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 41  

post #401 of 1593
Ouch that's a scary prospect.
post #402 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alatar View Post

No you would be incorrect....

Since sandy the focus has been on graphics, power delivery and power consumption. There haven't been any major design changes to the core design. Haswell just added AVX2 support but that's about it, and we can't expect all software to use AVX2, that would be silly.

So yes, clock for clock perf has only increased by around 10-15% since sandy (small tweaks to the architecture) but sandy would still look a lot worse in the comparison I made. That's because it draws more power, has a bigger die size and has less integrated stuff.

I have no idea why you are under the assumption that core performance should have jumped up significantly from sandy. That's just completely incorrect. It's still very much the same core design with some tweaks.
Performance per clock has increased, afaik. FPU instructions per clock has doubled; hence the increment in transistor count and chip area & density. You make it sound like its all for power gating. It definitely is not.
Haswell is great, definitely brings better latency computation than AMD's HSA approach. AMD definitely has more work to do in their hands to achieve similar performance. Interesting that they do not resort to cache buffers to keep the pipelines unstalled.
The Machine
(14 items)
 
Nexus 7 2013
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10 6800K Asus F2A85-V MSI 6870 Hawx, VTX3D 5770, AMD HD6950(RIP), Sap... G.skill Ripjaws PC12800 6-8-6-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate 7200.5 1TB NEC 3540 Dvd-Rom Windows 7 x32 Ultimate Samsung P2350 23" 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonic s12-600w CoolerMaster Centurion 5 Logitech G600 Auzen X-Fi Raider 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Quad Krait 300 at 1.5Ghz Qualcomm APQ8064-1AA SOC Adreno 320 at 400mhz 2GB DDR3L-1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
32GB Internal NAND Android 5.0 7" 1920X1200 103% sRGB & 572 cd/m2 LTPS IPS Microsoft Wedge Mobile Keyboard 
PowerAudio
3950mAh/15.01mAh Battery Stereo Speakers 
  hide details  
The Machine
(14 items)
 
Nexus 7 2013
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10 6800K Asus F2A85-V MSI 6870 Hawx, VTX3D 5770, AMD HD6950(RIP), Sap... G.skill Ripjaws PC12800 6-8-6-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate 7200.5 1TB NEC 3540 Dvd-Rom Windows 7 x32 Ultimate Samsung P2350 23" 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonic s12-600w CoolerMaster Centurion 5 Logitech G600 Auzen X-Fi Raider 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Quad Krait 300 at 1.5Ghz Qualcomm APQ8064-1AA SOC Adreno 320 at 400mhz 2GB DDR3L-1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
32GB Internal NAND Android 5.0 7" 1920X1200 103% sRGB & 572 cd/m2 LTPS IPS Microsoft Wedge Mobile Keyboard 
PowerAudio
3950mAh/15.01mAh Battery Stereo Speakers 
  hide details  
post #403 of 1593
I did point out that they added AVX2 support with haswell. Doesn't mean that the chip should perform better across the board.
 
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 #404 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alatar View Post

I did point out that they added AVX2 support with haswell. Doesn't mean that the chip should perform better across the board.
Stop playing mind games. There is no other bench that Intel leads by far, afaik. AMD is pretty OK with their chips' integer performance.
The Machine
(14 items)
 
Nexus 7 2013
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10 6800K Asus F2A85-V MSI 6870 Hawx, VTX3D 5770, AMD HD6950(RIP), Sap... G.skill Ripjaws PC12800 6-8-6-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate 7200.5 1TB NEC 3540 Dvd-Rom Windows 7 x32 Ultimate Samsung P2350 23" 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonic s12-600w CoolerMaster Centurion 5 Logitech G600 Auzen X-Fi Raider 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Quad Krait 300 at 1.5Ghz Qualcomm APQ8064-1AA SOC Adreno 320 at 400mhz 2GB DDR3L-1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
32GB Internal NAND Android 5.0 7" 1920X1200 103% sRGB & 572 cd/m2 LTPS IPS Microsoft Wedge Mobile Keyboard 
PowerAudio
3950mAh/15.01mAh Battery Stereo Speakers 
  hide details  
The Machine
(14 items)
 
Nexus 7 2013
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10 6800K Asus F2A85-V MSI 6870 Hawx, VTX3D 5770, AMD HD6950(RIP), Sap... G.skill Ripjaws PC12800 6-8-6-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate 7200.5 1TB NEC 3540 Dvd-Rom Windows 7 x32 Ultimate Samsung P2350 23" 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonic s12-600w CoolerMaster Centurion 5 Logitech G600 Auzen X-Fi Raider 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Quad Krait 300 at 1.5Ghz Qualcomm APQ8064-1AA SOC Adreno 320 at 400mhz 2GB DDR3L-1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
32GB Internal NAND Android 5.0 7" 1920X1200 103% sRGB & 572 cd/m2 LTPS IPS Microsoft Wedge Mobile Keyboard 
PowerAudio
3950mAh/15.01mAh Battery Stereo Speakers 
  hide details  
post #405 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by hagtek View Post

I really don't have a dog in this fight.

I don't care about either corporation just the better product for the money spent.

I built 2 intel machines late last year and wanted to see what AMD was all about. I couldn't resist an 8320 for $99 at Micro Center so I bought it along with a Gigabyte GA970A-UD3P for a bundled cost of $79.99. For perspective that's the same cost as the 4670K they have on sale.

My intel and AMD builds all run fine. However, even with the AMD overclocked the intels are more powerful and in my book give more for the money spent.

I honestly don't know what to think. If you need the 4770K performance then the $99 priced 8320 isn't a bargain even at that price, in fact it's a waste of money.

I assume AMD is in business to make money (although they lost money last year) and not necessarily to produce high end, high performance cpus.

Their move to APUs could turn out to be a good one for the company and I expect PS4 and XboxOne sales to help them out. I'll watch their first quarter earnings this year.

Hopefully with their work in APUs GPU memory etc...we'll see some performance increase or new ideas with regard to high end cpu design. On the other hand though they could be barking up the wrong tree.

This is like one of the most unbias reply in the thread, there could be more but I only read up until page 5 and skipped to page 41. From the 5 pages that I read it was just a battle between intel and amd, no one is stating any "real world" situations, and when they do, their responses is heavily influence by their brand loyalty and personal egos.

These benchmarks that various members are posting between AMD and Intel in my opinion could not be trusted, because just like this thread, probably heavily influenced by the tester's own opinion and egos.

There's no point in arguing on which is better, just use what you are happy with. Everyone is right in their own world, as everyone is innocent.
post #406 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by wardoc22 View Post

This is like one of the most unbias reply in the thread, there could be more but I only read up until page 5 and skipped to page 41. From the 5 pages that I read it was just a battle between intel and amd, no one is stating any "real world" situations, and when they do, their responses is heavily influence by their brand loyalty and personal egos.

These benchmarks that various members are posting between AMD and Intel in my opinion could not be trusted, because just like this thread, probably heavily influenced by the tester's own opinion and egos.

There's no point in arguing on which is better, just use what you are happy with. Everyone is right in their own world, as everyone is innocent.

Benchmarks do tend to have a liking for one end or the other, however this is why we look at a great number of benchmarks to determine what is appropriate to you.

Also the point of researching a product is find out which will provide the positive experience, a bit ironic I know. Objectively seeking a subjective result
    
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 #407 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alatar View Post

I did point out that they added AVX2 support with haswell. Doesn't mean that the chip should perform better across the board.
Actually I was looking for the article, really technical, that a poster on OCN linked me to that showed the difference between SB and Haswell and there was a good increase in performance at least on paper. And it wasn't just AVX2. It was fetch/prefetch and a bunch of cache fixes and other techy stuff that was a tad over my head. But I spent 1.5 hrs looking and I would like to get some some High-end gaming done tonight and not spend it searching for that needle. Anyway, Alatar I am gonna make you eat those words, telling me I am wrong. I can say without a doubt that I am not.

On the positive side I got thru a lot of my old posts and saw one where the debate between me and you looks almost exactly like it does in here. Some things never change.

I think it was MRJAVA that had the link to the Haswell architecture.
post #408 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alatar View Post

They definitely are not competing on a chip design level. Sure with price/performance but only because they are forced to. That's just the market forcing AMD to sell their parts at lower prices. However they cost much more to make than the intel ones do.

Vishera 8C:

315mm^2
125W TDP
No integrated NB
No integrated GPU

Haswell GT2 4C:

177mm^2 ( ~112mm^2 of which is dedicated to the CPU)
84W TDP
Integrated NB
Integrated GPU
Integrated voltage regulator

IB-E 6C:

257mm^2
130W TDP
integrated NB
twice the amount of memory controllers as the AMD/haswell designs

No, AMD definitely isn't competing well against intel's 22nm process.

Haswell more than handily outperforms Vishera pretty much across the board, usually by a wide margin, it has more integrated features on die and its die size dedicated to the CPU is just over 1/3 of Vishera's die.

IB-E on the other hand outperforms Vishera by about ~70%, consumes about as much power, has more integrated features on the die, and still maintains a smaller die size.

By Q3 this year we will have intel enthusiast parts that are literally more than twice as fast as the fastest AMD enthusiast parts.
Luckily for us the useless L3 takes half the space and Steamroller modules are only 60mm^2 or so each.
post #409 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMDATI View Post

Here goes a series of side by side video benchmarks of the I7 4770K and the 9590......and there are some pretty significant differences:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JGkCFXR_9E

While the i7 wins in every test, the 9590 is still more expensive than the 4770K.

In the crysis 3 benchmark, the min FPS is of particular concern.....with the 4770K getting 44fps min, and the 9590 getting 29fps min. That's a pretty substantial difference. The i7 also had an average FPS just above a 60fps vsync....while the 9590 couldn't even deliver an average FPS at vsync rates at all.

Now think about how this translates into future performance even just 1 year from now, or even just 2. That 29fps min gradually falls to 18fps, then 12fps and so on. That average FPS goes from 50 to below 30.

With the pevalance of SSD's I would consider benchmarks to be on more relevant ground, since they negate the differences. But it's not what the benchmark numbers tell us that matter so much, it's how they perform in relation to each other. You might not see X score in the real world with either system, but what you will most likely see is they will be similarly apart in the real world as they are in benchmarks.....with the exception of the task relying on another component such as gaming, because gaming relies mainly on the GPU.....but as you can see, the CPU can also matter greatly in helping to churn out a meaningful performance difference.

I'd consider 44fps min unacceptable, even with an avg. fps of 63. But 29fps? Heck, I wouldn't even bother to play at that frame rate (of course you could always lower quality settings....but no one likes to do that).

Now if the 9590 is performing this way, then the $150-$200 8xxx's are going to perform even worse.

And these tests were done with a GTX 780 3GB, which is a $500 card, one of the top cards on the market in raw power. So lesser cards with lesser GPU's, will obviously have even lesser performance now and in the future.

Like I pointed out before....even something that costs 17% more, but delivers 30% more performance, IS a better price to performance ratio product than the other.
You made a small mistake your math there smile.gif , re-examine your cost comparison.
Also how did you arrive at the 30% figure?
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 #410 of 1593
The Question/issue here is, Is AMD a viable option for mid/high end CPUs.
A better question is, where is the line drawn on CPU ratings. What makes it high end or mid range or Enthusiast.
The Goat
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i5 4670k asustek Z87 pro GTX 760 GTX 760 
RAMRAMHard DriveOptical Drive
Corsair XMS3 Team Dark Series Western Digital WD10EXEZ Atapi IHBS112 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
Corsair H100i 2 Fans NZXT Sentry 2 Windows 7 64bit 
MonitorMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Dell E198WFPv Dell E198WFPv Dell SE198WFPv Corsair K60 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Corsair CX750m Corsair Spec 02 Corsair M40 Logitech z506 
AudioOther
CHC Co Silverado 48oz cup of water 
  hide details  
The Goat
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i5 4670k asustek Z87 pro GTX 760 GTX 760 
RAMRAMHard DriveOptical Drive
Corsair XMS3 Team Dark Series Western Digital WD10EXEZ Atapi IHBS112 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
Corsair H100i 2 Fans NZXT Sentry 2 Windows 7 64bit 
MonitorMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Dell E198WFPv Dell E198WFPv Dell SE198WFPv Corsair K60 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Corsair CX750m Corsair Spec 02 Corsair M40 Logitech z506 
AudioOther
CHC Co Silverado 48oz cup of water 
  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?