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 99  

post #981 of 1593
Point is you still spent twice as much smile.gif I for one am a cheap stake so the more cash I save the better tongue.gif regardless of how long it'll last.

But that's me wink.gif
post #982 of 1593
That example hurts even more when you look at the x58 users that are still sitting happy with their machines and still have an upgrade path within their chipset
    
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 #983 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thready View Post

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115070

$340.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113285

$159.

You spent twice as much to future proof your PC for 3 years. I do not think that is worth it. You might, and good for you. You saved money. But how does this specific example translate to the masses?

You are using such a specific example. With all of science and technology, there is always 1 example that, if you look closely enough, goes against the grain. Sure, your $340 CPU is faster than AMD's top end CPU, but what does that mean? How does that mean that AMD is unable to compete? AMD has the talent and technology to make a very fast CPU. It doesn't do that as much as Intel does because they know that people who consider themselves mid-high end do not think paying almost $400 for a CPU is reasonable for them.


$
Yeah I said that too,pretty much. I guess my post got lost in the mess of benchmark graphs. A $300 CPU is in a whole difference price range than a $159 one,and sometimes the 8320 even goes for $129.
The "Bought FX-8150 in 2011" argument wouldn't really work either,as most of us here didn't buy into the bulldozer hype. There is no such as "future-proofing" either. Just because the 2600K does well enough for you,doesn't mean something like a 4670K wouldn't be an upgrade. Most users on OCN that use Intel upgrade at every refresh anyways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clairvoyant129 View Post

Oh great, so the excuse that AMD can't compete is, "Well the high end market is small so we'll make a slow CPU."
Yeah,cause the high end market is so huge,I wonder why Intel profits the most in tablets/notebooks and mid-end parts? I wonder why AMD is successful in low end,notebooks and mid-end?
FX-8320 is so slow,must be totally useless. Oh the Intel elitist ignorance. *facedesk*
Edited by Heavy MG - 3/30/14 at 12:26pm
Moar cores!
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX 8320 @ 4.0Ghz/4.2Ghz turbo gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 rev. 4.0 Gigabyte Nvida GTX 770OC 2GB/ Gigabyte 970 G1 G... Gskill Sniper 1866Mhz 8GB (4GB x 2) 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Corsair Neutron GTX 120GB WD Black 1TB Asus 24X CM Hyper 212Evo 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Home X64 HP 22BW 21.5" LED-IPS CM Storm Trigger/MX Brown Corsair TX 650V2 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM HAF922 Logitech G500S Steelseries QCK Mini Asus Xonar DX 7.1 
  hide details  
Moar cores!
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX 8320 @ 4.0Ghz/4.2Ghz turbo gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 rev. 4.0 Gigabyte Nvida GTX 770OC 2GB/ Gigabyte 970 G1 G... Gskill Sniper 1866Mhz 8GB (4GB x 2) 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Corsair Neutron GTX 120GB WD Black 1TB Asus 24X CM Hyper 212Evo 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Home X64 HP 22BW 21.5" LED-IPS CM Storm Trigger/MX Brown Corsair TX 650V2 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM HAF922 Logitech G500S Steelseries QCK Mini Asus Xonar DX 7.1 
  hide details  
post #984 of 1593
I just bought an a8-5545m. I'm going to use this for a few years till they get HSA working. It didn't cost me much either.
Power Tower
(22 items)
 
SteamBox
(9 items)
 
Doge Miner
(7 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1700X AX370-Gaming 5 AMD Radeon R9 200 Series G.Skill DDR4-2400 
RAMRAMRAMHard Drive
G.Skill DDR4-2400 G.Skill DDR4-2400 G.Skill DDR4-2400 Samsung 840 Pro 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
CX300 Crucial 480GB Toshiba 4TB Toshbia 4TB Western Digital Black 1TB 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
h110i Windows 10 42" LG TV 20" Digitizer ASUS 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Corsair Vengeance Mechanical Keyboard  850watt Vampire Gold Rated NZXT S340 Elite Corsair RGB FPS Mouse 
Mouse PadAudio
Borderlands Mousepad Realtek HD 
  hide details  
Power Tower
(22 items)
 
SteamBox
(9 items)
 
Doge Miner
(7 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1700X AX370-Gaming 5 AMD Radeon R9 200 Series G.Skill DDR4-2400 
RAMRAMRAMHard Drive
G.Skill DDR4-2400 G.Skill DDR4-2400 G.Skill DDR4-2400 Samsung 840 Pro 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
CX300 Crucial 480GB Toshiba 4TB Toshbia 4TB Western Digital Black 1TB 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
h110i Windows 10 42" LG TV 20" Digitizer ASUS 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Corsair Vengeance Mechanical Keyboard  850watt Vampire Gold Rated NZXT S340 Elite Corsair RGB FPS Mouse 
Mouse PadAudio
Borderlands Mousepad Realtek HD 
  hide details  
post #985 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thready View Post

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115070

$340.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113285

$159.

You spent twice as much to future proof your PC for 3 years. I do not think that is worth it. You might, and good for you. You saved money. But how does this specific example translate to the masses?

You are using such a specific example. With all of science and technology, there is always 1 example that, if you look closely enough, goes against the grain. Sure, your $340 CPU is faster than AMD's top end CPU, but what does that mean? How does that mean that AMD is unable to compete? AMD has the talent and technology to make a very fast CPU. It doesn't do that as much as Intel does because they know that people who consider themselves mid-high end do not think paying almost $400 for a CPU is reasonable for them.


$

Oh great, so the excuse that AMD can't compete is, "Well the high end market is small so we'll make a slow CPU."
 
Surface Pro 3
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 3720QM @ 2.6GHz/3.6GHz Turbo  HM77 Geforce GT650M 1GB GDDR5 @ 900MHz 16GB @ 1600MHz  
Hard DriveOSMonitor
256GB Samsung PM830 SSD OSX 10.8 Mountain Lion 2880x1800 Retina Display 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Core i5-4300U @1.9GHz/2.5GHz Turbo Intel HD4400 8GB @ 1600MHz 256GB SSD 
OSMonitorKeyboard
Windows 8.1 Pro 2160x1440 ClearType HD  Surface Pro Type Cover 3 
  hide details  
 
Surface Pro 3
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 3720QM @ 2.6GHz/3.6GHz Turbo  HM77 Geforce GT650M 1GB GDDR5 @ 900MHz 16GB @ 1600MHz  
Hard DriveOSMonitor
256GB Samsung PM830 SSD OSX 10.8 Mountain Lion 2880x1800 Retina Display 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Core i5-4300U @1.9GHz/2.5GHz Turbo Intel HD4400 8GB @ 1600MHz 256GB SSD 
OSMonitorKeyboard
Windows 8.1 Pro 2160x1440 ClearType HD  Surface Pro Type Cover 3 
  hide details  
post #986 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavy MG View Post

Most users on OCN that use Intel upgrade at every refresh anyways.
They do, but they don't really need to. Moving up from Sandy Bridge to Ivy or Ivy to Haswell is an extremely marginal "upgrade" for a desktop machine. Ivy and Haswell were almost entirely about progress in the mobile space.

From a practical standpoint, making a move like that on a desktop is about the same as if I retired my FX-8350 that can run at 4.85 in favor of a $340 FX-9590 in hopes of reaching a stable 5.1 GHz. But a lot of people on here like to have the bleeding-edge stuff, practical or not.
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Athlon X4 870K 4700mhz 1.63v ASUS A88X-PRO Radeon HD 6970 G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 16GB DDR2133 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Kingston V300 Toshiba 2.5" laptop HDD, 1TB Micron C300 SSD Generic 2TB HDD WL2000GSA1672 (external) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate Momentus XT 500GB ASUS DVD-RW Prolimatech Black Series Megahalems Linux Mint 18 Cinnamon "Sarah" 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 ViewSonic VG2030wm IBM Model M Fractal Design Newton R3 600W 
CaseMouseAudioOther
Phanteks Enthoo Pro Logitech Marble Mouse Behringer UCA222 Upgraded Realistic Minimus-7 speakers, Lepai 20... 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core 2 Duo Mobile T9900 Dell 0G848F Intel Mobile 4 series 4GB Crucial DDR2-6400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OWC Mercury Electra 3G 44GB SSD stock DVD-RW Linux Mint Cinnamon 17.1 "Rebecca" 1366x768 WXGA 
  hide details  
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Athlon X4 870K 4700mhz 1.63v ASUS A88X-PRO Radeon HD 6970 G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 16GB DDR2133 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Kingston V300 Toshiba 2.5" laptop HDD, 1TB Micron C300 SSD Generic 2TB HDD WL2000GSA1672 (external) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate Momentus XT 500GB ASUS DVD-RW Prolimatech Black Series Megahalems Linux Mint 18 Cinnamon "Sarah" 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 ViewSonic VG2030wm IBM Model M Fractal Design Newton R3 600W 
CaseMouseAudioOther
Phanteks Enthoo Pro Logitech Marble Mouse Behringer UCA222 Upgraded Realistic Minimus-7 speakers, Lepai 20... 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core 2 Duo Mobile T9900 Dell 0G848F Intel Mobile 4 series 4GB Crucial DDR2-6400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OWC Mercury Electra 3G 44GB SSD stock DVD-RW Linux Mint Cinnamon 17.1 "Rebecca" 1366x768 WXGA 
  hide details  
post #987 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by 996gt2 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisjames61 View Post

You don't get it. That's not future proof. People talk of "future proof" like a slightly faster processor somehow won't become obsolete. Let's say the I7 is 25% faster than the 8350. Which is about tight. A new game comes out that is very taxing on the CPU. Chances are it will be unplayable on the 8350 and the "future proof" I7.


Intel: Buy i7-2600K in January 2011 (almost 3.5 years ago). Maybe give it a moderate overclock to 4.5 GHz or so (just about all 2600Ks should able to do this easily on air cooling). Still a very fast CPU today, and faster than any of AMD's current offerings.

AMD: Buy FX-8150 in late 2011. Slower than 2600K when it came out. Upgrade to Vishera based FX-8320 in late 2012. Still slower than 2600K, much less an overclocked one. Not to mention there is no future upgrade path past Vishera on the desktop.

See the pattern here? No need to upgrade an Intel CPU because the Sandy Bridge chips from over 3 years ago are still faster than AMD's current chips.

Think about it from the Intel owner's point of view. If you bought a Sandy Bridge CPU 3.5 years ago and it remained faster than AMD's newest offerings over 3 years later, I'm sure you would feel that the Intel chip is pretty future-proof"

I remember back when I built my Athlon X2 rig back in 2005. When I built it, it was faster than anything Intel had at the time. But it didn't remain faster than Intel's offerings for anywhere close to 3 years, since Core 2 Duo was released about a year after I built my rig. So for my current Sandy Bridge rig to be over 3 years old and still faster than AMD's newest offerings is plenty future-proof by my standard.


From my experience regarding the person who overclocks, Intel really hasn't offered much incentive to move from a Sandy bridge I7 to the newer platforms in the same segment. The added headroom of the SB nearly nullifies any gains in design of newer chips from what I've seen. The 2600k I have is 5 ghz HT enabled on an H-60 capable at 1.4 volts ( or was when new , haven't messed with it for a couple years), the 3770K I have tops out at 4.7 ghz on the same voltage, on a Thermaltake extreme water 2.0. Pretty much a wash. I haven't any experience with the 4770K, I'd like to give one a try but it seems like they are hotter and have less OC headroom than the I 7's I already have, and It will cost me about $500 to give it a go.

Like I've said before though, I had the 2600k rig (I bought it figuring I would hand down the AMD to my son) and my 965 rig sitting on the same desk for a while and ended up keeping the 965 for myself and giving the I7 to my son. Outside of benchmark scores and playing BFBC2, I was happier with the AMD rig.
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 #988 of 1593
True, a lot of people still upgrade regardless of the chip and performance smile.gif

... I was one of the unlucky ones who bought into the Bulldozer hype frown.gif and now AMD has nearly lost a customer. I am ever so cautious about the FXs now and reason why I always try and avoid it. That's why I always tend to edge back to a Thuban.

Unfortunately.

mad.gif
post #989 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thready View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 996gt2 View Post

Intel: Buy i7-2600K in January 2011 (almost 3.5 years ago). Maybe give it a moderate overclock to 4.5 GHz or so (just about all 2600Ks should able to do this easily on air cooling). Still a very fast CPU today, and faster than any of AMD's current offerings.

AMD: Buy FX-8150 in late 2011. Slower than 2600K when it came out. Upgrade to Vishera based FX-8320 in late 2012 (I know quite a few BD owners did this upgrade). Still slower than 2600K, much less an overclocked one. Not to mention there is no future upgrade path past Vishera on the desktop.

See the pattern here? No need to upgrade an Intel CPU because the Sandy Bridge chips from over 3 years ago are still faster than AMD's current chips.

Think about it from the Intel owner's point of view. If you bought a Sandy Bridge CPU 3.5 years ago and it remained faster than AMD's newest offerings over 3 years later, I'm sure you would feel that the Intel chip is pretty "future-proof" as well.

I remember back when I built my Athlon X2 rig back in 2005. When I built it, it was faster than anything Intel had at the time. I had it overclocked to 2.8 GHz, and it basically performed like the FX-62. But it didn't remain faster than Intel's offerings for anywhere close to 3 years, since Core 2 Duo was released about a year after I built my rig. So for my current Sandy Bridge rig to be over 3 years old and still faster than AMD's newest offerings is plenty future-proof by my standard.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115070

$340.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113285

$159.

You spent twice as much to future proof your PC for 3 years. I do not think that is worth it. You might, and good for you. You saved money. But how does this specific example translate to the masses?

You are using such a specific example. With all of science and technology, there is always 1 example that, if you look closely enough, goes against the grain. Sure, your $340 CPU is faster than AMD's top end CPU, but what does that mean? How does that mean that AMD is unable to compete? AMD has the talent and technology to make a very fast CPU. It doesn't do that as much as Intel does because they know that people who consider themselves mid-high end do not think paying almost $400 for a CPU is reasonable for them.


$


You are making two mistakes in your price quotes. First, you're quoting prices of today, not release prices. The i7-2600K didn't cost $340 at release, it cost $317, secondly, you're comparing it against a CPU from 2012 and not 2011 like you should have, which is what 996gt2 did.

You are quoting prices for the i7-2600K and the FX-8320, when he mentioned the i7-2600K and the FX-8150, which is the comparison that makes sense if you held off from buying the i7-2600K in early 2011 (or in March / April, after the chipset problem was fixed) and waited until later that year to make a buying decision.

Now the problem with your argument then becomes the fact that the FX-8150 didn't cost anywhere near $159 when it was released, it cost $245.
 
Metro 2033 review
Metro 2033
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3820 Asus Sabertooth X79 MSI GTX 750 Ti TF Gaming 16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 1TB Sony Optiarc DVD-RW Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ RL2455HM Cooler Master Octane Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus 
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane 
  hide details  
 
Metro 2033 review
Metro 2033
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-3820 Asus Sabertooth X79 MSI GTX 750 Ti TF Gaming 16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 1TB Sony Optiarc DVD-RW Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ RL2455HM Cooler Master Octane Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus 
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane 
  hide details  
post #990 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by tpi2007 View Post

You are making two mistakes in your price quotes. First, you're quoting prices of today, not release prices. The i7-2600K didn't cost $340 at release, it cost $317, secondly, you're comparing it against a CPU from 2012 and not 2011 like you should have, which is what 996gt2 did.

You are quoting prices for the i7-2600K and the FX-8320, when he mentioned the i7-2600K and the FX-8150, which is the comparison that makes sense if you held off from buying the i7-2600K in early 2011 (or in March / April, after the chipset problem was fixed) and waited until later that year to make a buying decision.

Now the problem with your argument then becomes the fact that the FX-8150 didn't cost anywhere near $159 when it was released, it cost $245.
He wanted to discuss costs of "future-proofing" so it does makes sense.
$317 vs. $340,a $23 Difference doesn't seem like much to me (IMO) when you can afford a $300 CPU. Also,FX-8150 is discontinued/OOS http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103960
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeo01 View Post

True, a lot of people still upgrade regardless of the chip and performance smile.gif

... I was one of the unlucky ones who bought into the Bulldozer hype frown.gif and now AMD has nearly lost a customer. I am ever so cautious about the FXs now and reason why I always try and avoid it. That's why I always tend to edge back to a Thuban.

Unfortunately.

mad.gif
Even though I didn't buy a Bulldozer cpu,never purchase a CPU at release is what I learned,read as many reviews as you can and take your own opinions from it.
Moar cores!
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX 8320 @ 4.0Ghz/4.2Ghz turbo gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 rev. 4.0 Gigabyte Nvida GTX 770OC 2GB/ Gigabyte 970 G1 G... Gskill Sniper 1866Mhz 8GB (4GB x 2) 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Corsair Neutron GTX 120GB WD Black 1TB Asus 24X CM Hyper 212Evo 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Home X64 HP 22BW 21.5" LED-IPS CM Storm Trigger/MX Brown Corsair TX 650V2 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM HAF922 Logitech G500S Steelseries QCK Mini Asus Xonar DX 7.1 
  hide details  
Moar cores!
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX 8320 @ 4.0Ghz/4.2Ghz turbo gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 rev. 4.0 Gigabyte Nvida GTX 770OC 2GB/ Gigabyte 970 G1 G... Gskill Sniper 1866Mhz 8GB (4GB x 2) 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Corsair Neutron GTX 120GB WD Black 1TB Asus 24X CM Hyper 212Evo 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Home X64 HP 22BW 21.5" LED-IPS CM Storm Trigger/MX Brown Corsair TX 650V2 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM HAF922 Logitech G500S Steelseries QCK Mini Asus Xonar DX 7.1 
  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?