AMD Vs. Intel

Cookeh · 22 Nov 2010 at 21:01

Big.Wayne said:
Alistair, I feel the time is close when you finally get a new machine to replace the socket 478 that has served you well all these years! . . .

How much money do you have to spend right now? . . . and what kit have you got to sell? . . . What screen res do you game at and what GPU do you use atm?

Yes, I've had a fair few threads over the time

I keep saying I'll wait because XXXX is coming out soon and may affect prices/bring out something more suitable for me xD

By December I will have approx £350 to spend on the PC - but I don't really want to spend all of that, being a student is hard

I game at 1440x900, and use a HD3850 512mb 8x AGP graphics card.
Could sell whole of old rig when I get new one, but would need to purchse new one first as I am somewhat dependant on a PC now (one of my courses is research based for the next 3 months and nearly all PC based).

Other kit I could (and have been trying to) flog includes a Antec Sonata II case and 2x 40GB S-ATA HDD's.

Kobi · 22 Nov 2010 at 22:02

Awwwwwww! You guys have just thrown a spanner in the works again. Im getting as bad as a woman, cant make my mind up haha. Well, off to make another wish list again.

Although, from what i been reading, an i5 is better for gaming and amd cpu's are better for multitasking?

Cookeh · 23 Nov 2010 at 16:13

Double post FTL

Cookeh · 23 Nov 2010 at 16:13

Kobi said:
Awwwwwww! You guys have just thrown a spanner in the works again. Im getting as bad as a woman, cant make my mind up haha. Well, off to make another wish list again.

Although, from what i been reading, an i5 is better for gaming and amd cpu's are better for multitasking?

Half right.
i5 tends to be the best cpu bang for buck around atm.
But if you have a highly threaded application, i.e. something that uses 4 cores and beyond AMD X6 is the way to go.

Big.Wayne · 23 Nov 2010 at 17:44

Cookeh said:
i5 tends to be the best cpu bang for buck around atm

Price vs Performance "Parity"

Jony27 · 23 Nov 2010 at 17:53

may i ask why you divided by 218? and that iron man looks pale

Big.Wayne · 23 Nov 2010 at 18:08

Hey Jony27,

the division is to reduce the performance figures down "equally" so that they could be displayed on the Bang4Buckometer and calibrates price vs performance parity to AMD® so you can see what a whooping disproportionate "premium" Intel® charge for the extra performance!

The character you are referring too is actually Zion-Man . . . a Bang4Buck hero from the days of old . . . I think Marvel comics later used him as source of inspiration for one of their comic book heroes with a similar sounding name and look!

scrlk · 23 Nov 2010 at 18:11

It was only a matter of time before Big.Wayne flooded with thread with green.

Big.Wayne · 23 Nov 2010 at 18:16

Hey Vinni3 @H|H . . . leave me out of it please!

Look at the hardware, examine the facts etc . . . I've got nothing to do with it!

Cookeh · 23 Nov 2010 at 18:20

Ah true Wayne, I've not really thought to divide it.
Sure many people are grateful for the time you put into stuff - even if you are tempting us to the Dark side

Cookeh · 23 Nov 2010 at 18:38

Wondering if anyone can clear up the whole i5 branded ram.

For example, you see stuff such as Corsair 4GB (2x2GB) PC3-12800 XMS3 i5 for a name, when one cannot see any difference between ones branded i5 and those not.

Also, I heard that AMD uses different volts for ram? Does this matter at all, or is it true etc?

jakesnake · 23 Nov 2010 at 19:05

i love that graph, it proves all along wot ive been saying, that the i5 isnt bang for buck because of the price to setup a system using it.

should show it to "Liampope" he parades around shouting his mouth off calling it bang for buck just because its a little cheaper than an i7. its so funny. he once speced a £1500 rig and called it bang for buck because it was an i5 dressed up with a sidewinder keyboard and a blueray burner. he seriously doesnt get the theory of it. he thinks that if its cheaper its bang for buck no matter wot the price is. LOL wat a cowboy.

jakesnake said:
an i5 rig isnt bang for buck because the price difference between it and an i7 isnt substantial enough. an Athlon II X4 Quad & 460 768mb rig for gaming is bang for buck.
the rest of your post is just waffle

Cookeh · 23 Nov 2010 at 19:29

jakesnake said:
i love that graph, it proves all along wot ive been saying, that the i5 isnt bang for buck because of the price to setup a system using it.

should show it to "Liampope" he parades around shouting his mouth off calling it bang for buck just because its a little cheaper than an i7. its so funny. he once speced a £1500 rig and called it bang for buck because it was an i5 dressed up with a sidewinder keyboard and a blueray burner. he seriously doesnt get the theory of it. he thinks that if its cheaper its bang for buck no matter wot the price is. LOL wat a cowboy.

Personal attack is not needed.
He has his own opinions, and tbh an i5+HD6850/6870 is an amazing rig for the price.
I think he claims its best bang-for-buck in a certain price range, not in general...

jakesnake · 23 Nov 2010 at 19:39

personal attack in big bold font HAHAHA why dont you just fire a flare gun out your window instead and alert the e-police.

Jony27 · 23 Nov 2010 at 19:57

i thought this forum was for people to get help for their rigs, for learning, and sharing different opinions but it seems that proving someone wrong is more important....

Cookeh · 23 Nov 2010 at 20:07

jakesnake said:
personal attack in big bold font HAHAHA why dont you just fire a flare gun out your window instead and alert the e-police.

What is your problem? Any reason for this post and the one I highlighted?
If you have nothing nice or relevant to say don't say a thing.

cumulusjames · 23 Nov 2010 at 20:08

People are entitled to thier opinions and when someone starts a thrad like this it is to get other peoples opions. Freindly debate, yes, Personal attacks GROW THE **** up.

Cookeh · 23 Nov 2010 at 20:33

cumulusjames said:
People are entitled to thier opinions and when someone starts a thrad like this it is to get other peoples opions. Freindly debate, yes, Personal attacks GROW THE **** up.

So very true.

Porcelina · 23 Nov 2010 at 20:36

Seeing that this thread, after the initial posts and Big.Wayne's wonderful graphs notwithstanding, offer little of value, I will offer this little hijack.

To Big.Wayne. What kind of premium for performance would you consider to be good value? Given that I think it is fair to invoke the law of diminishing returns, I would not think that you would ever see a pure percent to percent ratio when upgrading performance. However, I am curious as to what you would consider a good ratio when choosing to go for more performance?

Looking at the Intel vs AMD graph, Intel offer a 41% increase of performance at the cost of 86% increase in price.

I find this to be rather expected. And it is definitely a lot better than what we find for ratios when going for more performance in GPUs.

Kobi · 23 Nov 2010 at 20:52

Ohhhh my, if this gets anymore heated, people will be throwing CPU's about like throwing stars.