theres nothing wrong with Amd CPUs
suck my dick /g/.
>>52005514
but /g/ sucks AMD's dick daily
But you can't Hackintosh! How else am I supposed to eat shit from my hands on a budget?
I hate jews but Intel is better
>>52005537
who doesnt
and lets just hope zen will come through
>>52005537
no i get 1000 fps with my 8350 on crysis 3 at 4k
I love AMD CPUs but even I can't bullshit people about their shitty single thread performance and the fact that they have nothing to compete with Haswell-E processors.
Zen is coming out soon but until then intel will be the better choice for CPU intensive tasks and gayming.
>>52005553
Not all games can efficiently use 8 threads though.
>>52005746
>shitty single thread performance
How do you conclusively come up with this? benchmarks? or does it actually take you like an hour to encode one 10 minute video? because my FX-8350 extracts, encodes, plays and just does everything I need it to without a hiccup?
>>52005952
Multi-core performance on FX CPUs is breddy good and even competes with some i7s if OC'd. I was talking about single thread performance which FX CPUs simply suck at. This affects more than just vydia gaems.
Still (for now), if you want better better multi-core performance you have no choice but to give into jewtel and buy a Haswell-E CPU. The i7-5820K OC'd will give you batshit crazy multi-core performance.
Let's all hope Zen actually changes all of this.
>>52006171
I'm not arguing that AMD single cores are not as fast as Intels.
What I'm saying is that what is it (apart from games or benchmarks) that makes AMD not satisfy your single core needs?
Most programs are single core let's say (I would even say a lot not most if that's more fair).
Even with single core programs things to very very fast for me with my 8350. What is it in real life that would make you say damn, this AMD cpu really is slow, I mean this is taking forever?.
>>52006171
And im just sitting here with my i7-5930k, when the 5820k is litteraly the same.
>>52006330
Can't it clock higher with more stability?
You're barking at the wrong tree sanpei, everyone here is a /v/edditor and it's a proven fact that intel performs much better on current generation games.
Come back in a couple years when game devs actually give a shit about multi-core perfomance
>>52006244
>What I'm saying is that what is it (apart from games or benchmarks) that makes AMD not satisfy your single core needs?
I actually own an APU based laptop and to be honest, I don't play vydia gaems often and don't use applications that would benefit from better single thread performance so idgaf. Some people might care though.
>Even with single core programs things to very very fast for me with my 8350. What is it in real life that would make you say damn, this AMD cpu really is slow, I mean this is taking forever?.
Well not much. You would get lower FPS on many vydia gaems and that might upset you a little at best.
Anyway if Zen pans out like we hope it does, AMD will become the best choice assuming intel does not cut Haswell-E prices too much. I'm betting that Zen will be good so I'm not going to buy a Haswell-E CPU until I'm sure Zen flopped. I hope the wait is worth it.
>>52006244
Intel CPUs destroy AMD for any type of encoding.
>>52006393
>multi-core performance
>amd
gr8 b8
>>52006436
i7s, ye but not i5s.
>>52006436
>destroys
yeah, I know you're saying it but I'm not so sure it's true, especially if you're talking an FX-8350 vs like an I5 or something.
>>52006454
>OCd 8350 is shit!! I should get an i7 6k for just 150 bucks more!
Multicore perfomance is fine on AMD.
Let me guess, you bought a 5820k to play games and 'edit videos' every 3 months.
>>52006435
bruh, zen is 40% better ipc over excavator. Shit is going to be ridiculously good. The 8 core zen might even shit on the infamous i7 5960x.
>>52006561
nah
Bottlenecks
>>52006574
You better fucking pray it doesn't else intel is fucking finished and bankrupt homeboy
>>52006544
I bought a 5930k for games
>>52006622
How much was your console?
AMD CPUs are shit
suck my dick OP
>>52006629
About 3200 dollars
>>52006635
>Needing fast single core performance for shitposting
>>52006561
It would be hilarious if that happened, intel would go full damage control. Though in reality that i7 might still outperform the 8-core zen but not by much.
>>52006607
If it does preform like you're shilling over, it'll be a palm sized space heater too.
>>52006658
Why do I believe you?.
Well, if you spend that much on a console you deserve to say it runs better than my $700 rig. Congrats friend, I'll bow down and accept defeat. I get 10 less FPS than you do.
daily reminder that AMD hasn't even released desktop excavator cpus so we don't fully know how devastating 40% better ipc would be like.
>>52006689
Right
>>52006171
What does single thread performance mean? Multi core?
>>52006756
It's like one Mexican versus 4 Mexicans sharing the work.
Intel employs Mexicans who do work so you'll pay to keep them.
AMD uses niggers that do half the work.
>>52005514
they're just fine for gaming and such. Only faggots care about muh threads and go for overpriced jewtel shit
>>52005553
Irony is that the 8350 throttles Crysis 1 to shit
>>52006793
I don't mind paying double when my cores are twice as good
>>52006756
what it sounds like. better single thread performance means one thread can compute more shit and better multi thread performance means all threads on the cpu can compute more shit.
some games can only use 2 or 4 threads efficiently and so they will suffer greatly if single thread performance is shit.
>>52006784
I like the fact that your autism is so strong that you think your comment makes sense.
>>52006815
I like my analogy better
i have a 9590 and 390X and i pretty much run all games on ultra ~120 fps
suck it intel & nvidia fags
>>52006812
What about paying quadruple and the performance is twice as good?
Full amd master race checking in.
>>52006841
8 core 4.7GHz AMD: runs hot as fuck at base clock, and cost 200 USD
6 core 3.3GHz Intel: decent temps, preforms better with less power and I paid 350
>>52006721
Wouldn't it exceed haswell ipc? That shit sounds like it would fucking bring intel to its knees.
>>52006949
>Paying $150 more
>performs better
what's your point again?
>>52007023
That you pay 3/4 more for double the performance, not to mention you can actually overclock the thing unlike the (pretty much maxed out) 9590.
>>52007023
that I'd rather pay a jew than have a cpu that bottlenecks my PC
>>52007042
You said "better performance" in this post >>52007023
not double and if you're claiming double then at least mention the chips you're talking about by model.
>>52007042
this is a different anon but thanks for having by back bro.jpg
Former fx user here. Had an fx-4100, 6300, and 9370. At 4.8ghz, 5.0ghz, and 5.2ghz in the same chip order.
My fx-9370 at 5.2ghz pulled close to 300w from the wall by itself. It ran insanely hot (still would hit 59C under 100% load) even while under a custom liquid loop with a 360mm and 240mm radiator set up. Not to mention to achieve those clocks the motherboards VRM section got really hot, and the socket temp started to have to be taken into account. My room would get easily 25F hotter than the rest of my home while encoding
I now have an i5-4690k. Clocked mildy to 4.4ghz at 1.2v. Before getting rid of the FX I was playing the new Wolfenstein on 1440p and dual 290s. I would get fps dips down the low 20s at times.
Same settings, resololution, and cards, with the i5, the lowest it went was 34fps. While pushing less heat, less noise, and using less power. The trade off was my encodes now take almost twice as long.
I truly miss my 5.2ghz 8 core monster churning through 300gb of bluray rips in 90 minutes, but I dont miss all the bullshit associated with running an amd chip like mentioned above.
I sincerely hope AMD Zen takes off as good as they say it is. I got roped into the faildozer hype and well, once bitten twice shy. They better bring everything and a bag of chips to the table or ill be buying x99.
>>52007101
>>52007103
Nothing? ok.
>>52007172
Just because no one feels like explaining these simple concepts to you doesn't mean your perceptions are correct
>>52007170
I can't help to think your story doesn't mean much because seems like you don't know what in the total fuck you're doing.
I say that because who in the right mind goes with anything above an fx-8350 anyways? and I'm an AMDfag asking this.
I already know the 8350 runs a bit warm and could have easily predicted the situation you ran from without going through that mess.
>>52007228
because he wanted Intel performance
>>52007218
soo...still nothing? ok.
>>52007239
because he wanted actual* performance
ftfy
>>52007228
I didnt buy the 9370 at release. I was in the market for the 8350 originally bit microcenter had the 9370 for only $20 more. Guaranteed better binned chip for $20? Stupid not to get it.
And as far as heat, i was only mentioning it in relation to performance gained to heat putput ratio.
More heat and more noise for less performance is what it came out to. Period.
Im an amd fan as well and am itching to go back to amd if the opportunity presents itself.
>And ive been clocking amd chips since the athlon x2/phenom 2 days fuck boy. I knew what I was in for. Merely stating my experience with FX as a whole.
>>52007378
BTFO
T
F
O
INTEL FAGS ON SUICIDE WATCH
