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 35  

post #341 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeo01 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I understand yours pretty well. But as sorry as you feel for my customers ( over 100 customer builds - only 1 that is mildly dissatisfied but it isn't related to cpu choice ), I feel equally so to people who have closed their minds to alternative viewpoints.
You are an overclocker, obsessed with benchmarking scores and blessed with plenty of means to pursue your hobbie. Intel makes sense to me in light of this. The synthetics you are interested in and spend most of your money on trying to pursue a better score in or hwbot points with are very Intel friendly.
It's all in your unwillingness to acknowledge a few things when it comes to the differences between benchmarking and daily use.
The most significant of which is the fact that they feel so much more nimble than the intels in everyday use it's a fact, you refuse to see it because you are obsessed with benchmarking numbers. Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I used to think benchmarking programs were the holy grail of daily use performance measurement, but that was a different time.
At that time I was using single core processors obviously running single thread benchmarks. From the moment the first dual core came out , it started gnawing at the synthetic benchmark's relevance as it pertains to daily use. The best measurement of daily use performance? Well that is daily use smile.gif
If you would accept that, then I think we might be of a common mind ( gosh I hope you aren't insulted tongue.gif).
Daily usage has also changed from that time, partly due to the limitations of the single core processor, not having much running at all at the same time. Today, as I sit here , I have 83 processes running and half a dozen programs open, if I tried doing that on my coppermine or barton, they would gag like a child being told to eat their broccoli tongue.gif

My of customers ( or friends i build for ) will most likely spend less than 1% of their computer use benching ( like most stats , pulled directly from a dark place , but that's an honest guess). Most of their use will not be reflected very well at all in any synthetic benchmark.

Now, the only time I would consider an intel 4 core 4 thread machine is to someone that spends a huge percentage of their time on something where the advantage in single core performance expresses itself in a preceptable way. I'm aware there are games out there where this happens. What disappoints me is that often times my experience with these games is they give pretty crappy fps no matter the hardware and the difference between using the 2 different cpus sometimes seems wildly exaggerated in the reviews by comparison. Often the minimum fps is shown as a representation of one's advantage over the other, this is a poor representation of the truth in my opinion. So many times I see that minimum manifest itself in a single sample and the next lowest fps being 20 to 30% higher. The truth is better served by average fps in my opinion.
Example ( more spread sheets oh goody , please contain your enthusiasm! lol ) for background I work for a huge corporation and spend a nauseating amount of time trying to decipher the truth in the numbers on spreadsheets. I might also add that I have developed a deep personal loathing for any overhead projector tongue.gif
Bioshock infinite benchmark simulating a 9590 , option 4 1920x1200 stock 7970
Notice the overall reported minimum fps is 30, on a single sample the next lowest is 50 ( unless I missed a lower one) outside of the "disregard due to scene change" samples
DefaultPCBenchmarkMap-2014-03-07.19-09-option41920x1200simul.csv 12k .csv file

Always dig into the numbers. Numbers are more often used to further an agenda than used to represent the truth. It's so easy to use them to do just that and so very very difficult to get them to show an accurate representation of reality.
I was very pleased that you seem to recognize this by showing average fps in your spreadsheet Alatar smile.gif

I like a certain level of performance and for the all around machine my low end recommendation is 3570k or FX 8320 just for a point of reference on my opinion.
HTPC's or specialty builds are different.

I wish you could come by my place Alatar, I'd BBQ you a nice Nebraska rib eye steak, serve you the beer of your choice and plop down in front of my rigs in hopes of finding a common ground.

Edited : forgot a word, old age will not be kind to me!

This comment will probably be punched. But yesterday I was running an I7-3770, and today I have installed my new Athlon 760K (basically 6800K).

Same system, same hard drive (same Windows 8 install), same GPU, same everything except that motherboard and chip.

Much to my surprise my Windows 8 system was fine with it so it was exactly the same operating system and files left on there. Meaning all I had to do was clean out the Intel stuff.


Now please tell me why this system now somehow feels faster? It's more snappy, same SSD.

Maybe AMD has more instructions to accelerate it? Either way it's baffling how this system now feels more responsive, with a quad core Richland chip in it.


A fluke? It's the first thing I noticed when I booted it up. I am sorry if "feel" isn't a measurement but for someone just coming from an I7-3770 to an Athlon 760K without any changes to the OS drive I felt it was necessary to mention smile.gif

Amazing isn't it? Welcome to the "AMD feels faster" Army! thumb.gif
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 #342 of 1593
I mean benchmarks aside I can definitely feel a difference. Probably because Piledriver supports newer instructions compared to my old Thuban?

Although benchmarks showed my I7 3770 was superior and very quick for some strange reason it just isn't matching up to the general feel of things.

My Intel based board (just the board) paid for 75% of my motherboard+Athlon smile.gif that's seriously great.


After having a go with one of the top Intel based chips I really don't think I will ever go back to them. I am a programmer (albeit not an expert) and compiling code is snappier on this AMD based system, it's a blink and it's done.

I am not even being biased or influenced by this thread, I genuinely moved to Intel due to their power consumption and stock performance. My mindset was "Well this is going to be faster than my Thuban at lower heat and power consumption, why not". But it hasn't turned out that way.


I do not understand smile.gif
post #343 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeo01 View Post

I mean benchmarks aside I can definitely feel a difference. Probably because Piledriver supports newer instructions compared to my old Thuban?

Although benchmarks showed my I7 3770 was superior and very quick for some strange reason it just isn't matching up to the general feel of things.

My Intel based board (just the board) paid for 75% of my motherboard+Athlon smile.gif that's seriously great.


After having a go with one of the top Intel based chips I really don't think I will ever go back to them. I am a programmer (albeit not an expert) and compiling code is snappier on this AMD based system, it's a blink and it's done.

I am not even being biased or influenced by this thread, I genuinely moved to Intel due to their power consumption and stock performance. My mindset was "Well this is going to be faster than my Thuban at lower heat and power consumption, why not". But it hasn't turned out that way.


I do not understand smile.gif
Me either, but it's there every time I push the power button.
I've been been trying to understand it for almost 5 years now, and am at a loss to do so.
The only answer I find plausable are that benchmarking doesn't reflect actual use very well at all.
I might add that gaming performance isn't all about fps numbers either. USB input lag will drive a CSS player insane and it seems to plague the intel platforms I've had. By comparison the mouse feels like an extension of my hand on the AMDs.
As a point of disclosure ,I did have random mouse freezes with my CHV-Z which was horrible, but I think it was a driver issue. I switched from a TactX to a coolermaster Inferno and the problem disappeared.

For those who want to bring overclocking into the fray, you won't find a chip more durable and fun to torture than a Vishera. The unlockable AMD phenoms and zosma's chips bring a whole new level of tweaking fun. One that the competition has no answer for. That's what it's all about for me , having fun smile.gif
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 #344 of 1593
It's probably to do with the way Windows handles threads; maybe it favours AMD's architecture which gives the overall smoothness feel.
Although I wonder just where the hype comes from, I bet most of Intel's success is from throwing money at developers.

As you'll find it's mainly the professional software Intel dominates.


I think what we all need to learn from this discussion is this: You don't really know what happens behind the scenes. You don't how much of Intel's success is down to software development and how true benchmarks really are.

That's why I respect people here at overclock.net, true benchmarks for a start and true personal experiences. Personal experiences with a particular chip really says a lot more smile.gif


I know one thing for sure, AMD chips are great fun to overclock thumb.gif who said high end is all about performance anyway. I class "High end" as a whole package.

A Xeon E5 with a 5200RPM hard drive and 4GB of RAM isn't very high end for example thumb.gif it's what you do with that hardware that makes it high end to the individual.

It's all subjective and you really need an individual's experience to make it seem like a viable choice.

That's where "Try before you buy" comes into play smile.gif you really need to have a go at system A to judge whether it's viable against system B for instance.
post #345 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMDATI View Post

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.

I think in the interest of accuracy someone should review the numbers used for the price comparisons. thinking.gif
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 #346 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeo01 View Post

This comment will probably be punched. But yesterday I was running an I7-3770, and today I have installed my new Athlon 760K (basically 6800K).

Same system, same hard drive (same Windows 8 install), same GPU, same everything except that motherboard and chip.

Much to my surprise my Windows 8 system was fine with it so it was exactly the same operating system and files left on there. Meaning all I had to do was clean out the Intel stuff.


Now please tell me why this system now somehow feels faster? It's more snappy, same SSD.

Maybe AMD has more instructions to accelerate it? Either way it's baffling how this system now feels more responsive, with a quad core Richland chip in it.


A fluke? It's the first thing I noticed when I booted it up. I am sorry if "feel" isn't a measurement but for someone just coming from an I7-3770 to an Athlon 760K without any changes to the OS drive I felt it was necessary to mention smile.gif

I'm an AMD guy because I like their HSA idea...but there is no reason your 760k should feel faster or anything compared to that 3770. Either you had a bad OC with the 3770 and windows let you get away with it by compensating (AKA being more forgiving about missed call/instructions which would give the feeling of a slower computer), bad memory settings(dual vs single), or a crappy board(low SATA or PCIe bandwidth) or something else.
     
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core m3-6Y30 Intel HD515 8GB 1866DDR3L Micron M600 MTFDDAV256MBF M.2, 256 GB 
CoolingOSOSMonitor
Fanless Win10 Home x64 Kubuntu 16.04 (requires Linux kernel 4.5/4.6) 13.3 inch 16:9, 1920x1080 pixel, AU Optronics A... 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AthlonIIX4 640 3.62GHz (250x14.5) 2.5GHz NB Asus M4A785TD-M EVO MSI GTX275 (Stock 666) 8GBs of GSkill 1600 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
4GBs of Adata 1333 Kingston HyperX 3k 120GB WD Caviar Black 500GB Hitachi Deskstar 1TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSOS
LG 8X BDR (WHL08S20) Cooler Master Hyper 212+ Kubuntu x64 Windows 7 x64 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Bodhi Linux x64 Acer G215H (1920x1080) Seasonic 520 HAF912 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
N450 1.8GHz AC and 1.66GHz batt ASUS proprietary for 1001P GMA3150 (can play bluray now!?) 1GB DDR2 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSOS
160GB LGLHDLBDRE32X Bodhi Linux Fedora LXDE 
OSOSMonitorKeyboard
Kubuntu SLAX 1280x600 + Dell 15inch Excellent! 
PowerCase
6 cells=6-12hrs and a charger 1001P MU17 Black 
  hide details  
     
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core m3-6Y30 Intel HD515 8GB 1866DDR3L Micron M600 MTFDDAV256MBF M.2, 256 GB 
CoolingOSOSMonitor
Fanless Win10 Home x64 Kubuntu 16.04 (requires Linux kernel 4.5/4.6) 13.3 inch 16:9, 1920x1080 pixel, AU Optronics A... 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AthlonIIX4 640 3.62GHz (250x14.5) 2.5GHz NB Asus M4A785TD-M EVO MSI GTX275 (Stock 666) 8GBs of GSkill 1600 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
4GBs of Adata 1333 Kingston HyperX 3k 120GB WD Caviar Black 500GB Hitachi Deskstar 1TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSOS
LG 8X BDR (WHL08S20) Cooler Master Hyper 212+ Kubuntu x64 Windows 7 x64 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Bodhi Linux x64 Acer G215H (1920x1080) Seasonic 520 HAF912 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
N450 1.8GHz AC and 1.66GHz batt ASUS proprietary for 1001P GMA3150 (can play bluray now!?) 1GB DDR2 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSOS
160GB LGLHDLBDRE32X Bodhi Linux Fedora LXDE 
OSOSMonitorKeyboard
Kubuntu SLAX 1280x600 + Dell 15inch Excellent! 
PowerCase
6 cells=6-12hrs and a charger 1001P MU17 Black 
  hide details  
post #347 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rookie1337 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeo01 View Post

This comment will probably be punched. But yesterday I was running an I7-3770, and today I have installed my new Athlon 760K (basically 6800K).

Same system, same hard drive (same Windows 8 install), same GPU, same everything except that motherboard and chip.

Much to my surprise my Windows 8 system was fine with it so it was exactly the same operating system and files left on there. Meaning all I had to do was clean out the Intel stuff.


Now please tell me why this system now somehow feels faster? It's more snappy, same SSD.

Maybe AMD has more instructions to accelerate it? Either way it's baffling how this system now feels more responsive, with a quad core Richland chip in it.


A fluke? It's the first thing I noticed when I booted it up. I am sorry if "feel" isn't a measurement but for someone just coming from an I7-3770 to an Athlon 760K without any changes to the OS drive I felt it was necessary to mention smile.gif

I'm an AMD guy because I like their HSA idea...but there is no reason your 760k should feel faster or anything compared to that 3770. Either you had a bad OC with the 3770 and windows let you get away with it by compensating (AKA being more forgiving about missed call/instructions which would give the feeling of a slower computer), bad memory settings(dual vs single), or a crappy board(low SATA or PCIe bandwidth) or something else.
A bad oc would certainly do it , but that's not what causes it in my case.
I notice the difference when all are stock using the same ram modules in comparing platforms ( 4 different mobo's 3 different intel chips an 2600k ,3770k I7's and a 2500k).
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 #348 of 1593
My I7-3770 wasn't overclocked, it was a non-K. Also memory configuration was exactly the same, dual channel with my G.Skill Ripjaws. SATA 6Gbps.

It was the MSI Gaming board range for the Z77 chipset.
post #349 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

A bad oc would certainly do it , but that's not what causes it in my case.
I notice the difference when all are stock using the same ram modules in comparing platforms ( 4 different mobo's 3 different intel chips an 2600k ,3770k I7's and a 2500k).

Honestly, it would have to be placebo in that case. Windows loves Intel and most programs favor Intel due to current programming trends among other variable. There is no reason for a stock 760k to "feel" faster than a stock i7 or i5.
     
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core m3-6Y30 Intel HD515 8GB 1866DDR3L Micron M600 MTFDDAV256MBF M.2, 256 GB 
CoolingOSOSMonitor
Fanless Win10 Home x64 Kubuntu 16.04 (requires Linux kernel 4.5/4.6) 13.3 inch 16:9, 1920x1080 pixel, AU Optronics A... 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AthlonIIX4 640 3.62GHz (250x14.5) 2.5GHz NB Asus M4A785TD-M EVO MSI GTX275 (Stock 666) 8GBs of GSkill 1600 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
4GBs of Adata 1333 Kingston HyperX 3k 120GB WD Caviar Black 500GB Hitachi Deskstar 1TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSOS
LG 8X BDR (WHL08S20) Cooler Master Hyper 212+ Kubuntu x64 Windows 7 x64 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Bodhi Linux x64 Acer G215H (1920x1080) Seasonic 520 HAF912 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
N450 1.8GHz AC and 1.66GHz batt ASUS proprietary for 1001P GMA3150 (can play bluray now!?) 1GB DDR2 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSOS
160GB LGLHDLBDRE32X Bodhi Linux Fedora LXDE 
OSOSMonitorKeyboard
Kubuntu SLAX 1280x600 + Dell 15inch Excellent! 
PowerCase
6 cells=6-12hrs and a charger 1001P MU17 Black 
  hide details  
     
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core m3-6Y30 Intel HD515 8GB 1866DDR3L Micron M600 MTFDDAV256MBF M.2, 256 GB 
CoolingOSOSMonitor
Fanless Win10 Home x64 Kubuntu 16.04 (requires Linux kernel 4.5/4.6) 13.3 inch 16:9, 1920x1080 pixel, AU Optronics A... 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AthlonIIX4 640 3.62GHz (250x14.5) 2.5GHz NB Asus M4A785TD-M EVO MSI GTX275 (Stock 666) 8GBs of GSkill 1600 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
4GBs of Adata 1333 Kingston HyperX 3k 120GB WD Caviar Black 500GB Hitachi Deskstar 1TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSOS
LG 8X BDR (WHL08S20) Cooler Master Hyper 212+ Kubuntu x64 Windows 7 x64 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Bodhi Linux x64 Acer G215H (1920x1080) Seasonic 520 HAF912 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
N450 1.8GHz AC and 1.66GHz batt ASUS proprietary for 1001P GMA3150 (can play bluray now!?) 1GB DDR2 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSOS
160GB LGLHDLBDRE32X Bodhi Linux Fedora LXDE 
OSOSMonitorKeyboard
Kubuntu SLAX 1280x600 + Dell 15inch Excellent! 
PowerCase
6 cells=6-12hrs and a charger 1001P MU17 Black 
  hide details  
post #350 of 1593
Well either way the difference is not that profound compared to the two. The gap doesn't feel as big as it should be put it that way.
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?