Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Various] AMD Piledriver FX-Series CPU Reviews (Vishera FX-8350, FX-8320, FX-6300, FX-4300)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Various] AMD Piledriver FX-Series CPU Reviews (Vishera FX-8350, FX-8320, FX-6300, FX-4300) - Page 169  

post #1681 of 2391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmac73 View Post

Your post was not proof by any means, i clearly stated that BF3 would be much more CPU dependant if you are under 1080P(Which basically everyone with an 8core CPU will be on, and beyond).
You continue to post results that are @ 1024 x 768 and with dual GPU's, which i also clearly suggested was a different story than single GPU BF3 testing... But seriously, i'm not going to go quote my self any more because others either dont have much comprehension skills or just don't read the person they are quoting. Who knows which one though.

Then you don't understand how to read the benchmark. The resolution isn't that important. By removing the gpu bottleneck, that graphs shows the performance ceiling of those cpus. No amount of extra gpu muscle will let those cpus beat those numbers(in the same conditions)

The min FPS is below 60 for quite a few cpus, and under 120 for all of them. Maybe if someone is gaming with a 5770 that won't matter, but to a lot of people it does.

In single player the cpu requirements are so low that it doesn't matter what cpu you have, but that's not true in multiplayer. That was my point. Did you have one?
Edited by erunion - 10/25/12 at 4:07pm
2500k
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsHard Drive
i5-2500k asus p8p67 Powercolor PCS+ HD 6870 Mushkin Chronos MX 120GB 
CoolingOSMonitorPower
Asetek 240mm Radiator Win 7 3x Dell Ultrasharp U2312HM 850W 
CaseMouse
Xion Predator 970 logitech MX 
  hide details  
2500k
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsHard Drive
i5-2500k asus p8p67 Powercolor PCS+ HD 6870 Mushkin Chronos MX 120GB 
CoolingOSMonitorPower
Asetek 240mm Radiator Win 7 3x Dell Ultrasharp U2312HM 850W 
CaseMouse
Xion Predator 970 logitech MX 
  hide details  
post #1682 of 2391
Quote:
Originally Posted by furyn9 View Post

Well I need a amd user with a Fx8350 and gtx 680 sli so we can make some benchmark, is gonna be real OCN user , no some random graphic biggrin.gif

There's an article comparing Bulldozer with a 2500k running SLI/TRI-SLI with GTX 580's and the results were not pretty... Piledriver is not that much of an improvement over Bulldozer and would fair any better.
post #1683 of 2391
this is very entertaining guys.
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770K @ 4.7ghz Gigabyte Z87X-UD4H EVGA GTX 980TI ACX 2.0  8GB G.Skill Trident X 2400 mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung 830 SSD 128GB 3TB Toshiba  3TB Toshiba Custom Water 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Window 7 Ultimate 64 bit HP 23xi Corsair HX750i Phanteks Enthoo Luxe 
Mouse
Logitech G600 
  hide details  
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770K @ 4.7ghz Gigabyte Z87X-UD4H EVGA GTX 980TI ACX 2.0  8GB G.Skill Trident X 2400 mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung 830 SSD 128GB 3TB Toshiba  3TB Toshiba Custom Water 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Window 7 Ultimate 64 bit HP 23xi Corsair HX750i Phanteks Enthoo Luxe 
Mouse
Logitech G600 
  hide details  
post #1684 of 2391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmac73 View Post

Your post was not proof by any means, i clearly stated that BF3 would be much more CPU dependant if you are under 1080P(Which basically everyone with an 8core CPU will be on, and beyond).
You continue to post results that are @ 1024 x 768 and with dual GPU's, which i also clearly suggested was a different story than single GPU BF3 testing... But seriously, i'm not going to go quote my self any more because others either dont have much comprehension skills or just don't read the person they are quoting. Who knows which one though.

Using a GTX 690 circumvents the chipset problem of using dual GPUs.

The point is at that low resolution with a 690, if there was no CPU bottleneck you would be getting 100+ FPS. The fact that there are CPUs getting 60 FPS or less means that there is a hard CPU limitation, and that limitation is lessened with more cores.

Also, most people say 60 FPS is the minimum for good gameplay in a FPS game (why the hell do they have the same acronyms?). Driving the resolution higher isn't going to make the framerates go up...
Millenium Falcon
(24 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 4930k MSI Big Bang Xpower II EVGA GTX 690 Patriot Viper II Sector 7 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
OCZ Deneva 2 Corsair Force 3 Maxtor Western Digital Green 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung BD/DVD-RW Swiftech MCP655 x2 Black Ice GTX 480 Black Ice GTX 280 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Alphacool Repack Dual D5 Watercool Heatkiller 3.0 Alphacool GTX 690 fullcover Bitspower Big Bang Xpower II fullcover 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8.1 64-bit Professional 3x Dell S2340 Max Keyboard Durandal CoolerMaster V1000 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Azza Genesis 9000B Logitech G700 Roccat Alumic Onkyo HT-S9100THX 
  hide details  
Millenium Falcon
(24 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 4930k MSI Big Bang Xpower II EVGA GTX 690 Patriot Viper II Sector 7 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
OCZ Deneva 2 Corsair Force 3 Maxtor Western Digital Green 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung BD/DVD-RW Swiftech MCP655 x2 Black Ice GTX 480 Black Ice GTX 280 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Alphacool Repack Dual D5 Watercool Heatkiller 3.0 Alphacool GTX 690 fullcover Bitspower Big Bang Xpower II fullcover 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8.1 64-bit Professional 3x Dell S2340 Max Keyboard Durandal CoolerMaster V1000 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Azza Genesis 9000B Logitech G700 Roccat Alumic Onkyo HT-S9100THX 
  hide details  
post #1685 of 2391
Quote:
Originally Posted by erunion View Post

Then you don't understand how to read the benchmark. The resolution isn't that important. By removing the gpu bottleneck, that graphs shows the performance ceiling of those cpus. No amount of extra gpu muscle will let those cpus beat those numbers(in the same conditions)
The min FPS is below 60 for quite a few cpus, and under 120 for all of them. Maybe if someone is gaming with a 5770 that won't matter, but to a lot of people it does.

I think it is you that don't understand.

Yes the low resolution let's the CPU breathe and really shows the true performance of the CPU, but in a single GPU config, there will be a hard ceiling at 1080P because the game is GPU dependent at those resolutions which is what i originally stated.
Heat
(14 items)
 
Asus G73JH
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 3770K @ 4600mhz Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD5H eVGA GTX 980 eVGA GTX 980 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Team 8gb @ 2400mhz  SSDs LiteOn H70Core/ Ultra Kaze PP 
OSPowerCase
W7 Ultimate X64 PCP&C MKII 950W CM Storm Scout 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 720 Asus HD5870M 6gb Triple Channel 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
500gb Asus Dual Fans W7 17.3" 
Mouse
Razer Orochi 
  hide details  
Heat
(14 items)
 
Asus G73JH
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 3770K @ 4600mhz Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD5H eVGA GTX 980 eVGA GTX 980 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Team 8gb @ 2400mhz  SSDs LiteOn H70Core/ Ultra Kaze PP 
OSPowerCase
W7 Ultimate X64 PCP&C MKII 950W CM Storm Scout 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 720 Asus HD5870M 6gb Triple Channel 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
500gb Asus Dual Fans W7 17.3" 
Mouse
Razer Orochi 
  hide details  
post #1686 of 2391
I dont unserstand whats the point of so low resolution. Yeah its slower at this resolution but i would never run bf3 at 1024x768. So useless information
Workstation
(4 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsMonitor
Xeon E5-2690 Supermicro 2011 Nvidia GP100/ Vega FE Dell ultrasharp 4k 
  hide details  
Workstation
(4 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsMonitor
Xeon E5-2690 Supermicro 2011 Nvidia GP100/ Vega FE Dell ultrasharp 4k 
  hide details  
post #1687 of 2391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsumi View Post

Using a GTX 690 circumvents the chipset problem of using dual GPUs.
The point is at that low resolution with a 690, if there was no CPU bottleneck you would be getting 100+ FPS. The fact that there are CPUs getting 60 FPS or less means that there is a hard CPU limitation, and that limitation is lessened with more cores.
Also, most people say 60 FPS is the minimum for good gameplay in a FPS game (why the hell do they have the same acronyms?). Driving the resolution higher isn't going to make the framerates go up...

Of course there is a CPU limitation on a 15 inch monitor. Ok. Anything else?
Heat
(14 items)
 
Asus G73JH
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 3770K @ 4600mhz Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD5H eVGA GTX 980 eVGA GTX 980 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Team 8gb @ 2400mhz  SSDs LiteOn H70Core/ Ultra Kaze PP 
OSPowerCase
W7 Ultimate X64 PCP&C MKII 950W CM Storm Scout 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 720 Asus HD5870M 6gb Triple Channel 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
500gb Asus Dual Fans W7 17.3" 
Mouse
Razer Orochi 
  hide details  
Heat
(14 items)
 
Asus G73JH
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 3770K @ 4600mhz Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD5H eVGA GTX 980 eVGA GTX 980 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Team 8gb @ 2400mhz  SSDs LiteOn H70Core/ Ultra Kaze PP 
OSPowerCase
W7 Ultimate X64 PCP&C MKII 950W CM Storm Scout 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 720 Asus HD5870M 6gb Triple Channel 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
500gb Asus Dual Fans W7 17.3" 
Mouse
Razer Orochi 
  hide details  
post #1688 of 2391
I would like to point out that going from a Phenom 2 X3 to a 3770k @ 4.7ghz,i experienced the same ~44FPS on maxed BF3 with a single GTX480 on Caspian Border 64 player multiplayer(1080). The minimums were no better visually, but that's not something i ever noted so i'm open to objection there.
Heat
(14 items)
 
Asus G73JH
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 3770K @ 4600mhz Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD5H eVGA GTX 980 eVGA GTX 980 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Team 8gb @ 2400mhz  SSDs LiteOn H70Core/ Ultra Kaze PP 
OSPowerCase
W7 Ultimate X64 PCP&C MKII 950W CM Storm Scout 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 720 Asus HD5870M 6gb Triple Channel 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
500gb Asus Dual Fans W7 17.3" 
Mouse
Razer Orochi 
  hide details  
Heat
(14 items)
 
Asus G73JH
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 3770K @ 4600mhz Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD5H eVGA GTX 980 eVGA GTX 980 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Team 8gb @ 2400mhz  SSDs LiteOn H70Core/ Ultra Kaze PP 
OSPowerCase
W7 Ultimate X64 PCP&C MKII 950W CM Storm Scout 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 720 Asus HD5870M 6gb Triple Channel 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
500gb Asus Dual Fans W7 17.3" 
Mouse
Razer Orochi 
  hide details  
post #1689 of 2391
It seem like every AMD thread is being overtaken by the intel fan boys. We all know that u guys already got the best cpus so why not open up a thread to brag about it and leave the AMD threads to the AMD users.
Giga Buster
(15 items)
 
Mega Buster
(15 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-2500K Asrock P67 Extreme4 Gen3 MSI RX 470 G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 16GB DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Western Digital  LG DVD Burner Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO Windows 7 Ultimate 64 Bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
COMPAQ WF1907 CM Storm Devastator EVGA 700W 80+ Bronze RAIDMAX VORTEX 
MouseMouse PadAudio
CM Storm Devastator AULA Onboard Realtek Audio 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom X6 1600T @3.8ghz 1.325v M5A99X EVO EVGA GTX 460 G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 8GB DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Western Digital  LG DVD Burner Cooler Master Hyper TX3  Windows 7 Ultimate 64 Bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ACER 17 inch Agiler Antec 520-HCG Super T 
MouseMouse PadAudio
EUROCASE None Onboard VIA HD 
  hide details  
Giga Buster
(15 items)
 
Mega Buster
(15 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-2500K Asrock P67 Extreme4 Gen3 MSI RX 470 G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 16GB DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Western Digital  LG DVD Burner Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO Windows 7 Ultimate 64 Bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
COMPAQ WF1907 CM Storm Devastator EVGA 700W 80+ Bronze RAIDMAX VORTEX 
MouseMouse PadAudio
CM Storm Devastator AULA Onboard Realtek Audio 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom X6 1600T @3.8ghz 1.325v M5A99X EVO EVGA GTX 460 G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 8GB DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Western Digital  LG DVD Burner Cooler Master Hyper TX3  Windows 7 Ultimate 64 Bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ACER 17 inch Agiler Antec 520-HCG Super T 
MouseMouse PadAudio
EUROCASE None Onboard VIA HD 
  hide details  
post #1690 of 2391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmac73 View Post

I think it is you that don't understand.
Yes the low resolution let's the CPU breathe and really shows the true performance of the CPU, but in a single GPU config, there will be a hard ceiling at 1080P because the game is GPU dependent at those resolutions which is what i originally stated.

Dude but you're thinking in averages again, if the CPU load increases to a point that it causes the CPU to become overwhelmed the GPU performance suffers, it's this that causes minimum frame problems.

I do not care one bit about average frame rates, it's all about the minimum frame rates and how consistent that frame rate is, and that is one area that AMD are very very bad at.

I'm going back to these graphs again

13201474041PaaGdw9mZ_4_3.gif

13201474041PaaGdw9mZ_5_1.gif

Now if HardOCP did not included minimum frame rate data and just provided the average frame rate in a bar graph it would be giving people the impression that the FX-8150 can easily keep up with a 2500k.

But that's not's the case is it? The minimum frame rates tell the true story, that in reality the FX-8150 can not get any where close to delivering an experience that is as smooth or consistent as the 2500k.

That' what has always annoyed me, reviewers NEED to start including minimum frame rates with there data.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Various] AMD Piledriver FX-Series CPU Reviews (Vishera FX-8350, FX-8320, FX-6300, FX-4300)