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 148  

post #1471 of 1593
if you like the K10.5 architecture and feel a bit nostalgic for it, and yet want something faster than the latest AMD desktop offerings... and if you are on a budget... you might look into pick up two Opteron 8439 SE chips (usually can be had on ebay for around $100 or so - list price was $2600 each back in 2009). These are "Istanbul" chips running at 2.8 ghz with 6 cores each, for a total of 12 cores - Istanbul is basically what Thuban derived from. Then pick up an inexpensive dual/quad dual power plane Tyan socket F board can be had for $100 or so. That and some DDR2 800 memory will be good for around 9.8 on Cinebench with Win 7 64bit and two of them, want more just add more 8439s.

As far as gaming on this type of setup... i'll be doing some benchmarks this coming week or so with a GeForce GTX 760 when it comes in... we'll see what the results are in Cinebench and Unigine.

If you have a bit more $$$, you could pick up a nice socket G34 board, and run dual or quad "Magny Cours" Opterons to start with... (each is a multi chip module which has two Istanbul cores in it)... then when the higher clocked Abu Dhabi ("Vishera" based) Opteron 6386 SEs come down in price (when the data centers start to upgrade them)... just upgrade to those. Memory performance is a bit better with those as well.

i built an i7 4770 for my daily use at work, and i can tell you that for productivity usage (ie doing builds, etc )... the 2009 vintage socket F dual Opteron 8439SE setup beats it handily.... Kind of sad actually to think of what a K10 running with a modern DDR3 memory system, on a modern .028 micron process tech would do today had AMD spent the time further optimizing the K10. A dual 4 ghz Phenom 1100T six core would do around 14+ on Cinebench today.

Downsides to these older chips = power consumption. But if you run software that can take advantage of lots of cores... they rock, and if you need more grunt... just add another CPU, or upgrade to Opterons with even more cores.

Overclocking wise... the options for overclocking them aren't as great on server boards... but i'd venture that is just because the pool of people running/tinkering with these setups is far less.

the stock clocked dual 8439SE i put together on a budget
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azFQCnvds0E

stock i7 3930k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0A30-VbDzQs

FX-9590
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGPfM93Gjao

At any rate just another option to think about....
Edited by rvborgh - 4/7/14 at 2:09am
post #1472 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by rvborgh View Post


i built an i7 4770 for my daily use at work, and i can tell you that for productivity usage (ie doing builds, etc )... the 2009 vintage socket F dual Opteron 8439SE setup beats it handily.... Kind of sad actually to think of what a K10 running with a modern DDR3 memory system, on a modern .028 micron process tech would do today had AMD spent the time further optimizing the K10. A dual 4 ghz Phenom 1100T six core would do around 14+ on Cinebench today.

Don't know about 28nm but AMD did port Stars cores to 32nm with Llano (still have one) and it was unspectacular, about zero gains really. K10.5 was maxed out long ago, it was an old design (65nm agena anyone?) anyway, it had a good run but it needed to go.
Mastodon Ryzen
(12 items)
 
HP Z220
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1800X Asus Crosshair VI Hero Sapphire RX Vega 64 reference Gskill TridentZ 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Pny SSD 240GB Crucial MX100 CM Nepton 280L Win 10 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
Acer Predator XG270HU Freesync XFX 750W Pro HAF XM Logitech G502 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsCooling
i7 3770 HP Quadro K2000 HP 
OSPowerCaseMouse
Win 7  HP 400W HP CMT RAT 7 
  hide details  
Mastodon Ryzen
(12 items)
 
HP Z220
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1800X Asus Crosshair VI Hero Sapphire RX Vega 64 reference Gskill TridentZ 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Pny SSD 240GB Crucial MX100 CM Nepton 280L Win 10 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
Acer Predator XG270HU Freesync XFX 750W Pro HAF XM Logitech G502 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsCooling
i7 3770 HP Quadro K2000 HP 
OSPowerCaseMouse
Win 7  HP 400W HP CMT RAT 7 
  hide details  
post #1473 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sgt Bilko View Post

Here's something straight from OCN:



Check out 10th place tongue.gif

You do realize that 10th place got significantly lower FPS than any of the Intel-based quadfire 7970 setups, right? It is getting similar FPS to 2x GTX 690s, and 4 7970s should be >>>> 2x GTX 690s.

If anything, this table shows evidence of the FX bottlenecking pretty hard.
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  
post #1474 of 1593
It's 12 FPS behind the i7-3930 also with quad HD 7970s. It's score is 302 points behind it too.

I wouldn't say it's bottlenecking "pretty hard" tongue.gif
post #1475 of 1593
It's also the best case scenario you can possibly have.

Pure GPU benchmark with no physics simulation, no AI etc.
 
Benching
(17 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
[i7 5960X @ 4.8GHz] [Rampage V Extreme] [Titan 1400MHz (1500MHz bench)] [Various] 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
[250GB 840EVO +2x SpinpointF3 1TB RAID0] [LD PC-V2 SS Phase Change] [XSPC X2O 750 pump/res] [Monsta 360 full copper + EK XT 360 + XT 240] 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
[Crossover 27Q LED-P 1440p+ASUS 1200p+LG 1080p] [Corsair AX1200] [Dimastech Easy v3.0] [Sennheiser HD558s] 
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
FX 8320, FX 8350, Phenom II x2 555BE i7 3930K, i7 860, i7 4770K, 68x Celeron D CVF, commando, 2x RIVE, Z87X-OC Asus 4870x2, Sapphire 4870 
GraphicsGraphicsGraphicsGraphics
2x 5870, 5850, 5830, 5770 2x 3870x2, 3870 GTX Titan, GTX 480, GTX 590 GTX 285, GTX 260, 4x 9800GT, 8800GTX 
RAMHard DriveCoolingCooling
4x4GB vengeance, 2x4GB predatorX, 2x1GB OCZ DDR2 Intel X25-M 80GB LD PC-V2 SS Phase Change OCN Marksman 
CoolingCoolingOSPower
2x old tek slims (GPU) Various watercooling stuff win7, winxp AX1200 
Case
test bench / cardboard box 
  hide details  
 
Benching
(17 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
[i7 5960X @ 4.8GHz] [Rampage V Extreme] [Titan 1400MHz (1500MHz bench)] [Various] 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
[250GB 840EVO +2x SpinpointF3 1TB RAID0] [LD PC-V2 SS Phase Change] [XSPC X2O 750 pump/res] [Monsta 360 full copper + EK XT 360 + XT 240] 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
[Crossover 27Q LED-P 1440p+ASUS 1200p+LG 1080p] [Corsair AX1200] [Dimastech Easy v3.0] [Sennheiser HD558s] 
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
FX 8320, FX 8350, Phenom II x2 555BE i7 3930K, i7 860, i7 4770K, 68x Celeron D CVF, commando, 2x RIVE, Z87X-OC Asus 4870x2, Sapphire 4870 
GraphicsGraphicsGraphicsGraphics
2x 5870, 5850, 5830, 5770 2x 3870x2, 3870 GTX Titan, GTX 480, GTX 590 GTX 285, GTX 260, 4x 9800GT, 8800GTX 
RAMHard DriveCoolingCooling
4x4GB vengeance, 2x4GB predatorX, 2x1GB OCZ DDR2 Intel X25-M 80GB LD PC-V2 SS Phase Change OCN Marksman 
CoolingCoolingOSPower
2x old tek slims (GPU) Various watercooling stuff win7, winxp AX1200 
Case
test bench / cardboard box 
  hide details  
post #1476 of 1593
The "accepted" belief system that "Intel is better" hangs on the thread of status quo. There could have been a better architecture with more performance, however these 4 core cpu's are actually "thin-clients", nothing more... which corresponds to most people's expectation, thus nobody is unhappy. Yet, suppose that Intel decides to ditch x86 and go for a full fledged "performance per watt per core" oriented horizon. What would happen? You guessed right, everybody would notice how the "new" architecture was performing better than the one they held so unreachable.
Welcome to demand economics guys.
Possible RISC contemporary to current Intel x86, should Intel decide to launch their own non-x86 compiler for the likes of cpu-coprocessors.VLIW> flashback to ATi!
The Machine
(14 items)
 
Nexus 7 2013
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10 6800K Asus F2A85-V MSI 6870 Hawx, VTX3D 5770, AMD HD6950(RIP), Sap... G.skill Ripjaws PC12800 6-8-6-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate 7200.5 1TB NEC 3540 Dvd-Rom Windows 7 x32 Ultimate Samsung P2350 23" 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonic s12-600w CoolerMaster Centurion 5 Logitech G600 Auzen X-Fi Raider 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Quad Krait 300 at 1.5Ghz Qualcomm APQ8064-1AA SOC Adreno 320 at 400mhz 2GB DDR3L-1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
32GB Internal NAND Android 5.0 7" 1920X1200 103% sRGB & 572 cd/m2 LTPS IPS Microsoft Wedge Mobile Keyboard 
PowerAudio
3950mAh/15.01mAh Battery Stereo Speakers 
  hide details  
The Machine
(14 items)
 
Nexus 7 2013
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10 6800K Asus F2A85-V MSI 6870 Hawx, VTX3D 5770, AMD HD6950(RIP), Sap... G.skill Ripjaws PC12800 6-8-6-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate 7200.5 1TB NEC 3540 Dvd-Rom Windows 7 x32 Ultimate Samsung P2350 23" 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonic s12-600w CoolerMaster Centurion 5 Logitech G600 Auzen X-Fi Raider 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Quad Krait 300 at 1.5Ghz Qualcomm APQ8064-1AA SOC Adreno 320 at 400mhz 2GB DDR3L-1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
32GB Internal NAND Android 5.0 7" 1920X1200 103% sRGB & 572 cd/m2 LTPS IPS Microsoft Wedge Mobile Keyboard 
PowerAudio
3950mAh/15.01mAh Battery Stereo Speakers 
  hide details  
post #1477 of 1593
I still dont see what the issue is. People here are only trying to defend their bought components, thats all. Can some one please prove me wrong, why my i5 3570k almost 2 years back was a bad choice, and If you can do that then I will take current AMD cpus for real. What amd cpus were there back then btw? Compare and discuss which would be the best and most future proof purchase. If one would build a gaming system today and have a budget high enough, why should he choose a fx 8350 instead of a i5 4670k. Money is not a issue since the price differance is 30-50 dollars max.
My PC
(28 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6700K Asus Z170 Pro Gaming KFA2 GTX 1080 Ti EXOC Corsair LPX 16GB (2x8), 2133Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Western Digital WD15EADS 1.5TB Samsung 840 250GB Crucial MX100 256GB Alphacool Eisblock XPX 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Alphacool ST30 360mm Alphacool ST30 140mm Alphacool Eisbecher 150mm Alphacool VPP655 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Masterkleer (10/13mm) Compression fittings (10/13mm) Corsair SP120 High Performance Phobya 6 Touch 30W 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Aquacomputer Kryographics Titan X (Pascal) Aquacomputer Active XCS backplate Watercool Heatkiller SW-X MB-Set Alphacool Monsta 240mm 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional Retail AOC Agon ag271qx CM Storm Quickfire Rappid-I Fractal Design Newton R3 1000W 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Cooler Master Cosmos II Logitech G502 Steelseries QcK Logitech 5:1 
  hide details  
My PC
(28 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6700K Asus Z170 Pro Gaming KFA2 GTX 1080 Ti EXOC Corsair LPX 16GB (2x8), 2133Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Western Digital WD15EADS 1.5TB Samsung 840 250GB Crucial MX100 256GB Alphacool Eisblock XPX 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Alphacool ST30 360mm Alphacool ST30 140mm Alphacool Eisbecher 150mm Alphacool VPP655 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Masterkleer (10/13mm) Compression fittings (10/13mm) Corsair SP120 High Performance Phobya 6 Touch 30W 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Aquacomputer Kryographics Titan X (Pascal) Aquacomputer Active XCS backplate Watercool Heatkiller SW-X MB-Set Alphacool Monsta 240mm 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional Retail AOC Agon ag271qx CM Storm Quickfire Rappid-I Fractal Design Newton R3 1000W 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Cooler Master Cosmos II Logitech G502 Steelseries QcK Logitech 5:1 
  hide details  
post #1478 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by PachAz View Post

I still dont see what the issue is. People here are only trying to defend their bought components, thats all. Can some one please prove me wrong, why my i5 3570k almost 2 years back was a bad choice, and If you can do that then I will take current AMD cpus for real. What amd cpus were there back then btw? Compare and discuss which would be the best and most future proof purchase. If one would build a gaming system today and have a budget high enough, why should he choose a fx 8350 instead of a i5 4670k. Money is not a issue since the price differance is 30-50 dollars max.

Your I5-3570K wasn't a bad choice, it's a wicked CPU! smile.gif

However I never ever recommend people the FX-8350 because the price is just too close to Intel's highest end I5s.

As such I always recommend a FX-8320 because of that. They are excellent for their money, considering they cost as much as Intel's highest I3 and lowest I5 it's a great choice.


Future proof doesn't exist. You should always buy the CPU for what you need or what you think you will need.


Prime reason I have gone back to my Thuban. It cost me half the price of a brand new FX-8320 and I figured it was an excellent performer. However I wouldn't be paying close to £90 because the FX-8320 will out perform it.


It's all about price in my eyes and where they sit for their money.
post #1479 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by PachAz View Post

I still dont see what the issue is. People here are only trying to defend their bought components, thats all. Can some one please prove me wrong, why my i5 3570k almost 2 years back was a bad choice, and If you can do that then I will take current AMD cpus for real. What amd cpus were there back then btw? Compare and discuss which would be the best and most future proof purchase. If one would build a gaming system today and have a budget high enough, why should he choose a fx 8350 instead of a i5 4670k. Money is not a issue since the price differance is 30-50 dollars max.
To each, their own; however benchmarks show oddities in outlier usage scenarios, outside the realms of generic desktop use.
Currently off the shelf 4 to 8 core cpu's aren't meant for issuing single processes at any moment in time, imo.
A newly concept sport called chess-boxing provides an analogy. A chess master, or a professional boxer may not adapt to needs that are rapidly changing between focused concentration and imminent events, but they are expected not fail should any of them accept the challenge.
Likewise if the cache structure fails, the expected benefit for 90% of the power output goes to waste because, there are only so many threads in serial processors.
The Machine
(14 items)
 
Nexus 7 2013
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10 6800K Asus F2A85-V MSI 6870 Hawx, VTX3D 5770, AMD HD6950(RIP), Sap... G.skill Ripjaws PC12800 6-8-6-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate 7200.5 1TB NEC 3540 Dvd-Rom Windows 7 x32 Ultimate Samsung P2350 23" 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonic s12-600w CoolerMaster Centurion 5 Logitech G600 Auzen X-Fi Raider 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Quad Krait 300 at 1.5Ghz Qualcomm APQ8064-1AA SOC Adreno 320 at 400mhz 2GB DDR3L-1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
32GB Internal NAND Android 5.0 7" 1920X1200 103% sRGB & 572 cd/m2 LTPS IPS Microsoft Wedge Mobile Keyboard 
PowerAudio
3950mAh/15.01mAh Battery Stereo Speakers 
  hide details  
The Machine
(14 items)
 
Nexus 7 2013
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10 6800K Asus F2A85-V MSI 6870 Hawx, VTX3D 5770, AMD HD6950(RIP), Sap... G.skill Ripjaws PC12800 6-8-6-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate 7200.5 1TB NEC 3540 Dvd-Rom Windows 7 x32 Ultimate Samsung P2350 23" 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonic s12-600w CoolerMaster Centurion 5 Logitech G600 Auzen X-Fi Raider 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Quad Krait 300 at 1.5Ghz Qualcomm APQ8064-1AA SOC Adreno 320 at 400mhz 2GB DDR3L-1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
32GB Internal NAND Android 5.0 7" 1920X1200 103% sRGB & 572 cd/m2 LTPS IPS Microsoft Wedge Mobile Keyboard 
PowerAudio
3950mAh/15.01mAh Battery Stereo Speakers 
  hide details  
post #1480 of 1593
Hi Kuivimaa,

Seems to me that Stars core on Llano was severely crippled frequency wise... almost like it was done on purpose.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2012/02/06/amd-a8-3870-review/3

compared to this:

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/174632-amd-kaveri-a10-7850k-and-a8-7600-review-was-it-worth-the-wait-for-the-first-true-heterogeneous-chip/3

Notice that 4 core LLano at 3.6 completely outscores the latest A10-7850 Steamroller part running .1 Ghz faster in Cinebench and it took two revs of Steamroller to get even to where it is.

Llano at stock 3 ghz... matches A10-7850k at 3.7 Ghz on Cinebench.

After 3 years of work... that really isn't progress (as far as cores go)...
Edited by rvborgh - 4/7/14 at 9:21am
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?