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 90  

post #891 of 1593
To be fair, all of those charts that had a big win for Intel were on horribly threaded engines. Not that I would pick a 8350 over a 4670k or 4770k, theres just to many games that run like crap and need that raw ipc tongue.gif
Alienware 15
(11 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7-4710HQ GTX 970M 3GB 16GB 256GB M.2 SSD 
Hard DriveHard DriveOSOS
250GB m.2 SSD 1TB HDD Fedora 23 Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardMouse
4k IPS Corsair K95 Corsair K65 
  hide details  
Alienware 15
(11 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7-4710HQ GTX 970M 3GB 16GB 256GB M.2 SSD 
Hard DriveHard DriveOSOS
250GB m.2 SSD 1TB HDD Fedora 23 Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardMouse
4k IPS Corsair K95 Corsair K65 
  hide details  
post #892 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMDATI View Post

The PCI bus serves a completely different purpose than memory, so the two really aren't comparable.

As always, GPU's will need far more internal memory bandwidth, than they will PCI bandwidth.

It isn't like high bandwidth memory is a necessity due to PCI limitations, therefore unnecessary in APU's. In reality, there aren't any PCI limitations other than in the upper most tier of videocard performance.

And keep in mind, if a CPU and GPU share the same memory, that memory bandwidth is effectively halved between them in an APU system. so even in your post, at best you'd be seeing more like 12GB/s in bandwidth......and probably much less.

Ehm, remember when I said that you should educate yourself? Sometimes it's better to read than to write. You're making a fool of yourself, it's sad. frown.gif

Give it a rest, consult some docs, then come back and have a valid argument.

Reality does not change just because someone says so. No matter how many times he might claim that 1+1=3, it will not change math. :|
post #893 of 1593
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 996gt2 View Post

For those who say AMD CPUs don't bottleneck high-end GPUs at 1080P, how do you explain this?

CPU_01.png

CPU_01.png

CPU_03.png

CPU_001.png

CPU_01.png

CPU_03.png

CPU_01.png

CPU_01.png


They'll just use it as an excuse to say that the upper end of AMD is 'close enough', completely negating their original argument of it not making a difference.

144fps vs 178fps may not seem like a meaningful difference, until you consider longevity. Frames will fall faster with newer more demanding titles with AMD than they will with Intel. And in actuality, that 144 vs 178 is a difference of 20%, which is pretty significant.

let's say a game comes out that the 4770k + Titan can only get 60fps in. It's reasonable to assume an AMD will get around 20% less, which drops them from 60fps to 48fps with the same exact videocard.

Funny thing is, the 3470 is cheaper or on par with the 8350, yet gets slightly better FPS. So if they want to focus on gaming, they've already lost. Of course that's right about when they'll try to cite non gaming performance, despite having shifted the focus off of it previously to say that it was gaming performance that mattered. Perfect explanation of the hypocrisy.
Edited by AMDATI - 3/28/14 at 1:32pm
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 #894 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMDATI View Post

They'll just use it as an excuse to say that the upper end of AMD is 'close enough', completely negating their original argument of it not making a difference. Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
144fps vs 178fps may not seem like a meaningful difference, until you consider longevity. Frames will fall faster with newer more demanding titles with AMD than they will with Intel. And in actuality, that 144 vs 178 is a difference of 20%, which is pretty significant.

let's say a game comes out that the 4770k + Titan can only get 60fps in. It's reasonable to assume an AMD will get around 20% less, which drops them from 60fps to 48fps with the same exact videocard.

Funny thing is, the 3470 is cheaper or on par with the 8350, yet gets slightly better FPS. So if they want to focus on gaming, they've already lost. Of course that's right about when they'll try to cite non gaming performance, despite having shifted the focus off of it previously to say that it was gaming performance that mattered. Perfect explanation of the hypocrisy.

So essentially what you are saying is "I am not happy with these results so I'll think something up".

You do realise once you get over your monitor's maximum refresh rate it doesn't matter?

With your analogy a lot of people would actually like to run at 48 fps and would be fine with that. The 4770K is a significant amount more than a FX-8320; some people will cut that because it isn't exactly a loss.


Depends on FPS and resolution. If person A likes running 30+ and person B likes running at 60+ FPS then you choose based on that preference. Both are capable and both deliver. E.g. I am fine with 30 FPS + so if an AMD chip can sustain that then it's win/win for me smile.gif I find it very difficult to tell the difference between 30 fps and 60 fps. An Intel chip may drive at 60 fps but if I physically can't tell the difference then yipee right? Depends on the game and depends on the smoothness you want to experience.
post #895 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeo01 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by AMDATI View Post

They'll just use it as an excuse to say that the upper end of AMD is 'close enough', completely negating their original argument of it not making a difference. Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
144fps vs 178fps may not seem like a meaningful difference, until you consider longevity. Frames will fall faster with newer more demanding titles with AMD than they will with Intel. And in actuality, that 144 vs 178 is a difference of 20%, which is pretty significant.

let's say a game comes out that the 4770k + Titan can only get 60fps in. It's reasonable to assume an AMD will get around 20% less, which drops them from 60fps to 48fps with the same exact videocard.

Funny thing is, the 3470 is cheaper or on par with the 8350, yet gets slightly better FPS. So if they want to focus on gaming, they've already lost. Of course that's right about when they'll try to cite non gaming performance, despite having shifted the focus off of it previously to say that it was gaming performance that mattered. Perfect explanation of the hypocrisy.

So essentially what you are saying is "I am not happy with these results so I'll think something up".

You do realise once you get over your monitor's maximum refresh rate it doesn't matter?

With your analogy a lot of people would actually like to run at 48 fps and would be fine with that. The 4770K is a significant amount more than a FX-8320; some people will cut that because it isn't exactly a loss.


Depends on FPS and resolution. If person A likes running 30+ and person B likes running at 60+ FPS then you choose based on that preference. Both are capable and both deliver. E.g. I am fine with 30 FPS + so if an AMD chip can sustain that then it's win/win for me smile.gif I find it very difficult to tell the difference between 30 fps and 60 fps. An Intel chip may drive at 60 fps but if I physically can't tell the difference then yipee right? Depends on the game and depends on the smoothness you want to experience.

So what's the point of even pairing an AMD CPU with a high-end GPU like a 780 or 290X if the CPU bottlenecks it in a large # of games anyway? Lots of AMD guys say "Oh, AMD is still relevant for gaming rigs, it won't bottleneck a high end GPU", but obviously that is not the truth.

It would be much smarter to get a 4770K + R9 290 instead of a FX-8320 + R9 290X, for example. The FX is going to bottleneck the 290X anyway. Not to mention the 4770K will still be a relatively good CPU in 3 years, whereas the FX is going to be a pile of junk performance-wise a few years from now. The 4770K will have no issues driving a high-end GPU 3 years from now, but you obviously cannot say that for the FX-8320, since it already bottlenecks high-end GPUs today.
Edited by 996gt2 - 3/28/14 at 1:50pm
5 GHz SFF Box
(18 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-2700K @ 5.0 GHz, 1.38V Asus Maximus IV GENE Asus GTX 670 DC II 4x4GB Samsung 30nm @ DDR3-2133 9-9-9-21 1.5V 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Plextor M3 SSD WD Velociraptor 500GB WD Caviar Black 1TB WD Caviar Green 2TB 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Thermalright HR-02 (GT AP-15 Push/Pull) Windows 7 Pro x64 LG 27" 2560x1440 S-IPS (Calibrated with Eye-One) CM Quickfire Rapid 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic X-750 Silverstone SG09 Logitech MX518 Steelseries QcK 
Audio
Asus Xonar DX + Shure SRH840 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Core i5-3570K Gigabyte H61N-USB3 Mini-ITX 2x4GB Samsung 30nm DDR3 Samsung 830 128GB SSD 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
WD Scorpio Blue 500GB Win 7 Pro x64 Antec 90W DC-DC/Delta power brick Antec ISK 110 
  hide details  
5 GHz SFF Box
(18 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-2700K @ 5.0 GHz, 1.38V Asus Maximus IV GENE Asus GTX 670 DC II 4x4GB Samsung 30nm @ DDR3-2133 9-9-9-21 1.5V 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Plextor M3 SSD WD Velociraptor 500GB WD Caviar Black 1TB WD Caviar Green 2TB 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Thermalright HR-02 (GT AP-15 Push/Pull) Windows 7 Pro x64 LG 27" 2560x1440 S-IPS (Calibrated with Eye-One) CM Quickfire Rapid 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic X-750 Silverstone SG09 Logitech MX518 Steelseries QcK 
Audio
Asus Xonar DX + Shure SRH840 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Core i5-3570K Gigabyte H61N-USB3 Mini-ITX 2x4GB Samsung 30nm DDR3 Samsung 830 128GB SSD 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
WD Scorpio Blue 500GB Win 7 Pro x64 Antec 90W DC-DC/Delta power brick Antec ISK 110 
  hide details  
post #896 of 1593
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeo01 View Post

So essentially what you are saying is "I am not happy with these results so I'll think something up".

You do realise once you get over your monitor's maximum refresh rate it doesn't matter?

With your analogy a lot of people would actually like to run at 48 fps and would be fine with that. The 4770K is a significant amount more than a FX-8320; some people will cut that because it isn't exactly a loss.


Depends on FPS and resolution. If person A likes running 30+ and person B likes running at 60+ FPS then you choose based on that preference. Both are capable and both deliver. E.g. I am fine with 30 FPS + so if an AMD chip can sustain that then it's win/win for me smile.gif I find it very difficult to tell the difference between 30 fps and 60 fps. An Intel chip may drive at 60 fps but if I physically can't tell the difference then yipee right? Depends on the game and depends on the smoothness you want to experience.

Quote:
You do realise once you get over your monitor's maximum refresh rate it doesn't matter?

See I totally called it. Which is where my 60fps vs 48fps example comes in.
Quote:
With your analogy a lot of people would actually like to run at 48 fps and would be fine with that.

See another excuse. He totally ignored the difference, and is making it out like you should be happy with getting 20% less fps with the same videocard, even though it's below the vsync in the example, completely contradicting his statement of "You do realise once you get over your monitor's maximum refresh rate it doesn't matter?" Well it seems like below refresh rate doesn't matter either eh? At least, when you don't want it to matter right?


It's just laughable how obvious the hypocrisy is.

Using the words 'fan boy' is considered name calling, so I won't bother......but I think the hypocrisy displayed serves as a great example of its definition.
Edited by AMDATI - 3/28/14 at 2:00pm
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 #897 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by 996gt2 View Post

Not to mention the 4770K will still be a relatively good CPU in 3 years

Implying that software and games will/won't need stronger CPUs in the future.

If you ask me, Technology is nearing its hardware limits. We can see this with the software optimizations being released. Mantle pulls even more out of old tech than we could have thought of a year ago. Windows 8 and Linux gets better performance.
I think the 4770k if not all 4th gen i7 and i5 CPUs will be around for awhile. Only thing that can be changed (IMO) is power consumption and TDP.
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  
post #898 of 1593
Well no the point is, is that AMD CPUs are "Decent" for a lot of people. People genuinely don't buy Intel parts based on price. If AMD can drive a high end GPU (Say BF3) on a standard monitor screen (1080P is widely popular) then where is the harm? Sometimes "Decent enough" is actually decent.

If you are experiencing lag or unsmoothness during gaming then there's the issue. But the point is AMD CPUs don't cause unsmoothness in the majority of games. Yes Intel parts get higher FPS but then that's why you pay the extra.

It does not mean AMD CPUs are rubbish because people can happily game on them without any problem. E.g. I have only ever gamed properly on AMD CPUs and it's smooth enough for my liking.


It only when single threaded performance or single threaded coding comes into place where you really need an Intel chip for. Single threaded performance kind of kills AMD for that.


Point being is not everyone checks with FRAPS, most people use their eyes and senses to the "smoothness" of things. AMD are still viable because they still game. E.g. they don't perform like an Athlon 64 at gaming as that would definitely be a rubbish experience.
post #899 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Insane569 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by 996gt2 View Post

Not to mention the 4770K will still be a relatively good CPU in 3 years

Implying that software and games will/won't need stronger CPUs in the future.

If you ask me, Technology is nearing its hardware limits. We can see this with the software optimizations being released. Mantle pulls even more out of old tech than we could have thought of a year ago. Windows 8 and Linux gets better performance.
I think the 4770k if not all 4th gen i7 and i5 CPUs will be around for awhile. Only thing that can be changed (IMO) is power consumption and TDP.

There's also the issue of FX being a dead-end setup. There's no upgrade path in the future after AMD's withdraw from the high end market.
5 GHz SFF Box
(18 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-2700K @ 5.0 GHz, 1.38V Asus Maximus IV GENE Asus GTX 670 DC II 4x4GB Samsung 30nm @ DDR3-2133 9-9-9-21 1.5V 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Plextor M3 SSD WD Velociraptor 500GB WD Caviar Black 1TB WD Caviar Green 2TB 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Thermalright HR-02 (GT AP-15 Push/Pull) Windows 7 Pro x64 LG 27" 2560x1440 S-IPS (Calibrated with Eye-One) CM Quickfire Rapid 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic X-750 Silverstone SG09 Logitech MX518 Steelseries QcK 
Audio
Asus Xonar DX + Shure SRH840 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Core i5-3570K Gigabyte H61N-USB3 Mini-ITX 2x4GB Samsung 30nm DDR3 Samsung 830 128GB SSD 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
WD Scorpio Blue 500GB Win 7 Pro x64 Antec 90W DC-DC/Delta power brick Antec ISK 110 
  hide details  
5 GHz SFF Box
(18 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-2700K @ 5.0 GHz, 1.38V Asus Maximus IV GENE Asus GTX 670 DC II 4x4GB Samsung 30nm @ DDR3-2133 9-9-9-21 1.5V 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Plextor M3 SSD WD Velociraptor 500GB WD Caviar Black 1TB WD Caviar Green 2TB 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Thermalright HR-02 (GT AP-15 Push/Pull) Windows 7 Pro x64 LG 27" 2560x1440 S-IPS (Calibrated with Eye-One) CM Quickfire Rapid 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic X-750 Silverstone SG09 Logitech MX518 Steelseries QcK 
Audio
Asus Xonar DX + Shure SRH840 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Core i5-3570K Gigabyte H61N-USB3 Mini-ITX 2x4GB Samsung 30nm DDR3 Samsung 830 128GB SSD 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
WD Scorpio Blue 500GB Win 7 Pro x64 Antec 90W DC-DC/Delta power brick Antec ISK 110 
  hide details  
post #900 of 1593
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Insane569 View Post

Implying that software and games will/won't need stronger CPUs in the future.

If you ask me, Technology is nearing its hardware limits. We can see this with the software optimizations being released. Mantle pulls even more out of old tech than we could have thought of a year ago. Windows 8 and Linux gets better performance.
I think the 4770k if not all 4th gen i7 and i5 CPUs will be around for awhile. Only thing that can be changed (IMO) is power consumption and TDP.

No it just implies that the 4770K will be able to keep up farther into the future, reducing time between upgrades and delivering overall greater performance the whole time.

The problem for AMD is that Intel already has TDP/Power Consumption heavily in its favor, so once AMD gets around to it, Intel will be even further along. Once AMD comes out with say 22nm chips, Intel will already be operating on something like 18 or 12nm, with even more IPC improvements than now.

We definitely do need to move off of silicon though. I'd rather see an era of 10Ghz quad cores than 4Ghz octa cores. We're actually still only on silicon because the raw materials are soo cheap and abundant, they wouldn't want to cut into their profit margins. The amount of silicon that makes a hundred chips, is probably worth a dollar or less.
Edited by AMDATI - 3/28/14 at 2:13pm
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  
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?