Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Tom's Hardware] FX Vs. Core i7: Exploring CPU Bottlenecks And AMD CrossFire
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Tom's Hardware] FX Vs. Core i7: Exploring CPU Bottlenecks And AMD CrossFire - Page 3

post #21 of 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alatar View Post

So the FX clearly loses in metro, F1, skyrim and ties in BF3 and AVP.

Not really surprised, I do hope that people notice the other games as well, not just those posted in the OP.
Clocking them to the same clock speed is just fine if they have similar OC ceilings. In this case the FX should probably be given an extra 100mhz or something (they clock a bit higher) but in the end that wouldn't change the results.

what no they didn't enable everything they skipped out of DOF and PhyX ?
Quote:
Our benchmark results have long shown that ATI's graphics architectures are more dependent on a strong processor than Nvidia's.

did not another Review site state that the AMD cards where better with slow cpu's ?
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
amd Phenom II x6 1090T gigabye UD7 990FX 5870 G.skill flare 2 x 4gbs 2000mhz  
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
westerdigital cooler master eisberg 240L Vista 64 bit spceptre 1920 x 1200 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
muli-media ftw lol 1200 watt silverstone none another cheap one $20 
Mouse PadOther
none ATi 650 pro theater  
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
amd Phenom II x6 1090T gigabye UD7 990FX 5870 G.skill flare 2 x 4gbs 2000mhz  
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
westerdigital cooler master eisberg 240L Vista 64 bit spceptre 1920 x 1200 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
muli-media ftw lol 1200 watt silverstone none another cheap one $20 
Mouse PadOther
none ATi 650 pro theater  
  hide details  
Reply
post #22 of 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge View Post

In addition to that, they are overclocking both chips to the same speed, 4.4GHz in this case. And they are considering that fair. Here is a fact: Difference CPU architectures need difference clock speeds in order to be considered equal. Clocking two completely different chips to the same speed, will always give one or the other an advantage. That method of testing is fine, as long as you are only testing a single architecture. But otherwise, it is just a way to create a biased review.

I used to have so much respect for TH. Back around 2000 I was their biggest fan, but they've soo gone downhill since then. Back then they didn't care which cpu was faster, intel or amd. They just reported the facts, without any slant.

The true motivation for your posts, as if it wasn't obvious.

If anything this article made me realize AMD isn't too far behind in gaming performance at all. I was uneducated, and thought they were getting slaughtered in multi-gpu setups.
post #23 of 595
Would you turn down settings to maintain 120hz?

If so, buy Intel.

For 60hz you would be wasting time not maxing the GPU
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
FX-8320 Gigabyte 990FXA UD3 Powercolor AX6850 Powercolor AX6850 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Corsair Vengeance LP CAS7 1600 (2 x 4GB) Samsung 840 Series Lite-On DVD-RW Corsair H80 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
Arctic Twin Turbo ll x2 Corsair AF140 x3 Corsair SP120 x2 Windows 7 Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG 32LH40 1080p 120Hz Interpolated 32" LCD Razer Arctosa Seasonic X650 Corsair 300R Windowed 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Razer Deathadder 2013 Razer Vespula Klipsch Promedia 2.1 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
FX-8320 Gigabyte 990FXA UD3 Powercolor AX6850 Powercolor AX6850 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Corsair Vengeance LP CAS7 1600 (2 x 4GB) Samsung 840 Series Lite-On DVD-RW Corsair H80 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
Arctic Twin Turbo ll x2 Corsair AF140 x3 Corsair SP120 x2 Windows 7 Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG 32LH40 1080p 120Hz Interpolated 32" LCD Razer Arctosa Seasonic X650 Corsair 300R Windowed 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Razer Deathadder 2013 Razer Vespula Klipsch Promedia 2.1 
  hide details  
Reply
post #24 of 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge View Post

TH on trying to figure out an unbiased way to calculate value:
Quote:
The only way we can make AMD's FX-8350 look like a better gaming value than Intel's Core i7-3770K (specifically in the games and at the settings we used to test) is if the rest of the system is free. Because the rest of the system is never free, the FX-8350 never serves up better high-end gaming value.
WRONG! SO WRONG!
Firstly: The majority of the system does not affect gaming performance even slightly, and thus should not be included in a performance/value calculation
Secondly: Assuming that the rest of the system is the same for everything except cpu/mobo, all they are doing is increasing the total cost used for the calculation. Which thereby creates a bias in favor of the more expensive cpu.

An unbiased value comparison should only include cpu/mobo. Because those two things can be thought of as a single unit (one doesn't work without the other), and it is not a comparison of any other part of the system, only those two things...

Last time I checked, prices were comparable for high end mobos for both AMD and Intel. If the rest of the system is copied between builds, then the total system cost, not including CPU, should be the same for both builds.

It messes with the %'s if you choose to include that system cost or not, but not in a way that is helpful.

Without it, it might look like Intel provides 5% more performance for 20% ($180 FX v. $220 i5) more cost.
But once you include the system cost (for example $500) , the cost increase is only 6%. For a $1,000 system, the cost increase would only be 3% for the +5% performance boost.

But how useful is that information? In both cases you pay $40 more for a fixed performance level. If that much more performance is worth $40 to you, then making the rest of the system free should not change your opinion.
Edited by willis888 - 1/24/13 at 8:53am
post #25 of 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buris View Post

So ridiculously biased. Wow. Where to begin? The fact that he's overclocking one much higher than stock and just barely overclocks the 8350 by raising the multiplier by 1. Not only that, he completely disregards the fact that the 3770k is in an entirely different price range. (More than 100$ more).

Read the whole article, when you compare just the price of cpus it sounds like a big gap but when you build a whole computer it comes out to only 5-10% more expensive and the article says that intel justifies that margin with its performance. Which is something we all already knew, nothing new. Also it's not their fault intel overclocks better under the same circumstances and yields better performance gains. Fx 8350 is a good processor, its just not as efficient. We all like competition and the price drops it brings so we want AMD to be competitive and hopefully with the xbox/ps4 deals they will get back on their feet and come up with even better performing and more efficient cpus.
post #26 of 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boinz View Post

Well done AMD, I am impressed. But damn is that Power consumption high compared to Intel.

It's strange that the power usage for Piledriver is so high.

At stock settings with Turbo enabled (Ultra LLC) my vCore is 1.38v and uses 68W at idle and 190W under load (Prime95) - Whole System
Overclocked to 4.4Ghz my CPU uses less than stock voltage at 1.325v and uses 68W at idle and 185W under load (Prime95) - Whole System

I'm only using a single video card (7850), but seeing as Tom's is using AMD Cards with GCN the difference should be minimal.

My meter is measuring the power draw from the socket. So it's everything the PSU is pulling.
post #27 of 595
I am not too up to speed with the different socket types used by AMD, but I think the price to performance comparison is flawed. You must take into consideration that AMD allows its users to simply upgrade processors without having to buy another motherboard, whereas keeping up with Intel processors requires you to purchase a new motherboard every year.

In this case, it would be more fair to measure price/performance over 2 or 3 generations of CPU's, which would really show the advantage of price to performance offered by AMD.
The Node
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k 4.7 GHz @ 1.32v Asus P8Z77-I Deluxe NVIDIA GTX 980 SC Samsung 30nm 8GB 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB EK Supremacy EVO EK-FC980 GTX XSPC RX240 V3 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
EK-SBAY DDC 3.2 PWM Windows 7 Pro Asus 23" LED KBC Poker II 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
SilverStone SFX SX600-G NCASE M1 Logitech G9x Steelseries 
  hide details  
Reply
The Node
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k 4.7 GHz @ 1.32v Asus P8Z77-I Deluxe NVIDIA GTX 980 SC Samsung 30nm 8GB 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB EK Supremacy EVO EK-FC980 GTX XSPC RX240 V3 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
EK-SBAY DDC 3.2 PWM Windows 7 Pro Asus 23" LED KBC Poker II 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
SilverStone SFX SX600-G NCASE M1 Logitech G9x Steelseries 
  hide details  
Reply
post #28 of 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bedo View Post

I am not too up to speed with the different socket types used by AMD, but I think the price to performance comparison is flawed. You must take into consideration that AMD allows its users to simply upgrade processors without having to buy another motherboard, whereas keeping up with Intel processors requires you to purchase a new motherboard every year.

In this case, it would be more fair to measure price/performance over 2 or 3 generations of CPU's, which would really show the advantage of price to performance offered by AMD.

Intel doesnt change sockets just for the hell of it. Intel innovates and adds new features unlike amd who charges you more for a 990fx chipset thats almost an exact carbon copy of the 790fx. This test is irrelevant imo. Haswell will be here in june and the 8350/8320 will be cut down in price because itll be 25-30% behind again.
Core I7 5960X
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core I7 5960X ASRock X99 OC Formula MSI GTX 970 Gaming MSI GTX 970 Gaming 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
G. Skill 16GB DDR4 2600 Sandisk Extreme II 240GB SSD Custom 480 Water Setup Windows 10 
PowerCase
AX1500I Corsair 900D 
  hide details  
Reply
Core I7 5960X
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core I7 5960X ASRock X99 OC Formula MSI GTX 970 Gaming MSI GTX 970 Gaming 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
G. Skill 16GB DDR4 2600 Sandisk Extreme II 240GB SSD Custom 480 Water Setup Windows 10 
PowerCase
AX1500I Corsair 900D 
  hide details  
Reply
post #29 of 595
There's no reason to buy an AMD CPU when i3/i5/i7 CPUs offer more performance per dollar these days.

They're even as long as the GPU is the limiting factor. But a lot of the recent games like Guild Wars 2 or Natural Selection 2 rely on a strong CPU.
post #30 of 595
THG are an entirely Intel/nVidia promotion site. There is no journalism there whatsoever and hasn't been for at least a decade. During the time of the P4 their reviews were never in line with other websites and used to 'report' that the P4 was not only equal to but was also superiour to the A64 when it was common knowledge that the P4 was sub par and a terrible architecture. I only visit that website when I have to but even then I don't trust a word of what they claim.

They even used to go on about how much better nVidia's 5xxx series were when ATI's 9600's and 9800's used to beat them to pulp (drivers aside).

THG are simply worthless and I simply assume they get paid to post propaganda, nothing more.
The girlfriend.
(15 items)
 
The Mistress
(13 items)
 
Media Server
(11 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX8320 @ 4.5 Crosshair V (Third One) 290 Tri-X OC 16GB HyperX 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Sandisk SSD Plus 240GB Toshiba 3TB Hitachi 2TB Swiftech H220-X 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Win 8.1/Mint Viewsonic VX2457-mhd Fuhlen L411 Slim Super Flower Golden King 650W 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Enthoo Pro G400 Super Flower 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A8-6410 Lenovo Lancer 4B2 K16.3 R5 128 Shaders/M230 Hynix 8GB DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveOSMonitor
Samsung 840 120 GB SSD Seagate Momentus 1TB 5400rmp Win 8.1 CMN1487 TN LED 14" 1366*768 
KeyboardPowerMouseMouse Pad
Lenovo AccuType 2900mAh/41Wh Elan Trackpad/Logitech M90 Super Flower 
Audio
AMD Avalon(Connexant) 
  hide details  
Reply
The girlfriend.
(15 items)
 
The Mistress
(13 items)
 
Media Server
(11 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX8320 @ 4.5 Crosshair V (Third One) 290 Tri-X OC 16GB HyperX 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Sandisk SSD Plus 240GB Toshiba 3TB Hitachi 2TB Swiftech H220-X 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Win 8.1/Mint Viewsonic VX2457-mhd Fuhlen L411 Slim Super Flower Golden King 650W 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Enthoo Pro G400 Super Flower 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A8-6410 Lenovo Lancer 4B2 K16.3 R5 128 Shaders/M230 Hynix 8GB DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveOSMonitor
Samsung 840 120 GB SSD Seagate Momentus 1TB 5400rmp Win 8.1 CMN1487 TN LED 14" 1366*768 
KeyboardPowerMouseMouse Pad
Lenovo AccuType 2900mAh/41Wh Elan Trackpad/Logitech M90 Super Flower 
Audio
AMD Avalon(Connexant) 
  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] FX Vs. Core i7: Exploring CPU Bottlenecks And AMD CrossFire