 core AMD idle at ~75w ... This is alot more !
The only spot where AMD really lead are in the IGPU market ... Intel Igpu are far behind. My mother have a 3870k
- Joined
- May 10, 2009
Yup you're right, that video of non-scripted non-benchmarks really blows me away.
Nevermind that it's a horrid comparison and laughably easy to doctor to get lots of views from the "OMG AMD BEAT INTEL FOR ONCE AMD RULES" crowd.
To do a real comparison, you must use in-game benchmarks or run-throughs that are identical every time. Multiplayer is a joke. Walking about in single player is almost always an equal joke.
His credibility suffers before he even opens his mouth, that desk array... lol
Beyond that, one video of AMD supposedly beating Intel does not in any way shape or form undo the dozens of reviews showing the exact opposite. You can't pick and choose like that and retain and respect as an unbiased anything.
Am I an Intel guy? Nope, I'd much rather see AMD win. The bottom line however is that Intel makes more sense CPU wise starting at the $200 mark.
Under $200, AMD's overclockability carry the day. At $200 and up, Intel wins.
Power consumption becomes very important when overclocking. OC the hell out of a 8350 and you're well north of 200w. OC the hell out of a 3570k and you reach, oh, 100w or so.
That means a (much) cheaper motherboard can be used for the OCing. Presto, cheap!
Plus, some people actually pay for electricity, which makes power savings rather important as well.
Lastly, 8350s aren't high end in the first place. It's a mid range chip with power consumption equal to Intels (far faster) high end chip.
Nevermind that it's a horrid comparison and laughably easy to doctor to get lots of views from the "OMG AMD BEAT INTEL FOR ONCE AMD RULES" crowd.
To do a real comparison, you must use in-game benchmarks or run-throughs that are identical every time. Multiplayer is a joke. Walking about in single player is almost always an equal joke.
His credibility suffers before he even opens his mouth, that desk array... lol
Beyond that, one video of AMD supposedly beating Intel does not in any way shape or form undo the dozens of reviews showing the exact opposite. You can't pick and choose like that and retain and respect as an unbiased anything.
Am I an Intel guy? Nope, I'd much rather see AMD win. The bottom line however is that Intel makes more sense CPU wise starting at the $200 mark.
Under $200, AMD's overclockability carry the day. At $200 and up, Intel wins.
Power consumption becomes very important when overclocking. OC the hell out of a 8350 and you're well north of 200w. OC the hell out of a 3570k and you reach, oh, 100w or so.
That means a (much) cheaper motherboard can be used for the OCing. Presto, cheap!
Plus, some people actually pay for electricity, which makes power savings rather important as well.
Lastly, 8350s aren't high end in the first place. It's a mid range chip with power consumption equal to Intels (far faster) high end chip.
- Thread Starter
- #10
Let me guess Intel fanboy also ?
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2009
- Thread Starter
- #12
Man I was just messing around I didn't mean any offense I just thought this video was interesting that was the only reason I posted it.No he is not
In fact, the only fanboy i see here is you
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2012
I couldn't agree more with Bob here. I have seen more people come to this forum using the new FX 8xxx and 6xxx processors on cheap boards and low end Air/H2o coolers saying I want to overclock to X ghz. Only to realize that these chips need a really high end boards to power them. No way your overclocking a 8xxx series on a board with a low end VRM section. Even if you do have a good board the heat they generate is hugh. I also have an I5 2500k which I've been able to push to 5.0 primed 2 hours on a Prolimatech Megahalems. Putting that cooler on my 8350 would be laughable, I'd be lucky to get 4.5 on it. Power consumption, ha, my I5 at 4.7 draws around 80w less then the 8350 at 4.7. In day in and day out use I really don't notice much of a difference using either chip. I do like the 8350 a lot it's fun to overclock and when it's able to use all of it's "cores" its a workhorse. Though in some benches my 955be will "pile-drive" it, never mind what the 2500k will do. As far as money goes just the board alone for the 6 and 8 series chips, if you want to overclock are going to cost you $30-40 more. My 2500k is on an Asrock z77 ext 4 which I paid $130 with 8g of free ddr3 1600 ram included.
I'd love to see AMD make a cpu that is better than a CPU twice it's cost... But we all know that the moment amd slams intel, intel will unlock an extra 2 cores hidden away in the i7 x6... It's an awesome failsafe really... I mean it really sucks they are holding back, but from a marketing point of view it is brilliant...
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2012
Can a mod just close this thread before it turns into the usual crap we get on here every month or two?
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2005
This post is the trademark of a troll. Are you a troll??
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2012
- Location
- Phoenix, Az
old video... there are some problems with their methodology, and some brilliance to it as well. The main problem though is the arbitrary overclocks.
He does a 2nd video to explain his methodology a bit more, as well as retest according to the numerous unanswered questions people have. Much more informative. The only thing to take from it (and its his conclusion as well) is that the FX8350 is an acceptible gaming chip.
something no one here would argue with.
his test results were found WHILE STREAMING VIDEO without a capture card of his gaming session. in that very specific situation, all those extra cores do some nutso heavy lifting for the AMD chip, and the intel chips are all handicapped by the lack of cores, the i7 as we all know wasn't helped at all by its HT... the result is a win for the FX in that specific usage in a number of non-standard benchmarking titles (as well as a few standard ones).
He's the first guy to admit, when not streaming video, the intel chips will beat the FX... i thought the most interesting bit was the results of the i7-3930k vs the fx 8350 in streaming video, the fx basically tied it. I would have expected more from the intel chip in that situation.
in the end though his conclusion wasn't that the FX was the best chip, its that its a perfectly acceptable gaming cpu; which while it might not bench as high as an intel in standard benchtests, works just fine in every day use... so good in fact it sometimes will beat an intel if the situation is right. He isn't claiming its as good as the intel, only that its good enough.
As a sidenote, having seen a number of that guys other videos and the like (i like his sense of humor) he's no AMD fanboy. His main rigs are all intel.
He does a 2nd video to explain his methodology a bit more, as well as retest according to the numerous unanswered questions people have. Much more informative. The only thing to take from it (and its his conclusion as well) is that the FX8350 is an acceptible gaming chip.
something no one here would argue with.
his test results were found WHILE STREAMING VIDEO without a capture card of his gaming session. in that very specific situation, all those extra cores do some nutso heavy lifting for the AMD chip, and the intel chips are all handicapped by the lack of cores, the i7 as we all know wasn't helped at all by its HT... the result is a win for the FX in that specific usage in a number of non-standard benchmarking titles (as well as a few standard ones).
He's the first guy to admit, when not streaming video, the intel chips will beat the FX... i thought the most interesting bit was the results of the i7-3930k vs the fx 8350 in streaming video, the fx basically tied it. I would have expected more from the intel chip in that situation.
in the end though his conclusion wasn't that the FX was the best chip, its that its a perfectly acceptable gaming cpu; which while it might not bench as high as an intel in standard benchtests, works just fine in every day use... so good in fact it sometimes will beat an intel if the situation is right. He isn't claiming its as good as the intel, only that its good enough.
As a sidenote, having seen a number of that guys other videos and the like (i like his sense of humor) he's no AMD fanboy. His main rigs are all intel.
Similar threads
