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 121  

post #1201 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by 996gt2 View Post

I will happily volunteer my 5 GHz 2700k to be benched against any current AMD CPU.

I don't think the Vishera owners will like seeing their chips get annihilated by a 3 year old Sandy Bridge chip in CPU benchmarks, however. biggrin.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by 996gt2 View Post

To be honest, you could bench your i7-4700MQ laptop CPU against a stock FX-8320 and it would probably win in most cases.



8-Core, 16-Thread Haswell-E:
AnandTech%20Unlocked%20ExtremeEdition_678x452.png

Since the AMD loves to claim that the FX series are "8-cores", I'd like to see a FX-9590 benched against a Haswell-E just for kicks.

i said before ' Agree - but whats gone on since to write home to mummy about? - Intel biggrin.gif '


Speaking for time gone and present - not what is coming - and when it does biggrin.gifthumb.gif
post #1202 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdlvx View Post

You realize that 4770k, 4670k, lower 4000 series quads are all the same chips, Intel just disables parts of it.

What AMD is doing is actually a nice thing. If AMD were Intel, the lineup would look something like this:

FX 8320: no VT-D or AVX/FMA3 part of L2 and L3 disabled
FX 8350 no VT-D, includes FMA3 but not AVX, less L2 and L3 disabled
FX 9370: no VT-D, includes FMA3 and AVX, even less L2 and L3 disabled.
FX 9590: VT-D, IOMMU, FMA3, AVX, full L2 and L3 enabled.

You don't seem to remember the days when Intel and AMD's CPU lineup consisted mostly of the same chips at different clock speeds, and part of being an enthusiast/overclocker was having the ability to buy cheap chips and turn them into more expensive ones.

Intel has completely changed the game and turned overclocking into this "elite club" where you have to pay an additional tax to enter, lose parts of the chip, etc.

I had a nice life of buying low end Intel and AMD chips, saving a ton of money, then overclocking them and having something nicer.

Your attitude irks me to no end, because you're basically completely against the kind of product line-ups where you can buy a cheap chip, overclock it, and have something nicer.

The only purpose of those more expensive AMD chips are to provide for those who can't or won't overclock. It is just like the old line-up of Core 2 Duo, Pentium 4, Athlon XP/64/etc, Opteron, etc.

The biggest thing that irks me the most is that before Intel completely flipped the game, they'd make more money off of people who weren't able to overclock by charging them more for what is basically a BIOS setting change that was locked after being sold. Now, Intel makes more money by making overclocking ridiculously easy and charging more for the ability to do it.

I don't know if you realize it, but you're basically arguing that Intel doing something like releasing an unlocked i5 3330k model for $190 would be completely stupid and horrible for customers.

The last Intel system I owned was an i7 920, and it was the same old situation where you could either save a ton of money by buying the slow model and overclocking, or if it you were stupid and couldn't overclock, you'd spend more on a "factory overclocked" system. Once Intel changed to IB, and decided to tell us all that we're basically moochers who get stuff for free by overclocking, and then locked overclocking to the most expensive parts in the line-up, I walked away from Intel and have never regretted it.

And in that time, I've been "lucky" enough to see the enthusiast community devolve into this awful benchmark pissing match of people who think they are SOOOO GOOD with computers because they can change the multiplier on their fisher price E-Z Clock CPU.

I'm going to rant and probably get in trouble for this, but screw it. I'm so sick and tired of you elitist Intel people. You constantly wag benchmarks around like a bunch of fools, and half the time they're benchmarks for programs for software that you don't even know what that software actually does. It's like you come to these place and feel like you have some sort of urge to be some sort of GOOD GOY INTEL MARKETING AGENT to show up on random forums and make sure that you try and advertise for Intel under the guise of "WOW I CHANGED THE MULTIPLIER AND NOW I WIN BENCHMARKS IM THE BEST COMPUTER ENTHUSIAST TO EVER EXIST!!!!!!!!!!! LOOK AT THESE BENCHMARKS!!!"

Years ago, you'd see people thrilled with the idea of buying cheap celerons, semprons, all the way up to high end just changing clocks and pushing chips far. Thanks to you awful Intel barbarians who can't appreciate a well performing chip, being a computer enthusiast has turned into this knuckle dragging circle jerk of the same 15 benchmarks.

And it's because Intel re-wrote overclocking. It turned it from a valuable skill which benefited those with knowledge into this awful, fanboy creating, ridiculously easy and simple procedure which makes people want to justify their purchases and create the most stable form of viral marketing to ever cross the internet. Yes, I view you "LOL EVO 212 COOLER I HIT 4.5GHZ IM THE BEST INTEL 4LYFE XDDD" enthusiasts even lower than the most rabid, inane Apple fanboy.

So just drop it already. I'd take a chip that was half as fast as FX 8320 but OCed a lot more and was a ton of fun to play with. You might even wonder why I don't have FX 4000 series to OC and play with if I feel that way? Well I disable cores and modules on my 8350 all the time, and it's like playing with a different chip.

Enjoy bashing on a company that still lets you get more out of cheaper hardware and hoping that they can some day give us a lineup that more reflects theirs, like perhaps AM4 platform with bus clock locked and only the highest end chip has an unlocked multiplier. OH GOD I HOPE THAT HAPPENS!!!! /s

Although I'm not sure it's relevant to thread, this post sums up the AMD section of overclock.net since.... more or less 2010.

On topic : if we go with the strict definition of high end :
- denoting the most expensive of a range of products,
obviously Intel has the most expensive parts.

So if AMD processors often perform similarly to their expensive Intel counterparts, why aren't they considered high end? If we put aside multi-gpu performance (despite seeming to be the defining factor for some in this thread, lol) and look at the average of overall performance (games, productivity, everyday tasks), I think it's safe to say that AMD chips can keep up with Intel chips fairly well, considering the 40% price difference between both.

High end for me means being able to throw the latest games, software at my machine and seeing good performance. Getting comparable numbers in some benchs is fun too (not for software that I don't know/use lol...) ... It doesn't mean blindly paying the highest price that's for sure.

Question : if a processor isn't labeled "high end", doesn't carry a "high end" price tag, but it's performance is very comparable to high end parts, can it be considered high end?
The Douchebag
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-8320 SABERTOOTH 990FX AMD Radeon (TM) R9 380 Series Mushkin  
  hide details  
The Douchebag
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-8320 SABERTOOTH 990FX AMD Radeon (TM) R9 380 Series Mushkin  
  hide details  
post #1203 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by doritos93 View Post

Although I'm not sure it's relevant to thread, this post sums up the AMD section of overclock.net since.... more or less 2010.

On topic : if we go with the strict definition of high end :
- denoting the most expensive of a range of products,
obviously Intel has the most expensive parts.

So if AMD processors often perform similarly to their expensive Intel counterparts, why aren't they considered high end? If we put aside multi-gpu performance (despite seeming to be the defining factor for some in this thread, lol) and look at the average of overall performance (games, productivity, everyday tasks), I think it's safe to say that AMD chips can keep up with Intel chips fairly well, considering the 40% price difference between both.

High end for me means being able to throw the latest games, software at my machine and seeing good performance. Getting comparable numbers in some benchs is fun too (not for software that I don't know/use lol...) ... It doesn't mean blindly paying the highest price that's for sure.

Question : if a processor isn't labeled "high end", doesn't carry a "high end" price tag, but it's performance is very comparable to high end parts, can it be considered high end?
I think there are different ways to attack it. Here for OCN it is probably the end performance that could be used to designate. For the general population, the stock performance and/or price is a likely standard.
post #1204 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by imran27 View Post

Why compare a stock clocked CPU to an over clocked one??,

You do notice what site youre on right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 996gt2 View Post

To be honest, you could bench your i7-4700MQ laptop CPU against a stock FX-8320 and it would probably win in most cases.


Agree - but whats gone on since to write home to mummy about? - Intel biggrin.gif
8-Core, 16-Thread Haswell-E:
AnandTech%20Unlocked%20ExtremeEdition_678x452.png

Since the AMD loves to claim that the FX series are "8-cores", I'd like to see a FX-9590 benched against a Haswell-E just for kicks.

I love how intel throws that out there. "First 8 Core"... You're a bastard Intel but i love it
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 #1205 of 1593
Thread Starter 
I think I already made a fair assessment of what the different ranges for AMD chips are a while back.

the 6100 is the very beginning of low end mid range. The 6300 and the 8320 are mid range, and 8350/9xxx is high end.

BUT the cut off point for Intel is their 6 core chips, while the cutoff for AMD is their 9xxx.

So compared to Intels offerings, AMD barely makes the cusp of high end, and it does so with some serious tradeoffs.

First off, you're looking at about a minimum of $60 in extra electric usage with AMD over a 3 year ownership....even if you only use the machine for a couple hours a day.

On top of that, if an Intel system saves you just 5 minutes a day for 3 years, that's a whole 4 days worth of time lost with AMD. That's a pretty big deal, considering that's about 96 man hours lost. If you even made just $5 an hour utilizing that saved time, that's $480 in lost time!!! Or, 96 hours spent doing something else, either way, it adds up. This alone pretty much closes the case. But we'll keep going.

Then there's the fact that PSU and motherboards will be more expensive on the upper end of the AMD side, just because of the need for extra wattage, and because of the fact that AMD motherboards for high wattage CPU's tend to cost a significant amount more. You could get away with a 400w PSU on an Intel 4770K system with a decent videocard......but you'll most likely need at least a 600w PSU to run an AMD 8350 or 9xxx with a decent videocard. That can mean the difference of around $20-$40 more.

These things are very hard to ignore.

In the long run, a more expensive intel processor ends up being cheaper and better performing at the same time. And the 9xxx isn't even really in the picture, since a 4770K is not only faster in general, it's also cheaper from the get go. In the long run, even a 3930k ends up being cheaper or just as cheap as a 9xxx, while providing massively more performance along with a few years more longevity.

Now people may want to twist it any way they want, but ultimately, Intel wins in price to performance in the mid-high end market, despite being initially more expensive.
Edited by AMDATI - 4/1/14 at 7:30pm
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 #1206 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMDATI View Post

I think I already made a fair assessment of what the different ranges for AMD chips are a while back.

the 6100 is the very beginning of low end mid range. The 6300 and the 8320 are mid range, and 8350/9xxx is high end.

BUT the cut off point for Intel is their 6 core chips, while the cutoff for AMD is their 9xxx.

So compared to Intels offerings, AMD barely makes the cusp of high end, and it does so with some serious tradeoffs.

First off, you're looking at about a minimum of $60 in extra electric usage with AMD over a 3 year ownership....even if you only use the machine for a couple hours a day.

On top of that, if an Intel system saves you just 5 minutes a day for 3 years, that's a whole 4 days worth of time lost with AMD. That's a pretty big deal, considering that's about 96 man hours lost. If you even made just $5 an hour utilizing that saved time, that's $480 in lost time!!! Or, 96 hours spent doing something else, either way, it adds up. This alone pretty much closes the case. But we'll keep going.

Then there's the fact that PSU and motherboards will be more expensive on the upper end of the AMD side, just because of the need for extra wattage, and because of the fact that AMD motherboards for high wattage CPU's tend to cost a significant amount more. You could get away with a 400w PSU on an Intel 4770K system with a decent videocard......but you'll most likely need at least a 600w PSU to run an AMD 8350 or 9xxx with a decent videocard. That can mean the difference of around $20-$40 more.

These things are very hard to ignore.

In the long run, a more expensive intel processor ends up being cheaper and better performing at the same time. And the 9xxx isn't even really in the picture, since a 4770K is not only faster in general, it's also cheaper from the get go. In the long run, even a 3930k ends up being cheaper or just as cheap as a 9xxx, while providing massively more performance along with a few years more longevity.

Now people may want to twist it any way they want, but ultimately, Intel wins in price to performance in the mid-high end market, despite being initially more expensive.

Agreed with most except, cost of mb for amd is higher???? Im guessing you never looked at a board for a 3930k. Its alnost double. And psu for amd...thats not true. A good 450w will run a 9xxx with a high end gpy. Look at the actual readings in the psu forum and you will realize just how far off you are. Besides those two points what you said was true.

Edit: high emd board for socket 2011 is $599, high end board for am3+ is $209. That is the real reason people go amd over intel. You can get a really good cpu, mb, ram, psu case and a better gpu(which is what you really need for gaming) when you are on a budget. That is the difference between and entry level video card with the intel system where your cpu isnt going to help you play games and a high end gpu with the amd system.

Now i am not saying amd is faster than intel. Im saying for a person with x amount to spent on a GAMING rig, amd can get you more bang for the buck.
Edited by Papas - 4/1/14 at 7:55pm
post #1207 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMDATI View Post


the 6100 is the very beginning of low end mid range. The 6300 and the 8320 are mid range, and 8350/9xxx is high end.

BUT the cut off point for Intel is their 6 core chips, while the cutoff for AMD is their 9xxx.

And how do you justify this? What makes those CPUs lower midrange? What is the number on a benchmark that determines high end or Extreme etc.
We keep fighting over AMD vs. Intel in here, but this thread wasn't started as an AMD vs. Intel thread. If you want that, go to facebook or youtube comments.

We still need to define the characteristics of a mid range CPU as well as every other category. CPUbenchmark.net puts the cutoff for High end at ~3,350~ points.
Once this question is answered in full. Then we can tackle the issue of AMD viability.
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 #1208 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReciever View Post

So again, why dont we have another bench off?

Its been done time and time again. You're pretending as if its going to make a believer out of someone. All it leads to is broken hearts, bruised egos, and locked threads. Give it up already and move on...

http://www.overclock.net/t/1210060/fx8120-vs-2500k-benchmark-results

http://www.overclock.net/t/1333027/amd-fx-8350-vs-i5-3570k-delidded-single-gpu-and-crossfire-gpu


Edited by 2advanced - 4/2/14 at 2:10am
The Beast
(12 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD 8120 Gigabyte 990FX-A UD5 Diamond HD 7970 G-Skill Sniper 1866 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
OCZ Agility 3 Lite-On Blu Ray Burner XSPC Raystorm Water Block, and custom Bucket Wa... Win 7 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
HannsG 24' HD Monitor Logitech MK700 OCZ ModExtreme 750 Fatal1ty Series Fractal Design Arc Midi 
  hide details  
The Beast
(12 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD 8120 Gigabyte 990FX-A UD5 Diamond HD 7970 G-Skill Sniper 1866 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
OCZ Agility 3 Lite-On Blu Ray Burner XSPC Raystorm Water Block, and custom Bucket Wa... Win 7 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
HannsG 24' HD Monitor Logitech MK700 OCZ ModExtreme 750 Fatal1ty Series Fractal Design Arc Midi 
  hide details  
post #1209 of 1593
Mid-end: Yes
High-end: No

thumb.gif
Golden Ivy
(14 items)
 
HTPC
(10 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-3770K @ 5 GHz Gigabyte Z77X-UD5H 980 Ti @ 1580/2000 2x 8GB G.Skill @ 2400/CL10 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
2x 850 Evo 500 GB Custom Water Windows 10 Pro Asus PG258Q 1080p/240Hz TN 
MonitorKeyboardPowerMouse
Dell U2515H 1440p/60Hz AH-IPS Logitech G610 MX-Red + O-Rings EVGA SuperNova G2 850W Logitech G403 
AudioAudio
Asus Xonar Essence STX Philips Fidelio X1 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
i3-4150T AsRock Z97E-ITX/ac 2x 4GB @ 1600/CL9 Samsung 850 Evo 250GB + 20TB NAS 
Optical DriveCoolingKeyboardPower
None Fanless Logitech K400 Streacom Nano150 Fanless 
Case
Streacom FC8 Evo 
  hide details  
Golden Ivy
(14 items)
 
HTPC
(10 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-3770K @ 5 GHz Gigabyte Z77X-UD5H 980 Ti @ 1580/2000 2x 8GB G.Skill @ 2400/CL10 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
2x 850 Evo 500 GB Custom Water Windows 10 Pro Asus PG258Q 1080p/240Hz TN 
MonitorKeyboardPowerMouse
Dell U2515H 1440p/60Hz AH-IPS Logitech G610 MX-Red + O-Rings EVGA SuperNova G2 850W Logitech G403 
AudioAudio
Asus Xonar Essence STX Philips Fidelio X1 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
i3-4150T AsRock Z97E-ITX/ac 2x 4GB @ 1600/CL9 Samsung 850 Evo 250GB + 20TB NAS 
Optical DriveCoolingKeyboardPower
None Fanless Logitech K400 Streacom Nano150 Fanless 
Case
Streacom FC8 Evo 
  hide details  
post #1210 of 1593
Your focus should be your budget, not "which side is better". Avoid the politics, stick to the numbers. "You get what you paid for" can be a bad OR good thing.
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?