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 17  

post #161 of 1593
The problem with Intel is they use lots of secret designs and also the price is much higher because the AMD cpu has complete instructions and open multipliers. I think the mobos are more expensive. Intel is better but it doesn't make sense to buy it. It's like Goliath vs. David. David gets the Girl!?
Crayemulator
(34 items)
 
HTPC
(14 items)
 
Laptop
(20 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-6100 Asus Sabretooth 990FX rev 2.0 Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X Vulcan DDR3 2400 Orange Series 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Western Digital Western Digital Samsung Seagate Barracuda 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
LG DVD-RW DH16A1L 140 mm Cooltek fan Noctua NF-P12 premium fan Noctua NF-P12 premium fan 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
140 mm Cooltek fan 140 mm Cooltek fan Coolermaster Seidon M120 140 mm Cooltek fan 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC 420 reservoir and pump Antec Kühler 920 Phobya G-Silent 12 Phobya G-Silent 12 
OSOSMonitorKeyboard
Windows 8.1 Professional OpenSuSE 12.2 22" LG Flatron W2243T Keysonic 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Be quiet! Straight Power E6 (700W) Corsair Carbide 400R Logitech Gaming Mouse Case Logic Gel-eez 
AudioAudioOtherOther
Samsung 240T Loudspeaker Onboard SATA Y power cable 2x Y 3-pin power cable 
OtherOther
4x S-ATA cable black 50 cm 12volt 4x 3-pin power cable adapter 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom 550 2x Biostar TA870+  ATI Radeon HD 4300 Noname Ram 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Western Digital Caviar Blue Hitach LC Power Cosmo Cool LC-CC95 Arctic Cooler F9 PWM 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Arctic Cooler F8 PWM Windows 7 Ultimate 27" Acer Noname 
PowerOther
Enermax Pro87+ 500 Watt  3.5" 1.44 MB disk drive  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Turion 64 X2 Ultra  SB 700 series HD 3650 HD 3200 
RAMRAMHard DriveOptical Drive
Komputerbay Noname Samsung Spinpoint M8 Sony DVD/DV-RW TS-L633A 
OSMonitorKeyboardMouse
Windows 8 LG Flatsscreen PS/2 compatible PS/2 compatible 
AudioOtherOtherOther
AMD High Definition Audio Device Bluetooth Adapter Winbond CIR Transceiver IEEE 1394 Firewire 
OtherOtherOtherOther
Qualcomm Atheros AR928X wireless JMicron PCIe MS/SD/MMC/xD Host Controller Realtek PCIe GBE  Logitech 1.3 M WebCam 
  hide details  
Crayemulator
(34 items)
 
HTPC
(14 items)
 
Laptop
(20 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-6100 Asus Sabretooth 990FX rev 2.0 Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X Vulcan DDR3 2400 Orange Series 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Western Digital Western Digital Samsung Seagate Barracuda 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
LG DVD-RW DH16A1L 140 mm Cooltek fan Noctua NF-P12 premium fan Noctua NF-P12 premium fan 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
140 mm Cooltek fan 140 mm Cooltek fan Coolermaster Seidon M120 140 mm Cooltek fan 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC 420 reservoir and pump Antec Kühler 920 Phobya G-Silent 12 Phobya G-Silent 12 
OSOSMonitorKeyboard
Windows 8.1 Professional OpenSuSE 12.2 22" LG Flatron W2243T Keysonic 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Be quiet! Straight Power E6 (700W) Corsair Carbide 400R Logitech Gaming Mouse Case Logic Gel-eez 
AudioAudioOtherOther
Samsung 240T Loudspeaker Onboard SATA Y power cable 2x Y 3-pin power cable 
OtherOther
4x S-ATA cable black 50 cm 12volt 4x 3-pin power cable adapter 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom 550 2x Biostar TA870+  ATI Radeon HD 4300 Noname Ram 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Western Digital Caviar Blue Hitach LC Power Cosmo Cool LC-CC95 Arctic Cooler F9 PWM 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Arctic Cooler F8 PWM Windows 7 Ultimate 27" Acer Noname 
PowerOther
Enermax Pro87+ 500 Watt  3.5" 1.44 MB disk drive  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Turion 64 X2 Ultra  SB 700 series HD 3650 HD 3200 
RAMRAMHard DriveOptical Drive
Komputerbay Noname Samsung Spinpoint M8 Sony DVD/DV-RW TS-L633A 
OSMonitorKeyboardMouse
Windows 8 LG Flatsscreen PS/2 compatible PS/2 compatible 
AudioOtherOtherOther
AMD High Definition Audio Device Bluetooth Adapter Winbond CIR Transceiver IEEE 1394 Firewire 
OtherOtherOtherOther
Qualcomm Atheros AR928X wireless JMicron PCIe MS/SD/MMC/xD Host Controller Realtek PCIe GBE  Logitech 1.3 M WebCam 
  hide details  
post #162 of 1593
can someone supply a stock 8320 and 8350 cinebench score? Thanks
    
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  
post #163 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

If you require benchmarks to support a discussion - that should lend itself pretty well to supporting my viewpoint in the eyes of people who value numbers.

It doesn't. If you aren't talking about it "feeling" like it's completing a Cinema4D render faster, then what you posted is irrelevant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

Daily use is much different than benchmarking where the machine is free to concentrate its efforts on a single application to the exclusion of all others.

If you are under the impression that benchmarking must involve a single application to the exclusion of all others, you are completely wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

These days there is a heck of a bunch of stuff running simultaneously, single thread performance is still important, but much less so for day to day operation. Benchmarking is a very esoteric endeavor. I spend much more time at it than the average user, and it's still a very small portion of the time I spend with my machines. I think you have to recognize that by it's nature a benchmark reflects such a narrow portion of a machine's capabilities that it doesn't represent daily use capability very well at all.

It's not difficult to benchmark multi-tasking performance, application start up time, I/O busy time, or pretty much anything else you can conceive of.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

The truth is, there isn't a unbiased, foolproof , easy way to measure the differences I see between my Intels and AMD's during daily use that would exclude all outside factors.

Wrong.

You can keep all components the same except for motherboard and CPU. Start with a fresh OS install, and wherever possible, keep everything identical between platforms; only a handful of drivers need be different.

Then you can make some batch files/macros to perform some common combinations of tasks, as simple or complex as you desire. You can time how long they take to complete and compare the utilization patterns each time. Even if the tasks are very short, they can still be compared by making a video of the display (with your phone, laptop, webcam, or whatever) and then comparing frame counts from the moment you execute the batch file/macro to the moment it completes; at 30 fps you'll be accurate to within 16.67ms.

I'm really having trouble thinking of any scenario that does not involve multiplayer gaming that cannot be turned into a repeatable and fairly consistent benchmark.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

A few months back I had a brand new 4770 ( non k) equipped pre-built on my desk at the same time I was re-formatting my mother's malware collection unit that has a 7850 X 2 in it. For browsing , opening and closing programs etc. the ancient 7850 handicapped by 800mhz ddr2 was quicker than the new prebuilt ( rhymes with "smell") machine. I am at a loss to explain that one, could be the bloatware , antivirus etc. or the "flavor of the month" HDD the prebuilt had vs the WD caviar black in old Ma Deuce, but it was maddening. Obviously if comparing it during workloads, it would have been no contest. It was the most extreme manifestation of this phenomenon I've experienced to date.

Yeah, and my EeePC 900 is more responsive than my 4.2GHz i7 970 setup. This is not because the 900MHz Celeron M paired with 2GiB of DDR3-533 on a 9 year old chipset is somehow magically superior to the Gulftown/X58/ICH10R platform, it's because the EeePC has an fresh OS install on an SSD while the i7 970 system hasn't been cleaned in years and runs off a mechanical HDD.

On the rest of my SSD equipped systems, including (but not limited to) a laptop with a first gen mobile i5 (2.33GHz I believe), a 4.5GHz FX-8150, a 4.4GHz 3930k, a 4.6GHz 2700k, a 4.4GHz 4930k, and a 3.8GHz Pentium E6300, tasks like browsing, opening/closing programs, etc, may as well be instantaneous or only limited by network factors.

It's hard to conceive of any well tuned system made in the last 10 year that has noticeable delays in such basic tasks when equipped with an SSD. Conversely, any such system loading everything from a mechanical disk will be limited by that disk before light use tasks any other component.

The simple fact you are even using a pre-built with the default bloatware intact renders any meaningful comparison impossible. If you gave a damn about how responsive it was, you would have wiped it first thing.
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 #164 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReciever View Post

can someone supply a stock 8320 and 8350 cinebench score? Thanks

I already did, using the same memory timings as with a 3770k rig with enhanced turbo (3.9) vs the 8350 locked at its max turbo speed (4.1). There was less than 5% difference, the 3770k score matched the example 3770k score on cb 15 exactly at 662. Not completely scientific, as there were differences in the ram kits used and the 8350 was mistakenly ran at 2200 mhz on the ht link speed vs stock 2600. I doubt it makes a lot of difference however.

If you want to compare your 4770k at the same settings please do. For my comparison I used the same timings and speed on the ram,for both machines . If you want to directly compare cpu vs cpu it might be best to match those, but that's up to you. Kind of a pain in the butt to change them.
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 #165 of 1593
On days like today when it is 19 degrees outside, I wouldn't mind a FX9590 rig under my desk keeping my feet warm.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5 6600k Asus Z170 Pro Gamer EVGA Geforce GTX 970 SC 16GB Patriot DDR4 3000 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 850 Evo 250gb WD Black 1TB $15 SATA LG DVD+RW that serves as a drink holder Coolermaster Hyper 212+ 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 x64 Home Acer K272HUL 1440p x2 Azio $15 mushy USB keyboard Thermaltake 850w modular 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Antec P100 Logitech M510 Steelseries QCK+ x2 Soundblaster X-FI Titanium 
Audio
Klipsch Promedia 2.1 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5 6600k Asus Z170 Pro Gamer EVGA Geforce GTX 970 SC 16GB Patriot DDR4 3000 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 850 Evo 250gb WD Black 1TB $15 SATA LG DVD+RW that serves as a drink holder Coolermaster Hyper 212+ 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 x64 Home Acer K272HUL 1440p x2 Azio $15 mushy USB keyboard Thermaltake 850w modular 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Antec P100 Logitech M510 Steelseries QCK+ x2 Soundblaster X-FI Titanium 
Audio
Klipsch Promedia 2.1 
  hide details  
post #166 of 1593
OK simply put, if people are "claiming" their system feel quicker isn't that more important than synthetics?

If one claims his/her computer feels snappy then I don't really see the problem.


E.g. Some people say "I need my game running at 60 fps" and others say "I can't tell the difference after 30 fps". Synthetic benchmarks show but in real world performance sometimes the difference is in milliseconds.
post #167 of 1593





Stock scores on on the first one.

Can it be long 'til.............................
post #168 of 1593
I feel like my celeron is faster than my i7, does that mean that it is true?
post #169 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

I already did, using the same memory timings as with a 3770k rig with enhanced turbo (3.9) vs the 8350 locked at its max turbo speed (4.1). There was less than 5% difference, the 3770k score matched the example 3770k score on cb 15 exactly at 662. Not completely scientific, as there were differences in the ram kits used and the 8350 was mistakenly ran at 2200 mhz on the ht link speed vs stock 2600. I doubt it makes a lot of difference however.

If you want to compare your 4770k at the same settings please do. For my comparison I used the same timings and speed on the ram,for both machines . If you want to directly compare cpu vs cpu it might be best to match those, but that's up to you. Kind of a pain in the butt to change them.

First off, cool your jets man. OCN is meant to have high standards and low drama.



Even though I have confirmed this in another thread, the 4700mq performs in margin of error of i7-3770 (non K). My laptop runs 1600 DDR3 Ram. This is just one benchmark however and not representative of user experience in anyway.

Mine scores lower than the traditional 4700mq as I undervolted mine to reduce possibility of throttling from temperatures, I also only use up to x34 multi when the max is x36 however the performance loss is nothing for me to lose sleep over

EDIT2: Frankly Im amazed of the improvements made in the mobile sector, I just wish that AMD had some similar improvements so as to drive down the pricing.

This is my primary machine and I use it for Browsing, gaming, 10+ Virtual machines (single and multiple) and what ever else comes my way
Edited by TheReciever - 3/3/14 at 10:40am
    
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  
post #170 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blameless View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

If you require benchmarks to support a discussion - that should lend itself pretty well to supporting my viewpoint in the eyes of people who value numbers.

It doesn't. If you aren't talking about it "feeling" like it's completing a Cinema4D render faster, then what you posted is irrelevant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

Daily use is much different than benchmarking where the machine is free to concentrate its efforts on a single application to the exclusion of all others.

If you are under the impression that benchmarking must involve a single application to the exclusion of all others, you are completely wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

These days there is a heck of a bunch of stuff running simultaneously, single thread performance is still important, but much less so for day to day operation. Benchmarking is a very esoteric endeavor. I spend much more time at it than the average user, and it's still a very small portion of the time I spend with my machines. I think you have to recognize that by it's nature a benchmark reflects such a narrow portion of a machine's capabilities that it doesn't represent daily use capability very well at all.

It's not difficult to benchmark multi-tasking performance, application start up time, I/O busy time, or pretty much anything else you can conceive of.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

The truth is, there isn't a unbiased, foolproof , easy way to measure the differences I see between my Intels and AMD's during daily use that would exclude all outside factors.

Wrong.

You can keep all components the same except for motherboard and CPU. Start with a fresh OS install, and wherever possible, keep everything identical between platforms; only a handful of drivers need be different.

Then you can make some batch files/macros to perform some common combinations of tasks, as simple or complex as you desire. You can time how long they take to complete and compare the utilization patterns each time. Even if the tasks are very short, they can still be compared by making a video of the display (with your phone, laptop, webcam, or whatever) and then comparing frame counts from the moment you execute the batch file/macro to the moment it completes; at 30 fps you'll be accurate to within 16.67ms.

I'm really having trouble thinking of any scenario that does not involve multiplayer gaming that cannot be turned into a repeatable and fairly consistent benchmark.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

A few months back I had a brand new 4770 ( non k) equipped pre-built on my desk at the same time I was re-formatting my mother's malware collection unit that has a 7850 X 2 in it. For browsing , opening and closing programs etc. the ancient 7850 handicapped by 800mhz ddr2 was quicker than the new prebuilt ( rhymes with "smell") machine. I am at a loss to explain that one, could be the bloatware , antivirus etc. or the "flavor of the month" HDD the prebuilt had vs the WD caviar black in old Ma Deuce, but it was maddening. Obviously if comparing it during workloads, it would have been no contest. It was the most extreme manifestation of this phenomenon I've experienced to date.

Yeah, and my EeePC 900 is more responsive than my 4.2GHz i7 970 setup. This is not because the 900MHz Celeron M paired with 2GiB of DDR3-533 on a 9 year old chipset is somehow magically superior to the Gulftown/X58/ICH10R platform, it's because the EeePC has an fresh OS install on an SSD while the i7 970 system hasn't been cleaned in years and runs off a mechanical HDD.

On the rest of my SSD equipped systems, including (but not limited to) a laptop with a first gen mobile i5 (2.33GHz I believe), a 4.5GHz FX-8150, a 4.4GHz 3930k, a 4.6GHz 2700k, a 4.4GHz 4930k, and a 3.8GHz Pentium E6300, tasks like browsing, opening/closing programs, etc, may as well be instantaneous or only limited by network factors.

It's hard to conceive of any well tuned system made in the last 10 year that has noticeable delays in such basic tasks when equipped with an SSD. Conversely, any such system loading everything from a mechanical disk will be limited by that disk before light use tasks any other component.

The simple fact you are even using a pre-built with the default bloatware intact renders any meaningful comparison impossible. If you gave a damn about how responsive it was, you would have wiped it first thing.

I really don't think there is a place at where we will agree , but the fact remains. I'm happier with my AMD rigs than my Intel rigs and it's completely possible that others can be too. This will depend on the machines use of course and should be the biggest factor in making a choice. The vast majority of users spend their time doing what I do, putter around on the internet, game, e-mail, spreadsheets etc. there is no huge advantage expressed while doing those things with a mid-high end chip from either brand. I am simply answering the OP's question.
If all I did was benchmarking then , yes Intel would be the choice to go with.


No need to curse - wiping the machine, I agree completely, but my hands were tied on that one, it was purchased for the company I work for and I was forbidden to do so. And yes It has a huge effect on responsiveness as does the use of an SSD vs HDD. Given the vast differences expressed in any benchmark , I was surprised that the 7850 was much more enjoyable to operate and I thought it was something relevant to mention in the context of this conversation.

You seem to be confident that the differences in daily user experience can be measured in a scientific way, I really have my doubts, but if you can please do . Until then , I think it would be disrespectful not to acknowledge my point of view as being... oh goodness not that word again "viable" smile.gif

The only agenda I have is education , it's not like I designed , built or own stock in either of these companies. The only investment I have in them is the chips themselves. I have nothing to gain by expressing my opinion, no hardware will be given to me, I have no sponsors to answer to. Expressing a viewpoint that runs contrary to popular belief is difficult and I wouldn't bother if it wasn't sincerely how I see things.

I really think that is my generation's ( I'm 47) biggest failure( and a personal character flaw), not standing up for what we believe be it popular or not.

It seems no matter what I post , be it hard numbers or anecdotal , it's difficult for some to accept the validity of my point of view. That disappoints me greatly.

I do have a great appreciation for being allowed to express my opinions here, I hope others find value in them.
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  
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?