Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › AMD No longer a viable option for mid-high end?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AMD No longer a viable option for mid-high end? - Page 101  

post #1001 of 1593
Why aren't you buying a Ford GT? It's more expensive but it's MUCH quicker than a Ford Focus, plus it's future proofing. That Ford GT will last you YEARS more smile.gif

Why aren't you buying that quad core smartphone? It's more expensive but it's MUCH quicker than that physical pad phone, plus it's future proofing. That quad core smartphone will last you YEARS more smile.gif

etc etc etc etc etc
post #1002 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by 996gt2 View Post

Who's comparing current prices? Only you AMD guys are using the $160-170 ish current price of Vishera.

I am comparing the price of a $299 2600K to the price of a $245 FX-8150. The higher cost of the 2600K can easily be justified by the fact that it came out a good 9 months earlier than Bulldozer.

Point being, again, if you had bought a 2600K in Jan 2011 for $299, you wouldn't need to make any upgrades CPU-wise and you'd have a system today which can run any GPU setup.

If you waited 9 months to save $50 with Bulldozer, you'd not only have a slow chip, but even if you went through the hassle of upgrading to Vishera, you'd still have a chip which is 1) slower than the 2600K from Jan 2011 and 2) will bottleneck high-end GPU setups.

OK, I guess I should start being more specific since some people don't seem able to follow.

I should start by explicitly stating that I am not an *insert brand here* guy. Now, I suppose that you could continue declaring what kind of guy I am, but it should be really convenient if you guys decided together on something consistent.

Now, the post with the prices had current prices on an old processor. I'm quite sure that the price on the 2600k was quite low too sometimes in the past (even sub 300$ in some cases). I found this procedure to be nonsensical and confusing. Was I wrong?

The poster could either mean to compare those two processors if purchased now, cause the prices are current... but the rest of his post would be nonsensical, or could mean to compare them if the 2600k was purchased 3 years ago... but in that case his prices would be nonsensical.

How exactly is this my fault and not the poster's?

The thread participants are already too hardcore. Errors like the one above would give them even more fuel to interpret someone's words the way they find more convenient.
post #1003 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMDATI View Post

not to mention buying both AMD chips equates to a much higher cost altogether.

$500 on 2 AMD chips over a 5 year period vs ~$300 on 1 Intel chip over a 5 year period.

!!!!!! Who says someone will be upgrading that AMD chip? You do realise people still keep their computers for long. You see threads querying about very old hardware. Not everyone upgrades.

Buy the deal and be done with it. It isn't all about brand vs brand.
post #1004 of 1593
On the other hand being called an Intel guy and an AMD guy on the same thread could be a good thing in the end.

Hmmm... ok, I think I'm good enough and still holding a neutral state.

Carry on... tongue.gif
post #1005 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by PsyM4n View Post

On the other hand being called an Intel guy and an AMD guy on the same thread could be a good thing in the end.

Hmmm... ok, I think I'm good enough and still holding a neutral state.

Carry on... tongue.gif

Just call yourself a Qualcomm guy and you'll be fine tongue.gif
post #1006 of 1593
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeo01 View Post

!!!!!! Who says someone will be upgrading that AMD chip? You do realise people still keep their computers for long. You see threads querying about very old hardware. Not everyone upgrades.

Buy the deal and be done with it. It isn't all about brand vs brand.

Actually, your point holds no meaning to the nature of what I was responding to, since the original poster has made a point that they upgrade every few years anyways.


And obviously, if a person doesn't upgrade, they're going to still have a much less performing system. That intel processor will STILL be the better buy because it will last longer for those that don't upgrade 'often'. Where that AMD system might last them 5 years, that Intel system will last them at least 7 (while providing more performance than AMD over the first 5 years at least...icing on the cake), further increasing their time between upgrades. so your point becomes very dull.

Now if you compound this over a lifetime of CPU purchases and price to performance, you end up saving thousands with Intel over AMD, while also having a significantly faster system the whole time.
Edited by AMDATI - 3/30/14 at 1:44pm
Not Yours
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4790k ASRock Z97E-ITX/AC MSI GTX 1080Ti G.SKILL DDR3  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SAMSUNG 830 OCZ Deneva 2R WD Scorpio Noctua U14S 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Acer XB270HU IPS CM Quickfire Rapid Fractal Design 650w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Node 304 SteelSeries Rival 700 SteelSeries Qck Sennheiser HD598 
  hide details  
Not Yours
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4790k ASRock Z97E-ITX/AC MSI GTX 1080Ti G.SKILL DDR3  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SAMSUNG 830 OCZ Deneva 2R WD Scorpio Noctua U14S 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Acer XB270HU IPS CM Quickfire Rapid Fractal Design 650w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Node 304 SteelSeries Rival 700 SteelSeries Qck Sennheiser HD598 
  hide details  
post #1007 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeo01 View Post

Just call yourself a Qualcomm guy and you'll be fine tongue.gif

No way, have you worked with those things? The GPU drivers are full of problems, devices with those SOCs reset and crash all the time. I wouldn't want to deal with every unhappy qualcomm customer in this thread.

Can I be a tegra guy instead? tongue.gif
post #1008 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMDATI View Post

Actually, your point holds no meaning to the nature of what I was responding to, since the original poster has made a point that they upgrade every few years anyways.


And obviously, if a person doesn't upgrade, they're going to still have a much less performing system. That intel processor will STILL be the better buy because it will last longer for those that don't upgrade 'often'. Where that AMD system might last them 5 years, that Intel system will last them at least 7 (while providing more performance than AMD over the first 5 years at least...icing on the cake), further increasing their time between upgrades. so your point becomes very dull.

Now if you compound this over a lifetime of CPU purchases and price to performance, you end up saving thousands with Intel over AMD, while also having a significantly faster system the whole time.

Well not really. Businesses still use dated Opterons for example (AM2). A lot of systems use dated workstations. A lot of people are still happy using their low spec system with XP.


A system will last you years, it's the impatience or need for speed (as I have said when time = money) that causes an upgrade smile.gif or a gamer wanting more FPS.


So no it isn't always viable, people use laptops, which by the way, is MUCH slower than our desktop systems. Many game on laptops, many do work on laptops.

Your point is aimed towards enthusiasts mainly.
post #1009 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by PsyM4n View Post

No way, have you worked with those things? The GPU drivers are full of problems, devices with those SOCs reset and crash all the time. I wouldn't want to deal with every unhappy qualcomm customer in this thread.

Can I be a tegra guy instead? tongue.gif

Ah fair point, you may be a Tegra guy instead yes wink.gif but then that's taking good old nVidia into account tongue.gif then it'll turn into an AMD vs nVidia battle wink.gif

Haha. Funny tongue.gif
post #1010 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeo01 View Post


So no it isn't always viable, people use laptops, which by the way, is MUCH slower than our desktop systems. Many game on laptops, many do work on laptops.

Your point is aimed towards enthusiasts mainly.

I don't diagree with you on this point in general, but the latest Haswell mobile i7s are in fact faster than AMD's desktop FX chips. And I'm not even talking about the Extreme Editions, either. I think that provides some perspective on how far behind the performance curve AMD is these days.

A FX-8320 @ 3.5 GHz does 6.06 in Cinebench. A 2.4 GHz i7-4700MQ laptop chip does gets around 7 in the same benchmark.

Heck, even the 35W TDP, 2.0 GHz i7-4765T found in the Macbook Pro performs on the same level as a FX-8320.
Edited by 996gt2 - 3/30/14 at 2:03pm
5 GHz SFF Box
(18 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-2700K @ 5.0 GHz, 1.38V Asus Maximus IV GENE Asus GTX 670 DC II 4x4GB Samsung 30nm @ DDR3-2133 9-9-9-21 1.5V 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Plextor M3 SSD WD Velociraptor 500GB WD Caviar Black 1TB WD Caviar Green 2TB 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Thermalright HR-02 (GT AP-15 Push/Pull) Windows 7 Pro x64 LG 27" 2560x1440 S-IPS (Calibrated with Eye-One) CM Quickfire Rapid 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic X-750 Silverstone SG09 Logitech MX518 Steelseries QcK 
Audio
Asus Xonar DX + Shure SRH840 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Core i5-3570K Gigabyte H61N-USB3 Mini-ITX 2x4GB Samsung 30nm DDR3 Samsung 830 128GB SSD 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
WD Scorpio Blue 500GB Win 7 Pro x64 Antec 90W DC-DC/Delta power brick Antec ISK 110 
  hide details  
5 GHz SFF Box
(18 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-2700K @ 5.0 GHz, 1.38V Asus Maximus IV GENE Asus GTX 670 DC II 4x4GB Samsung 30nm @ DDR3-2133 9-9-9-21 1.5V 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Plextor M3 SSD WD Velociraptor 500GB WD Caviar Black 1TB WD Caviar Green 2TB 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Thermalright HR-02 (GT AP-15 Push/Pull) Windows 7 Pro x64 LG 27" 2560x1440 S-IPS (Calibrated with Eye-One) CM Quickfire Rapid 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic X-750 Silverstone SG09 Logitech MX518 Steelseries QcK 
Audio
Asus Xonar DX + Shure SRH840 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Core i5-3570K Gigabyte H61N-USB3 Mini-ITX 2x4GB Samsung 30nm DDR3 Samsung 830 128GB SSD 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
WD Scorpio Blue 500GB Win 7 Pro x64 Antec 90W DC-DC/Delta power brick Antec ISK 110 
  hide details  
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD CPUs
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › AMD No longer a viable option for mid-high end?