Why do people say AMD processors are shit?
An fx 6300 almost matches a third gen i5 in performance and costs much less.
For rendering the fx 8350 completely annihilates the competition.
Primarily because /g/ is full of uneducated idiots who know nothing about cpus beyond "muh intel". The 6 and 8 core FX chips (lol fuck the quadcore ones) are highly competitive in many, many areas given their current pricing.
Today for even vidya an 8350 competes against an i5 most of the time (and the higher clocked models can approach a 4770k).
They perform decently in newer games that are well threaded.
>>51909368
Here's an overclocked fx6300 keeping up with an i5 4460.
I think vishera was great, I'm really disappointed that they've built up a reputation about having shit processors.
The reason is simple. While the utility programs and professional programs make use of all the hardware, the games don't. The games developer most of the time minimum CPU and thus is only interested in the fast small calculations.
>>51909391
Don't forget many anons still think you need an i7 for high end gaming because sdacgvtsecbwsrhrstg.
Ironically playing at 4k is the one place where generally any old cpu will do.
I have an FX-6300. Can confirm.
>>51909411
New games take advantage of more cores though, and directx 12 is going to be great for that too.
I'd take an fx6300+gtx670 over an i4 4460 and gtx 660 any day.
>>51909416
Doesn't the fx8350 outperform haswell i7s at 4k gaming?
I remember something on tweaktown.
In theory AMD processors are still solid, but Intel's compiler which many, many games and applications use intentionally cripples performance on AMD processors.
![maxresdefault[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/rYW124Y.jpg "maxresdefault[1].jpg")
>>51909469
>I'd take an fx6300+gtx670 over an i4 4460 and gtx 660 any day.
wew lad. how much are you getting paid for this thread?
>>51909480
Its a wash realistically - modern chips have more than enough grunt to keep two gpus fed.
>>51909515
You do realise that is a better setup right? In general cheaper cpu + beefier gpu is better than expensive cpu and shittier gpu right?
http://www.overclock.net/t/1535399/intel-vs-amd-same-budget-shootout-8350-4-5ghz-r290-vs-4670k-4-4-ghz-280x
http://www.overclock.net/t/1534128/vishera-vs-devils-canyon-a-casual-comparison-by-an-average-user
>>51909391
the thing is, you can overlock the new non k skylakes now so an overclocked 6300 vs a stock intel cpu is not a valid metric. the 6300 was quite easily the best budget cpu up until about a week ago. now you can overlock an i3 skylake.
>>51909515
>8fps difference between 3rd gen i5 and 6th gen i7
>16fps difference between fx 6300 and third gen i5
Yeah that's bullshit.
>>51909588
That's true, buying an amd processor would have been fine till late 2014, but now that we have skylake and ddr4 it's best to wait for zen or get skylake.
because where it counts "games" intel rapes AMD
http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2389469/intel-4150-amd-6300-6350-gaming-modern-games.html
What the fuck
>>51909720
Looks like /g/ to be honest.
After coming from an 8320 to a 4790k, I can honestly say there's a big difference. Games stutter and frame skip less now. Everything is just smoother now... Maybe because there's barely any dips now? Fps stays consistent while playing, min fps are higher now, there's less heat. Everything is just different. The place where it excels even more in is emulation. Dolphin and pcsx2 have little to no stutters when playing now. I still play 4 player smash on the weekends and switching from amd to Intel has been a huge improvement and everyone notices.
While the amd is OK, once you get a high end Intel, you just don't want to go back. You can also sell your cpu for the same price as the newer cpus. 3570k is still around 200 bucks on eBay which is fucked. This makes upgrading later even less of a hassle.
As a side note, I'm wondering if the 8320 was just not able to support high end GPUs in SLI which caused the random stutter and dips. Either way, I'm happy with this purchase.
>>51909764
Holy fuck, I just realized how many times I used the word "now". I sound like a tard now
>>51909776
Also contradicts evidence provided in this very thread.
>>51909785
What do you mean?
>>51909776
Well the fx processors were limited by pcie 2.0
Also, were you stock or overclocked?
I try to stay usual but I haven't seen any stutter issues on my friends fx 6350. He's got it clocked to 4.6ghz and it runs like a champ. Outperforms my i5 2500 in battlefield 4.
>>51909785
Op here, don't be a shill. Average fps doesn't mean no microstutter.
I started this thread because I got tired of hearing how shit amd processors are even though they're still performing competitively.
>>51909800
That a 4790k is considerably faster than a 8320. Unless you were insane enough to keep the 8320 at stock and overclock the i5 and suddenly claim there is a world of difference.
>>51909829
pcie2.0 in't a limitation in practical terms.
>>51909836
Well, he did say he was using 2 high end GPUs in sli, so while the bandwidth for 1 gpu may not be a bottleneck, it might hurt multiple GPUs?
Also, like I said, looking at average fps doesn't determine if there are any stutters.
>>51909309
Because /g/ these days is a popular hangout place for /v/ faggots who accidentally opened dxdiag and now think they know all about hardware.
>>51909889
>$220 fx 8320
Or
>$270 i5 4460
Will there really be a 50 dollar difference in electricity over 3 years?
>>51909906
Yes for sure
>>51909906
>>51909889
Fucking hell.
>>51909889
>intel are the poorfags now
oh, ok.
>>51909912
No
Learn to math pls, middle school isn't even that bad
>>51909912
>has twice as many cores
>doesn't use twice as much peak power under load
Remind me again how AMD isn't more efficient per core than Intel?
8 core vishera = 125w
4 core Ivy bridge = 77w
AMD = 15.625w per core
Intel = 19.25w per core
You get more cores and more performance for only a slight performance difference. Your cpu isn't 100% under load when gaming, you're looking at only a few dollars per year.
>>51909994
For only a slight energy consumption difference*
Bloody hell dinner can't be ready soon enough.
>>51909665
specifically it's because you can overclock the base clock on z170 boards that have a BIOS update enabling them to without affecting system stability this means the budget non overclockable intel chips can now be overclocked, specifically the budget skylakes and some of the newer pentiums. this was not possible a week ago.
>>51910013
Up till skylake, AMD processors were still worth it. Now we just wait to see if zen is competitive.
Also Intel isn't pissed about that? I can see a lot of people overclocking an i3 instead of buying an i5 now.
Iirc there was something similar with haswell but until made them stop it.
Still doesn't mean AMD processors are shit. They held their own very well against the competition both in price and performance.
>38/15
Keep samefagging op
>>51910042
There is a reason why Intel can push microcode through windows update now. Woops one update later and your i3 is now back to stock clocks.
>Why do people say AMD processors are shit?
>almost matches a third gen i5 in performance and costs much less
>FX chips are highly competitive in many, many areas given their current pricing.
>They perform decently
>perform competitively
>were still worth it
>still doesn't mean they are shit
Wew lad, I can really see how good it is
>>51910042
I used to recommend the 6300 quite regularly over intel's. I think people underrate how nice it is having extra cores for multitasking. How often are you just doing one thing that uses one core? I'm always doing several things simultaneously and an assessment of my CPU cores will show all of them being utilized. But still, an overclock i3 is a pretty impossible deal to recommend against right now. I too am waiting for Zen.
>>51910098
An overclockable i3 basically invalidates the entire i5 range - Intel WILL block it one way or another.
>>51910098
I love this myth that i3s or i5s would chug if you were doing multiple things at the same time.
>>51909370
what's up with this graph? I have a 955 at 3,8ghz with a 960 and i get drops to 28 FPS on 64 player servers
Is this a single player benchmark? Because sp is literally irrelevant and runs much better
>>51910106
Its not a myth, its a matter of workload. There is a reason why the anniversary pentium is terrible for most systems despite its impressive single core performance when overclocked.
>>51910119
We're talking about i3s here, which are four-threaded. And no, they do NOT chug when doing multiple things. You'll never hang while watching a video, having many tabs open, managing folders, listening to music and whatnot. One of my PCs has a goddamn i3 2120 and it has no trouble whatsoever multitasking, let alone a modern i3 or a fucking i5.
>>51910106
I know desktops are more powerful but my quad core laptop gets slow as fuck when my av is running a scan.
If a game takes advantage of 4 cores, having 2 more to handle background processes helps. That's where the fx 6300 wins against an i3.
>>51909869
Alien Isolation may not be a good benchmark.
I ran at least 60 fps in 1080 on a 3.9Ghz fx6300 with stuttering at loading screens.
>>51910148
>We're talking about i3s here, which are four-threaded.
Thats nice, but doesn't change what I said at all. Again the point is: it depends entirely on what you are doing whether the i3 chugs or not.
A hypothetical example is playing GTA V while boincing in the background.
>>51910148
you'll absolutely get larger framerate dips from having multiple shit open while gaming on an i3 whereas on my four or eight core systems the impact is much smaller. i don't want to shut everything down everytime i fire up any graphically intensive task to avoid large frame dips
>>51910196
>>51910176
AMD may offer more cores, but you're forgetting that their per core performance is also much better.
>>51909588
But does your is have 6 cores niggles?
>>51910161
I thin your machine gets slow because your availability is raping your hard drive.
>>51910257
Right, that is a factor but not as much as you may think. There is a reason why xeons with their million cores are clocked way below consumer level intel chips. Its all about being as parallel as possible.
>>51910291
You need to shut the fuck up and not go down this route.
>>51910300
That might be it, it's an older 5400rpm hdd since the original one died after dropping the laptop.
>>51909994
>has twice as many cores
no.
the modules are more like 1,5 cores or so. it's a thing between HT and two physical cores.
>>51910550
This is wrong. Shared resources doesn't stop them executing multiple instructions per module. If you actually believe that retard trying to sue AMD you'd have to realise by his some definition some old chips aren't technically cpus at all due to lacking the hardware that supposedly counts as a core.
>Why do people say AMD processors are shit?
Any money you save on the processor you lose over the course of the year on powering the CPU.
>>51910713
You don't even save anything actually.
There are NO am3+ mATX motherboards that are suitable for overclocking because all of them have poor phase controls/few VRMs and itx am3+ board do not exist. That will already push you directly into bulky ATX shit to overclock AND mobos suited for OCing are way more expensive.
And you have to overclock to get somewhere with these chips to try to alleviate the piss poor IPC.
In any case, the stock cooler is literal garbage. It can't even hold the CPU at stock depending on where you live and no matter what it's gonna sound like a jet engine. Even if you're not overclocking, you need an aftermarket cooler.
In the end you're gonna end up buying an aftermarket cooler + paying premium for a good mobo with good phase control to overclock while having only ATX as an option all so you can have worse performance than any stock i5 or even i3 that will run to their fullest on literally any mobo with their stock cooler perfectly. And they also generate WAY less heat and consume less energy. And yeah, at stock clocks the energy consumption difference between amd and intel isn't much, but OCing amd chips will dramatically bump up their energy consumption. It's not a linear progression at all.
People should just try to stop defending these absolutely terrible CPUs because nobody is buying this crap about them being good anymore. This battle has already been lost years ago.
The ONLY scenarios where I would truly recomend an AMD cpu to someone is for video rendering or if the person simply wants a cheap build to surf the web, type and whatnot. These are the only case scenario where these cpus are a better purchase than an intel one. For everything else, specially gaming in this day and age of unoptimized crap being the standard, they are an absolutely terrible purchase advice.
>>51910103
>overclockable 2c-4t cpu invalidates overclockable 4c-4t cpu
what?
If anything it just invalidates buying anything but the entry-level chip of each tier; 2x the cores is very worth it, HT not so much.
a fully-overclocked i3-6300 will still be miles behind a fully-overclocked i5-6400
meanwhile the price difference is £130 for the i3 and £150 for the i5
what a shill thread
come back when your single core performance touches the lowest end i3
>>51910713
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBeeGHozSY0
>>51910933
>what?
Given the rather large difference in price between an i5 and an i3 but relatively low difference in performance at identical clocks an overclockable i3 is the smarter buy by miles. If you want ultimate performance you aren't buying an i5 anyway - you'd be looking at i7 chips.
Plus there is a £50 difference between the 6300 and 6400 according to overclockers.
>>51909776
thats because u are trying to belive yourself something not real. U just paid that money and ur brain trying to accept that loss, thats why u keep saying that word. (now)
>>51909309
because they require a nuclear power plant to run and still can't match up to the top of the line intel processors
they're bad, but if you just need a cpu in your personal computer then they're fine to use
they're just shit scientifically
gaymers saying intel is the only way to go are just faggots
>>51911004
the performance difference between an equally-clocked i3 and an equally-clocked i5 is proportionately bigger than the performance difference between an equally-clocked i5 and an equally-clocked i7
>i5-6400
£149.99 on ocuk
£147.99 on amazon
£145.98 on ebuyer
£146.58 on scan
>i3-6300
£119.99 on ocuk
£147.95 on amazon
£118.98 on ebuyer
£116.56 on scan
The price difference between the i3 and the i5 is roughly £30-35 depending on where you buy from.
25% more expensive for 30-40% more performance is a reasonable deal.
Meanwhile the first i7 is almost twice the price of that i5, and you're looking at a 10-25% performance increase tops.
>>51911153
>>51911188
That's the 6100 not the 6300. That said, I didn't realise it was that much chaper, maybe losing 1/4 of your l2 cache is worth the £20 in savings.
>>51911208
L3 cache, even
>>51911208
If you are overclocking you might as well get the cheapest chip you can and clock it up since yo uare running above whatever clocks the more expensive model ships with anyway.
The 2mb cache difference between the i3 and i5 isn't especially important for vidya and while hyperthreading is no substitute for real cores we are overclocking anyway so the delta shrinks. Remember the main point of this conversation is getting similar performance for less money.
>>51910713
See >>51909994
There's like a 40w difference under load.
Even less during regular use because the processor won't be loaded to 100% very often.
I get Intel because I am not poor.
less shilling than usual ITT
Is /g/ begining to pass the edgy teen years??
>>51911347
Nah, in a few hours or so when a certain group of individuals reach their computers it will change.
>>51911347
There was a bit of shilling in this thread unfortunately.
Also op was kinda shilling too, but in a good way, not like those really annoying shills on here.
Reminder that AMD CPUs are complete SHIT at running emulators. They are usually running on 1-2 cores, my 8350 just completely melts when you try to put on some decent hw hacks.
>>51911548
At least you didn't explicitly cite dolphin - the shit those devs pull is mindboggling.
>>51910950
>What a shill thread
>Shills for Intel
>Entire thread is people shilling for Intel
>>51909602
The FX 6300 is at the bottom of that chart, below an i3. That is the CPU being used. Couldn't you have picked a better pic to reply to that with?
>>51911622
Gta v is a quad core game, isn't it?
That explains why a 3.8ghz 4350 is ahead of the 3.5ghz 6300.
>>51911712
>Gta v is a quad core game, isn't it?
Yes, it hits 4 threads - no more, no less. Thus in that regard any modern chip benefits from more gigglehurtz when playing GTA V.
>>51910899
Calm down intelshill.
>>51911741
Well he is right on one thing - there are no good mATX am3+ boards, but in general there are only a few good mATX boards regardless of platform if one wants to overclock on them (and none of the good ones are built for heavy overclocks).
>>51911712
Game in the picture is GTA IV with graphics mod.
So 8320e+mobo is more expensive than 4460+h81 but Intel CPU is more power efficient and doesn't require an aftermarket cooler. It also performs better in vydia, and similar to AMD in multithreaded applications. What is not to like?
4460+h81 is the real poorfag build to go for.
>>51911936
> similar to AMD in multithreaded applications
It really, really won't. Bonus point for the 8320e though: can be overclocked.
>>51911936
>doesn't require an aftermarket cooler
did AMD stop selling HS&F units bundled?
>>51911967
No - other anon just thinks you need one for any cpu (little realising the intel one also gets loud as fuck at full load).
>>51910899
>implying an Athlon 860k plus good gpu isn't the best way to build a gaming pc for cheap
>>51911967
Well, if you are taking the AMD route the point is to overclock it and make it comparable to Intel. Can you overclock it to 4.7 or 4.8 with stock cooler?
I know Intel is loud is as well. It's not about noise.
>>51911952
>It really, really won't
Do you have any benchmarks to back up that claim?
>http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1368?vs=1403
8320e vs 4570s (closest to 4460 available)
It depends on the benchmark. Intel is faster in some of them and AMD wins others.
>>51911936
Poorfags are probably less than 500 for the whole build. You're looking used parts or some pentium or low end amd cpu build for best bang to buck in games.
>>51912074
>Do you have any benchmarks to back up that claim?
Your own link does - just about every benchmark in that list that identifies itself as multi-threaded the 8320e crushes the i5.
>>51912187
why are you even responding to this shitposting faggot?
he's obviously just trying to shill for intel.
>paying 30% the total price
>just for the ABILITY to overclock
>overkeking only give 5% performance boost at best
All these poor people! Am I right kek. Stop using ur old hardware when you can have money and buy new stuff.
Ya old broke-o's.
>>51912240
Great post.
It's literally impossible to have a meaningful conversation with amdfags.
>>51909368
Lol, I used to believe in the AMD meme about 10 years ago. Bought several Athlon cpus over the years.
Even bought an AMD laptop once.
Never again.
>>51912330
Don't be like that, what if you have to compress a file in the future? AMD beats Intel by 20 seconds in Winrar and whatever MIPS are, AMD has a lot more of them in 7zip! Being an Intel shill must be suffering.
>>51909309
>taking this bait
Its probably been repeated many times already, but multi core processing applications are rare. Most of them are still pure dogshit and only the higher performance per core matters.
If people werent lazy and coded better amd > intel
If this is the reality and not a pretend, crazy land of competent programmers intel > amd
>>51912000
The stock cooler that came with my FX 6300 (the copper pipe one from the 8350) does a average job keeping temps fine but the noise is just obnoxious (on a hot day it hits 5000rpm)
What time is it on the east coast of clapistan? I'm noticing an increase in shitposting on /g/.
>>51912425
9:47
>>51909720
Tomscuckware is notoriously paid by intel and nvidia
>>51912041
860k and 290 master race
>>51912466
Just as the NEETs slime out of bed. So yeah, burger shitposting.
>>51909309
shills
>>51912041
>not a 771 to 775 modded Xeon
anon pls
So when will 8 cores be relevant? When intelcucks start marketing and producing them on a consumer level? How do you think the current AMD FX chips would perform by that time?
>>51913779
If you have more tasks than you do cores then having additional cores can always provide a benefit basically. Having additional cores means background tasks can be done off of the main core(s) which frees them up to deal with the foreground tasks more closely. Even if your programs are not threaded having additional cores can help quite a bit.
>gaming this
>gaming that
Rip /g/
Okay, I'm going to be real with you, right here, right now, I use and, I love AMD, but Jesus Christ, you can't just blindly go out and say that one thing is better that the other in every aspect. Okay, here's what you're getting with AMD
1. Lower price/performance ratio
2. Higher overall performance
3. Lower price/core ratio
Here's what you're getting with Intel
1. hugely improved single core performance
2. Better performance in some real world applications due to 1
3. Better power consumption
These facts in mind, lets be realistic, AMD could never, EVER beat Intel In professional applications that usually are carried out on unbelievably expensive i7 processors, but I guarantee you that if you're doing anything that isn't professional, or you're on a budget, you will notice that the AMD processor is significantly better, that being said, no one is objectively better than the other.
>>51909764
Bulldozer was shit, try the 8350 and you'll see what I mean.
>>51913155
Poorfags need a warranty since they can barely afford to buy it at all
>>51912517
This is funny considering you're the shitposter.
>>51915051
8320 is Piledriver, not Bulldozer
>>51909830
The i7, not i5, was at stock, I haven't had time to overclock it yet. My 8320 was at 4.5 ghz(I could get it to 4.6 but there was no fps gains at all). The average difference between a stock 8320 and the OC was 20 fps in Valley benchmark extreme HD preset.
The stutters are very noticeable at stock and with the overclock they are not as present. I guess it depends on your game as well. I should also mention the stuttering is during emulation. when playing intensive games the frames just dip which sorta messes up the immersion for me. I personally can't deal with frame dips below 50-55. It just slows the game down too much.
>>51909829
4.5 ghz OC. I'm starting to think it really was the chip not bring able to completely handle the 2 gpus. Like that one anon said, average fps means nothing, especially when the min fps is a lot lower than the max. That's why I like digital foundry benchmark vids. They show the fps live as well as the frame time. Anyway, the i7 has been immensely better and all my problems are solved. That's all I really cared about.
Found an old pic while I was testing different gpus. Had 3 gtx 770s laying around and 2 780tis. Stuttering was on the lower end card AND the high end card. It's not the overclock for sure since the stutters are there even on stock.,just a little worse. I even checked if AMD cool n quiet was turned off
