How a R3k AMD CPU can keep up with a R8k Intel CPU :)

[d0b33]

I built an AMD rig but have a random crash that happens when playing video, I've read many possible causes, the low power mode scales too much, AMD drivers etc. I think it could be the CPU power profile scaling too much, it's not happened since I've disabled it.

But this has put me off a future AMD build, I might go back to intel.

 

[CataclysmZA]

He's struggling to play Dead rising, Ryse and Dragons age Inquisition. So secondhand didn't work out for him.

In the same breath I can brag that my 7year old AMD Athlone 2 5800+, with Asus MB, Radeon 7850 could play these games with ease.

Oh, you're playing DA:I on a dual-core chip? Please tell us all how you achieved this.

Why would anyone in their right mind buy a 1st gen i7 3 months back.
Price must of been really cheap in order to justify it. It's gonna be terrible for the majority of games that only have duo core support, and barely keep up with a newer i3 duo core in a game supports all it's cores.

A Bloomfield is still a solid chip, it's no slouch when it comes to productivity and gaming. My editor moved to a i7 960, a ASUS board and 12GB RAM some time ago (all second-hand) and he hasn't had any issues with running modern games. Sure, it's outperformed slightly by an i3-4330, but it has held on pretty well so far.

I built an AMD rig but have a random crash that happens when playing video, I've read many possible causes, the low power mode scales too much, AMD drivers etc. I think it could be the CPU power profile scaling too much, it's not happened since I've disabled it.

Depends on what software you're using to play the video and what your hardware setup is. Writing off a brand because of one particular problem is a little excessive.

 

[KleinBoontjie]

Yeah sorry, you're right, only got Dragon age the other day. The other two I did play on the Athlone.

 

[Neoprod]

Clickbait-y article is clickbait-y...sorry, couldn't resist

The Tweaktown dudes could have picked an i3-4360 (costs about 25% less than the fx-8350) and gotten similar results in a graphics-intensive test.

For info - I use an i5-2500k \ Z68 for a workstation, an X3-245 in an HTPC and an A8-5600k in a file server...yes, I built them when electricity was cheaper

 

[d0b33]

Depends on what software you're using to play the video and what your hardware setup is. Writing off a brand because of one particular problem is a little excessive.

Happens with any software, does not matter since the GPU handles the decoding, it is more likely the Radeon GPU, R7 line.

 

[Progenix Oj101]

What can I say, my older hardware played that games, on low settings, but it played.

I certainly wouldn't call that "playing with ease"

Why would anyone in their right mind buy a 1st gen i7 3 months back.
Price must of been really cheap in order to justify it. It's gonna be terrible for the majority of games that only have duo core support, and barely keep up with a newer i3 duo core in a game supports all it's cores.

On the other end if it's an easy OC it's not totally irrelevant.

Also what Nvidia graphics card?

The part in bold is important, those old i7s could fairly easily do 4 GHz at which point they are close to on par in single threaded performance with a Haswell-based i3 at stock speed. The i3 can be thought of as two i3s glue together, 2c/4t vs 4c/8t. There has not been a 100% increase in IPC between Bloomfield and Haswell, so clock for clock the i7 will be ahead by a large margin in any properly threaded task even with a clock speed deficit.

I built an AMD rig but have a random crash that happens when playing video, I've read many possible causes, the low power mode scales too much, AMD drivers etc. I think it could be the CPU power profile scaling too much, it's not happened since I've disabled it.

But this has put me off a future AMD build, I might go back to intel.

I've built many Intel rigs that had issues which needed to be ironed out One bad experience isn't reason to write off a brand completely, if you're looking for reasons I could list some which are more plausible

Happens with any software, does not matter since the GPU handles the decoding, it is more likely the Radeon GPU, R7 line.

Drivers maybe? A background process? It's definitely not a common issue (yes, you can find dozens or hundreds of reports of most issues online, but when you look at the percentage of products that give issues out of how many have been sold it is an insignificant number).

 

[d0b33]

I've built many Intel rigs that had issues which needed to be ironed out One bad experience isn't reason to write off a brand completely, if you're looking for reasons I could list some which are more plausible

I've been building rigs for more than a decade...
This is a rare issue. My system runs stable, I can game for hours for example it's just when I switch to video it could freeze, no bsod just becomes unresponsive.

Drivers maybe? A background process? It's definitely not a common issue (yes, you can find dozens or hundreds of reports of most issues online, but when you look at the percentage of products that give issues out of how many have been sold it is an insignificant number).

I've been looking into it and narrowed it down to something to do with the AMD-FX CPU power saver scaling + the MSI motherboard + Radeon card, never been a fan of MSI but few options I had at the time.

 

[Swa]

Compare the Quadro K6000 or a FirePro W9100 to a GeForce GTX 780 Ti, GeForce GTX 980, Radeon R9 295X, etc and see how poorly the "premium" graphics cards do with gaming? It's EXACTLY the same - call it "performance sacrificing" - oh the horror! Oh wait, not designed with gaming in mind. Oh snap.

I'll say this very briefly for you then since you still don't grasp it. There's nothing wrong with performance sacrificing. There is with paying a premium for it like you do with Intel.

It DOES make sense to compare second hand from one camp when it obliterates everything the other camp has to offer And if you want to overclock the i7-2600K or i5-4690/K you're going to reach levels that the FX-8350 can't hope to rival - running close to 5 GHz it can't keep up with the Intel processors in question at stock speed.

ROTFLOL. Just because you don't see the flaw in that doesn't mean the rest of us don't. And as I've shown you don't get all the features AMD has without going more expensive motherboard/chipset. So I rest my case, you haven't shown a complete Intel system for the same price as an AMD that beats it. And your overclocking headroom is useless when you can't actually overclock.

Both Takealot and others (eg Landmark) have the Core i5-4690 and i5-4690K for less than the FX-8350, so no, not a "second hand special."

Not with motherboard.

Show me where Intel needs more than DDR3-1600 for gaming? I'm talking about where it can actually make a real world difference, don't throw AIDA64 benchmarks at me

So now you're for real world difference where before it was all about the benchmarks. Nice flip-flop.

A second hand AMD with board that is priced equal to a second hand Intel i7-2600K CPU with P67 board (R 2,000) is going to offer nowhere near the performance of the Intel, so why bother with it? Same price, worse performance. Where's this saving you're going to spend on the graphics card? You keep mentioning it, but I'm not seeing them.

You keep mentioning these second hand super savings, but I'm not seeing them. So one guy struck a bargain vs the thousands of others who don't. Regular second hand pricing of i7-2600K seems to be ~R2500. Motherboard alone R2000. A new FX-8350 goes for sub R2600 at at least two shops. New top of the range motherboard R1300. That's R600 on a new AMD system that can go towards beating a second hand Intel system plus overclocking is available by default.

AMD not pursuing 3DNow! is typical of AMD not taking advantage of situations wherever possible. Instead, they offered Intel the advantage of a silver platter.

Maybe and maybe not. AMD has a cross licensing deal with Intel so they let them do the development and focus on other areas. They scored with AMD64.

Does anyone care about Physical Address Extensions in the Pentium Pro? No? Did anyone care than the Pentium Pro had it when we actually needed it? No, it was obsolete. Then why does it matter? Same for Bulldozer and Piledriver.

Completely not the point.

Again, a shared design (CMT) cannot always equal the performance of a multicore design. As soon as there is competition for the shared resources, there's a performance penalty.

And again a shared design can allow more cores on the same die to increase performance or present a space and cost saving, something AMD needs for their APUs where they are again beating Intel. There's no sign of a performance penalty with Piledriver since the issues with the shared pipeline were fixed.

 

[Swa]

I've been building rigs for more than a decade...
This is a rare issue. My system runs stable, I can game for hours for example it's just when I switch to video it could freeze, no bsod just becomes unresponsive.



I've been looking into it and narrowed it down to something to do with the AMD-FX CPU power saver scaling + the MSI motherboard + Radeon card, never been a fan of MSI but few options I had at the time.

Certainly is. My sound would go all scratchy when plugging in the Logitech unified receiver. A BIOS upgrade fixed it but now instead of shutting down it restarts. Doesn't bother me though when I switch it off at the wall.

 

[Chevron]

I built an AMD rig but have a random crash that happens when playing video, I've read many possible causes, the low power mode scales too much, AMD drivers etc. I think it could be the CPU power profile scaling too much, it's not happened since I've disabled it.

But this has put me off a future AMD build, I might go back to intel.

I've never had such this issue. Sounds PEBKAC to me.

 

[d0b33]

I've never had such this issue. Sounds PEBKAC to me.

neither have I, and reserve PEBKAC comments to yourself with grammar that bad.

 

[Chevron]

neither have I, and reserve PEBKAC comments to yourself with grammar that bad.

Yes like you don't use predictive text...

 

[Progenix Oj101]

I've been building rigs for more than a decade...
This is a rare issue. My system runs stable, I can game for hours for example it's just when I switch to video it could freeze, no bsod just becomes unresponsive.

How's that relevant? You're still crucifying AMD for one bad experience...

I've been looking into it and narrowed it down to something to do with the AMD-FX CPU power saver scaling + the MSI motherboard + Radeon card, never been a fan of MSI but few options I had at the time.

So it's a combination of certain hardware, not all of which is made by AMD. Why's it AMD's fault?

 

[Progenix Oj101]

I'll say this very briefly for you then since you still don't grasp it. There's nothing wrong with performance sacrificing. There is with paying a premium for it like you do with Intel.

Let me break this down to you in VERY simple terms:

Core i7-5960X is more expensive than Core i7-4790K
Core i7-4970K is faster in games than Core i7-5960X
Core i7-5960X is faster in heavily threaded tasks than Core i7-4790K

By your reasoning that is performance sacrificing. HOW is that ANY different to the scenario I propose?

FirePro W9100 is more expensive than Radeon R9 295X2
Radeon R9 295X2 is faster in games than FirePro W9100
FirePro W9100 is faster in CAD and other design work than Radeon R9 295X2

Same situation, yet that isn't "performance sacrificing for a premium price?" Your logic doesn't make sense.

ROTFLOL. Just because you don't see the flaw in that doesn't mean the rest of us don't. And as I've shown you don't get all the features AMD has without going more expensive motherboard/chipset. So I rest my case, you haven't shown a complete Intel system for the same price as an AMD that beats it. And your overclocking headroom is useless when you can't actually overclock.

Features such as? What more does a gamer need than four RAM slots, six SATA ports and two PCIe slots for graphics cards? And I've already shown that an overclocked FX-8350 can't even hope to compete with a stock i5-4690 so why do we need overclocking room on the Intel side?

Not with motherboard.

I never claimed that - you're welcome to go back through my posts and show me where I said that the Core i5-4690 with motherboard is under R 3,000. What I DID say is that the Core i7-2600K dogwhips the FX-8350 and can be had with a motherboard for less.

So now you're for real world difference where before it was all about the benchmarks. Nice flip-flop.

Theoretical benchmarks vs real world performance. RAM does not give anything other than a larger number at the end of a benchmark, a higher frame rate or work being processed quicker is something perceivable.

You keep mentioning these second hand super savings, but I'm not seeing them. So one guy struck a bargain vs the thousands of others who don't. Regular second hand pricing of i7-2600K seems to be ~R2500. Motherboard alone R2000. A new FX-8350 goes for sub R2600 at at least two shops. New top of the range motherboard R1300. That's R600 on a new AMD system that can go towards beating a second hand Intel system plus overclocking is available by default.

Come over to Carbonite and you'll see the prices all the time, an i7-2600K will never sell for R 2,500. Excuse the links to Carbonite, but here we go...

• Starting price R 1,800, dropped to R 1,500 to get it sold
• Entire i7-2600K based PC with GeForce GT 8600, 500 GB hard drives and 4 GB RAM R 3,500
• R 1,500
• Another for R 1,500
• 2600K + 8 GB Mushkin RAM + P67 motherboard + CM212 cooler + CM690II case R 3,300
• R 1,800
• Starting price R 2,000, dropeed to R 1,800 but not selling

I could go on, but I think you get the point... R 2,000 for a 2600K and motherboard is by no means a once in a blue moon deal. R 2,000 motherboards are uncommon, I'm not going to dig up another hundred links for you but P67 boards can be had for as little as R 600 on their own. For what it's worth...

3770K for R 2,100
3770K for R 2,300

So yeah, good luck to whoever is selling a 2600K for R 2,500

You say a top end motherboard for AMD is R 1,300 (the board you linked is decidedly mid range, it doesn't even use the top chipset - I just see a lot of buzzwords but other than that a very average spec and yes, I'm going to call them buzzwords - Killer NIC is a Realtek controller, that ultra fancy onboard sound can't hold a candle to a semi decent sound card) - show me? Cause on Landmark, the cheapest 990FX motherboard is R 1,578 and here's one for R 3,939 (which happens to be the top AMD board - not some R 1,300 el cheapo).

Let's check elsewhere, how about Rebeltech? They list boards by socket only, not by chipset. According to their list of AM3 boards, the cheapest 990FX board is an MSI at R 1,505.83. On the other end of the scale is, once again, the Crosshair Formula-Z at R 3,792.83. I'm really struggling to find a top end board for R 1,300 - I need to triple my budget to make that a reality. Yeah, you can get decent AM3+ boards around the R 1,200 to R 1,600 range, but not top end. The same can be said about Intel.

Again though, everything I'm saying is backed up by citations, I'm not seeing anything from you other

Maybe and maybe not. AMD has a cross licensing deal with Intel so they let them do the development and focus on other areas. They scored with AMD64.

Maybe not? How did AMD capitalize on 3DNow! when it is nothing but a distant memory of something that had a cool logo once upon a time?

Completely not the point.

No, it's completely the point. "Piledriver sucks, but look at this awesome technology it has introduced that can't be used for the next five years when nobody cares about Piledriver anymore!" Nobody cares that the Pentium Pro had PAE. They care that PAE exists today, but not that it was in the Pentium Pro. Five years from now we might say thank you to AMD for the CMT design they introduced when every second program can make 100 % efficient use of it, but we're not going to worship Bulldozer/Piledriver for being the first to have it.

And again a shared design can allow more cores on the same die to increase performance or present a space and cost saving, something AMD needs for their APUs where they are again beating Intel. There's no sign of a performance penalty with Piledriver since the issues with the shared pipeline were fixed.

AGAIN? Wait, other than the APU market where they pretty much have a monopoly, where is AMD beating Intel? I dare say Intel has the desktop market pretty well wrapped up if their mid range SKUs are beating AMD's finest.

 

[DA-LION-619]

.

 

[Swa]

Let me break this down to you in VERY simple terms:

Core i7-5960X is more expensive than Core i7-4790K
Core i7-4970K is faster in games than Core i7-5960X
Core i7-5960X is faster in heavily threaded tasks than Core i7-4790K

By your reasoning that is performance sacrificing. HOW is that ANY different to the scenario I propose?

FirePro W9100 is more expensive than Radeon R9 295X2
Radeon R9 295X2 is faster in games than FirePro W9100
FirePro W9100 is faster in CAD and other design work than Radeon R9 295X2

Same situation, yet that isn't "performance sacrificing for a premium price?" Your logic doesn't make sense.

Oh boy. I've really tried to be civil through all your miscomparisons and taking things out of context but your comprehension skills are either non-existent or you're just playing obtuse. How is their top of the range card with 16GB memory anything near the usual desktop market? They have an entire range of FirePro cards at the same price points as regular desktop cards that will beat them in some areas and not in others. There is no premium price unless you actually want a real premium card.

But without being able to apply logic and with non-sensible comparisons like second hand vs new I don't expect you to get it like the rest of us. So stay with your Intel inside and we'll stay with AMD being able to afford more other stuff inside. I'm no longer interested in having illogical arguments with you.

 

[Progenix Oj101]

Oh boy. I've really tried to be civil through all your miscomparisons and taking things out of context but your comprehension skills are either non-existent or you're just playing obtuse. How is their top of the range card with 16GB memory anything near the usual desktop market? They have an entire range of FirePro cards at the same price points as regular desktop cards that will beat them in some areas and not in others. There is no premium price unless you actually want a real premium card.

But without being able to apply logic and with non-sensible comparisons like second hand vs new I don't expect you to get it like the rest of us. So stay with your Intel inside and we'll stay with AMD being able to afford more other stuff inside. I'm no longer interested in having illogical arguments with you.

How is an eight core chip with quad channel memory controller, 40 PCIe lanes and a HEDT socket anything near the usual desktop market? Just like Intel has cheaper regular desktop (not HEDT) chips that compete with AMD's chips? An entire range? You don't pay a premium unless you want a really premium chip which can lose against cheaper chips, just like a top end FirePro or Quadro? It is an EXACT simile.

As for the new vs second hand argument, I've proven that Intel has direct competition at the same or lower price point. I've provided sources. I've provided sources showing that AMD's finest with a heavy overclock can't compete with a stock Intel CPU at the price point. I've shown that a three generation old Intel platform can be bought for less than an AMD chip alone and still beats it. I see you blabbering a lot but not backing up anything you say. I have backed up the lot. I have not said anything that cannot be backed up. I have provided DIRECT comparisons that you are too blind to see.

 

[CataclysmZA]

The funny thing about this thread is that while I'm following it, I'm doing so knowing that I'm getting a MSI 970 Gaming board in the next two weeks and I'll probably plop down cash for a FX-8320/FX-8350 on Carbonite.

 

[d0b33]

How's that relevant? You're still crucifying AMD for one bad experience...
So it's a combination of certain hardware, not all of which is made by AMD. Why's it AMD's fault?

I like AMD, I was just frustrated with my issues, enough so to choose intel and nvidia as my next build. In the department of drivers and software the legacy of ATI still remains, I really really really dislike catalyst. I thought the new omega driver release would be new and refreshing, I was seriously disappointed.

Let me be clear though my gripe is more with Radeon, I can't fault the CPUs they are rock solid.

 

[CataclysmZA]

I like AMD, I was just frustrated with my issues, enough so to choose intel and nvidia as my next build. In the department of drivers and software the legacy of ATI still remains, I really really really dislike catalyst. I thought the new omega driver release would be new and refreshing, I was seriously disappointed.

At this point, though, driver releases from both sides are more or less painless. I didn't like the shortcuts taken with Raptr but okay, it mostly works.