should I abandon the AMD ship? (Updated)

[Cheesesticksandbeer]

Again, on 1080

Min: 28.3
Max: 182.3
Avg: 91.8
Score: 2313

 

[crashtech]

Yeah, whatever..... You were seriously exaggerating the cost penalty between 1150 and LGA 2011-3 -- by like $150.....

That's a pretty damn big number..... I know people that spend around $150 on their entire build. People get so bitter when they are proven wrong.

Any perceived disgruntlement on my part comes only from dealing with participants who will say anything in order to try to appear as if they are winning an argument which they themselves ginned up. Such behavior is worse than noise, it is a self aggrandizing waste of everyone's time, and often willfully misleading as well.

 

[Schmide]

but right now he is saving up some cash for 2 new video card first.

So he wasted an extra $200 which he could of used towards video cards at the time of the build.

Pun intended PRICELESS.

 

[AtenRa]

So he wasted an extra $200 which he could of used towards video cards at the time of the build.

Pun intended PRICELESS.

well, he got a new platform AND 6-core CPU for that extra cash.

It all depends on the individual, some will spend more for platform + CPU at the beginning so to keep the platform longer. Others spend more for the GPU early on and update the platform sooner.

If I would want to upgrade today, i would go Haswell-E vs 1150.

 

[Schmide]

The rule of thumb is you get a balance that fits your budget and you'll almost always lose if you chase the proverbial "future proof" bug. What you buy now will most certainly be cheaper in the pre-thanksgiving sales. Ram prices will plummet as they often do ever 2-4 years, same as the SSD prices are moving now. Sometimes you lose, but more often than not launch time is never cost effective.

 

[Ramses]

Again, on 1080

Min: 28.3
Max: 182.3
Avg: 91.8
Score: 2313

Download Valley and run it on the 1080P Extreme HD preset or whatever it's called.
I'd like to compare notes just for giggles. Those benches are very un-CPU involved as I'm sure you know, but I did pick up a solid 6 or better going from 8350 to 9590 for no apparent reason.

 

[USER8000]

I know you didn't, frozentundra -- I was responding to Witeken's comment.....

To quote Witeken did:
"Intel has the fastest IGP since Haswell. Time to catch up. Broadwell will offer a healthy increase and Skylake will add a nice number of EUs.
Things are even worse in TDP limited scenarios. Core M's GPU performance is top-notch."

He was the person I was addressing with the Iris/Kaveri comparison. The reality is Intel's IGP is no faster than Kaveri.
I have no agenda. I simply was proving his statement was wrong by pointing out the many instances where Iris was
slower than AMD's IGP. You're trying to read between the lines -- but nothing is actually there.

The funny thing is the Iris Pro IGP section is not only much bigger than the IGP section of Kaveri,but also uses another 80MM2 of L4 cache on top of this. Plus its made on a much more advanced process node too.

Its expensive to implement and hence is only sold in expensive laptops,and ultimately at least for the DIY market none of us can even buy one.

At least in the UK Kaveri quad cores are Core i3 level pricing,so even if an Iris Pro part was made available it would be sold for more I would imagine.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Quad channel gives a good performance boost over the dual channel for gaming?

Like MotR, I haven't seen benchmarks indicating one way or the other. That's something we'll have to put solidly in the realm of the possible-but-not-probable.

Point is that a 5820k is a heck of a lot more than a game machine. Quad channel is one of the platform's key features. I could understand the mindset that might allow one to skimp on memory channels on the basis that it "probably wouldn't make a difference in games", but while you're at it, you could cut even more corners by buying into a cheaper platform if gaming is the only goal.

I haven't seen any benchmarks to indicate that -- at least so far. I think Dual Channel is usually good enough for gaming. He was happy with 8 GB of DDR4 -- he just upgraded from a Core 2 Duo that only had 2 GB. He's just running the entry level Crucial 8 GB dual channel kit (he's not an overclocker). I'm sure he'll run the motherboard in quad channel when DDR4 prices drop -- but right now he is saving up some cash for 2 new video card first.

Replacing the RAM with a better kit once DDR4 prices come down would make some sense. Might also make sense to wait to buy the entire machine until that point. It all depends on how long you can wait, I guess. If he wanted to pay early adopter tax, then more power to him. He's financing all us bottom-feeders out here.

 

[exar333]

Hello

I am wanting to update my primary rig. AMD FX 6300 @ 4.6ghz, gigabyte 990FXA-ud3, 8gig ddr3 1600, 2x840 evo ssds, Corsair TX750 PSU, and Sapphire 7970 (second in the mail for crossfire).

Basically I am looking at getting a 8350 for 150$ or i5\Z97 combo for 285$ at micro center. My big issue is, with having a solid board, is the 8350 the smart upgrade or would the Intel path be better. No issues with cost, more focused on which purchase would be wiser of the two. I have been looking and watching prices for awhile, I can not decide.

Gaming
Bf4
Thief
Titanfall
Csgo
Dota2
Diablo3
Dayz

I also use 3 monitors, if that matters.

Sadly, yes I would say to abandon AMD (for now). After using AMD (almost exclusively) for 10 years, I abandoned AMD in 2006 for CPUs and never looked back. GPUs are another story, obviously.

 

[6100]

what about reducing the number of core in the fx? because i got a fps increase in some MMO, when i reduce my fx6100 to 4 core in bios.

 

[Cheesesticksandbeer]

Download Valley and run it on the 1080P Extreme HD preset or whatever it's called.
I'd like to compare notes just for giggles. Those benches are very un-CPU involved as I'm sure you know, but I did pick up a solid 6 or better going from 8350 to 9590 for no apparent reason.

Valley 1080p extremeHD

Min 20.1
Max 126.6
Avg 72.6
Score 3038

 

[Cheesesticksandbeer]

Again, on 1080

Min: 28.3
Max: 182.3
Avg: 91.8
Score: 2313

Turned ULPS off or whatever its called on heaven 4.0 and got:

Min 30
Max 245.2
Avg 130.7
Score 3290

Might need more fans now, temps higher with ULPS off, 70 on one 65 on other after running both benches. Joys of crossfire

 

[SlowSpyder]

Looks like you're scoring about where you should with two 7970's:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2341362&highlight=heaven

 

[Cheesesticksandbeer]

Last benchmark, heaven 4.0 extreme settings, 1080p

Min: 8.5
Max: 153.0
Avg: 67.0
Score: 1688

 

[Maximilian]

 

[SlowSpyder]

Last benchmark, heaven 4.0 extreme settings, 1080p

Min: 8.5
Max: 153.0
Avg: 67.0
Score: 1688

Are your 7970's overclocked?

 

[davie jambo]

Turned ULPS off or whatever its called on heaven 4.0 and got:

Min 30
Max 245.2
Avg 130.7
Score 329

Might need more fans now, temps higher with ULPS off, 70 on one 65 on other after running both benches. Joys of crossfire

70 is alright for crossfire by the way

It throttles at 80 odd

 

[Cheesesticksandbeer]

Are your 7970's overclocked?

Stock speeds

 

[CHADBOGA]

LOL :biggrin:

 

[Arachnotronic]

This is great. Thank you.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

So he wasted an extra $200 which he could of used towards video cards at the time of the build.

Pun intended PRICELESS.

$200 would be a lame low-end SLI configuration. He wants 2 cards that are considerably better than the leftover Radeon 7770 that he already using for this build.

He's planning to spend around $500 on the video cards -- he just needs to wait for the next paycheck.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

well, he got a new platform AND 6-core CPU for that extra cash.

It all depends on the individual, some will spend more for platform + CPU at the beginning so to keep the platform longer. Others spend more for the GPU early on and update the platform sooner.

If I would want to upgrade today, i would go Haswell-E vs 1150.

Yeah, I love how people keep ignoring the fact that the last time Intel released a Six Core CPU it retailed for $1000 -- now you can buy an even faster one for under $400. We're talking about a 12 thread CPU, people. Nothing on 1150 can touch it. It costs $40 more than a 4790k -- IMO, totally worth the extra 40 bucks. An upgrade is all about making progress -- and that is how you make progress.

 

[crashtech]

The X99 platform is significantly more costly than 1150, a fact which you seem curiously intent on minimizing. Hopefully it will come down in the coming months, at which point your assertions will have more merit.

 

[Ramses]

Valley 1080p extremeHD

Min 20.1
Max 126.6
Avg 72.6
Score 3038

Bout right, I'm at 78avg with a pair of 280x's and the 9590,
was 71ish with the 8350. ULPS made jack-all difference in my
back to back testing, it seems to work perfectly shutting down the
second card completely, even the fans, when not in use. I left it on, and
nothing else is optimized benchmark wise either, I'm sure if I like, close my
browser it might hit 80 lol. Or not. I have noticed this particular setup is
sensitive to monitoring software running, I still use it most times but it's there.
If you haven't made up your mind and I can bench anything for you let me know.

 

[witeken]

One, I agree on the i7 point. However, my understanding is the 8350 has 8 cores which shares resources. My point is still 100% valid if I am correct. And yes I understand the single thread performance, but a program that fully uses the 8350 potential "should" beat the i5 in certain sitations.

I am in no way saying overall the 8350 is better, but you must admit the 8350 has the potential if fully utilized to hold its own and in some sitations best the i5.

8 integer cores,
4 flop cores.