should I abandon the AMD ship? (Updated)

[Ramses]

In Cinebench 11.5 all cores loaded, one Intel Haswell core w/o HT is roughly equal to two Piledriver cores (or one module).

Really the only time Piledriver is worth it is if you KNOW you are going to be using those cores hard all the time.

Or if you don't game hard enough, or on heavily cpu dependent games, enough to need anything faster. Pretty much everything else happens instantly on either one given a decent SSD.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Not really -- Kaveri is usually faster at playing most games (BF4, Grid 2, etc):
http://wccftech.com/amd-kaveri-apu-a10-7850k-intel-i5-4570r-iris-pro-graphics-showdown/

Hmmm........ You must be using the "new math" since I count 2 wins for AMD, 2 wins for intel, and one tie. Either that or you have redifined most to mean equal.

 

[crashtech]

Or if you don't game hard enough, or on heavily cpu dependent games, enough to need anything faster. Pretty much everything else happens instantly on either one given a decent SSD.

Could say the same thing about an i3, then, for less money and power consumption. But the OP is worried about not having enough horsepower, so I referred him some information that is not anecdotal. Results show that clock for clock and fully loaded, an octa-core Piledriver and a quad-core Haswell are nearly neck and neck, which means the Haswell has a rather stunning IPC lead.

 

[crashtech]

Hmmm........ You must be using the "new math" since I count 2 wins for AMD, 2 wins for intel, and one tie. Either that or you have redifined most to mean equal.

Well, Iris Pro is to me mostly an academic discussion as a hobbyist, since there can't be any LGA parts and BGA boards seem to be unobtainium the last I looked. So AMD gets the IGP win just by showing up, imo.

 

[Yuriman]

For the record, I'm very happy with the performance of the Haswell i3 I put in my wife's computer.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Well, Iris Pro is to me mostly an academic discussion as a hobbyist, since there can't be any LGA parts and BGA boards seem to be unobtainium the last I looked. So AMD gets the IGP win just by showing up, imo.

Agreed, but that was not my reason for pointing out the post. My point was that the conclusion reached by the poster is not supported by the very data that he cited.

And bottom line, gaming on an igp basically sucks anyway, but I just dont like to see facts misrepresented or distorted.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

X99 is just not a cost effective upgrade for most people at this time. Takes about $850 for an entry level 5820K setup, I know because I am currently looking into it and not liking what I see.

So distressing so see the hyperbole and lies of omission. I think standards have fallen even in my brief time here.

$850? Nope.

My best friend at work just built a i7 5820K, AsRock X99 Extreme3 Motherboard with 8 GB of DDR4 for $700.

Newegg, dude....

The price difference between an unlocked i7 on 1150 with a good gaming motherboard versus LGA 2011 is only about $200. It's really not a bad deal.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

Hmmm........ You must be using the "new math" since I count 2 wins for AMD, 2 wins for intel, and one tie. Either that or you have redifined most to mean equal.

I guess reading comprehension isn't one of your strengths -- Do I really need to copy and paste the term "USUALLY" from the dictionary?
Benchmarks can always go in either direction depending on how that respective software was optimized.

Technically, the Kaveri is faster in 5 of the games -- Bioshock Infinite at 720p, Grid 2 at 1080p, Skyrim at 1080p, Battlefield 4 and Grid at all resolutions....
There was only a single game for which Kaveri trails the Iris Pro under all resolutions -- Crysis 3.

So apparently reading graphs is a challenge as well.

The original quote was "Intel has the fastest IGP since Haswell." -- which really isn't true. Iris Pro is competitive, but nothing to call home about.
Anyone who spends that much on that CPU is probably not going to be running the IGP anyways -- so Iris Pro is kinda a wasted effort.

 

[ElFenix]

Not really. That's what you said:





There were a lot better performing solutions than an 8-core Jaguar CPU and Radeon HD7850-like GPU back then, but it's clear that there were much more important factors than pure performance going on (APU integration, power, costs, time to market, etc.). Either way, saying Intel/NVIDIA/IBM wouldn't be able to deliver a solution with better performance is plain ridiculous. Also your personal attacks are getting pretty boring.

I think the biggest factors were that nvidia and Intel had already screwed the pooch back with the original Xbox, and both ms and Sony had a relationship with AMD from the previous console round. AMD was the only vendor that could provide both the CPU and GPU that wasn't on someone's blacklist. Maybe if IBM had licensed a GPU they could, or if imagination had MIPS a few years ago they could have.

 

[crashtech]

$850? Nope.

My best friend at work just built a i7 5820K, AsRock X99 Extreme3 Motherboard with 8 GB of DDR4 for $700.

Newegg, dude....

The price difference between an unlocked i7 on 1150 with a good gaming motherboard versus LGA 2011 is only about $200. It's really not a bad deal.

Wow, you are so smart! I'm going to hang on your every word from now on. Do you have a fan club?

 

[DrMrLordX]

Who puts 8 GB of RAM on a 5820k? The smallest DDR4 DIMMs out there that I've seen are all 4 GB, so if you want quad-channel (which I would think that you probably do), 16 GB is the minimum.

If you take something like this build here and remove the vid card, mouse, and SSD, you're still looking at around $780-$790

 

[cbn]

Who puts 8 GB of RAM on a 5820k? The smallest DDR4 DIMMs out there that I've seen are all 4 GB, so if you want quad-channel (which I would think that you probably do), 16 GB is the minimum.

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

 

[frozentundra123456]

I guess reading comprehension isn't one of your strengths -- Do I really need to copy and paste the term "USUALLY" from the dictionary?
Benchmarks can always go in either direction depending on how that respective software was optimized.

Technically, the Kaveri is faster in 5 of the games -- Bioshock Infinite at 720p, Grid 2 at 1080p, Skyrim at 1080p, Battlefield 4 and Grid at all resolutions....
There was only a single game for which Kaveri trails the Iris Pro under all resolutions -- Crysis 3.

So apparently reading graphs is a challenge as well.

The original quote was "Intel has the fastest IGP since Haswell." -- which really isn't true. Iris Pro is competitive, but nothing to call home about.
Anyone who spends that much on that CPU is probably not going to be running the IGP anyways -- so Iris Pro is kinda a wasted effort.

So intel is faster than Kaveri at 2 of 3 resolutions in Bioshock and you consider Kaveri "faster"? That is taking cherry picking to new heights that I have never seen before. Same for Skyrim. Intel is faster in 2 of 3 resolutions, yet you consider that a win for AMD? Wow, just wow. Although TBH, Skyrim is a tie within the limits of measurement.

Counting as a "win" games in which a given processor is faster at all resolutions, Kaveri wins BF4 and Grid 2, while Iris pro wins Crysis 3 and FFIV. The other 2 games, I will be generous and consider a tie, although of the 6 conditions, Intel is faster in 4.

Dont see how that can be construed that Kaveri is "usually faster". Do you really want me to copy and paste the definition for you?

 

[dmoney1980]

Wow, this thread escalated to 9 pages in 2 days, impressive! A couple of personal observations from the OP and some of the posts here (I have not read thru all 9 pages, so I do apologize if I'm repeating someone else here)....

1 - OP has a dual GPU setup with 3 monitors. OP also mentioned no issues with cost. This, to me, says he/she is what I would call close to an "enthusiast".

2- OP lives near a Micro Center. There are options here. An i7 4790k and an ASRock extreme 4 will cost $385 + tax. OP can use existing RAM / HSF and call it a day. Or, OP can go balls out and get an entry level x99 based setup: 5820k + ASRock Extreme 4 for $499. This would obviously also include the higher entry cost of DDR4 RAM, but you can start with 8gb in dual channel. Also consider the cost of the cpu HSF.

3- OP can sell the AMD setup and keep the RAM if going with a z97 setup.

4- OP mentioned some games that are cpu heavy when running multiplayer. A 6 core, x99 setup costs more, but may be the better long-term investment overall.

Food for thought

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

Wow, you are so smart! I'm going to hang on your every word from now on. Do you have a fan club?

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.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

So intel is faster than Kaveri at 2 of 3 resolutions in Bioshock and you consider Kaveri "faster"? That is taking cherry picking to new heights that I have never seen before. Same for Skyrim. Intel is faster in 2 of 3 resolutions, yet you consider that a win for AMD? Wow, just wow. Although TBH, Skyrim is a tie within the limits of measurement.

Counting as a "win" games in which a given processor is faster at all resolutions, Kaveri wins BF4 and Grid 2, while Iris pro wins Crysis 3 and FFIV. The other 2 games, I will be generous and consider a tie, although of the 6 conditions, Intel is faster in 4.

Dont see how that can be construed that Kaveri is "usually faster". Do you really want me to copy and paste the definition for you?

Well, a person can't make a blanket claim that the Intel IGP is faster than AMD -- when in reality Iris was slower at 4 out of 5 games at those respective resolutions. Even the article came to the same conclusion -- the margins for the "wins" were so small for both IGP's.... It was a stalemate. Iris Pro isn't any better than Kaveri. And I have proven that point -- they are both competitive with each other. When the reviewer uses a term like stalement, me thinks that the Iris Pro isn't the fastest IGP as was asserted in this thread.

 

[Cerb]

Just stop, both of you. That Kaveri is going against Iris Pro, which, as of now, is expensive, unusual, and on the desktop, unobtanium (Intel is still showing it being unusual and expensive for the foreseeable future, too). The "win" for Kaveri is that Kaveri can be had in <$1000 well-made notebooks, and <$500 desktops.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

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

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.

 

[VirtualLarry]

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.

$150 on an entire build??? And he was the one exaggerating?

I do mostly budget builds, and I rarely get below $200 in parts costs, buying new.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Well, a person can't make a blanket claim that the Intel IGP is faster than AMD -- when in reality Iris was slower at 4 out of 5 games at those respective resolutions. Even the article came to the same conclusion -- the margins for the "wins" were so small for both IGP's.... It was a stalemate. Iris Pro isn't any better than Kaveri. And I have proven that point -- they are both competitive with each other. When the reviewer uses a term like stalement, me thinks that the Iris Pro isn't the fastest IGP as was asserted in this thread.

I never said Iris pro was faster. I only said your statement that Kaveri is usually faster is not correct, and I stand by that statement in the games tested. If you only want to look at the particular conditions that fit your agenda, knock yourself out, but it is not an accurate depiction of the overall results.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

$150 on an entire build??? And he was the one exaggerating?

I do mostly budget builds, and I rarely get below $200 in parts costs, buying new.

It can be done, but I wouldn't want to try to play games on it.

I did help a neighbor build a computer with an E1-2100 -- she got that motherboard/CPU combo for $39. I know she scored the Micro ATX case with power supply for $19.99 after rebate from Newegg. Bought a cheapie hard drive from GoHardDrive and she only bought 2 GB of DDR3. Installed Zorin OS for free (Linux). Her build was uber cheap -- I think she nearly pulled off a $100 build. But let's face it, with those specs it's a pudgy netbook.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

I never said Iris pro was faster. I only said your statement that Kaveri is usually faster is not correct, and I stand by that statement in the games tested. If you only want to look at the particular conditions that fit your agenda, knock yourself out, but it is not an accurate depiction of the overall results.

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.

 

[VirtualLarry]

It can be done, but I wouldn't want to try to play games on it.

I did help a neighbor build a computer with an E1-2100 -- she got that motherboard/CPU combo for $39. I know she scored the Micro ATX case with power supply for $19.99 after rebate from Newegg. Bought a cheapie hard drive from GoHardDrive and she only bought 2 GB of DDR3. Installed Zorin OS for free (Linux). Her build was uber cheap -- I think she almost pulled off a $100 build.

Those case + PSU are false economy. I tried doing a budget charity build using one, and it killed an SSD and damaged a mobo.

PSUs that come with cases are bad juju.

Also, I try to spec at least 4GB of RAM for my builds. Again, false economy to go any lower. And I usually use smaller SSDs for OS.

Edit: I've also taken to buying cheap refurb HP/Compaq DC5800 PCs with Windows 7 on sale. The most recent ones are a 2.0Ghz C2D, 2GB DDR2, 80/160GB HDD, DVD-ROM, and Win7, for $90. Hard to beat that package.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

Those case + PSU are false economy. I tried doing a budget charity build using one, and it killed an SSD and damaged a mobo.

PSUs that come with cases are bad juju.

Also, I try to spec at least 4GB of RAM for my builds. Again, false economy to go any lower. And I usually use smaller SSDs for OS.

Edit: I've also taken to buying cheap refurb HP/Compaq DC5800 PCs with Windows 7 on sale. The most recent ones are a 2.0Ghz C2D, 2GB DDR2, 80/160GB HDD, DVD-ROM, and Win7, for $90. Hard to beat that package.

Those off-lease HP/Compaqs are wonderful. Those are the types of Desktops the non-profit where I worked usually purchased (when their ancient Pentium 4's crapped out).

I would never try to run 2GB on Windows 7 or 8 -- but it's generally enough for most flavors of Linux.

 

[Cheesesticksandbeer]

So first test with the CF complete... Not sure how this is....
Heavenbenchmark 4.0 (default settings?)
DX11
1920x1200
Preset Custom
Quality High

Min FPS: 28.1
Max FPS: 158.6
Avg: 83.2
Score: 2097

Havent tweaked anything, just installed latest beta drivers and ran it