why I love and hate my AMD gear

[Alaric]

An awful lot of people think they're having more fun with the red chips. Maybe it's a greater sense of accomplishment ? One of my questions is why does Intel have to have a new socket every time they bump the performance 10% ? Intel's socket list for the last 5 years looks like a calculus problem. And if you look at some of the shenanigans Intel has pulled over the years , I can't get mad at AMD for selling the same chip for five years. It's an FX , they said it's an FX , has it right on the box. They aren't cheating me. I don't think you can lock down the magic formula for "fun". It isn't an engineering parameter. Outright performance , Intel owns the crown. Intel is for engineer types , AMD is for mechanics.

 

[caddi daddi]

amd has new sockets for the new apu's fm1 and fm2, still piledriver cores. why the new sockets? I don't know, it might have to do with the worthless IGPU's.
all said and done when I shut down the two I use to learn the new software, pour a long tall glass of the necter of the gods it's an amd I'm beating on.

 

[chrisjames61]

I guess my take on not touching anything is nothing else shows significant gains. Memory doesn't in most cases, cache doesn't either, so why touch it? Sure you can do it, but to what end? I like to see results when I overclock, not just bigger numbers with few to no returns.

Very few people are really into other aspects of overclocking vs cpu frequency or so it seems. I think Woomack is the exception.

 

[Woomack]

Intel has new socket about every 2 generations in "Core i" series. 1366 = 2 CPU series, 1156 = 1 , 1150 = 2 , 1155 = 2 , 2011 = 2 , 2011-3 = 1 so far but 1 or 2 are in plans. The only different was 775 = 4 or 5 , don't remember now.
AMD had almost the same and even if they were keeping socket like AM2/AM2+ or AM3 then new CPUs from higher series couldn't work anyway as boards were supporting 95W CPUs while new chips were 125-140W ( just an example ). At the end for every new CPU you had to buy new motherboard anyway.
I just can't see that AMD is any different than Intel in this matter. All are changing socket when they have to add something new and for them it's better because it also brings profit from new chipsets.

Average PC life is 3 years. In this time most users will replace motherboard anyway because of new additional features or something else. For 95% users it really doesn't matter if new CPU will work on new socket or not. Most users will buy whole new PC, not new motherboard. I wouldn't care about these 5% if I was Intel or AMD.

I had some hopes on interesting APUs but AMD stuck in this too. New cores, yes but it's not bringing anything really innovating. Just the same barely faster core under new name. I wonder why they are not improving anything for AM1. How long is only Kabini for AM1 ... 2 years ? They could release 6 core 2.5GHz chip at 30W and maybe 2 channel memory and RAID on at least 4 SATA ports. I bet that many users would like to see something like that in ITX format.

 

[caddi daddi]

woomack you said you liked your kabinis, what did you like about them.
I have read in a few place that people liked them, I think one was mandrake here on ocf.

 

[chrisjames61]

Intel has new socket about every 2 generations in "Core i" series. 1366 = 2 CPU series, 1156 = 1 , 1150 = 2 , 1155 = 2 , 2011 = 2 , 2011-3 = 1 so far but 1 or 2 are in plans. The only different was 775 = 4 or 5 , don't remember now.
AMD had almost the same and even if they were keeping socket like AM2/AM2+ or AM3 then new CPUs from higher series couldn't work anyway as boards were supporting 95W CPUs while new chips were 125-140W ( just an example ). At the end for every new CPU you had to buy new motherboard anyway.
I just can't see that AMD is any different than Intel in this matter. All are changing socket when they have to add something new and for them it's better because it also brings profit from new chipsets.

Average PC life is 3 years. In this time most users will replace motherboard anyway because of new additional features or something else. For 95% users it really doesn't matter if new CPU will work on new socket or not. Most users will buy whole new PC, not new motherboard. I wouldn't care about these 5% if I was Intel or AMD.

I had some hopes on interesting APUs but AMD stuck in this too. New cores, yes but it's not bringing anything really innovating. Just the same barely faster core under new name. I wonder why they are not improving anything for AM1. How long is only Kabini for AM1 ... 2 years ? They could release 6 core 2.5GHz chip at 30W and maybe 2 channel memory and RAID on at least 4 SATA ports. I bet that many users would like to see something like that in ITX format.

I recently bought a Athlon 5350 and a ASRock AM1H-ITX that is powered by a laptop psu. It makes for a great file and media server. I agree that a Kabini refresh would be interesting as you proposed.

 

[Alaric]

amd has new sockets for the new apu's fm1 and fm2, still piledriver cores. why the new sockets? I don't know, it might have to do with the worthless IGPU's.
all said and done when I shut down the two I use to learn the new software, pour a long tall glass of the necter of the gods it's an amd I'm beating on.

The heart wants what the heart wants.

 

[Kenrou]

Just my 2 cents and might be wrong, but you hear so many people say Intel is better that you just want to prove them wrong with an AMD, and we turn to tweaking and overclocking ours to hell and back out of spite (and ofc a good part sense of wonder of how far we can go). In my case as well the last Intel i had was a PII so i would have to re-learn everything about them in order to change...

I was there when AMDs were crap, i was there when Athlons suddenly dominated the market and been there for all the rest. I like AMD regardless of being better or worse, its that good old workhorse that never lets you down and its still the best "bang for bucket" in the market by a mile

 

[EarthDog]

its still the best "bang for buck" (FIXED) in the market by a mile

You would be surprised at the difference between comparable platforms. I am not sure how you define 'by a mile', but in my book its a bit closer than that.

The reason why pricing may be closer than you think is because of the differences in motherboards and required cooling for overclocking the FX octo cores. You need a robust and more expensive motherboard (for example, on INtel, you cna use a $120 motherboard EASILY vs with AMD to properly push an octo FX, you need a solid, sometimes $200 motherboard - correct me if I am wrong). You also need a dual rad AIO to keep up with it versus a $30 air cooler will take a 4790K to around 4.5Ghz or so. So it does balance out.

4790K + ASRock Z97 Ex 3 + Hyper 212 EVo = ~$493
8370 + 990 sabertooth + Corsair AIO = ~$470

 

[Tyerker]

You would be surprised at the difference between comparable platforms. I am not sure how you define 'by a mile', but in my book its a bit closer than that.

The reason why pricing may be closer than you think is because of the differences in motherboards and required cooling for overclocking the FX octo cores. You need a robust and more expensive motherboard (for example, on INtel, you cna use a $120 motherboard EASILY vs with AMD to properly push an octo FX, you need a solid, sometimes $200 motherboard - correct me if I am wrong). You also need a dual rad AIO to keep up with it versus a $30 air cooler will take a 4790K to around 4.5Ghz or so. So it does balance out.

4790K + ASRock Z97 Ex 3 + Hyper 212 EVo = ~$493
8370 + 990 sabertooth + Corsair AIO = ~$470

This is the primary disadvantage I see in AMD right now. That and they have no Mini ITX support for their top-end CPUs, but they are also trying to push a Mini ITX Fury. Which means they are pretty much telling people to go buy Intel CPUs. An 860K is not going to keep up with the Fury Nano.

 

[Kenrou]

You would be surprised at the difference between comparable platforms. I am not sure how you define 'by a mile', but in my book its a bit closer than that.

4790K + ASRock Z97 Ex 3 + Hyper 212 EVo = ~$493
8370 + 990 sabertooth + Corsair AIO = ~$470

??? AMD is so much cheaper if u pick the right set - Amazon prices for comparable gear (stuck with your MB because i know next to nothing of Intel) :

i7-4770k $329.99 + ASRock z97 Extreme6 $187.36 + Hyper 212 EVO $31.05 = +- $548
FX-8350 $165 + M5A99X Evo R2.0 $119.99 + Noctua nh-d14 $76 = +- $360

The 8350 is the rough equivalent of the 4770k (the 8370 is just better binned) with the price of the Intel CPU i get almost the whole AMD setup. This is what i mean by "bang for buck" (FIXED).

 

[EarthDog]

A couple of things...

1. You lowered the tier on the AMD CPU (so +$34 on the AMD rig). I wouldn't call that fair against the 4790K/4770K. But the 4770K is cheaper by $10.
2. The board you picked is NOT the board I picked, it is $55 more (so -$55 on the Intel rig).
3. Is that motherboard blessed for overclocking an FX octo? A quick search here and there are concerns (read that post and above it shows he chose the board you did - this also mentions watercooling): http://www.overclockers.com/forums/...l-throttling?p=7811855&viewfull=1#post7811855
I chose the Sabertooth as that is quite a common board and one of the best for sustaining a heavy overclock (and $165).
4. Hopefully the NHD14 can keep up with the Octo.... it is frequently recommended to go dual rad AIO by the AMD guys around here, hence why I chose that.

So if you used the 4770K on what I posted up there, we are looking at $477. If we keep the saberkitty and drop to your air cooler, you go down to ~$435. Still not a mile. I would pay $42 more for the Intel personally. Just easier to run all around.. no sweat on cooling and less power consumption. That isn't to say the FX rig is a slouch, hardly, there is just you need to be concerned about.

Also, if this is a gaming rig, no need for the Intel 4770K, a 4690K would be plenty... So that shaves $100 off the Intel rig.

Sorry to nitpick details, but, it is a lot closer than most tend to believe when getting the proper parts for the CPU.

 

[Kenrou]

ok let me try to explain more thoroughly

1. as i said, the 8370 is just a better binned 8350, performance-wise they are exactly the same when overclocked, no reason to pick the most expensive as both 90% of the time hit 4.5ghz (i could argue that i could have gone with the 8320 instead same as you could have gone with the respective cheaper Intel).
2. apologies but i couldn't find the exact one, so correcting Intel prices to $498
3/4. Forums aside, my father has had the M5A99X Evo R2.0 and is rocking a FX-8350 4.5ghz with a NH-D14 24/7 and clocked max temp Prime95 overnight at 56 with roughly half the noise from the most common used AIO Corsair H100 for the past 2 years and has not had any problems so far, so this is from "personal" experience (this resulted in many bench wars when i upgraded my rig)

I would not comment half-assed, i respect this forum too much for their good advice so even compensating for motherboard, Intel is still $100/$150 more expensive then the roughly same setup from AMD. So question stands, why go more expensive ?

 

[EarthDog]

I get ya... some with a lot of knowledge on the subject just don't like that motherboard for overclocking FX octos far. I'm glad its working for you though! But that said, it doesn't make it a good (read: comparable) choice. I think of it like PSUs, people say, "well my diablotek PSU is working how can it be bad for my computer"? Not knowing the PSU is better at starting fires than powering PCs. While that board is certainly not junk and I was being a bit dramatic with the PSU analogy, many people prefer better boards for the job.

I wouldn't hesitate to overclock that intel to the moon on the board I chose, but many would worry about that Evo it seems. Just trying to compare apples to apples as best we can.

I guess if I moved over to AMD, I would get the board our AMD guys recommend, and not take any chances. There is a bit more risk with that motherboard and overclocking AMD octos. But if one is good with that, then there is more of a difference.

 

[Kenrou]

Totally agree on the nitpicking, but "don't like" doesn't mean "doesn't work", is simply a matter of personal opinion. There is also other threads in other forums with peeps hitting 5ghz on the same board, so again, its subjective. Personally i would prefer having 6+2+2 or 8+2 for an octa, but i had the budget to go on a spree, would many other have the same fortune ?

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-1717660/1st-stable-overclock-5ghz-fx8350.html

This was one of the reasons that made me pick the NH-D15 on top of an AIO like the H110i GT, 4.7ghz Prime95 overnight 52 temp on 50% fan speed is heaven, atm my docked HDD makes more noise then my entire case

 

[EarthDog]

Its not personal opinion in a lot of cases though. People have seen throttling on that board (and plenty others that claim it supports a 140W CPU) due to the VRM's/socket overheating, hence why there are only several boards that people recommend (sabertooth being the more common and cheaper of the bunch). It could be a product of their environment on that Evo you chose, but there are not many $120 boards that can handle overclocking an FX octo past the easy 4.5GHz mark without throttling...hence my point and the math being a lot closer than most think.

 

[Kenrou]

How much would a 80mm fan or a better passive cooler on the VRMs would cost ? simple, cheap, problem solved ? and keeping tabs, its still around $130 cheaper. Say you go for an expensive MB then it becomes around $60/$80 closer, and you are still $50/$70 under the Intel.

But my point has always been you can do roughly the same by much cheaper. Someone in this forum said Intel is for engineers, AMD is for mechanics and i quite agree

 

[EarthDog]

That is already needed on the boards appropriate for the CPU. These CPUs suck down arseloads of power when overclocking, particularly when you get over 4.5GHz and start to actually push them. They also die due to trying to handle things it can't do so well regardless if a fan is on them. Hence the recommendations by those in the know to get a board best equipped for the job at hand. Some boards don't even like these things at stock speeds though, LOL!

But I digress. I am getting dizzy going around in circles. Good discussion. Good information.

 

[Tyerker]

Well looks like it's time for full motherboard water cooling, in order to allow for a cheaper motherboard.

$70 MB + $200 Watercooling > $200 Motherboard

BAM, problem solved.

But in all honesty, the Gigabyte UD3 and UD5 are plenty beefy for the 8 cores for $130-150. I had a UD3 with an 8320 and Corsair H60 that I clocked to 4.4 or something. Never had any problems.

 

[Kenrou]

Yes very good arguments, nitpicking is nice every now and then reminds me of when i changed from a GA-78LMT-S2P (rev. 5.x) to my current, my old little 4300 went from 4.2ghz 58 temp to 4.7ghz 52 temp just because i could adjust all my settings the way their supposed to be.

I admit the thought of crossing over to the dark side (Intel) crossed my mind a few times, but then stuff like the Pentium III PSN or the newest batch of Windows 10 privacy crap comes to mind and i hesitate enough to get the next gen of AMD by the time i am done thinking about it. There's not enough hackers in the world to keep up with the s*** that Microsoft comes up with and in my opinion until they change their mindsets i will always worry.