AMD processors have a long, and fantastic history. You're a little confused however, in the late 90's the intel platforms were still top tier. The problem came with Rambus, the only reason their platforms remained ontop was thanks to that. It cost an absolute fortune however, so most people skipped it. When using standard memory (PC100/PC133) AMD was starting to come out ontop of Intel with their Thunderbird chips. Come the release of the P4 and the release of the Athlon XP, AMD gained more. Price and performance was fantastic, they were beating out Intel consistantly and to top it off, offered more overclocking ability. Even AMD's Durons at the time were beating out low tier P4's. With the release of the A64 AMD was outright trashing everything Intel had to offer. It wasn't until the mid 2000's that Intel started to come back with its Core series. AMD was the top dog for a long, long time in terms of raw performance. Lets hope that happens again eventually.
I was mostly an amd guy up to and including socket 939, once socket 775 came out I switched sides. would do it again in a heartbeat if the tables were turned again
^Likewise. I love AMD, I loved seeing an underdog with so little funding compared to Intel come to dominate the performance market. But I buy where the performace is for myself. The only time I make AMD rigs now is when I make an HTPC. FM2 is fantastic for it. I'd love to build a higher end Vishera workstation however, but haven't been in a position yet.
i aint gonna watch this video because ive seen the first, tell me why that review goes against every single other review about the8350
It do not go against. If you think it goes, well... I like STFU formula also. Anyway, buy what you want, those results are legit in the same way as non realistic results where you "testing CPU", but in reality, you test how platform preforms with less stress on it, and there, Intel do better job anyway (most of the time,a t current software).
you cant have exaggeration and facts as facts. its either one or the other. if you exaggerate a fact it is no longer fact
No, same rule apply for i3 vs FX 4xxx series (let alone ppl did go so far to compare them with Pentium Gxxx...). Only difference is, in high end sector, AMD do not have anything to offer against Intel, but more factors are included here, not CPU speed alone. Everything is explained well in 2nd video. On light load, Intel platform preforms better, but that is only because of per core performance of Intel architecture. On heavy load, in some situations, even higher end CPU's from Intel can't keep up with AMD high grade CPU (positioned at mid range Intel CPU's). I think that was the point.
Just pick the cpu that has the features you want and what you can afford and call it a day.Why fight over some guy's youtube video. You guys are better then this.
Because allot of people are wrong in their assumptions, and types of reviews (someone) forced created all sort of misconceptions. Other than that, you are right, one should pick what is best for him, and people who suggest things should know better in the first place before actually suggesting something.
Your last point is why I even started this thread, and which by the way for all you fanboys is also what the dude is saying in the video. There are way too many people suggesting BS on many forums.
Posting an unsubstantiated review, does not make people doubting it fanboys, perhaps its quite the opposite. 2 seperate people posted video reviews from the same site.
The reason many find that vid objectionable is that it is from a virtual unknown, a site many never even heard of, vs the findings of many other more credible, well established sites who use detailed methodologies in their testing and which all corroborate each other to a large extent (links). Furthermore he doesnt use some of the more CPU demanding games out there (ie, SC2, CivIV, GTAIV, etc) and chooses very heavy GPU titles like Metro 2033 and Crysis2. Now heres where this dude and his site flub things spectacularly: Metro 2033: 8350: 1080 - 36.44 1440 - 20.44 3570k: 1080 - 21.200 1440 - 12.800 3770K: 1080 - 27.480 1440 - 12.960 Look at the massive differences in this very heavy GPU title! Even between the 3570k and 3770k (@1080) which should be close (Metro doesnt use HT). Epic fail! I dont know what else to say dude. Make of it what you will, but I have a feeling sooner or later people are going to find it embarassing to link to that site or its vids.
heavy gpu title like that, most cpu`s will have exactly the same avg framerate. didnt that video show the 8320 actually costing less in electricity? something like a STFU or something?
Tom's Hardware had a Crossfire/Eyefinity comparison between IB and FX this week... Especially Skyrim and F1 2012 run at 'poor' framerates on FX in their review.
When you ask for a forums opinion on hardware, that's what you get. Everyone has different setups, and favorite brands. Not everyone has used every piece of hardware available, so recommendations you get are for what they have experience with or have read about. I used amd for many, many years, never owned a intel until I bought this 2600k for more photoshopping power. Never seen the point of paying more for a intel. I can now honestly say I will never go back to amd, had way to many issues and quirks with them compared to the intel. So when you ask what I recommend 10 out of 10 times it will be intel from personal experience, not from some number graph.
LOL, tomshardware is obvious Intel fanboy club. First of all, testing same games over and over again, 2nd, comparing two different price range CPU's. And again, not testing at full stress. You guys obviously missed the point again. There is no problems with AMD that are more severe than Intel, it is only Windows problem (if any, depends on both platforms). You, again, failed to understand that those results do not contradict any of those results you keep posting... I'm not sure why people who obviously do not take $ from Intel keep bragging about it. Apart from that, fact that is proven, that Intel did used all sort of "questionable" methods yo gain advantage over competition, is enough for anyone to never buy those company products. Ofc, it is not proven that AMD didn't, but weight is not on the one who defend itself. Unfortunately, most corporations work that way, and it would be no surprise if AMD do similar (or same, less severe, or more, doesn't matter), it can be changed, but that require some serious mental evolution of people in general, witch will not happen for obvious reasons. That's all i need to say about this topic that is far more wide than just some numbers, tests, sites etc. etc. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3-VeaElwt8 That seems right.... ish, 30 something feet per minute...
Run metro2033 benchmark and monitor cpu usage, it uses a lot of cpu power, HT included, be it 1680x1050 @ high or 1920x1080 @ v.high.