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 27  

post #261 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

True but that is a little too tidy, benchmarks certainly can be biased even if not intentionally made to be so.

It's about understanding your needs and matching your purchase to those needs, a screwdriver makes a very poor hammer.

Well luckily we have a great number of benchmarks to draw results from and make our purchasing decision after becoming more knowledgeable
    
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 #262 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReciever View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

True but that is a little too tidy, benchmarks certainly can be biased even if not intentionally made to be so.

It's about understanding your needs and matching your purchase to those needs, a screwdriver makes a very poor hammer.

Well luckily we have a great number of benchmarks to draw results from and make our purchasing decision after becoming more knowledgeable

Yes, but benchmarks are by their nature are different from "normal" use and it is unwise to make that decision solely based on them. I really don't put much stock in most of them to be honest, they don't reflect what I do with my machines very well at all. Differences in instruction sets , compilers etc. make many of them all but useless tools to compare machines as different as the FX's and modern I5, I7's are. Their greatest usefulness is in measuring the performance of a single system at different settings allowing you to get the most from your hardware. Daily use is the benchmark that matters the most in my opinion- cssorkinbench, yeah there we go smile.gif.

For those that think that benchmark scores are the holy grail - I have 4 opportunities for you. Find an Intel processor currently being sold at newegg that outperforms the 8320 (both at stock clocks) by a margin significant enough to answer yes to the OP's question for less money than it is currently being sold for ( $160 I think) in any one of these benchmarks.

1. Cinebench multithread, 11.5 or 15
2. wprime 32m
3. Passmark
4. HWBOT prime

AMD has segments where they don't compete with Intel , those are the mobile I7's and the 6 core ,12 thread machines. While it's true that for a great deal of what I do , I don't notice much of a difference between my daughter's A8 4500 laptop and my QM 3610, 7850m I7 ENVY, there is no question which is more capable. I am very pleased at the gaming performance el-cheapo lappy gives though 100 fps + in css smile.gif. $1600 for the Envy, $329 for the AMD. I don't think any reasonable person would argue the point that AMD offers nothing as capable as these machines , prices reflect that. Anything under the $250 mark in the desktop market is a different story, AMD is going to compete just fine with anything the blue team offers in daily tasks.( once again, my opinon from my perspective).

It's my opinion that the FX8320 is the best value going for the majority of users. The customers that I would recommend a more expensive 4 core 4 thread Intel chip to is a narrow group of users and It gets narrower with time.
Edited by cssorkinman - 3/5/14 at 10:06pm
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 #263 of 1593
Im not really speaking in regards to just a few benchmarks. What I saying is that you find a few applications that will be your mainstay, find evidence to place your selection of chips (within budget of course), typically via benchmark that represents performance to expect with said application. Then follow up with other users personal experience to verify information and possibly find additional information like for AMD bumping the Northbridge and HyperTransport. etc and so forth, realistically what to expect from your selection and follow up with other requirements from there.

There are of course the used segments, but I suppose its easier to not consider those here in the forums for some reason...If we cant look at the entire picture to see what is beneficial to you, then why do we bother to begin with?

http://cdn.overclock.net/2/2a/2ac1df98_ztbx4o.jpeg

http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/xeon-x5660-x58-full-review-comparison-to-x79-high-end-cpus-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside-longest-post-ever/0_100

EDIT3: not mad or anything, I just dont understand why when entering these debates we refuse to look at what is available to us, I could understand if OP stated clearly that warranty is a must then sure. Its late and have had a pretty cruddy few days so Im a little heated. I apologize in advance if this rubs off the wrong way
Edited by TheReciever - 3/5/14 at 11:09pm
    
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 #264 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

Yes, but benchmarks are by their nature are different from "normal" use and it is unwise to make that decision solely based on them. I really don't put much stock in most of them to be honest, they don't reflect what I do with my machines very well at all. Differences in instruction sets , compilers etc. make many of them all but useless tools to compare machines as different as the FX's and modern I5, I7's are. Their greatest usefulness is in measuring the performance of a single system at different settings allowing you to get the most from your hardware. Daily use is the benchmark that matters the most in my opinion- cssorkinbench, yeah there we go smile.gif.

For those that think that benchmark scores are the holy grail - I have 4 opportunities for you. Find an Intel processor currently being sold at newegg that outperforms the 8320 (both at stock clocks) by a margin significant enough to answer yes to the OP's question for less money than it is currently being sold for ( $160 I think) in any one of these benchmarks.

1. Cinebench multithread, 11.5 or 15
2. wprime 32m
3. Passmark
4. HWBOT prime

AMD has segments where they don't compete with Intel , those are the mobile I7's and the 6 core ,12 thread machines. While it's true that for a great deal of what I do , I don't notice much of a difference between my daughter's A8 4500 laptop and my QM 3610, 7850m I7 ENVY, there is no question which is more capable. I am very pleased at the gaming performance el-cheapo lappy gives though 100 fps + in css smile.gif. $1600 for the Envy, $329 for the AMD. I don't think any reasonable person would argue the point that AMD offers nothing as capable as these machines , prices reflect that. Anything under the $250 mark in the desktop market is a different story, AMD is going to compete just fine with anything the blue team offers in daily tasks.( once again, my opinon from my perspective).

It's my opinion that the FX8320 is the best value going for the majority of users. The customers that I would recommend a more expensive 4 core 4 thread Intel chip to is a narrow group of users and It gets narrower with time.

The thread title is "AMD No longer a viable option for mid-high end"

If you can't afford an i5, it's not mid-high end
Insert Name Here
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6700k Asus Maximus VIII Hero Gigabyte Aorus Xtreme 1080ti Corsair LPX 2x8GB 3200c16 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Old Seagate HDD Samsung 850 EVO Thermalright Silver Arrow SB-E SE Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus PG258Q (240hz + Gsync) WASDKeyboards.com v1 semi custom w/ mx browns, ... Superflower Golden Green HX550 Air540 
MouseMouse Pad
Logitech G Pro Qck+ 
  hide details  
Insert Name Here
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6700k Asus Maximus VIII Hero Gigabyte Aorus Xtreme 1080ti Corsair LPX 2x8GB 3200c16 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Old Seagate HDD Samsung 850 EVO Thermalright Silver Arrow SB-E SE Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus PG258Q (240hz + Gsync) WASDKeyboards.com v1 semi custom w/ mx browns, ... Superflower Golden Green HX550 Air540 
MouseMouse Pad
Logitech G Pro Qck+ 
  hide details  
post #265 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReciever View Post

Im not really speaking in regards to just a few benchmarks. What I saying is that you find a few applications that will be your mainstay, find evidence to place your selection of chips (within budget of course), typically via benchmark that represents performance to expect with said application. Then follow up with other users personal experience to verify information and possibly find additional information like for AMD bumping the Northbridge and HyperTransport. etc and so forth, realistically what to expect from your selection and follow up with other requirements from there.

There are of course the used segments, but I suppose its easier to not consider those here in the forums for some reason...If we cant look at the entire picture to see what is beneficial to you, then why do we bother to begin with?

http://cdn.overclock.net/2/2a/2ac1df98_ztbx4o.jpeg

http://www.overclock.net/t/1461359/xeon-x5660-x58-full-review-comparison-to-x79-high-end-cpus-and-xeon-l5639-benchmarks-inside-longest-post-ever/0_100
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReciever View Post

Im not really speaking in regards to just a few benchmarks. What I saying is that you find a few applications that will be your mainstay, find evidence to place your selection of chips (within budget of course), typically via benchmark that represents performance to expect with said application. Then follow up with other users personal experience to verify information and possibly find additional information like for AMD bumping the Northbridge and HyperTransport. etc and so forth, realistically what to expect from your selection and follow up with other requirements from there.

There are of course the used segments, but I suppose its easier to not consider those here in the forums for some reason...If we cant look at the entire picture to see what is beneficial to you, then why do we bother to begin with?

http://cdn.overclock.net/2/2a/2ac1df98_ztbx4o.jpeg

It wouldn't be long and someone would waltz in here claiming to have bought a $300 processor for $30 , overclocked it by 2ghz on air and would declare themselves king of the world, regardless of what brand he had or what the reality actually was. I don't think that would serve anyone's interests

Nearly anyone in the US can shop at newegg and multithreaded benches should be at least as viable as single ones. I doubt you would find a single person here that has only 1 application or process running on their machine during everyday use. BTW for the cinebench comparisons I did earlier, there were 81 processes in the background on the AMD vs 51 on the 3770K not a huge deal but thought it worth mentioning.

Found that processor yet?
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 #266 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyro999 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

Yes, but benchmarks are by their nature are different from "normal" use and it is unwise to make that decision solely based on them. I really don't put much stock in most of them to be honest, they don't reflect what I do with my machines very well at all. Differences in instruction sets , compilers etc. make many of them all but useless tools to compare machines as different as the FX's and modern I5, I7's are. Their greatest usefulness is in measuring the performance of a single system at different settings allowing you to get the most from your hardware. Daily use is the benchmark that matters the most in my opinion- cssorkinbench, yeah there we go smile.gif.

For those that think that benchmark scores are the holy grail - I have 4 opportunities for you. Find an Intel processor currently being sold at newegg that outperforms the 8320 (both at stock clocks) by a margin significant enough to answer yes to the OP's question for less money than it is currently being sold for ( $160 I think) in any one of these benchmarks.

1. Cinebench multithread, 11.5 or 15
2. wprime 32m
3. Passmark
4. HWBOT prime

AMD has segments where they don't compete with Intel , those are the mobile I7's and the 6 core ,12 thread machines. While it's true that for a great deal of what I do , I don't notice much of a difference between my daughter's A8 4500 laptop and my QM 3610, 7850m I7 ENVY, there is no question which is more capable. I am very pleased at the gaming performance el-cheapo lappy gives though 100 fps + in css smile.gif. $1600 for the Envy, $329 for the AMD. I don't think any reasonable person would argue the point that AMD offers nothing as capable as these machines , prices reflect that. Anything under the $250 mark in the desktop market is a different story, AMD is going to compete just fine with anything the blue team offers in daily tasks.( once again, my opinon from my perspective).

It's my opinion that the FX8320 is the best value going for the majority of users. The customers that I would recommend a more expensive 4 core 4 thread Intel chip to is a narrow group of users and It gets narrower with time.

The thread title is "AMD No longer a viable option for mid-high end"

If you can't afford an i5, it's not mid-high end

i5's are most certainly welcome competitors.
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 #267 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyro999 View Post

I agree, just think there's too many games right now where FPS is too low in comparison to oc'd 4670k for it not to be considered a liability if you're throwing $1k at a build (mid range)

especially with >60hz monitor
I seriously hope your are not alluding to my build, because you don't have all the facts. And assuming you're not, look at the argument below.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReciever View Post

Problem is, we have plenty of members that are biased, which is why we use benchmarks to objectively look at a product.

I still wouldnt purchase either vendor right now. I still vote X5660, more performance than the best offering from AMD, and cheaper than comparable Intel offerings still being produced
The problem would be if you are asking those that don't own one. That is not what I was saying. There are 4-5 hardcore users of the FX 8350 in this thread, 2-3 that use both Intel and AMD. We have given our take and experiences with the 8350 and conceded that it isn't extreme/highend but mid-to-high, yes. Lets be honest, this definition really applies more to gaming than anything else. Industry and business doesn't go looking for high or low end as far as performance, maybe cost, but even then it just for what they need to do. And a considerable amount of businesses out there still operate with 5-10 year old equipment, so I doubt they would be so picky as a gamer. So lets stick to Gaming and maybe video editing ( for those that record their gaming exploits).

Here is what bothers me most:
Quote:
But that is the problem, wording. There is nothing about my system that says OK. I have gotten better than most reviews with less. I run 7770x2 and run high to ultra on most of my games. Skyrim I run full 2K textures with 4eq SSAA with high FXAA SMAA 8xAF capped @ 75FPS. There isn't a single Skyrim review with a 8350 and a 7970 that alludes to the outcome I got. If you got the desire and patience to learn how to tweak your system, be it AMD, Intel or Nvidia, then you will quickly learn the reviews mean Jack.

You want to know what to buy, ask those that actually use it. A review will only get you so far.

Now this is my post. Notice I give my hardware and examples with its use. Do you see any response validating or acknowledging it? Other than a possible misinformed slant and your response to the last line: NOPE. This is the problem. Posters in here will argue that one bench is valid and another not, generally depending on the outcome. I offer the fact that they all suck and lack the in depth look that is needed for a true assessment. However users here with said equipment have done all the testing and tweaking and quite a few can give very detailed finding to clocks speeds and performance at each as well as cooling need and the amount of heat to expect and power draw and efficiency. You don't get any of this from a review.

I posted a while back the frametime graphs between AMD and Intel, mentioning that the min/max/avg you get from reviews doesn't tell the whole story. Hence why I am reluctant to advise using those criteria as buying decision. The fact remains that I get mid-to-high results with this machine using GPUs that are at best low-mid. And as mentioned (seeming rather condescendingly) 60hz 1080p is the lions share of the market and if that is what you have and want to know if you can get max results with a FX 8350 and a top end GPU then the answer is YES. No other qualifiers needed.

And remember, IF you want to really know how a piece of hardware runs in everyday REAL use ask a user. If someone posts a bench from a review, they don't really know.
post #268 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post


It wouldn't be long and someone would waltz in here claiming to have bought a $300 processor for $30 , overclocked it by 2ghz on air and would declare themselves king of the world, regardless of what brand he had or what the reality actually was. I don't think that would serve anyone's interests

Nearly anyone in the US can shop at newegg and multithreaded benches should be at least as viable as single ones. I doubt you would find a single person here that has only 1 application or process running on their machine during everyday use. BTW for the cinebench comparisons I did earlier, there were 81 processes in the background on the AMD vs 51 on the 3770K not a huge deal but thought it worth mentioning.

Found that processor yet?

Credibility is pending to per user basis. We dont take AMD or Intel users at word of mouth either so why change the rules for this other scenario? Because its not convenient? Like anything else in these forums, if someone cant back a claim then it is either simply ignored or assumed average scores based from our own knowledge base. You think if someone got a 300 USD value for 30 they are very likely to screenshot or provide proof of some sort (as that scenario has come up many times in the past). A member recently claimed to receive 2 780's when he paid for one, everyone thought he was trolling until he provided the invoice.

Everyone in the world can purchase from Fleabay. If you like to use averages then I would say the X5650 is 140 after shipping.

There are a host of benchmarks to choose from in the thread I linked earlier, if its not there then I will ask OP to provide them, hes a pretty nice fellow
    
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 #269 of 1593
Benchmarks are a great starting point for data but they are not the end. The only true benchmark is actually usage.

The issue is benchmarks are not meant to represent real world experience. They are clinically scrubbed moments in time. Look at benchmarks using compression, they use huge file sizes that seldom if ever happen in the real world. Use a real world file size for compression testing and the difference is so minor as to not be seen. Benchmarks have to exaggerate the scenario in an effort to show any meaningful difference in performance.

One of the best ways to look at components, but also the hardest to do is the blind taste test. I actually had an APU based system using a 6800K and an Intel 4770K setup to do this a bit back. We used a 7950 video card in each with the same amount of RAM and same SSD and then challenged my gamer friends to tell the difference when gaming at 1080 and high detail settings. We used a number of different games, some GPU heavy and some CPU heavy.

The results of the test surprised us all, only ONE game could these experienced gamers and hardware geeks tell the difference in and that was Civilization V. They noticed the AI turn took just a bit longer, not a huge difference but they did see it. All the benchmarks say that a $140 chip cannot be competitive with a $250+ chip but it is. What was even stranger was an unintended comparison. When using the two computers for general use, web browsing and just everyday functions the AMD system was perceived as faster by EVERYONE.

Now again there is not a benchmark on the planet that will agree with these results and yet here they are. We ended up with 23 different people sampling our little test before I made some part switching. The group ranged from some tech experts to people that game and could care less about tech and the results stood up every time.
post #270 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReciever View Post

Credibility is pending to per user basis. We dont take AMD or Intel users at word of mouth either so why change the rules for this other scenario? Because its not convenient? Like anything else in these forums, if someone cant back a claim then it is either simply ignored or assumed average scores based from our own knowledge base. You think if someone got a 300 USD value for 30 they are very likely to screenshot or provide proof of some sort (as that scenario has come up many times in the past). A member recently claimed to receive 2 780's when he paid for one, everyone thought he was trolling until he provided the invoice.

Everyone in the world can purchase from Fleabay. If you like to use averages then I would say the X5650 is 140 after shipping.

There are a host of benchmarks to choose from in the thread I linked earlier, if its not there then I will ask OP to provide them, hes a pretty nice fellow
I think the point to price is you can really only give avg expected not the random low price one may have to wait months to see.
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?