AMD OWNERS ONLY what cpu do you have

[trickynickyuk]

Hi all just a quick question which cpu do you have and what's your spec

AMD FX-8150 @ 4ghz
Asus sabertooth 990fx
Msi twin frozr lll HD 6950 2gb
Corsair mx3 8gb @ 1600mhz
Crucial c300 64gb
Samsung f3 1tb

Also check my sig for 2nd setup

Performance on both of them is fantastic

 

[thingemajib]

i dont really see where this is going but ill join in

phenom ii 555, unlocked to quad @ 4ghz
zalman cnps 9700
asus crosshair V
sapphire hd5770
crucial ballistix elite 8gb @1866 mhz
crucial m4 256gb
WD caviar black 2tb - $70 in the US just before the floods
ocz modxstream 500W
thermaltake tsunami black windowed

as you may or may not be able to tell, im about halfway through a slow refresh of parts. To do:
- new mediumish sized case capable of fitting a h100, eyeing up the cm690ii adv or the bitfenix shinobi (might even go with the white one just to see what i can do with it)
-new psu?
-pray that bulldozers replacement is a worthy upgrade and invest in that
-upgrade to 7870 once prices have dropped a bit (idealy sub £175)

much further down the line i would like to dabble with full watercooling, but that may be in a future build alltogether

 

[trickynickyuk]

I going with this because all i see on on this forum at the min is intel intel intel i was just curious to see if there are many AMD fans still out there

 

[Bishie]

Antec Three Hundred
GIGABYTE GA-970A-UD3 AM3+
AMD FX-8150 Black Edition 4.20GHz 16MB Cache
Kingston HyperX Genesis 16GB (4x4GB) DDR3 1600MHz CL9 DIMM
Seagate 500GB 3.5" Barracuda SATA-III 6Gb/s Hard Drive - 7200RPM 16MB Cache
EVGA GeForce GTX 670 2048MB GDDR5
Corsair Enthusiast Series TX650
Microsoft Windows 7 Professional 64-bit

Logitech Gaming Mouse G700
Microsoft Sidewinder X4 Keyboard
AOC E2250SWDA 21.5 inch Widescreen LED Monitor

 

[Hagar]

OK

 

[jamesfreddie]

Also check my sig for 2nd setup

Performance on both of them is fantastic

Looks like your second setup is better than your first

 

[humbug]

See signature.

Some benches....

And 3DMark 11

P5557

Graphics Score
5485

Physics Score
6045

Combined Score
5439

CPU @ 3.9Ghz http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3816182

I going with this because all i see on on this forum at the min is intel intel intel i was just curious to see if there are many AMD fans still out there

Wait until / if and when its 'conclusively' confirmed Piledriver has made gains on Intel, things will get very interesting then, i'm already preparing the popcorn.

I wonder what they make of my Thuban @ 4Ghz mashing the 2500K @ 4.5Ghz in x264 encoding, And the FX-8 mashing my Thuban... And then there is the wPrime bench, love to see the 2500K beat that @ 4Ghz.

 

[Marine-RX179]

My ancient PC which still in use today:
AMD Athlon 64 3500+
MSI K9N Ultra
OCZ DDR2 PC2-5300 667MHz 1GB
Sapphire X1600XT 256MB
Maxtor 120GB HDD
Corsair CX400 PSU

 

[Martini1991]

I wonder what they make of my Thuban @ 4Ghz mashing the 2500K @ 4.5Ghz in x264 encoding.

That's nothing.

My 1055T was a daemon clocker with the Crosshair IV Formula.
4.375GHZ with a 3.3GHZ CPU NB.
4GB 1600MHZ CL6 (Could also do 1400MHZ CL5)

That'd beat down quite a few i5's in heavily threaded situations.

Intel owners aren't AMD haters, most of them are probably AMD fans.

 

[Marine-RX179]

That's nothing.

My 1055T was a daemon clocker with the CH IV.
4.375GHZ with a 3.3GHZ CPU NB.

That'd beat down quite a few i5's in heavily threaded situations.

But I thought when comparing AMD vs Intel on encoding (or other thread-heavy tasks) and gaming, it's always the matter of whether the user value finish encoding (or other thread-heavy tasks) a bit faster, or value having higher frame rate in game more. And then it is a case of trading light-thread performance for better heavy thread performance if going for AMD Phenom II 6 cores over Intel i5. Personally I would take 10-20 higher fps on gaming over finishing encoding say...10-15mins faster (which I would do overnight anyway if I was to do encoding)...but that just my opinion. If people only use heavy-threaded software for work all the time and don't use the PC for gaming, then the Phenom II X6 would probably make a better choice.

 

[Martini1991]

But I thought when comparing AMD vs Intel on encoding and gaming, it's always the matter of whether the user value finish encoding (or other thread-heavy tasks) a bit faster, or value having higher frame rate in game more.

I'm kind of confused at the point you're making there, you've lost me.

The i5 will give consistently good/excellent performance.
The Thuban would give consistent performance lower than the i5, but same/better in the heavy threaded situations, although with the clocking advantage of the i5's, it's not crystal clear.

 

[humbug]

That's nothing.

My 1055T was a daemon clocker with the Crosshair IV Formula.
4.375GHZ with a 3.3GHZ CPU NB.
4GB 1600MHZ CL6 (Could also do 1400MHZ CL5)

That'd beat down quite a few i5's in heavily threaded situations.

Intel owners aren't AMD haters, most of them are probably AMD fans.

Oh i believe it, get a decent air cooler on this, crank it up to 4.3Ghz, ramp up the CPU NB up to 3Ghz (have stress tested there already, a little warm but stable) clock the RAM at decent speeds..... and its an absolute rendering / encoding / math monster for no money.

 

[bemaniac]

Hey that 1090T I totally would have bought over the i920 last generation if I'd have known it stacked up so well! What an awesome processor and cheaper too.

 

[Martini1991]

Oh i believe it, get a decent air cooler on this, crank it up to 4.3Ghz, ramp up the CPU NB up to 3Ghz (have stress tested there already, a little warm but stable) clock the RAM at decent speeds..... and its an absolute rendering / encoding / math monster for no money.

I'd have to see it to believe it.
I had it under a 120.3 RAD and mine had a stupid low VID at 1.15v, "Cherry picked" if you will.

Hey that 1090T I totally would have bought over the i920 last generation if I'd have known it stacked up so well! What an awesome processor and cheaper too.

The i7 920 was out almost 2 years beforehand, a clocked i7 920 has lesser/same heavily threaded performance, but a lot better elsewhere, also AMD with Thuban lacked some instruction sets such as SSSE3 etc.

 

[Marine-RX179]

I'm kind of confused at the point you're making there, you've lost me.

The i5 will give consistently good/excellent performance.
The Thuban would give consistent performance lower than the i5, but same/better in the heavy threaded situations, although with the clocking advantage of the i5's, it's not crystal clear.

Ah sorry...brain fart. I think was thinking of Phenom II X6 vs last gen i5/i7. I think Phenom II X6 was a bit faster on encoding than last gen i5?

 

[Martini1991]

Ah sorry...brain fart. I think was thinking of Phenom II X6 vs last gen i5/i7. I think Phenom II X6 was a bit faster on encoding than last gen i5?

Definitely.
A clocked Thuban could leave a lynfield dead in its tracks.
There was only a 20-30% IPC deficit IIRC.
That was made up by 50% more cores.

 

[humbug]

I'd have to see it to believe it.
I had it under a 120.3 RAD and mine had a stupid low VID at 1.15v, "Cherry picked" if you will.



The i7 920 was out almost 2 years beforehand, a clocked i7 920 has lesser/same heavily threaded performance, but a lot better elsewhere, also AMD with Thuban lacked some instruction sets such as SSSE3 etc.

SSE3 and SSE4 are perfectly functional on all AMD CPU's.

It's actually software, mostly benching software made with Intel's compiler is where the problem lays.

Intel's compiler blocks or does not use SSE3 and SSE4 on any chip other than Intel, giving completely skewed results.

There was a huge legal palaver about it (among other things), AMD took Intel to town over it, Intel settled with AMD out of court.

There was still a ruling that Intel must inform software creators that there compiler discriminates against any CPU other that Intel, and refund the cost of recompiling with other compilers should the software company chose to do so.

Intel do now inform software developers of this, they call it (optimising for Intel CPU's)

 

[Martini1991]

SSSE3 not SSE3, and no they're not.
PCSX2, a Phenom II can't use SSE4 mode or SSSE3 mode since the CPU doesn't contain those instruction sets. The Phenom II has a SSE4, but it's something like SSE4.A or something and not the one that allows for a speed boost.

Don't care too much for the Intel/AMD compiler lark, but it's mainly AMD's CPU's simply don't have the IPC, rather than software, which is why the Phenom II > Bulldozer, unless every software developer made their software anti Bulldozer.

 

[humbug]

SSSE3 not SSE3, and no they're not.
PCSX2, a Phenom II can't use SSE4 mode or SSSE3 mode since the CPU doesn't contain those instruction sets. The Phenom II has a SSE4, but it's something like SSE4.A or something and not the one that allows for a speed boost.

Don't care too much for the Intel/AMD compiler lark, but it's mainly AMD's CPU's simply don't have the IPC, rather than software, which is why the Phenom II > Bulldozer, unless every software developer made their software anti Bulldozer.

Not every software performs badly on Bulldozer, but yes Bulldozer has IPC issues.

Now if you look at this slide you can see where those issues stem from and the improvements made, because of the shared FP ecte.... its still not going to match K10 clock for clock (should get close), that's not what there aiming for tho, it seems. there aiming for very high clocks.

 

[Martini1991]

My care level for a BD performance discussion is nil sorry, it's been done to death, and doesn't change anything.
Back on topic I guess.