Why Intel processor are adviced than AMD for gaming?

[NTMBK]

Yes HSA needs more time but with so many big companies on the wagon it will liftoff eventually, they all are waiting final hardware and software specs.

Eventually? Perhaps. Soon enough to affect my decision to not buy a Kaveri? Nah. By the time that software is ready, Kaveri will be obsolete.

 

[davie jambo]

I dont even want to ask you to post a picture with that setup in BF4 MP.

Also, i have both Intel and AMD CPUs and with the same GPU latest games are very close to even feel the difference. There are older games that Intel is faster but both AMD and Intel CPUs produce more than enough Frames that actually it doesnt matter if one is faster than the other.
Of course there are Games like Skyrim, Starcraft and some MMOs that Intel is simple the better choice, but generalizing that AMD CPUs are not for gaming is simple BS.
Like those Dual Core Celerons/Pentiums, with certain GPUs and older games are doing just fine, but modern games need at least 4 Threads or more this days and thats going to continue because all major Game Engines support more than 4 Threads.

It was obviously not BF4 at the highest settings , think it was medium. As I say was amazed at how well it ran

Built it for him on Saturday then downloaded Metro last light just to see. Ran that on a mixture of medium and high 40-50 fps. Was expecting it to be about 30 so tried a load of other games. Titanfall ran 60fps on medium and it did not break a sweat. As I say watchdogs was the only one where I would say it was unplayable but I suppose you could have ran it 720p or 900p maybe

I've taken a load of benchmark screen shots also

 

[AtenRa]

Eventually? Perhaps. Soon enough to affect my decision to not buy a Kaveri? Nah. By the time that software is ready, Kaveri will be obsolete.

No consumer will buy Kaveri for HSA, but OpenCl apps can be accelerated today and Kaveri provides the best performance/price in GPGPU and iGPU gaming against Intel's Offerings.

 

[tential]

One thing remains constant about threads like this.

OP asks the question, then NEVER responds to the thread ever again....

 

[OverVolt]

Meh I don't really care about CPU speed anymore. I just buy AMD because its cheap.... yup.

 

[bailw]

One thing remains constant about threads like this.

OP asks the question, then NEVER responds to the thread ever again....

They started the fire, then wait for people add fuel into it and watch it burn. 😀

 

[DrMrLordX]

Errm, I think you have that rather backwards... one of the main advantages of Mantle/DirectX 12 is that it improves scaling over multiple threads, and reduces the "driver thread" single core overhead.

I dunno, most of the Mantle benchmarks I've seen (all BF4, admittedly) show improved performance even for dual or quad-core CPUs. That would seem to indicate that, in the end, the CPU becomes less important given sufficient available iGPU/dGPU resources.

The problem is that Kaveri is too big to support those kind of low prices. It was originally planned to support GDDR5M, which is why it has so many GPU cores- but when Elpida went bankrupt that plan fell through. That's why it has so many GPU cores that it can't feed. A smaller die designed around A8-7600 level performance would perhaps have been a better product.

The 7850K certainly was too big. The 7700k and 7600 were cheap enough that they were able to set an MSRP of around $120 for the lower-clocked chip. Of course, setting the price there and actually selling product in volume at that price are two entirely different things.

 

[Loser Gamer]

AMD is burning up electric right now a lot more than INTEl with gaming cpu chips. Although the difference is with INTEL a bit more powerful gaming - which I'm not sold you could actually tell playing the two side by side, nobody wants a larger electric bill.

The way I look at it I'll buy an INTEL when i upgrade to save some electric jsut as I did when i bought LED light bulbs for my home.

 

[SPBHM]

considering how outdated AM3+ is, the power requirements and low performance per core
it's almost impossible to justify AM3+ compared to haswell i3 for the lower end (4300/6300 with low cost MB + small OC) or comparing to locked i5 +$50 MB (8320+good MB and cooling + OC) based on cost effectiveness or performance for gaming,

Kaveri is not even worth mentioning as a CPU, and the Richland X4s seem to be clearly outperformed by i3s, only comparable to similarly priced Pentium...

if you exclude (small) cost differences there is no reason to even consider AMD...

so yes... I'm sure you can find certain situations more favorable to AMD, but overall AMD is in a really poor position, the argument you can use to defend AMD is that gaming most of the time is GPU limited, but I fail to see this as an advantage when AMD is failing to deliver a clear cost advantage or anything....

 

[Grooveriding]

For some reason every time I read the OP's name I hear Stewie from Family Guy in my head saying 'cool whip'.

 

[amenx]

Main reason Intel chips are better performing than AMD is that they have much deeper pockets and can throw billions into R&D and state of the art fabs/facilities which AMD can not afford.

 

[tollingalong]

Of course there are Games like Skyrim, Starcraft and some MMOs that Intel is simple the better choice, but generalizing that AMD CPUs are not for gaming is simple BS.

Skyrim and Starcraft are running ancient x87 instead of 'modern' SSE if memory serves me right. I think (could be wrong) AMD removed x87 on hardware. Hopefully, future games won't rely on engines that were designed for last century.

 

[AtenRa]

Skyrim and Starcraft are running ancient x87 instead of 'modern' SSE if memory serves me right. I think (could be wrong) AMD removed x87 on hardware. Hopefully, future games won't rely on engines that were designed for last century.

Correct about the AMD x87 support but no matter what, those games run faster with Intel.

 

[Sattern]

I have had my AMD Quad Core processor since 2006 and have run my computer every day doing various tasks for large amounts of time without any problems. Intel is higher quality, but much more expensive.

I prefer AMD because of the cost and the fact it is nice, I have played various games with it perfectly fine and at high speeds.

Intel can handle more though so if you like premium performance just stick with that.

 

[SPBHM]

Correct about the AMD x87 support but no matter what, those games run faster with Intel.

yes because the core performance from Intel is always going to be much higher and Skyrim is using 2 cores, also as far as I know Skyrim 1.4 or something uses SSE (the patch is from Q1 2012) and had a huge performance benefit to any CPU.

I have had my AMD Quad Core processor since 2006 and have run my computer every day doing various tasks for large amounts of time without any problems. Intel is higher quality, but much more expensive.

I prefer AMD because of the cost and the fact it is nice, I have played various games with it perfectly fine and at high speeds.

Intel can handle more though so if you like premium performance just stick with that.

AMD quad core in 2006?

Intel much more expensive!? we are not in the 90's anymore...
Intel Have CPUs in the same price range as AMD, and normally the Intel options will perform better or the same for the same money, with lower power usage.

the only thing AMD is doing clearly better is integrated graphics, but the use cases for gaming are very limited on desktops... and Intel is not as far as it used to be

 

[Headfoot]

Skyrim and Starcraft are running ancient x87 instead of 'modern' SSE if memory serves me right. I think (could be wrong) AMD removed x87 on hardware. Hopefully, future games won't rely on engines that were designed for last century.

Skyrim got updated to use through SSE2 (or 3?) I think, and there is a mod for up to SSE4. Immense speed up. It came out around the same time as the Bethesda official high res texture packs. I remember I upgraded a Phenom II 940 to a 2500k just for Skyrim, then the patch made it so they would have been equivalent on my GPU at the time. Oh well, 2500k was a great purchase anyways.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Skyrim got updated to use through SSE2 (or 3?) I think, and there is a mod for up to SSE4. Immense speed up. It came out around the same time as the Bethesda official high res texture packs. I remember I upgraded a Phenom II 940 to a 2500k just for Skyrim, then the patch made it so they would have been equivalent on my GPU at the time. Oh well, 2500k was a great purchase anyways.

Imagine if modern games took advantage of all of the latest ISAs? AMD made a solid choice by putting AVX on the Jaguar core that ended up in all of the game consoles 🙂

 

[lamedude]

No way dude. I got an overclocked Athlon Thunderbird in the artic that I stream games from. If they want my sale they will compile for x87.

 

[davie jambo]

It's also not true that skyrim and starcraft 2 run poorly on AMD machines

Skyrim runs 60fps solid on my fx8350 , it does drop when you run through a town like whiterun but so does my 3770k

StarCraft 2 , I've not noticed it drop before but I've not played a great deal of that game

FX8350 or FX6300 are fine CPU's but they are 3 years old. If I were building a new PC tomorrow I would use intel as they are newer and by all accounts they do perform better

AMD need a new chip ASAP

 

[n47h4n96]

Hello all,

I have been reading upon CPU's recently out of interest which I past a stage about internal and external clocks. Read the link below:

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/How-a-CPU-Works/209/3

 

[Ranulf]

Starcraft 2 seems to have problems no matter the cpu.

 

[onething]

Benchmark bias. You only buy Intel if you have a specific need (hackintosh, quicksync), or you have too much money. The average consumer wouldn't notice the difference between the 2 in everyday use. Because AMD is significantly cheaper than Intel, you can use the extra money towards something useful, such as an SSD. This actually makes a night & day difference.
A previous gen i5 and motherboard is about $400. Current gen is about $500. A current gen quad core APU and motherboard is <$200.

And don't pay attention to the exaggerated benchmarks. For example, office productivity is twice as fast! We went from processing a document in .6 second to .3 seconds! $200 well spent!

 

[ChronoReverse]

And don't pay attention to the exaggerated benchmarks. For example, office productivity is twice as fast! We went from processing a document in .6 second to .3 seconds! $200 well spent!

And this is relevant to a thread about Gaming how?

There are a few games that can use the extra power Intel CPUs have per core (and more).

 

[SPBHM]

Benchmark bias. You only buy Intel if you have a specific need (hackintosh, quicksync), or you have too much money. The average consumer wouldn't notice the difference between the 2 in everyday use. Because AMD is significantly cheaper than Intel, you can use the extra money towards something useful, such as an SSD. This actually makes a night & day difference.
A previous gen i5 and motherboard is about $400. Current gen is about $500. A current gen quad core APU and motherboard is <$200.

And don't pay attention to the exaggerated benchmarks. For example, office productivity is twice as fast! We went from processing a document in .6 second to .3 seconds! $200 well spent!

AMD is not cheaper, both have options for the same money, and for the same money Intel normally performs the same or better while using less power when it comes to gaming with discrete graphics.

also "APU" is normally a bad choice for gaming since you have to use discrete graphics anyway, and you are paying for an IGP you are not going to use, and your $400 for i5 + MB is not really necessary, i5s can run on cheap MBs, any random $50 h81/b85 will do, and you have good locked i5s for $200 or less, and Intel have cheaper CPUs than that.

also CPUs can make a big difference in some games, do I have to post graphics again?

 

[Madpacket]

I love an underdog but the only area on the desktop AMD has left is with their low power/cheap Kabini and soon to be Beema APU's. These little quad core CPU's are fast enough for general web / office work with the ability to play older games well.

The only other AMD chip I would consider is maybe the 6300 provided you need the threads else you'd be better off with the Pentium AE in most circumstances. If you need anymore power than that you'll want to jump to a 4670K.