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 30  

post #291 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeo01 View Post

That's a seriously great chart for future reference thumb.gif although what's great is there's only a couple of games that AMD's chips actually get impacted by; most are over the 60 FPS mark (majority have 60 Hz monitors) paired with an R9 280X.

It's good to note that those are average framerates though. minimum fps will be lower and usually from what I saw (though I didn't make a chart) the difference is a bit bigger when it comes to minimums.

So while most games might have a 60+ avg fps the minimums wont be as good.
 
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 #292 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

After initially using a microcenter price for my comparison, a moderator in this thread suggested I use newegg pricing for my comparisons instead, as it relates to a wider group of customer , I agree with him . smile.gif

EDIT: As for beating a 5 year old platform, well you were the one that brought it here for comparison's sake. Is it valid or isn't it. No choosing which is more "convenient" please


The non server motherboard used in the comparison you cited is still being sold for $250 used , on Ebay.

I benched a workstation against a workstation in my cinebench comparison, AMD scored better in 2 of the 3 tests despite the simulated 9370 in the test having a $100 advantage in pricing over the 3770k. What about that is not valid?

newegg was suggested as a new medium as more users will have access to its store front than a Microcenter. Ebay also falls under this category, as well as any forum marketplace within the consumers respective area.

That was me taking a jab at AM3+ since its efficiency has finally passed that of a 5 year old platform at stock. Stock being 2.67Ghz, being that we are an enthusiast site I would imagine we would overclock to 4.8Ghz nearly doubling its frequency. Of course if overclocking is intimidating then sure go with the 8300 series as it already has a high stock frequency.

Looking now, there were plenty of boards at 160 and 200 range. The boards above that range are for users that want the ability to go TriSLI/3 way xfire. I wouldnt recommend 3770k either, dont feel its an ideal CPU to chase for performance per dollar.

Bench the 8350 against those that are sharing the info in our forums and see where the 8350 stands.

What really boggles me is when AMD supporters praise the price/performance but then go on to say "used doesnt count" because its not convenient for their stance. Im not here stating that the 8350 isnt viable for gaming, it will do fine. However there are better options out there for the money.
    
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 #293 of 1593
I think people are also betting on more games supporting more cores; hence why a FX-8320/8350 may seem viable in future games smile.gif

In terms of games however.
post #294 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReciever View Post

What really boggles me is when AMD supporters praise the price/performance but then go on to say "used doesnt count" because its not convenient for their stance. Im not here stating that the 8350 isnt viable for gaming, it will do fine. However there are better options out there for the money.

Like I said, I don't have a dog in this fight, so I'll play devil's advocate and address your last sentence.

I bought an FX-8320 for $99. At that price point, what is better for the price?

I also picked up a Gigabyte GA970A-UD3P for $89, which, with the exception of SLI, can pretty much utilize this cpu to it's fullest.
post #295 of 1593
We can play that game, but it ultimately leads no where.

I got the X5660 for 100 and bought EVGA Tri SLI from a local partout for 100.

Which is the better value?

EDIT: I will leave the thread at this point, as I dont think its going anywhere and I have too much personal drama going on at the moment that will impede my ability to discuss from a professional and respectable manner. Ill check back on this when I have the chance or you can PM me if you like.

AMD is viable for gaming. OP title is flamebait. However there are better offerings out there.
Edited by TheReciever - 3/6/14 at 2:19pm
    
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 #296 of 1593
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alatar View Post

3rd party benchmarks without cherry picking is the exact opposite of bias.
I've been studying all day, it's 10pm here. I was listening to a podcast while reading the thread so I figured why not. tongue.gif
Large amount of results from a huge number of games?

Your results are valid if the user is interested in Cinema4D performance. The ones I listed are if you're interested in games launched in the past 6 months.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alatar View Post

3rd party benchmarks without cherry picking is the exact opposite of bias.
I've been studying all day, it's 10pm here. I was listening to a podcast while reading the thread so I figured why not. tongue.gif
Large amount of results from a huge number of games?

Your results are valid if the user is interested in Cinema4D performance. The ones I listed are if you're interested in games launched in the past 6 months.

I think no matter what benchmarks you show, they'll always refer to another to try to stay in keeping with their own POV.

After all, when I mentioned things like Professional CPU rendering, they heavily shifted it toward "that doesn't matter" and started using gaming performance as a benchmark point between them. But of course, as we all know, even a 5 year old CPU can deliver decent enough gaming performance.

I find it a bit funny that now that you take the time to bring up gaming performance comparisons that don't jive with their POV, they immediately switch to "what about cinebench?" or "you have too much free time".
Not Yours
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4790k ASRock Z97E-ITX/AC MSI GTX 1080Ti G.SKILL DDR3  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SAMSUNG 830 OCZ Deneva 2R WD Scorpio Noctua U14S 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Acer XB270HU IPS CM Quickfire Rapid Fractal Design 650w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Node 304 SteelSeries Rival 700 SteelSeries Qck Sennheiser HD598 
  hide details  
Not Yours
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4790k ASRock Z97E-ITX/AC MSI GTX 1080Ti G.SKILL DDR3  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SAMSUNG 830 OCZ Deneva 2R WD Scorpio Noctua U14S 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Acer XB270HU IPS CM Quickfire Rapid Fractal Design 650w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Node 304 SteelSeries Rival 700 SteelSeries Qck Sennheiser HD598 
  hide details  
post #297 of 1593
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeo01 View Post


So from those graphs bottom line is the games that AMD's chips cannot cope with are in the minority rather than the majority; especially with the transition to multi-threaded gaming.

Considering the 4770K is almost 50% more expensive than the FX-8320 and about 40% more than the FX-8350 for an average of 24% more performance in terms of gaming.

UPDATE: It isn't biased as there's some good results from both sides smile.gif

See, this is kind of inaccurate. As I said before, you could get a Xeon equivalent of the 4770 for $250. that makes the price difference between that performance level and an 8350 about $50. That will all be more than justified by the energy saving and extra performance you get with Intel, longer time between a CPU upgrade, not to mention lower wattage power supplies are quite a bit cheaper, I could easily save $40 by going with a 400-500w PSU rather than an 600-800w PSU.

Now if we forget that there's a cheaper Xeon eqiuvalent of the 4770K (not to mention there's also a cheaper 4770 minus the "K" and the 4670, and others available) let's compare the 4770K and the 8350 then.


http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i7-4770K-vs-AMD-FX-8350


The 4770K makes an average gain of around 30% and as high as 40%, and even has high as 75 percent if you include single core tests (which I just don't think matter soo much anyways, but still).

At around $100 more than the 8350, the 4770K also costs about 30% more.....So 30% more performance, 30% more cost, that's about on par right?

BUT that's before you take energy savings into account, or the lack of a need for a higher power PSU, which all costs the consumer money. The 4770K will have a longer usable life than the 8350, which means less money spent in your life time on CPU's over all.

Then if you take overclocking into account, the clear winner will be the 4770K in terms of extent and performance gains from overclockability.

So all of these factors, really do make the 4770K a better price to performance ratio in the long run, despite it costing $100 more initially. That cost is technically already offset by the performance gains from the start, so if you include all of those other savings and performance increases, you're essentially getting a 4770K level of performance for the cost of an 8350 (or less) in the end.

Then if you take all of these considerations and apply them to the Xeon version of the 4770 that sells for only $250, you definitely can't ignore that it's an even better buy over both




Heck, even the 4670K shows some pretty significant FPS increases over the 8350.....and it's only $40 more.

example:

Enslaved odyssey to the west
4670K: 190
8350: 136

While both are respectable FPS, more than enough.....you have to think about how this translates into future performance and hardware longevity.

Most of these FPS increases of the 4670K over the 8350 are at least 10-30%

At $200 for the 8350, and $240 for the 4670, that's a price difference of just 17%!

This means the performance gains far outweigh the price difference. And that's before you factor in other things I've brought up time and again, like energy savings, etc.
Edited by AMDATI - 3/6/14 at 3:19pm
Not Yours
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4790k ASRock Z97E-ITX/AC MSI GTX 1080Ti G.SKILL DDR3  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SAMSUNG 830 OCZ Deneva 2R WD Scorpio Noctua U14S 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Acer XB270HU IPS CM Quickfire Rapid Fractal Design 650w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Node 304 SteelSeries Rival 700 SteelSeries Qck Sennheiser HD598 
  hide details  
Not Yours
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4790k ASRock Z97E-ITX/AC MSI GTX 1080Ti G.SKILL DDR3  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SAMSUNG 830 OCZ Deneva 2R WD Scorpio Noctua U14S 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Acer XB270HU IPS CM Quickfire Rapid Fractal Design 650w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Node 304 SteelSeries Rival 700 SteelSeries Qck Sennheiser HD598 
  hide details  
post #298 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alatar View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Durquavian View Post

Lol way to show your bias. Users show results and experiences and you jump right back into benches from reviews.

3rd party benchmarks without cherry picking is the exact opposite of bias.
Quote:
Originally Posted by felon View Post

You have way too much free time..

I've been studying all day, it's 10pm here. I was listening to a podcast while reading the thread so I figured why not. tongue.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

What makes those facts more valid than my cinebench comparsion?

Large amount of results from a huge number of games?

Your results are valid if the user is interested in Cinema4D performance. The ones I listed are if you're interested in games launched in the past 6 months.


I respect your opinion Alatar and I appreciate you taking the time to gather that, it's certainly useful.

I believe the cinebench scores I used are much more directly related to cpu performance , they are insulated from differences in motherboard chipsets for one. I also was more than willing to compare them against the what is undoubtably a segment for which the thread was aimed at, the I 7 3770K that costs as much as $140 more than the 8350 it was compared to which it beat by a slim margin . The comparisons against simulated 9370's and 9590's where clear victories for the AMD. That should satisfy your need for scores in relevant benches to prove that not only is it viable competition for the more expensive I5's (if you don't consider them mid-high end) but can run with the big dogs in the segment in question. As you said , they are hard numbers, it is simple math.
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 #299 of 1593
1) 3770K is last gen already, it isn't really any more relevant than the 8150.

2) 9370 / 9590 vs. intel CPUs is only really relevant if you're looking to run at stock.

Neither of the 9xxx chips has much OCing headroom so you're already close to the max performance of the things.

For example, lazy 4770K OC with bad cache freq and bad memory speeds:


(back from when R15 launched)

It's not even at 4.6ghz but the Visheras would have to reach ungodly frequencies in order to match the result...

And even then, R15 only represents cinema4D performance. There is no such thing as a bench that represents overall real world performance. Only choice is to look at a huge variety of software.
 
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 #300 of 1593
Quote:
I bought an FX-8320 for $99. At that price point, what is better for the price?

The question isn't of value, the question is if AMD is a viable option for mid-high end
Quote:
At $200 for the 8350, and $240 for the 4670, that's a price difference of just 17%!

The problem i see with that argument it is it's not really about that, but more for example a $1000 system against a $1100 system, even if one CPU is $100 more than the other. If you pay 10% more, overall, and run certain games at 30-50%+ higher framerate, it's hard to make a case for value
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  
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?