Originally Posted by overclockabi
I have bolded and underlined the part where I think you have grossly miscalculated the 8350's numbers and in the process inadvertently showed it in a poorer light than it deserved
I believe you are wrong here .... the reason is 26400 frames encoded at 62.07fps will consume just 425 seconds (26400/62.04=425)
425 seconds ~ 7.05 minutes
You (probably) mistyped it as 823 seconds, which turned out to be nearly 14 minutesSo, doing the math right:
firstname.lastname@example.org first pass 356 seconds or ~6 minutes
email@example.com first pass 425 seconds or ~7.05 minutes
firstname.lastname@example.org seoncd pass ~30.25 minutes
email@example.com second pass ~29 minutes
i7-3770k ~ 36.25 minutes
FX 8350 ~ 36.05 minutes
They are tied !
Of course, now I am not at all familiar with x264 encoding, so I am basing this corrective post based purely on my numerical knowledge
By your own corrected calculation they are NOT tied, the FX 8350 clearly edges out the I7 3770k
So, counter-corrections welcome
Originally Posted by maarten12100
Don't forget people the biggest drawback at AMD was neither the performance nor the support nor the price.
It was the marketing and the power consumption for most normal people and pc builders
Most desktop enthusiasts care a rats ass about power consumption. Power consumption driven users are mainly on mobile devices.
Originally Posted by Mad Skillz
In case anyone's interested, I was curious which Intel processor AMD's 8350 matches in single threaded performance.
It turns out the 8350 @ 4.2 ghz is closest to an i5 750 @ 3.2 ghz in single threaded performance (source
). Those clock speeds are taking turbo boost into account. The i5 750 was released in Fall 2009, and the 8350 was released in Fall 2012, so that puts AMD about 3 years behind Intel in single-threaded performance. Hopefully steamroller helps narrow that margin.
btw.. this wasn't meant as a knock to amd. Just fun trivia.
I put it differently. Hopefully in the next year you single threaded obsessed dinosaurs will come to ther realization that other than word processors which can have a few multithreaded operations, single threaded apps are obsolete , reflect poor design skills, and are biting the dust in the new age of programming. You only have single threaded apps to desperately vow Intel superiority, so that is what you cling to in your criticisms. I never heard of any FX chip lagging in word processing chores. The rest of the single threaded apps are bloatware that can easily be avoided by making intelligent purchase decisons with your software. I do not need winrar when winzip is much faster and has mutlithreading. Most of the newer popular games are multithreaded except for skyrim,. I am tired of hearing nonsensical whining about obsolete apps and poorly designed wares that make Intel look anything other than a hasbeen , Oh I meant haswell
I should not have to be wasting my time here pointing out Intel fallacies . Thisk thread is suppoed to be about discussing AMD innovation and performance with Steamroller. But it is infested with so many Intel faknboys who really do NOT belong here as they are only here to heap negative PR on AMD cpus. If this thread was properly moderated they would be told to go packing. If we want a full-time debate about cpu wars then someone should start a thread entitled AMD vs Intel or the like. I actually enjoy demolishing the flawed logic of Intel lovers. but I think the vibrancy and intellectual dilligence of exploring the architecture should be the primary focus of this thread , not destroying fanboy mythology.