Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Tom's Hardware] Picking A Sub-$200 Gaming CPU: FX, An APU, Or A Pentium?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Tom's Hardware] Picking A Sub-$200 Gaming CPU: FX, An APU, Or A Pentium? - Page 9

post #81 of 186
Intel, AMD however still has a good bang for the buck.
/thread
post #82 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by KittensMewMew View Post

Totally, because everyone games at 800x600.

Why do so many people not understand the point of benching at a low resolution when reviewing cpu's gaming potential? You want to show the different performance levels one can expect between different cpu's in a game. At a high resolution you see little to no difference, because the games are highly gpu dependent at those resolutions. At the lower resolutions the real differences between the cpus come out.

Then you take that data and see, wow, X cpu performs 30% better than Y cpu once you take the gpu out of the equation. X is only 20% more expensive, so it is the best performance for your dollar between X and Y. That is how it is supposed to work. When you bench at such high resolutions you might as well not bench at all for all the pertinent information you are getting.

Understand people?

EDIT: I mean didn't anyone wonder why the performance was close among virtually all the processors? Especially when other, non-gaming benchmarks, show much more variation? Maybe the way they did it isn't really showing the true difference in performance between the processors. Why would that be? Oh, maybe because the gpu is the bottleneck at this resolution. Everyone seems to get this in reverse, the cpu bottleneck, but reverse it and all of sudden no one gets it.
At a low resolution you see this:
2h6y6mv.png
At a high resolution you see this:
2mxqxdh.png
Get it? One shows a 35% difference between the FX and the Core i7, the other shows around a 1% difference.
Edited by Mygaffer - 1/30/12 at 5:10pm
SBD:
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-3770k Gigabyte ga-z77x-up4 tb EVGA GTX 980 SC 32GB G.SKILL Trident X F3-1600C7Q-32GTX  
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 256GB SSD Western Digtal 2TB RE4 Plextor 24x DL Burner ThermalTake Water 2.0 Extreme 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 7 Pro 64-bit Acer XB270HU 2560x1440, IPS-type panel, 144hz, ... EIZO FG2421 1920x1080 VA 120Hz QuickFire Cherry Blue 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Lepa G1000 1kw Corsair 550D Logitech G400 Roccat Taito 
AudioAudio
Xonar Essence ST Niles SI-275 Amplifier 
  hide details  
Reply
SBD:
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-3770k Gigabyte ga-z77x-up4 tb EVGA GTX 980 SC 32GB G.SKILL Trident X F3-1600C7Q-32GTX  
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 256GB SSD Western Digtal 2TB RE4 Plextor 24x DL Burner ThermalTake Water 2.0 Extreme 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 7 Pro 64-bit Acer XB270HU 2560x1440, IPS-type panel, 144hz, ... EIZO FG2421 1920x1080 VA 120Hz QuickFire Cherry Blue 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Lepa G1000 1kw Corsair 550D Logitech G400 Roccat Taito 
AudioAudio
Xonar Essence ST Niles SI-275 Amplifier 
  hide details  
Reply
post #83 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mygaffer View Post

Why do so many people not understand the point of benching at a low resolution when reviewing cpu's gaming potential? You want to show the different performance levels one can expect between different cpu's in a game. At a high resolution you see little to no difference, because the games are highly gpu dependent at those resolutions. At the lower resolutions the real differences between the cpus come out.
Then you take that data and see, wow, X cpu performs 30% better than Y cpu once you take the gpu out of the equation. X is only 20% more expensive, so it is the best performance for your dollar between X and Y. That is how it is supposed to work. When you bench at such high resolutions you might as well not bench at all for all the pertinent information you are getting.
Understand people?
EDIT: I mean didn't anyone wonder why the performance was close among virtually all the processors? Especially when other, non-gaming benchmarks, show much more variation? Maybe the way they did it isn't really showing the true difference in performance between the processors. Why would that be? Oh, maybe because the gpu is the bottleneck at this resolution. Everyone seems to get this in reverse, the cpu bottleneck, but reverse it and all of sudden no one gets it.
At a low resolution you see this:
2h6y6mv.png
At a high resolution you see this:
2mxqxdh.png
Get it?

Yes, as as the charts you showed indicate you can see the trend at low and higher resolutions but more apparent at low resolutions. You notice the order of performance did not change(aside from HT factor, which most should know yes it is known to hurt more than help) when comparing those resolutions?

That is because if a cpu can hinder 1080P gaming it sure as hell will hinder even lower resolution gaming. The 7970 is the fastest single gpu, and if you add SLI or CF into the picture you would notice certain cpu's failing even worse.

Simply stated, if a cpu can hold back the fastest gpu on the market at 1080P you know it sure as hell isn't going to fair much better even at lower resolutions and a lower end gpu used.

I think if you did the same tests you would see a very similar resulting trend even at an appalling resolution no one with respect would use of 800x600. The only catch is it would be more apparent. thumb.gif


Don't get me wrong, I know what you mean. But I also understand if a cpu alone can hurt 1080p gaming like that where in theory no cpu should matter due to most stress typically applied to gpu. Then obviously in other scenarios the trend will show just much more so.
Edited by rx7racer - 1/30/12 at 5:20pm
D
(15 items)
 
The Sheep Skinner
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6700 Gigabyte Z170N-Gaming5 Sapphire Radeon R9 Fury Tri-X 3840 G.Skill TridentZ  
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
960 EVO 500GB EK SE 240mm, Magicool slim 240mm EK Supreme HF CU Gold EKFC-Fury X WB 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Win 10 Pro Acer XG270HU EVGA 750W  Evolv ITX 
MouseMouse Pad
Naos7000 Corsair MM600 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
C2D E8400 DFI LT P35 Radeon HD4890 OCZ 2GB 800MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
500GB Asus multi DVD W7 U Samsung 2232BW+ 
PowerCase
Corsair HX520W CM 690 
  hide details  
Reply
D
(15 items)
 
The Sheep Skinner
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6700 Gigabyte Z170N-Gaming5 Sapphire Radeon R9 Fury Tri-X 3840 G.Skill TridentZ  
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
960 EVO 500GB EK SE 240mm, Magicool slim 240mm EK Supreme HF CU Gold EKFC-Fury X WB 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Win 10 Pro Acer XG270HU EVGA 750W  Evolv ITX 
MouseMouse Pad
Naos7000 Corsair MM600 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
C2D E8400 DFI LT P35 Radeon HD4890 OCZ 2GB 800MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
500GB Asus multi DVD W7 U Samsung 2232BW+ 
PowerCase
Corsair HX520W CM 690 
  hide details  
Reply
post #84 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by rx7racer View Post

Yes, as as the charts you showed indicate you can see the trend at low and higher resolutions but more apparent at low resolutions. You notice the order of performance did not change(aside from HT factor, which most should know yes it is known to hurt more than help) when comparing those resolutions?
That is because if a cpu can hinder 1080P gaming it sure as hell will hinder even lower resolution gaming. The 7970 is the fastest single gpu, and if you add SLI or CF into the picture you would notice certain cpu's failing even worse.
Simply stated, if a cpu can hold back the fastest gpu on the market at 1080P you know it sure as hell isn't going to fair much better even at lower resolutions and a lower end gpu used.
I think if you did the same tests you would see a very similar resulting trend even at an appalling resolution no one with respect would use of 800x600. The only catch is it would be more apparent. thumb.gif
Don't get me wrong, I know what you mean. But I also understand if a cpu alone can hurt 1080p gaming like that where in theory no cpu should matter due to most stress typically applied to gpu. Then obviously in other scenarios the trend will show just much more so.

My main point is that people look at the high resolution results and say "look, there is virtually no difference, I might as get whichever one I can best afford today". Well as time goes and the gpu gets upgraded while the cpu stays the same, which is the trend most rigs follow, one or two gpu upgrades for every cpu upgrade, the difference in performance will probably become more pronounced, as the cpu starts to lag behind. I really like what Anand did, which is probably the best tech site on the web, where he shows both. That way people can see realistic performance difference as well as what performance will look like today at high resolutions.

Beyond that one or two people didn't seem to realize it would even make a difference, like the cat person, mewmew or whatever his name is.
SBD:
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-3770k Gigabyte ga-z77x-up4 tb EVGA GTX 980 SC 32GB G.SKILL Trident X F3-1600C7Q-32GTX  
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 256GB SSD Western Digtal 2TB RE4 Plextor 24x DL Burner ThermalTake Water 2.0 Extreme 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 7 Pro 64-bit Acer XB270HU 2560x1440, IPS-type panel, 144hz, ... EIZO FG2421 1920x1080 VA 120Hz QuickFire Cherry Blue 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Lepa G1000 1kw Corsair 550D Logitech G400 Roccat Taito 
AudioAudio
Xonar Essence ST Niles SI-275 Amplifier 
  hide details  
Reply
SBD:
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-3770k Gigabyte ga-z77x-up4 tb EVGA GTX 980 SC 32GB G.SKILL Trident X F3-1600C7Q-32GTX  
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 256GB SSD Western Digtal 2TB RE4 Plextor 24x DL Burner ThermalTake Water 2.0 Extreme 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 7 Pro 64-bit Acer XB270HU 2560x1440, IPS-type panel, 144hz, ... EIZO FG2421 1920x1080 VA 120Hz QuickFire Cherry Blue 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Lepa G1000 1kw Corsair 550D Logitech G400 Roccat Taito 
AudioAudio
Xonar Essence ST Niles SI-275 Amplifier 
  hide details  
Reply
post #85 of 186
Well I am certainly not saying it won't make a difference. Contrary it will show the difference in a usually more astounding double digit percentages gaps.

But that isn't to say this review here has no valuable info. One can derive a lot from it especially if one is thinking about a multi gpu setup or the latest gen gfx cards out and upcoming from NV.

It's still a review that lets you go, " hey, this cpu bottlenecks and holds this high end gpu up out now and they're only getting faster, gah imagine how bad it will be in a years time. *shudders* " in the certain areas you know cpu matters.

imo though, just expressing I don't feel it's a complete waste of an article. Good info can be derived from it. But as you say, I do see where some bad opinions and info can be derived as well.
D
(15 items)
 
The Sheep Skinner
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6700 Gigabyte Z170N-Gaming5 Sapphire Radeon R9 Fury Tri-X 3840 G.Skill TridentZ  
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
960 EVO 500GB EK SE 240mm, Magicool slim 240mm EK Supreme HF CU Gold EKFC-Fury X WB 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Win 10 Pro Acer XG270HU EVGA 750W  Evolv ITX 
MouseMouse Pad
Naos7000 Corsair MM600 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
C2D E8400 DFI LT P35 Radeon HD4890 OCZ 2GB 800MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
500GB Asus multi DVD W7 U Samsung 2232BW+ 
PowerCase
Corsair HX520W CM 690 
  hide details  
Reply
D
(15 items)
 
The Sheep Skinner
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6700 Gigabyte Z170N-Gaming5 Sapphire Radeon R9 Fury Tri-X 3840 G.Skill TridentZ  
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
960 EVO 500GB EK SE 240mm, Magicool slim 240mm EK Supreme HF CU Gold EKFC-Fury X WB 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Win 10 Pro Acer XG270HU EVGA 750W  Evolv ITX 
MouseMouse Pad
Naos7000 Corsair MM600 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
C2D E8400 DFI LT P35 Radeon HD4890 OCZ 2GB 800MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
500GB Asus multi DVD W7 U Samsung 2232BW+ 
PowerCase
Corsair HX520W CM 690 
  hide details  
Reply
post #86 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mygaffer View Post

Why do so many people not understand the point of benching at a low resolution when reviewing cpu's gaming potential? You want to show the different performance levels one can expect between different cpu's in a game. At a high resolution you see little to no difference, because the games are highly gpu dependent at those resolutions. At the lower resolutions the real differences between the cpus come out.
Then you take that data and see, wow, X cpu performs 30% better than Y cpu once you take the gpu out of the equation. X is only 20% more expensive, so it is the best performance for your dollar between X and Y. That is how it is supposed to work. When you bench at such high resolutions you might as well not bench at all for all the pertinent information you are getting.
Understand people?
EDIT: I mean didn't anyone wonder why the performance was close among virtually all the processors? Especially when other, non-gaming benchmarks, show much more variation? Maybe the way they did it isn't really showing the true difference in performance between the processors. Why would that be? Oh, maybe because the gpu is the bottleneck at this resolution. Everyone seems to get this in reverse, the cpu bottleneck, but reverse it and all of sudden no one gets it.

People don't understand it, or do you not understand people?

There are a lot of people (like myself) who use benchmarks for one reason and one reason only: To gauge performance of a potential system. When I built my most recent system I wanted to play Witcher 2 and Skyrim at a high level. I knew I was playing on my 1680x1050 monitor so what the hell difference does it make how well the game plays at 1024x768? How does that information help me determine whether I need a 6870 or a 6950? It DOES_NOT_HELP!! Most of us don't care why it's close - we only care about what we need to buy to get the performance we desire.

If you disagree, then please explain to me why there are so many threads titled "Can this rig run Battlefield 3 on High?" or "Can the 7970 run eyefinity?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mygaffer View Post

My main point is that people look at the high resolution results and say "look, there is virtually no difference, I might as get whichever one I can best afford today". Well as time goes and the gpu gets upgraded while the cpu stays the same, which is the trend most rigs follow, one or two gpu upgrades for every cpu upgrade, the difference in performance will probably become more pronounced, as the cpu starts to lag behind.

Yet another post that sounds good in theory but takes too little in consideration.

What if newer games are designed to scale on all available cores? Wouldn't that skew these numbers in favor of the FX-8150?

What if future programs took advantage of FMA4 or other instruction sets that Bulldozer supports but current gen Intels do not? Or if programs support AMD's AVX alongside Intel's SSE5? Wouldn't that also lessen the performance gap?

What if GPU's 2 generations from now become too fast for PCIe 2.0? You'd have to upgrade your MB anyways so you can't just upgrade the GPU.

You can't say with certainty that software architecture won't change enough to render these figures obsolete.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom X6 1090T ASUS M5A97 EVO Sapphire HD 6970 G-Skill Ripjaws DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
SanDisk Extreme SDSSDX-240G-G25 Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 LITE-ON Black 12X BD-ROM Corsair H80 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Ultimate 64-Bit ASUS VS228H-P 21.5-Inch LED Monitor Logitech Wave Corsair TX750 V2 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair Carbide 500R Logitech MX-518 XTRAC PADS Ripper 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom X6 1090T ASUS M5A97 EVO Sapphire HD 6970 G-Skill Ripjaws DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
SanDisk Extreme SDSSDX-240G-G25 Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 LITE-ON Black 12X BD-ROM Corsair H80 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Ultimate 64-Bit ASUS VS228H-P 21.5-Inch LED Monitor Logitech Wave Corsair TX750 V2 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair Carbide 500R Logitech MX-518 XTRAC PADS Ripper 
  hide details  
Reply
post #87 of 186
Sad AMD just sad!laughingsmiley.gif
Primo
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7-7700k Asus Maximus Hero ix Evga GTX 1080 ACX 3.0 G-Skill F-43200C15D-16GTZKW 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Samsung 850 Evo Corsair Neutron  Ek Supremacy CSQ clean OCOOL 360mm radiator 
CoolingCoolingOSKeyboard
OCOOL 360mm radiator Ek -FC1080 GTX  Windows 10 CM Storm 
PowerCaseMouse
Evga 750 watt Phanteks Enthoo Primo Roccat Kone Optical 
  hide details  
Reply
Primo
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7-7700k Asus Maximus Hero ix Evga GTX 1080 ACX 3.0 G-Skill F-43200C15D-16GTZKW 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Samsung 850 Evo Corsair Neutron  Ek Supremacy CSQ clean OCOOL 360mm radiator 
CoolingCoolingOSKeyboard
OCOOL 360mm radiator Ek -FC1080 GTX  Windows 10 CM Storm 
PowerCaseMouse
Evga 750 watt Phanteks Enthoo Primo Roccat Kone Optical 
  hide details  
Reply
post #88 of 186
it's a given fact already. intel.
AEON
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500k 4.7ghz @ 1.25v ASRock P67 Fatal1ty Pro 5850 1050mhz/1250mhz Corsair Vengeance 8gb 1600mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB Liquid Windows 7 Ultimate Chimei 23LH 1080p 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G510 OCZ ModXStream 700w Cooler Master HAF 922 White Cooler Master Inferno 
  hide details  
Reply
AEON
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500k 4.7ghz @ 1.25v ASRock P67 Fatal1ty Pro 5850 1050mhz/1250mhz Corsair Vengeance 8gb 1600mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB Liquid Windows 7 Ultimate Chimei 23LH 1080p 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G510 OCZ ModXStream 700w Cooler Master HAF 922 White Cooler Master Inferno 
  hide details  
Reply
post #89 of 186
Why did the 8120 have such a mild OC?

I wish the reviews would explain how they oc'd the CPUs. Ie multi only; ref clock; combo. Because they all affect system performance differently. Just how SB sees no benefit from upping the ref clock, while FX does more so than upping the multi.
 
Napkin Folder
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-6100 4.72Ghz @ 1.428V 990FX Sabertooth 2 X 6950 Unlocked Crossfired OC'd 925/1375 Ripjaws X (4x4GB) 16GB @ 1739 MHz 
Hard DriveHard DrivePowerCase
Crutial M4 64GB 2 x 1TB HDDs Rocketfish 900watt Lian Li PC-K57W 
AudioAudio
Creative Titanium HD Ultrasone Pro 550 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD x2 250 ASUS M3N78-VM EVGA GTS 450 3 GB ddr 400 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
80GB Seagate XP cheapo 460watt Antec 200 
  hide details  
Reply
 
Napkin Folder
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-6100 4.72Ghz @ 1.428V 990FX Sabertooth 2 X 6950 Unlocked Crossfired OC'd 925/1375 Ripjaws X (4x4GB) 16GB @ 1739 MHz 
Hard DriveHard DrivePowerCase
Crutial M4 64GB 2 x 1TB HDDs Rocketfish 900watt Lian Li PC-K57W 
AudioAudio
Creative Titanium HD Ultrasone Pro 550 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD x2 250 ASUS M3N78-VM EVGA GTS 450 3 GB ddr 400 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
80GB Seagate XP cheapo 460watt Antec 200 
  hide details  
Reply
post #90 of 186
I'm not disputing the end results btw
 
Napkin Folder
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-6100 4.72Ghz @ 1.428V 990FX Sabertooth 2 X 6950 Unlocked Crossfired OC'd 925/1375 Ripjaws X (4x4GB) 16GB @ 1739 MHz 
Hard DriveHard DrivePowerCase
Crutial M4 64GB 2 x 1TB HDDs Rocketfish 900watt Lian Li PC-K57W 
AudioAudio
Creative Titanium HD Ultrasone Pro 550 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD x2 250 ASUS M3N78-VM EVGA GTS 450 3 GB ddr 400 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
80GB Seagate XP cheapo 460watt Antec 200 
  hide details  
Reply
 
Napkin Folder
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-6100 4.72Ghz @ 1.428V 990FX Sabertooth 2 X 6950 Unlocked Crossfired OC'd 925/1375 Ripjaws X (4x4GB) 16GB @ 1739 MHz 
Hard DriveHard DrivePowerCase
Crutial M4 64GB 2 x 1TB HDDs Rocketfish 900watt Lian Li PC-K57W 
AudioAudio
Creative Titanium HD Ultrasone Pro 550 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD x2 250 ASUS M3N78-VM EVGA GTS 450 3 GB ddr 400 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
80GB Seagate XP cheapo 460watt Antec 200 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Tom's Hardware] Picking A Sub-$200 Gaming CPU: FX, An APU, Or A Pentium?