why I love and hate my AMD gear

[bassnut]

When When say push hard I am talking about running my FX8370 full on all 8 cores @ 5.1GHZ for hours on end or someone lik Johan or Mandrake4565 trying to squeeze that last few MHZ for benching. You can add anyone that want or has Z need to run their FX8XXX at 4.7GHZ+ stable to that definition. For someone like you who may try an OC like you stated 4.2GHZ ish to maybe 4.5gHZ or stock there are boards that can run them just fine. Keep in mind there are just a couple boards outside of our recommended boards that can run it up to 4.5GHz.

The problem you will find with your board if you should find the want or need to go beyond that is where you will need a better board and better cooling. Granted the newer chips don't seem to need as much VCore to OC but the heat you have to deal with is still there.

If my rig died today and I had to put something together on a budget I can guarantee you I would not even think of anything less then a 8 + 2 motherboard.

 

[Kenrou]

Running around in circles again, scroll up a bit and you will see the reply to this post

 

[caddi daddi]

when I first started it was the 8 core and cheap motherboard, I learned from that, it was costly, in boards and cpu's.
now when I change platforms i just don't fool around, I pick a top shelf board, then pick a cpu.
My get in cost is higher but over the life of the platform it's actually cheaper, cepting when I decide to try things that are just ......well lets just say things I should pay some one to do instead on trying to teach myself.

 

[Kenrou]

Again, not many can do that and i get back to the original point, as a working guy doing average wages with wife and kids the choice between Intel and AMD is very easy, AMD all the way as i can get roughly the same FPS in games with a bit of overclocking a lot cheaper. I don't mind taking the time to OC to the moon and back if its going to justify my bang for buck

As i stated before, if you have the money to burn by all means burn it, but a lot us have other priorities, hence recommending cheaper parts that do the job that is required not the job you dream of

 

[caddi daddi]

if you're on a budget, don't get a god forsaken 8 core, leave that for rendering, benching and bling.
get a 4 or six core for that, less cooling and motherboard investment and most games right now and for quite a while to come can only use 4 cores.
as for the 4.5 clocks, that's where fx just hits it's stride and most fx chips can make that before it hits the big vcore leap.

 

[unsafesteagle]

I so disagree with public sentiment on "it is what it is" I would have to say 'if its to be, it will be"

$9.99 a month Life Lock.

- - - Updated - - -

I was going to hire a debt consolidation company and then I thought, why hire a third party.

- - - Updated - - -

and then I feel empathy for those animated flying neon green vampires on television

- - - Updated - - -

as always I'm a product of my own demise. just seems <---- options become less and less

 

[Kenrou]

In my particular case i ordered and payed for a 8320 from Amazon and they sent me a 8370 (so i was still being cheap and i have the order email to prove it) the crosshair was a gift, so i really had to get the octo, wasted on a 4300. I mainly play online while streaming and transcode/burn videos for my girls ps2 so it really was a massive upgrade for me, World of Warcraft alone went up by around 20fps from a 4300 4.7ghz to a 8370 4.7ghz.


Besides, even a 8370 costs half of an i7-4770k and does roughly the same job, so... why not ?

 

[caddi daddi]

the 8 cores ARE better cpus, everything else is a failed 8 core.
even the 6350 is second place, or as i say, the first loser.

 

[Kenrou]

My wife's 4300 4.7ghz 1.308v resents that comment

 

[caddi daddi]

my old 4100 does too, but it's long gone...........

 

[Tech Tweaker]

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 buck" in the market by a mile

Can't say I agree there.

I spec'd out some builds a while back and in AMD FX-8350 vs Intel i5 4690K, and the Intel system ended up being cheaper to build. Which surprised me quite frankly, since I expected that the AMD would be cheaper to build. Seems now AMD is only cheaper if you have a low budget.

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/RhgJQ7 : AMD FX-8350: $903.46 (replace the $169.99 for the FX-8350 from Newegg with $149.99 from Micro Center)

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/pYjPBm : Intel i5 4690K: $892.94 (replace the $239.99 for the i5 4690K from Newegg with $199.99 from Micro Center)

 

[Kenrou]

Miracles do happen every now and then well its all good for us i suppose, im wondering how much the prices will drop/spike when the Zen and the new batch from Intel popup. Then we will see if its worth or not to switch sides like a good little traitor

 

[EarthDog]

Lol

 

[caddi daddi]

fingers crossed for SOMETHING of interest.

 

[Kenrou]

Well supposedly the Zen is gonna be 40% faster at same clock speed then the FX, so will do direct competition with the i5-i7 but problem is that i think its too little too late at this point since Intel is gonna send something new at the same time

 

[NZKshatriya]

Meh, Ill put it in philosophical terms. Intel = Determinism, AMD = Free Will



*am in the middle of writing an essay on Free Will for a philosophy course........my mind is slush*

 

[Kenrou]

Out of curiosity, why do Intel OC so little compared to AMD ? is it a hardware block (like the voltages on the GTXs) or construction wont allow much going above 4.6ghz ? i seem to see a pattern no matter the model, the ceiling seems to be always that 4.5ghz/4.6ghz

 

[NZKshatriya]

yeah............buying a cheap mobo, is like having a house on a flimsy foundation.

There are things to go cheap on. That which you build everything on top of, is not one of them.

 

[EarthDog]

Out of curiosity, why do Intel OC so little compared to AMD ? is it a hardware block (like the voltages on the GTXs) or construction wont allow much going above 4.6ghz ? i seem to see a pattern no matter the model, the ceiling seems to be always that 4.5ghz/4.6ghz

Its in the architecture I would imagine... Its not really a hardware block, no. Sandybridge (2600K) overclocked really well.. 3.4Ghz to nearly always above 4.5Ghz and a lot were stable damn close to and even over 5Ghz. THOSE chips had a hardare block as you call it (over a certain multiplier it wouldn't boot, PERIOD).

Ivybridge (3700K) was also 3.5Ghz and overclocked into 4.5Ghz+ range

Haswell (4770K) same story. About 4.5Ghz+ from 3.5GHz...heat issues there generally. It also started at 4Ghz.

Devil's canyon (haswell pt 2) had improved TIM

These are significant overclocks of 1GHz....

But when you look at the FX... 8370 for example.. 4Ghz and most struggle to reach 5 Ghz (heat/power delivery on mobo)...and end up in that 4.6-4.7Ghz range just like the Intel, no?

Its about power envelopes and yields. AMD seems to careless about the former considering their 9370 is a 220W monster that barely overclocks (from what I have seen).

So, I wouldn't say it overclocks so little, personally when it is seemingly in the ballpark for the same % overclock in a lot of cases.

 

[Kenrou]

But when you look at the FX... 8370 for example.. 4Ghz and most struggle to reach 5 Ghz (heat/power delivery on mobo)...and end up in that 4.6-4.7Ghz range just like the Intel, no?

Depends on when you bought it, the latest chips OC run cooler but hit ceiling faster, while older chips (the 1st batches) you see the complete reverse. And 4.6ghz/4.7ghz is limit to air, water goes well into 5.0ghz/5.4ghz, in some extreme "golden chip" cases 5.5ghz/5.6ghz.