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 151  

post #1501 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMDATI View Post

a 25% overclock doesn't necessarily mean 25% more performance.

In a CPU limited task it usually means very nearly this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuivamaa View Post

There are cheap (sub 90 euro) AM3+ boards able to sustain 4.5Ghz+ FX octocores.

I've used a few well regarded budget boards for FX eight-cores, they were disappointing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuivamaa View Post

125W TDP designated vishera processors come boxed with this

I've got a few of these; the same design has been an AMD stock cooler for a very long time.

It will cool a stock eight core part, but you can't really OC much on it. I did get my Opteron 165 to 3GHz with one though...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavy MG View Post

Stock coolers suck on both sides, why would you even consider one for power/enthusiast use?

Because the price difference between the stock cooler for my 3570k and my NH-D14 is $70 dollars (which adds almost 40% the cost of the CPU), but the difference in maximum stable clock speed is around 5-7%.

Being a power user and an enthusiast doesn't mean I always need to piss money away for no reason.
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.3/3.6GHz core/uncore, 1.225/1.2v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) 2x Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X OC New Edition (10036... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-11-12-27-T1, 1.37v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.05) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Cooler Master Nepton 280L 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Reference R9 290X w/Stilt's MLU 1000e / 1375m E... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.3/3.6GHz core/uncore, 1.225/1.2v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) 2x Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X OC New Edition (10036... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-11-12-27-T1, 1.37v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.05) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Cooler Master Nepton 280L 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Reference R9 290X w/Stilt's MLU 1000e / 1375m E... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
post #1502 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavy MG View Post

A 970 series board is usually a sub $100 board and is the same as a 990FX board aside from less PCI-E lanes,a 990FXA-UD3 R4 is cheap,so is a M5A99X EVO R2.0.
There's 3-4 revisions of the Gigabyte boards because Gigabyte tried to go cheap,Asus did too,thats why there are revision 2 boards.

There are no sub 100$ 970 series boards with good vrm. Just having 8 phases doesn't make a vrm good. That 990 ud3 r4 is also on the expensive side (it uses more expensive and more powerful parts, it's good stuff).

Using one of those "cheap" boards for overclocking is not viable unless you don't mind frequent board RMAs (and the associated downtime).
post #1503 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by PsyM4n View Post

VT-D with RAID cards and the likes on a board with 4 ram slots and "just" 32 free PCIe lanes? If you go that far you'll be better off with the 48 lanes of x79. Sure it's gonna be a 200$ difference, but with a few 600$ RAID cards on top, this is the least of your concerns.

Now, you could just want to use a single RAID card and the likes, with cost being a very high concern. But in that case an overclockable CPU that draws more power than something like an i5 4430 will be of no real use... unless the only things you do on those VMs are to play games and make zip archives. The i5 system will cost less to buy too (literally any x87 LGA1150 board will be fine and will cost less than an AMD board able to handle an overclockable FX 8xxx, plus the intel comes with a cooler).

Of course there's also the slight chance of not needing much CPU power. Well, in that case your best choice will be an FX-4300. The problem is that this is on the low end side of things. tongue.gif

So the moment an FX is a better choice than an i5, it automatically disqualifies, because you should go with X79 instead for more PCIe lanes? We've been talking mostly this entire thread about FX vs i5 for mid range. MID RANGE.....repeat MID RANGE.

Well, so you're technically suggesting that an FX platform is actually a viable solution after all, because base on your statement, for Virtualization i7 > FX > i5. And here we've been told for over 100 pages by Intel lovers that the AMD FX isn't viable option for anything.

Edit: You don't need $600 dollar raid card, any Dell Perc6i or HP P410 will do just fine. An entire FX virtualization build can be had for $600, and you want to pair that up with a costly $600 raid card?

Some virtualization don't require a lot of CPU power, like storage box or media server VM, but at least AMD provides you with the option of overclocking with virtualization. Intel has gimped the entire K platform. I may not want to run a 5ghz FX 83x0, but at least AMD gives me that choice, that I can run a 5ghz virtualization box. Intel, stick with B87 or Q87 and non OC CPUs.
Edited by flyin15sec - 4/7/14 at 7:27pm
post #1504 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by PsyM4n View Post

There are no sub 100$ 970 series boards with good vrm. Just having 8 phases doesn't make a vrm good. That 990 ud3 r4 is also on the expensive side (it uses more expensive and more powerful parts, it's good stuff).
Using one of those "cheap" boards for overclocking is not viable unless you don't mind frequent board RMAs (and the associated downtime).
Like I said,they're 990FX boards minus the extra PCI-E lanes having 8 phases on a board is cheap to do these days,we've already gone through it in this thread, page back through the thread before you clam false things. Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3P,would handle overclocks fine,so would a Asus M5A97 R2.0,spend a bit more for a 990FXA-UD3 or M5A99X EVO R2.0 for the feature set and more PCI-E.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blameless View Post

It will cool a stock eight core part, but you can't really OC much on it. I did get my Opteron 165 to 3GHz with one though...
Because the price difference between the stock cooler for my 3570k and my NH-D14 is $70 dollars (which adds almost 40% the cost of the CPU), but the difference in maximum stable clock speed is around 5-7%.
Being a power user and an enthusiast doesn't mean I always need to piss money away for no reason.
So you would rather have the heat,noise and more chip degradation from excess heat? To each their own,I guess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyin15sec View Post

So the moment an FX is a better choice than an i5, it automatically disqualifies, because you should go with X79 instead for more PCIe lanes? We've been talking mostly this entire thread about FX vs i5 for mid range. MID RANGE.....repeat MID RANGE.

Well, so you're technically suggesting that an FX platform is actually a viable solution after all, because base on your statement, for Virtualization i7 > FX > i5. And here we've been told for over 100 pages by Intel lovers that the AMD FX isn't viable option for anything.
Claiming that a mid end platform doesn't have as many available PCI-E lanes as a high end one (requires you to buy a $300 mobo and a $570 CPU) isn't as silly as being told a $89-130 motherboard " isn't cheap enough".
Edited by Heavy MG - 4/7/14 at 7:18pm
Moar cores!
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX 8320 @ 4.0Ghz/4.2Ghz turbo gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 rev. 4.0 Gigabyte Nvida GTX 770OC 2GB/ Gigabyte 970 G1 G... Gskill Sniper 1866Mhz 8GB (4GB x 2) 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Corsair Neutron GTX 120GB WD Black 1TB Asus 24X CM Hyper 212Evo 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Home X64 HP 22BW 21.5" LED-IPS CM Storm Trigger/MX Brown Corsair TX 650V2 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM HAF922 Logitech G500S Steelseries QCK Mini Asus Xonar DX 7.1 
  hide details  
Moar cores!
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX 8320 @ 4.0Ghz/4.2Ghz turbo gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 rev. 4.0 Gigabyte Nvida GTX 770OC 2GB/ Gigabyte 970 G1 G... Gskill Sniper 1866Mhz 8GB (4GB x 2) 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Corsair Neutron GTX 120GB WD Black 1TB Asus 24X CM Hyper 212Evo 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Home X64 HP 22BW 21.5" LED-IPS CM Storm Trigger/MX Brown Corsair TX 650V2 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM HAF922 Logitech G500S Steelseries QCK Mini Asus Xonar DX 7.1 
  hide details  
post #1505 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyin15sec View Post

So the moment an FX is a better choice than an i5, it automatically disqualifies, because you should go with X79 instead for more PCIe lanes? We've been talking mostly this entire thread about FX vs i5 for mid range. MID RANGE.....repeat MID RANGE.

Well, so you're technically suggesting that an FX platform is actually a viable solution after all, because base on your statement, for Virtualization i7 > FX > i5. And here we've been told for over 100 pages by Intel lovers that the AMD FX isn't viable option for anything.

Well, for starters, my very first post in this thread explicitly stated that AMD processors are viable as budget workstations. Virtualization is part of what workstations do.

Now, you mentioned a case where you needed an overclocked FX for virtual machines with RAID and the likes. Those things are expensive. Such kind of load usually needs lots of RAM. Such kind of load usually wants lots of throughput.

Now, with x79 you do have a 40GB/s throughput for your pcie devices. More than double the throughput of an AM3 based setup. You also have space for double the RAM. If you really need many fast RAID controllers and lots of processing on the data on them, then yeah, as you already said, AMD automatically disqualifies. It would be stupid to halve the performance of your four 400$ 12gb/s SAS controllers (ie: LSI SAS 9300-8i) and all the overpriced SAS 12gb/s drives connected to them just to save 200$.

Edit:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavy MG View Post

Like I said,they're 990FX boards minus the extra PCI-E lanes having 8 phases on a board is cheap to do these days,we've already gone through it in this thread, page back through the thread before you clam false things. Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3P,would handle overclocks fine,so would a Asus M5A97 R2.0,spend a bit more for a 990FXA-UD3 or M5A99X EVO R2.0 for the feature set and more PCI-E.

I don't claim those things. I see the end results (fried boards and the likes). You have your opinion. I have fried motherboards. If your opinion is stronger, then I surrender. tongue.gif
Edited by PsyM4n - 4/7/14 at 7:39pm
post #1506 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyin15sec View Post

I'm sure there are more than 1, uno, single, reason in the mid range. Look at virtualization for example. The AMD FX platform is the better choice over any of i5 K series processor across SB, IB, and Haswell.

FX series has IOMMU for direct IO pass through, none of the i5 K have VT-d, Intel's hardware pass through version for bare metal hypervisors. So say goodbye to any RAID card, GPU, or various other ports if you want to pass them along to the guest OS.

Additionally the extra cores of the FX 8xxx series give you much more leeway into how many VMs you can build with one CPU. The i5, without hyper threading will be bogged down quite fast after only a few VMs.

So before you spew none sense about FX not being a choice at all, learn about the many different uses in the real world, as oppose to just gaming.
And since when do you use a mid range gaming system to actually work on? If you are building a mid range workstation, well thats a different story. I see very few people actually game and work on the same computer for serious, and if they do use their gaming/workstation in a profession im sure their budget allow them to spend more than 1000 dollars on a "mid range system". Your logic is flawed in so many ways. i5 with no HT can take a serious hit in game as well...IF you run two top end cards in heavy games like bf3/bf4 multiplayer at 1080p, thats alreaddy proven long time ago....in fact some people with i7 even claim they get bothered in those scenarios. As I wrote before im talking about gaming systems, not workstations.
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 #1507 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by PachAz View Post

And since when do you use a mid range gaming system to actually work on? If you are building a mid range workstation, well thats a different story. I see very few people actually game and work on the same computer for serious, and if they do use their gaming/workstation in a profession im sure their budget allow them to spend more than 1000 dollars on a "mid range system". Your logic is flawed in so many ways. i5 with no HT can take a serious hit in game as well...IF you run two top end cards in heavy games like bf3/bf4 multiplayer at 1080p, thats alreaddy proven long time ago....in fact some people with i7 even claim they get bothered in those scenarios. As I wrote before im talking about gaming systems, not workstations.

Just because all you do is game on a computer doesn't mean that other people only game on a computer. A computer can be use for more than gaming. You're consistently falling back on gaming to make your stance, and I quote " no reason to chose AMD over Intel...". Fact is, gaming isn't the only reason to have a computer.

Just because I proved your statement false don't say my premiss is wrong/flawed. You're just in denial if you keep saying that. You said "flawed in so many ways", Please, I implore you, give me all those many reasons as to why it is flawed.

Can your i5 3570K do this?
A bare metal hypervisor: Linux VM with GPU for mining and 1 core, run a FreeNAS storage server with a RAID controller and 2 cores, run Windows box for folding with 4 cores, 1 core for a PFense appliance, all at the possibility of 4.6ghz or higher?

no, not with your 3570K, but it is possible with a mid range AMD FX build.
Edited by flyin15sec - 4/7/14 at 8:32pm
post #1508 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyin15sec View Post

Can your i5 3570K do this?
A bare metal hypervisor: Linux VM with GPU for mining and 1 core, run a FreeNAS storage server with a RAID controller and 2 cores, run Windows box for folding with 4 cores, 1 core for a PFense appliance, all at the possibility of 4.6ghz or higher?

no, not with your 3570K, but it is possible with a mid range AMD FX build.

A simple 3570T would be a much better choice to do all the aforementioned things. It'll also be far cheaper in the long-run if paired with other efficient components.

As soon as you start speaking about things like mining, storage servers and folding, things stop being about just maximizing absolute performance. It starts being a performance per power consumption relation rather than performance per initial price, or just performance unbounded to anything.

Of course doing all that on a gaming system might justify getting an FX (I don't think so, but let's assume it does). Well, that picture is uncommon. It's the exception, not the rule. Not many people have this kind of system.

Of course there are other exceptions too. The system here is part of those for example. It doesn't change the rules though.
post #1509 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by PsyM4n View Post

I don't claim those things. I see the end results (fried boards and the likes). You have your opinion. I have fried motherboards. If your opinion is stronger, then I surrender. tongue.gif
You didn't list what boards you've fried,so it's all just opinions to me.
I'd have to assume you're using Intel judging by you have to argue everyone's AMD build with Intel, even where an AMD setup may be more viable,also by you claiming that all AMD motherboards "are crap and will fry or explode".
Quote:
Originally Posted by PsyM4n View Post

A simple 3570T would be a much better choice to do all the aforementioned things. It'll also be far cheaper in the long-run if paired with other efficient components.

As soon as you start speaking about things like mining, storage servers and folding, things stop being about just maximizing absolute performance. It starts being a performance per power consumption relation rather than performance per initial price, or just performance unbounded to anything.

Of course doing all that on a gaming system might justify getting an FX (I don't think so, but let's assume it does). Well, that picture is uncommon. It's the exception, not the rule. Not many people have this kind of system.

Of course there are other exceptions too. The system here is part of those for example. It doesn't change the rules though.
No of course not because with every situation in this thread you've found a excuse for AMD to not be viable and always use gaming as an excuse. A 3570T is still a $200 chip,and locked. Can it do a VM on 1 core,storage server on 2 cores,4 cores for folding,and another core for PfSense? Doing all that at once? No,because you're out of cores by the time you do a VM,storage,and PfSense setup,as storage wouldn't be optimal on just 1 core.
Edited by Heavy MG - 4/7/14 at 9:38pm
Moar cores!
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX 8320 @ 4.0Ghz/4.2Ghz turbo gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 rev. 4.0 Gigabyte Nvida GTX 770OC 2GB/ Gigabyte 970 G1 G... Gskill Sniper 1866Mhz 8GB (4GB x 2) 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Corsair Neutron GTX 120GB WD Black 1TB Asus 24X CM Hyper 212Evo 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Home X64 HP 22BW 21.5" LED-IPS CM Storm Trigger/MX Brown Corsair TX 650V2 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM HAF922 Logitech G500S Steelseries QCK Mini Asus Xonar DX 7.1 
  hide details  
Moar cores!
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX 8320 @ 4.0Ghz/4.2Ghz turbo gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 rev. 4.0 Gigabyte Nvida GTX 770OC 2GB/ Gigabyte 970 G1 G... Gskill Sniper 1866Mhz 8GB (4GB x 2) 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Corsair Neutron GTX 120GB WD Black 1TB Asus 24X CM Hyper 212Evo 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Home X64 HP 22BW 21.5" LED-IPS CM Storm Trigger/MX Brown Corsair TX 650V2 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM HAF922 Logitech G500S Steelseries QCK Mini Asus Xonar DX 7.1 
  hide details  
post #1510 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavy MG View Post

So you would rather have the heat,noise and more chip degradation from excess heat? To each their own,I guess.

Higher voltages required to reach higher clocks, and the extra current those higher clock will invariably consume, are often going to degrade the higher clocked part faster, even if it's kept moderately cooler.

The chances of noticeable damage or degradation with settings that are stable on the stock cooler is going to be phenomenally small within the service life of the processor. Also, there won't be more heat, there will be less, even if the temperature is higher.

Noise may or may not be problematic. Intel stock coolers are not terribly loud. I cannot hear the fan on my 3570k except in very rare cases. I don't need the system to be dead silent when running AVX LINPACK, but it is completely inaudible in general use or while playing movies. It may or may not be making noise while gaming, the reference 7950 in the system drowns everything else out in such scenarios.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavy MG View Post

Claiming that a mid end platform doesn't have as many available PCI-E lanes as a high end one (requires you to buy a $300 mobo and a $570 CPU) isn't as silly as being told a $89-130 motherboard " isn't cheap enough".

Most people who are paying more than 80 dollars for an LGA-1150 board are paying to much. Only very specific uses really justify more.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PsyM4n View Post

A simple 3570T would be a much better choice to do all the aforementioned things. It'll also be far cheaper in the long-run if paired with other efficient components.

There are definitely some virtualization tasks that I would rather be running an 8-core FX for than a 3570T, even if I had to rule out OCing to keep costs similar.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PachAz View Post

I see very few people actually game and work on the same computer for serious, and if they do use their gaming/workstation in a profession im sure their budget allow them to spend more than 1000 dollars on a "mid range system".

Being a professional doesn't mean one is made of money. My wife has a doctorate and often does heavy duty bioinformatics work on her system, which is the same system she plays demanding games on. She's got loans to pay off, and the postdoc she's doing doesn't pay exceptionally well (more than worth it for the experience and great benefits though).

Likewise, most of my systems are very multi-functional. I play games, but not enough to justify a dedicated gaming system that isn't efficient in other tasks. My primary system needs to be able to do all of my wife's bioinformatics work in the case something happens to the other system, as well as my own work, and cover my entertainment needs.
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.3/3.6GHz core/uncore, 1.225/1.2v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) 2x Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X OC New Edition (10036... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-11-12-27-T1, 1.37v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.05) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Cooler Master Nepton 280L 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Reference R9 290X w/Stilt's MLU 1000e / 1375m E... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.3/3.6GHz core/uncore, 1.225/1.2v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) 2x Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X OC New Edition (10036... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-11-12-27-T1, 1.37v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.05) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Cooler Master Nepton 280L 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Reference R9 290X w/Stilt's MLU 1000e / 1375m E... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  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?