Should I get an AMD CPU for gaming?

[2is]

I am not a fan of either brand, for the record. But things are not black and white either. Nobody is ignoring the fact, that Intel has the best processor out there, gaming or not. But you seem to ignore the fact, that there are people who are buying AMD processors every day and are absolutely content with their purchases. Just read reviews from web stores. Why are they buying AMD? They have their reasons. The real-world difference between AMD and Intel is not that big, when you actually game, and not reading too much into every benchmark, world wide web has to offer. Choice is good and I am glad AMD is still around to offer that choice, whether you like it or not. AMD has the second-best processor in the world, for significantly less, what's not to like? Nobody is forcing you to buy it, but do not limit options to others, as they may have different things on agenda.

There are people drinking and driving every day too, that doesn't make it a good idea. When it comes to the 8320 vs 3570/4670 you're looking at $80-90, which isn't much when building a gaming machine. Saving $80-90 to get a CPU that's worse at just about everything, while consuming 2x the power, isn't a good way to spend your money no matter how many people are making that mistake.

I'm not giving you a black and white answer. I'm looking at the cost difference and what you're getting for your money. What is your argument? Other people are doing it? Really? What actual reason can you come up with when I counter that argument with "other people are buying Intel too"

 

[tential]

Many people every day buy things because they're uneducated about what they purchased.

My little brother bought an AMD gaming machine. Why? He didn't know what he was doing. Poor guy suffered 4 years or so with horrible graphics. His new AMD gaming machine didn't beat out my old gaming LAPTOP.

However, it was good to him because it was an upgrade from what he previously had, and he didn't know anything else in the world.

In the end, he ended up getting a whole new laptop. This time though, I helped him, he got what he needed and was EXTREMELY happy with it. He said he'd never make a decision on it without me ever again after he saw the vast improvement using a gaming laptop I picked out, vs a choice he picked out.

90% of the population does research that is a complete joke compared to what we looked at every day. Most people on here who are intelligent are reading the data. The rest of the population just goes into a store, picks something up, and is happy with it.

Another example. I purchased Polk Monitor 70 speakers. Thought it was the best thing ever would have certainly given it a 5 star review. Now after owning more home theater gear, I realize just how entry level ~$1-2K is in home theater equipment.
You're happy with what you know usually but when your knowledge base expands, then you realize what is better than what and what is the best buy. When you have no knowledge base, anything you get you'll be happy with.

 

[frozentundra123456]

I am not a fan of either brand, for the record. But things are not black and white either. Nobody is ignoring the fact, that Intel has the best processor out there, gaming or not. But you seem to ignore the fact, that there are people who are buying AMD processors every day and are absolutely content with their purchases. Just read reviews from web stores. Why are they buying AMD? They have their reasons. The real-world difference between AMD and Intel is not that big, when you actually game, and not reading too much into every benchmark, world wide web has to offer. Choice is good and I am glad AMD is still around to offer that choice, whether you like it or not. AMD has the second-best processor in the world, for significantly less, what's not to like? Nobody is forcing you to buy it, but do not limit options to others, as they may have different things on agenda.

What's not to like? Increased power consumption and lower performance in the vast majority of games.

Of course it is good amd is available as an alternative. Of course they can play any game. The 6300 is a good option for a low/mid range system. For gaming use, though, and considering overall system cost and cost of operation, Intel is the best choice above that. And come on, no one is limiting anyone else's options. People are just expressing their opinions. Nobody said they want amd to go out of business.

 

[AtenRa]

while consuming 2x the power

Could you please provide a link to show that 2x more power consumption in Gaming ???

 

[2is]

Could you please provide a link to show that 2x more power consumption in Gaming ???

Feel free to refer back to IDC's testing to see where it consumed more power. I'm being generous, it was actually more than 2x

It is what it is, you being a fan of AMD isn't going to change that. It's a fact of life you'll just need to make friends with. It's a crap processor taking everything into consideration. There's no reason for anyone to buy one that isn't a fan of the brand, because quite simply, the value they provide is no where near what AMD advocates like to pretend it is.

 

[redhotiron2004]

@2i: And you think that the 2x price that intel asks for 1/4th or 1/5th increase in performance for there processors is completely justified and value for money?
They even artificially increase the cost on things like motherboards for which they have no business doing that?

 

[AtenRa]

Feel free to refer back to IDC's testing to see where it consumed more power. I'm being generous, it was actually more than 2x

It is what it is, you being a fan of AMD isn't going to change that. It's a fact of life you'll just need to make friends with. It's a crap processor taking everything into consideration. There's no reason for anyone to buy one that isn't a fan of the brand, because quite simply, the value they provide is no where near what AMD advocates like to pretend it is.

Between you and me, Im the one that have both the FX8350 and Core i7 3770K not you, so spare me the AMD Fan BS.
I can confirm the FX8350 uses more power than the Core i7 3770K in Games but the highest i have seen is 60-70W in BF games when all 8 threads are being utilized. Core i7 was at 250-260W when FX8350 was at 320-330W, same GPU, same PSU, same Memory etc.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFcMRtq1zGo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ch0mR4Evu8I

So next time, spare as the AMD Fan boy lessons. You are the one talking like a fan boy, exaggerating over power consumption in Gaming without even providing any data.

 

[2is]

Between you and me, you were the one who wasted money on an inferior AMD setup that performs worse than your 3770k setup. And please stop pretending like I'm the one who said "in games" that was your stipulation, not mine. Furthermore, it looks to me like it's consuming damn near twice the power in BF4, pretty horrible considering the performance is worse. Lets not twist the truth, the processor IS using about twice the power. I didn't say putting an AMD processor in your system will make your system use 2x the power, and I'm sure you know that. Nice try, but even your own numbers prove it. AMD = Crap processors.

So spare me the shifting of goal posts with your arguments.

 

[2is]

@2i: And you think that the 2x price that intel asks for 1/4th or 1/5th increase in performance for there processors is completely justified and value for money?
They even artificially increase the cost on things like motherboards for which they have no business doing that?

I'll answer your question when you show me your math.

 

[inf64]

@ 2is

He just proved your statement of 2x more power in gaming is wrong... Why don't you admit it like a man and move on? He obviously has both systems and he checked it, no point to argue about this any more since you won't disprove anything.

 

[2is]

@ 2is

He just proved your statement of 2x more power in gaming is wrong... Why don't you admit it like a man and move on? He obviously has both systems and he checked it, no point to argue about this any more since you won't disprove anything.

I never made the statement of using 2x more power in gaming. I said the CPU uses 2x more power, and it does. He's measuring total system consumption, and under his own testing scenario. Proof read, then reply.

 

[inf64]

The system uses 70W more, I mean come on XD. Or it's maybe too much for your taste? Dunno, IMO it's pathetic difference but hey that's just me .

 

[2is]

The system uses 70W more, I mean come on XD. Or it's maybe too much for your taste? Dunno, IMO it's pathetic difference but hey that's just me .

70 watts more for a crappier CPU. Pathetic is a pretty apt description.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2289809

For the non-believers

That 70 watts is about what an i7 uses under load... So yeah, the CPU uses 2x the power, which is what I said to start with. So who's proving who wrong again?. Click above link for more

 

[crashtech]

Yeah, AMDs are inferior, but less inferior than some people say.

 

[AtenRa]

I never made the statement of using 2x more power in gaming.

1: The thread is about Gaming.
2: You were commenting on Magic Carpet post who was talking about gaming.
3: I have specifically asked you to provide data about power consumption in gaming

You have provided ZERO data to showcase your saying, even if you mean the CPU alone using 2x the power.
And guess what, IDC measured total system power usage. There is no way to know how much that CPU was really drawing.

 

[crashtech]

Still, an unbiased look at the total potential power consumption between the two is pretty compelling, much more than any insistence on complying with some special case scenario.

 

[blackened23]

I just can't see it. While I can appreciate the value angle AMD brings, the 4670K is just a way better product that doesn't cost a whole lot more. The cost difference is akin to a couple of tanks of gas for a vehicle. I just can't see it. If anyone is hurting THAT MUCH for the cost difference, they shouldn't be buying a new PC in the first place. Generally speaking, you want to buy the best product a budget can buy. Or you can buy the cheapest but you usually get what you pay for? Right?

Maybe if someone has a pre-existing motherboard that will work for the AMD chip, then I could see the argument being made. Then you could easily shave a decent amount of money from the total cost...if you're hurting that much for the cash. Otherwise, the 4670k is just a hands down better product with all metrics considered, and the cost is not far different.

 

[crashtech]

I was being sarcastic, not something that should be done in writing.

 

[2is]

1: The thread is about Gaming.
2: You were commenting on Magic Carpet post who was talking about gaming.
3: I have specifically asked you to provide data about power consumption in gaming

You have provided ZERO data to showcase your saying, even if you mean the CPU alone using 2x the power.
And guess what, IDC measured total system power usage. There is no way to know how much that CPU was really drawing.

Perhaps you should delete all your posts in this thread starting with your reply to me, because IDC measured in far greater detail than you did and you're complaining about it.

 

[scannall]

There are people drinking and driving every day too, that doesn't make it a good idea. When it comes to the 8320 vs 3570/4670 you're looking at $80-90, which isn't much when building a gaming machine. Saving $80-90 to get a CPU that's worse at just about everything, while consuming 2x the power, isn't a good way to spend your money no matter how many people are making that mistake.

I'm not giving you a black and white answer. I'm looking at the cost difference and what you're getting for your money. What is your argument? Other people are doing it? Really? What actual reason can you come up with when I counter that argument with "other people are buying Intel too"

Spending that $90 on a better graphics card would be a much wiser choice for a budget gaming rig.

 

[pw257008]

There are people drinking and driving every day too, that doesn't make it a good idea. When it comes to the 8320 vs 3570/4670 you're looking at $80-90, which isn't much when building a gaming machine. Saving $80-90 to get a CPU that's worse at just about everything, while consuming 2x the power, isn't a good way to spend your money no matter how many people are making that mistake.

I'm not giving you a black and white answer. I'm looking at the cost difference and what you're getting for your money. What is your argument? Other people are doing it? Really? What actual reason can you come up with when I counter that argument with "other people are buying Intel too"

nice red herring with the drunk driving.

 

[crashtech]

Spending that $90 on a better graphics card would be a much wiser choice for a budget gaming rig.

Maybe so. I am a big proponent of spending the bulk of the money on a GPU for a gaming build, that always makes good sense. But it seems that AMD is competitive only within a narrow budget constraint, and even then the extra cores you get come at the expense of single-threaded performance that is literally several generations behind, matching or barely exceeding the Phenoms of yore.

I remember the heady days of AMD's supremacy in the early 2000's with a bit of wistful nostalgia, it would be great if they could manage to come up with a design that could even come close to the per-core performance that Intel is putting out these days. It's a really tough time to be an AMD fan.

In a way, I'd almost rather recommend a Haswell i3 over any AMD CPU in that budget range, even though while some game performance might be sacrificed (depending on the game), the overall general computing experience would be the same or better, and most importantly, a platform would be in place (LGA 1150) that has lots of room for improvement, a statement which unfortunately cannot be applied with any certainty to an AMD platform.

 

[AtenRa]

Perhaps you should delete all your posts in this thread starting with your reply to me, because IDC measured in far greater detail than you did and you're complaining about it.

It is you who is taking IDCs total system power measurement running Intel Optimized Linx AVX (Floating Point) to suit your 2x power consumption agenda in a thread about GAMING.
Not only that, but when i asked you politely to link data for your comment you reverted with a member call out and trolling with words of "Crap Processors"

Im not complaining about IDCs measurement, it is what it is, a Total System power consumption that doesn't show the CPU only power draw.

It is clear that you wanted to exaggerate from the start about the power consumption of the AMD CPUs and then you continued with personal attacks and insults. Your comments are off topic contributing nothing useful. If you have to show us AMD power consumption in GAMING then by all means do so, thread crapping only shows your true colors.

 

[SPBHM]

I would expect the gaming CPU related power usage on AMD CPUs to not be as bad as simply peak power load under other heavy MT work, for sure, it's pretty hard to find any CPU power usage tests while gaming (I would like to see in a game like Skyrim with high 2c load, and also on Battlefield 4, with 4c+ load, but another important factor is, Skyrim would have much higher GPU load with the Intel CPU, so you would have to isolate the CPU power, and not measure the total system power, and even so...), for heavy MT the power usage from an 8 core FX will increase more over ST load than it does on a core i5/i7, most power usage tests are 100% load (8t load), while most games are never going to act like that, but clearly, even for 1t load Intel can still have easily a big advantage... but when you consider total system power, specially with a power hungry GPU while gaming, it's probably nothing close to "2x", not for the CPU+MB alone, and specially not for the entire system, but if you go to performance per watt under CPU bound games it can look specially bad for AMD.

 

[redhotiron2004]

Ok... Here I am posting the latest benchmarks for all those processors along with the new amd apu.

www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/65031-amd-kaveri-a10-7850k-a8-7600-review-9.html

Its a very comprehensive series of benchmarks and tests that would answer all the questions that have been raised in this thread.
Frankly enough. I am amazed to see amd8350 performance which matched i7 haswell in some tests and even surpassed a few. In gaming too it was a solid chip giving mostly above 55-60 fps in the most difficult of tests where intel best 4770k had 75fps. Which is more than sufficient.

As far as load is concerned. At it's peak amd 8350 is shown to draw 80watt more than i7 4770k. Which can easily be compensated by going for a 600watt psu instead of 500watt for intel. Not much price difference is going to be there above 500watt smps.

I am thinking of getting amd 8320 for 100$ at microcenter. Nothing even come close to that. The i5 4670k is 180$. Considering the motherboard cost and all. I won't even give it a second look.
And I am making a new system. In case you have any misconception. I Am saving the money for a nice GPU.