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 116  

post #1151 of 1593
I keep expecting a mod to come along and put this thread out of its misery...
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Athlon X4 870K 4700mhz 1.63v ASUS A88X-PRO Radeon HD 6970 G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 16GB DDR2133 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Kingston V300 Toshiba 2.5" laptop HDD, 1TB Micron C300 SSD Generic 2TB HDD WL2000GSA1672 (external) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate Momentus XT 500GB ASUS DVD-RW Prolimatech Black Series Megahalems Linux Mint 18 Cinnamon "Sarah" 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 ViewSonic VG2030wm IBM Model M Fractal Design Newton R3 600W 
CaseMouseAudioOther
Phanteks Enthoo Pro Logitech Marble Mouse Behringer UCA222 Upgraded Realistic Minimus-7 speakers, Lepai 20... 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core 2 Duo Mobile T9900 Dell 0G848F Intel Mobile 4 series 4GB Crucial DDR2-6400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OWC Mercury Electra 3G 44GB SSD stock DVD-RW Linux Mint Cinnamon 17.1 "Rebecca" 1366x768 WXGA 
  hide details  
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Athlon X4 870K 4700mhz 1.63v ASUS A88X-PRO Radeon HD 6970 G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 16GB DDR2133 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Kingston V300 Toshiba 2.5" laptop HDD, 1TB Micron C300 SSD Generic 2TB HDD WL2000GSA1672 (external) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate Momentus XT 500GB ASUS DVD-RW Prolimatech Black Series Megahalems Linux Mint 18 Cinnamon "Sarah" 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 ViewSonic VG2030wm IBM Model M Fractal Design Newton R3 600W 
CaseMouseAudioOther
Phanteks Enthoo Pro Logitech Marble Mouse Behringer UCA222 Upgraded Realistic Minimus-7 speakers, Lepai 20... 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core 2 Duo Mobile T9900 Dell 0G848F Intel Mobile 4 series 4GB Crucial DDR2-6400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OWC Mercury Electra 3G 44GB SSD stock DVD-RW Linux Mint Cinnamon 17.1 "Rebecca" 1366x768 WXGA 
  hide details  
post #1152 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durquavian View Post

How about you prove your point and refrain from using words like suckers.

I'm sorry if that offends you but that is exactly what AMD is taking you for. I was wrong before, AMD's flagship is the $160 8320, not the 8350.

8320 - a good buy if it fits your very specific low end needs.

8350 - same amount of cores and cache, they simply overclocked it out of the box and ask for more money. You can do this yourself.

9370 - same amount of cores and cache, they simply overclocked it a little more out of the box and ask for more money. You can do this yourself.

9590 - same amount of cores and cache, they simply overclocked it to the limits out of the box and ask for even more money. You can do this yourself.

Have you seen the competition? When Intel charges more for a processor you get more cores, hyperthreading, more cache. You're actually paying for something that you can't just hop in the bios and change yourself.

So yeah, that $160 flagship is low end, sorry.
post #1153 of 1593
No. The 8350 is higher binned. The 9xxx series are stupid however.

And um when you pay for Intel you get more cores, hyperthreading? Firstly hyperthreading is used in very few software, so it's barely important. Secondly take a look at Intel's lowest I5 offering compared to their highest. Difference? Clock speed and "K" series. You have to pay a a lot extra for a few hundred Mhz and an unlocked chip. Kind of contradicted yourself.

Also low end? The FX-8350 matches Intel's I7 in some instances, so essentially you are saying Intel's I7 acts "low end" in some benchmarks?


Also a "low end processor" wouldn't be capable of rendering, multi-tasking and gaming with a powerful graphics card. And somehow the 8320 is.

What's considered low end? Google Chrome benchmarks and how fast Word and Notepad opens?
post #1154 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeo01 View Post

No. The 8350 is higher binned. The 9xxx series are stupid however.

And um when you pay for Intel you get more cores, hyperthreading? Firstly hyperthreading is used in very few software, so it's barely important. Secondly take a look at Intel's lowest I5 offering compared to their highest. Difference? Clock speed and "K" series. You have to pay a a lot extra for a few hundred Mhz and an unlocked chip. Kind of contradicted yourself.

Also low end? The FX-8350 matches Intel's I7 in some instances, so essentially you are saying Intel's I7 acts "low end" in some benchmarks?


Also a "low end processor" wouldn't be capable of rendering, multi-tasking and gaming with a powerful graphics card. And somehow the 8320 is.

What's considered low end? Google Chrome benchmarks and how fast Word and Notepad opens?

 

If hyper-threading is used in very few pieces of software, then we must be in an era where the same goes for AMD's multi-core CPUs also not being able to take advantage of its multiple cores. Why? Because you don't code for hyper-threading (unless you are into OS design, which almost all momdern OS's these days are coded for SMT, which both sides can take advantage of).

 

Any program that is coded to split its workload into multiple threads will benefit both parties. You might want to go actually read up on how hyper-threading works.

post #1155 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Insane569 View Post

The Question/issue here is, Is AMD a viable option for mid/high end CPUs.
A better question is, where is the line drawn on CPU ratings. What makes it high end or mid range or Enthusiast.

Gonna bring this back because it seems everyone has forgotten the purpose of this thread.
We can't answer OPs question if we can't draw the lines on mid-high end.
What the hell makes an i7 high end and why is an FX 8xxx not high end? Is it pricepoint? Is it benchmark scores?
The Goat
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i5 4670k asustek Z87 pro GTX 760 GTX 760 
RAMRAMHard DriveOptical Drive
Corsair XMS3 Team Dark Series Western Digital WD10EXEZ Atapi IHBS112 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
Corsair H100i 2 Fans NZXT Sentry 2 Windows 7 64bit 
MonitorMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Dell E198WFPv Dell E198WFPv Dell SE198WFPv Corsair K60 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Corsair CX750m Corsair Spec 02 Corsair M40 Logitech z506 
AudioOther
CHC Co Silverado 48oz cup of water 
  hide details  
The Goat
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i5 4670k asustek Z87 pro GTX 760 GTX 760 
RAMRAMHard DriveOptical Drive
Corsair XMS3 Team Dark Series Western Digital WD10EXEZ Atapi IHBS112 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
Corsair H100i 2 Fans NZXT Sentry 2 Windows 7 64bit 
MonitorMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Dell E198WFPv Dell E198WFPv Dell SE198WFPv Corsair K60 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Corsair CX750m Corsair Spec 02 Corsair M40 Logitech z506 
AudioOther
CHC Co Silverado 48oz cup of water 
  hide details  
post #1156 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blameless View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeo01 View Post

Point is you still spent twice as much smile.gif I for one am a cheap stake so the more cash I save the better tongue.gif regardless of how long it'll last.

Spending not quite twice as much, half as often, and needing to do less work, does not translate into higher cost.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavy MG View Post

The "Bought FX-8150 in 2011" argument wouldn't really work either,as most of us here didn't buy into the bulldozer hype.

You speak as if Bulldozer had no virtues and Vishera was a major upgrade. Vishera has 5-10% more IPC and ~5% more clock headroom.

If Bulldozer wasn't worth buying after it's first price cut, Vishera isn't worth buying now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavy MG View Post

There is no such as "future-proofing" either. Just because the 2600K does well enough for you,doesn't mean something like a 4670K wouldn't be an upgrade.

A 4670k is not an upgrade over a 2600k. It's faster in a few areas, but it does not over clock better, and in most multi-threaded tasks, the 2600k is still ahead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thready View Post

Will an FX 8350 even bottleneck a 780 TI? That just doesn't sound right when I say it out loud to myself here behind my keyboard... If it doesn't bottleneck the best consumer GPU out there, then what is the fuss all about in the first place?

The answer to "will this bottleneck that" is always "it depends", outside of the clear cut extremes. I have encountered situations where my 1.6GHz single core Celeron is not a bottleneck for 3x7950s, and situations where my 4.5GHz 4930k bottlenecks a single 6970.

And again, just because you have a GPU limited scenario where most any CPU will do, it does not make that CPU high-end, it makes it sufficient for that task.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thready View Post

The original topic is about AMD not being good for mid-high end.

High-end is relative, you can't begin to define it without comparing it to what else is out there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

The 9590 would out perform the 4770k .

If I were to give systems built around each chip my honest best effort (highest bang for the buck everything, once hard minimums were surpassed, and equal care done with OCing/tweaking), the 9590 setup would cost 150 dollars more, and would lose to the 4770k setup most of the time.

The FX-9590 is a novelty item. It's like an Intel X part of the current generation. Almost double the cost for next to no tangible benefit. I wouldn't touch one at typical prices for the same reason I bought an i7 970 over a 980X, a 3930k over a 3960X, or my 4930k over a 4960X.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PsyM4n View Post

Well then, get an 8320! wink.gif

A good chip.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

To be honest, the 9xxx have about the same headroom as the haswells.

This is blatantly and obviously incorrect, most especially if you are referring to the 9590.

A typical 4770k is capable of about a 25% OC on a modest air cooler and a cheap board, without any potentially dangerous modifications like delidding. Use a better board and cooling, and you can extend this a bit further.

An FX-9370 has around 15% OC headroom, while the 9590 generally has 10% or less, and even these OC need decent water loops and some of the most robust AM3+ boards for 24/7 stability.

Roughly double is not "about the same".
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

I have a very high VID ( 1.538) 9370 that has validated on an h-100 at 5740 mhz in some chilly ambients. There are much better examples out there than mine. For daily use at normal ambients on water it will pull 5.3 or better, 600 mhz over turbo or 900 over base.
70% of 4770k's top out at a 600 mhz overclock over turbo speeds.

Even in these dubious scenarios, the 4770k has proportionally more headroom.
.
In the extreme:
The 9590 has a top overclock of 3305 mhz over turbo
4770k -3224
4670k-3300
9370 - 3805
Source HWBOT
smile.gif
In practice:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/06/01/intel_haswell_i74770k_ipc_overclocking_review/6#.UzjQ8VfTtbZ
Ryzen Shine!
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1800X @ 4125mhz 1.432 Volts MSI X370 Titanium   Fury  G.SKILL TridentZ Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) 288-Pin... 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 pro Hp 1260 I liquid unobtanium Koolance 480mm radiator, 39... Win 7 HP/Winspy 10 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
24" hp @ 1900x1200 Logitech G19 PC power and cooling 910 watt silencer Thermaltake P5 
MouseMouse Pad
Logitech MX 518 fUnc industries 
  hide details  
Ryzen Shine!
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1800X @ 4125mhz 1.432 Volts MSI X370 Titanium   Fury  G.SKILL TridentZ Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) 288-Pin... 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 pro Hp 1260 I liquid unobtanium Koolance 480mm radiator, 39... Win 7 HP/Winspy 10 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
24" hp @ 1900x1200 Logitech G19 PC power and cooling 910 watt silencer Thermaltake P5 
MouseMouse Pad
Logitech MX 518 fUnc industries 
  hide details  
post #1157 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Insane569 View Post

Gonna bring this back because it seems everyone has forgotten the purpose of this thread.
We can't answer OPs question if we can't draw the lines on mid-high end.
What the hell makes an i7 high end and why is an FX 8xxx not high end? Is it pricepoint? Is it benchmark scores?
Cant speak a lot for Intel, way too many numbers and designations and release tiers ie: haswell IB or SB to keep up with. For AMD, that I can speak to.

If you keep to just stock then the 8350/8320 at best would be mid end. They have decent performance there but short of true speed and power like what you might find with high end and extreme Intel series. But this is the part where you have to consider what you can get out of them. Can you make them into high end CPUs or Extreme?

First you have to look at the 9370 and 9590. These 2 CPUs can be considered High end at their stock levels. They seem to be able to compete on a performance level with Intel stock CPUs. Being that the 8350 for certain(well very high probability) and the 8320 has just a slightly lesser chance of reaching these 9590/9370 OCs then yes they can be made into High end CPUs. I think they might fall just shy of extreme, basing on what I might call Extreme. So far as I can tell only Intel can fill that niche.

But it does have a valid claim to the high-end position. There are many that use these CPUs daily at 5.0+GHZ, gaming and benching, most for the entire life of the existence of the Vishera 8 cores. So you can rest easy on longevity and reliability.

So even though they Trail Intel in performance across a number of actual architectural performance facts, they still manage to compete. For those that wish to build an AMD rig, it can be done as a high-end rig.
post #1158 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavy MG View Post

I have to say it's totally not the fx 6300 if at all,SLI doesn't work all that well in BF4.
A few review sites that got working samples doesn't mean it's a perfect board for running "3 way 780Ti's". Read some actual reviews form Newegg,I don't think you'd want to purchase a board that has a 50/50 chance of not even booting. Besides, if you can afford 3 780Ti's,you wouldn't be buying a $115 motherboard in the first place.
The 4670K,and a Vishera based 83xx is still and upgrade even though you're saying both are "only better in a few areas". If it's faster in some thing's I'd call it an upgrade,lol. A $150 CPU isn't worth buying that comes within a few FPS of a CPU that costs $100+ more? That really makes me question if you even have a FX 83xx/Vishera chip. Vishera is worth the upgrade if you're still on Phenom II or want a cheap price/performance setup. You're acting as if an FX cpu is a Sempron/Celeron only worth handling browsing and a few apps.
The FX Visheras actually have a 10% IPC increase,some areas 15%,and way more OC headroom than just 5% as Bulldozer was a nuclear reactor if you moved it above stock.

You're saying I should trust newegg reviews over trusted sites? lachen.gif
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  
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  
post #1159 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsc1973 View Post

I keep expecting a mod to come along and put this thread out of its misery...

It was reopened unfortunately.
post #1160 of 1593
9370 and 9590 remind me of the Phenom II C2.

High stock frequency compared to competition with little overclocking headroom.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2670 @ 2.8Ghz m4600 m5100 @ 1100c/1500m 16GB DDR3 1333Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
c300 128GB SSD 2TB FireCuda 7mm 2TB Firecuda 7mm 1TB 5400rpm 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
750GB 5400rpm Windows 10 x64  1920x1080 @90hz 150w 
Mouse
Corsair M40 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2670 @ 2.8Ghz m4600 m5100 @ 1100c/1500m 16GB DDR3 1333Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
c300 128GB SSD 2TB FireCuda 7mm 2TB Firecuda 7mm 1TB 5400rpm 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
750GB 5400rpm Windows 10 x64  1920x1080 @90hz 150w 
Mouse
Corsair M40 
  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?