• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

GTA5 CPU Benchmarks (I3 beats FX yet again)

Didn’t Microsoft say they are releasing the new Fable game for free around the same time as Win 10 (Maybe at the end of the year). That’s Dx12 out the box.

I doubt older games like BF4 will see DX12, support is soon to end on that game. But I bet DICE will be one of the first developers to move on towards DX12. It wouldn’t surprise me if DX12 is brought to to the Battle Front Star Wars game.
 
Erm? you haven't read anything in this thread have you?

Is this you mmj_uk?

micv9t.jpg


:D
 
Apparently instead of 8 really slow cores AMD's next flagship is rumored to have 16 slow cores lol.

You really have to question what the hell they are doing at this point. I mean when Intel realised that the Pentium IV was a dead end and they needed to go back to the Pentium III and develop from there they lost a lot of ground and the Athlon 64 and later chips just destroyed the Pentium IV and Pentium D on price/performance, but they managed it in the end and produced the "Core2" and later the "Core i" architecture.

AMD know they have to do this, they should have started working on a worthy successor to Phenom II as soon as faildozer flopped but no, they went with faildriver and are still trying to polish their turd, even planning to add on twice the turd, for gods sake guys it isn't going to work, stop trying lol.

This is akin to Mario World where the bad guys keep making bigger cannons that fire bigger yet slower bullets, but Mario has small/fast fireballs. Just throw fireballs at him, they work.
 
And what's the point of that when the 990 board has more PCIE bandwidth than the Z97?

Does it really though? I mean it has more lanes yes but they are half the speed (PCI-E 2.0 vs 3.0).

By comparison the 990FX lets you run one 16x card, two 16x cards, or two 8x cards and one 4x card. The Z97 let's you run one 16x card, two 8x cards, or one 8x card and two 4x cards.

If you want to use one card the Z97 offers more bandwidth.
If you want to use two cards they offer the same bandwidth.
If you want to use three card the Z97 offers more bandwidth.
If you want to use four cards buy an enthusiast board.
 
Apparently instead of 8 really slow cores AMD's next flagship is rumored to have 16 slow cores lol.

You really have to question what the hell they are doing at this point. I mean when Intel realised that the Pentium IV was a dead end and they needed to go back to the Pentium III and develop from there they lost a lot of ground and the Athlon 64 and later chips just destroyed the Pentium IV and Pentium D on price/performance, but they managed it in the end and produced the "Core2" and later the "Core i" architecture.

AMD know they have to do this, they should have started working on a worthy successor to Phenom II as soon as faildozer flopped but no, they went with faildriver and are still trying to polish their turd, even planning to add on twice the turd, for gods sake guys it isn't going to work, stop trying lol.

This is akin to Mario World where the bad guys keep making bigger cannons that fire bigger yet slower bullets, but Mario has small/fast fireballs. Just throw fireballs at him, they work.
AMD doesn't have the luxury of Intel's R&D budget, which also means they don't have the luxury of moving to the next technology node every two years. Intel made a mistake with Netburst and that allowed AMD to pull ahead but that was a rare thing. When you compare the two companies it's amazing that it happened at all.

Fortunately for AMD, the last few manufacturing nodes have barely improved anything on the CPU side (the main benefit has been gaining extra space to be used for iGPU cores), so they have a chance to compete still. Whether that will happen though, who knows? DirectX 12 may help them - they've obviously got a nice head-start on Intel in the multithreaded front, even if they're abandoning their "module" approach. I wonder how good their HyperThreading implementation will be. As far as I know, HyperThreading hasn't changed since Bloomfield (I haven't read anything about it or seen benchmarks that show it) so it's possible that there's a decent opportunity there for them.
 
Ooh, great to hear, I had missed that :D

A true quad/hex core with hyperthreading will be much better than a multi module CPU without HT :D

There is a post in this room somewhere about them making a 32 Core 64 Thread CPU, no doubt thats for servers but if we get a 16 Core 32 Thread CPU for Desktop i'll be pretty chuffed.
 
Does it really though? I mean it has more lanes yes but they are half the speed (PCI-E 2.0 vs 3.0).

By comparison the 990FX lets you run one 16x card, two 16x cards, or two 8x cards and one 4x card. The Z97 let's you run one 16x card, two 8x cards, or one 8x card and two 4x cards.

If you want to use one card the Z97 offers more bandwidth.
If you want to use two cards they offer the same bandwidth.
If you want to use three card the Z97 offers more bandwidth.
If you want to use four cards buy an enthusiast board.

PCIE 3 was just more snake oil and has yet to prove its worth.

As I said, frivolous rubbish that makes little to no difference yet more £. Typical Intel.

When it comes down to what you actually need? crap, even X58 is still more than current provided you RAID 0 two SSDs to make up for the fact it doesn't have SATA 3 which is about the only thing I would want.
 
SATA 3 was the only thing i missed on my X58 run ^^^^ it does slow an SSD noticeably.

But we are talking about a 990FX Chipset here and i still don't see how i would be better off with a new Intel Chipset.

PCIe 3 makes no difference to my single 290
 
yeah x58 would still be going if it had sata 3 for sure :)

Still if AMD is perfect for everything i am struggling to see why even the 5820k has caught up and overtaken the 9590 in sales :o (slight edit for context)

you know since it's such a rip off and full of frivolous carp :p


jokes aside I do hope AMD actually hurry up and release a replacement for piledriver
 
Last edited:
yeah x58 would still be going if it had sata 3 for sure :)

Still if AMD is perfect for everything i am struggling to see why even the 5820k has caught up and overtaken the 9590

you know since it's such a rip off and full of frivolous carp :p


jokes aside I do hope AMD actually hurry up and release a replacement for piledriver

The 5820k is actually useless to me given how few PCIE lanes it has. I run two Titan Blacks, an X2 sound card and soon to be an X4 PCIE SSD.

The 5820k would crumble, it's a mere toy.
 
The 5820k is actually useless to me given how few PCIE lanes it has. I run two Titan Blacks, an X2 sound card and soon to be an X4 PCIE SSD.

The 5820K has 28 lanes, take out the sound card/SSD that leaves 22 which is more than enough for 8x SLI unless I'm missing something. The 5820K is supposed to be good for up to three GPUs or dual GPUs with an expansion card or two, it's only quad SLI/CF it can't do :confused:
 
SATA 6 Gb/s is kinda useful but by no means a deal breaker - hell, it's on its way to being replaced by NVMe for SSDs anyway (and storage HDDs don't need SATA 6 Gb/s).

The fact that X58 doesn't have it isn't a problem at all.
 
The 5820K has 28 lanes, take out the sound card/SSD that leaves 22 which is more than enough for 8x SLI unless I'm missing something. The 5820K is supposed to be good for up to three GPUs or dual GPUs with an expansion card or two, it's only quad SLI/CF it can't do :confused:

yeah and if your're planning quad anything you have the money for the next chip up which can do it. Or you can sell it all buy a 9590 and a crosshair V :rolleyes:
 
PCIE 3 was just more snake oil and has yet to prove its worth.

As I said, frivolous rubbish that makes little to no difference yet more £. Typical Intel.

When it comes down to what you actually need? crap, even X58 is still more than current provided you RAID 0 two SSDs to make up for the fact it doesn't have SATA 3 which is about the only thing I would want.
For those still running X58, the option to stick in a hex core chip like the 5650 gives the platform a whole new lease of life for very little money.
 
The 5820k is actually useless to me given how few PCIE lanes it has. I run two Titan Blacks, an X2 sound card and soon to be an X4 PCIE SSD.

Absolute rubbish it's all in your head, the 5820K is perfectly fine for 2-way SLI you'll only see any difference if you're running out of VRAM and texture swapping is occuring (which will massively impact performance regardless of your PCI-E speed), the difference between 8x/8x and 16x/16x at PCI-E 3.0 is going to be negligible in normal use.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom