GTA5 CPU Benchmarks (I3 beats FX yet again)

[ALXAndy]

BIASED BIASED BIASED

ERMERGERD

BIASED

I'm an Intel user, and I think this guy's claims are BS. I'm an AMD user too, but I have 2x 6 core X79 systems (soon to be 3) and an 8320 system.

I put him on ignore ages ago. Only a noob will take the first set of benchmarks he sees and take them for gospel. He only posts to troll AMD users for a reaction and there's no talking sense to some one who doesn't understand sense in its rawest form.

I find the AMD owners to be far far far more bias than Dave frankly (Even though I think he's a bit of a numpty and is irrational and constantly over reaching, but then that's just testament to the discontent I have with people jumping to AMD's defense). Clawing and clawing, constantly.

Nonsense. I don't see AMD users going around starting threads to brag that when threaded properly their £100 CPUs are faster than Intel's £180 ones. All I ever see is AMD users rushing to defend their rigs when trolls like Dave post crap like this.

In fact come to think of it I don't think I've ever seen any AMD users post threads simply to troll Intel users and bait them like Dave has done here.

Why the guy still has posting rights is beyond me. No seriously, I absolutely can not find one legitimate reason why he can still post crap like this.

 

[Bonjour]

When I first read this thread, I thought 'oh dear, it's probably time for me to upgrade to an i7'. I started pricing up a few mobo / CPU combos, but then I thought I'd do a little further research, which made it apparent that I'd be unlikely to see such a large performance increase at 1440p.

I posted the 1440p benchmark simply because I thought others at the same resolution may find it useful.

 

[Martini1991]

Given how I've seen you posting Bonjour, I don't particularly believe you. But meh.

 

[ALXAndy]

When I first read this thread, I thought 'oh dear, it's probably time for me to upgrade to an i7'. I started pricing up a few mobo / CPU combos, but then I thought I'd do a little further research, which made it apparent that I'd be unlikely to see such a large performance increase at 1440p.

I posted the 1440p benchmark simply because I thought others at the same resolution may find it useful.

Sadly for me even when you put some one on ignore you still see their threads. Ignore should make them disappear completely but sadly not.

I viewed his initial post and there isn't even a link to back up his claims. Furthermore, there's no mention of what operating system is being ran and the FX series do not work properly in Windows 7. If the tests were done using Windows 7 then the CPU would be incredibly hobbled and the FX would not stand a chance.

Looking around at other benchmarks there is also no mention of what OS was used. This means the results are completely worthless to me.

Don't try explaining anything rational to Dave though. You're completely wasting your time. I suggest the ignore function. It's worked ok enough for me.

 

[Rroff]

Can't agree with people who are saying its all going to be ok when DX12/more efficient APIs are being used - developers will be able to divert extra CPU time to other areas of their games like AI, etc. rather than having to accommodate for time spent due to inefficiencies or actual CPU hogging in the rendering pipeline.

 

[Martini1991]

I find it hilarious when ALXAndy talks about irrationality.

 

[ALXAndy]

I find it hilarious when Martini drops in a little smug one liner.

 

[Bonjour]

Given how I've seen you posting Bonjour, I don't particularly believe you. But meh.

Could you explain, please? I'm slightly flumoxed.

 

[Martini1991]

Could you explain, please? I'm slightly flumoxed.

To me you've just came across as another AMD owner who's trying to convince himself his CPU is on par with a modern i5 in gaming, when the reality is that it isn't.

 

[spoffle]

Biased.
Happy Spoffle ?

Most of his claims are BS (Said as much previously), but I still find others to be as bad/worse. While Dave can talk crap (And does), there's an absolute truth in Intel have the higher performing CPU's, and this can come through in games, and while he may try and exaggerate, there's plenty of AMD owners who simply ignore it and pretend there's no truth in anything he'd say. Given the choice these people would take an FX83 over a modern i5 in gaming, despite the i5 being factually better. In order for one to do so, a bias must exist.

Yes! Now!

Of course, I don't disagree there, which is why I've got 2x 6 core Intel systems. AMD don't offer a performance level that I require, so for my high performance machines they aren't an option.

As Th0nt points out though, it's clear what the guy's trying to do, and that's stir for the sake of it.

Possibly Martini. I would be one of your bias defenders from the AMD camp (disregard my ownership of intel since P100 days) but regardless of the side of the fence you think people belong on - Dave has created a thread to stir and naturally you will get people who own them post to say if this statement is accurate!

Stating that the i3 beats them "again" just cements the lack of credibitiliy from the guy but as you put is aptly just read even your thoughts on him.

I want AMD to push performance in the CPU's as much as the next man. You cant win on this forum in the GPU or CPU as if you even oppose one item against intel or an nvidia component then you are a fanboy!

BIASED BIASED BIASED

ERMERGERD

BIASED

That aside, I do agree. You're not allowed to dislike the things that nVidia gets up to, for example, without people foaming at the mouth about it. I have issues with how nVidia does stuff in general.

I reassessed my views when they released the 9 series, as it looked like they'd changed, or at least start to change their ways, then the 970 issues came to light and it was apparent nothing had really changed. But I don't make crap up about them, I like dealing in facts.

 

[Martini1991]

Can't agree with people who are saying its all going to be ok when DX12/more efficient APIs are being used - developers will be able to divert extra CPU time to other areas of their games like AI, etc. rather than having to accommodate for time spent due to inefficiencies or actual CPU hogging in the rendering pipeline.

We'll have to see how it all plays out.

Think it's more unlikely we'll suddenly get better AI though.

 

[Martini1991]

Yes! Now!

Of course, I don't disagree there, which is why I've got 2x 6 core Intel systems. AMD don't offer a performance level that I require, so for my high performance machines they aren't an option.

I don't even want an ultra high performance part, AMD can offer me nothing over a mainstream i7 (Stretching perhaps, but they've not got an i5 equivalent I can use either,), they can't get their CPU's in anything that'll rival my Surface 3 Pro, or my Ultrabook.
Barring the "current" (As I know how much you hate the "Next gen" saying ) consoles, we haven't gotten any AMD devices, not through any Intel bias, but from a lack of equivalent products. We did have 2 AMD devices, an old tablet (Stolen, replaced with an Intel ; as there was nothing from AMD to compete) and an AMD Laptop (Which broke, and the replacement from Acer was an Intel)

Of course they have had 1 (2 if you're stretching) Ultrabooks in the past few years, but not now (And those had caveats that made a purchase moot)

On the GPU side, I own a 290X, but AMD has their own bag of crap to deal with, while not as bad as Nvidia, AMD are far and away from a "good" image with me. But I can fully accept that AMD have the inferior GPU's, and unlike some in the GPU forum, I don't need to pretend my 290X is better than it is. Finding it fairly old hat to be honest now.

 

[Scurburg]

Shocker as different testing methodologies and settings changes results.
Upmanship galore.
Shortsighted minefield.
Previously used sites now ignored shocker.

Etc etc.

I find the AMD owners to be far far far more bias than Dave frankly (Even though I think he's a bit of a numpty and is irrational and constantly over reaching, but then that's just testament to the discontent I have with people jumping to AMD's defense). Clawing and clawing, constantly.

Defending something is very different in its intent than attacking it, which is all dave does. I find it disappointing you think people defending these attacks are somehow worse than those doing the attacking. TBH that just doesnt make much sense to me. Are we supposed to just let dave's over exaggerated opinions go without question, even though they appear to be misguided?

I mean, even I was mislead by his first post, as it appeared an i3 was viable cheaper alternative for this game and out classed the AMD's. It seems this just isnt the case. I for one don't appreciate misinformation, which I think that is what dave often gives regarding amd cpus.

I don't think any of the defenders have done anything other than call dave out for his bias opinion and often dishonest tactics. IMO rightly so.

 

[Martini1991]

Can someone give me some benchmarks of an i3 getting smashed by GTA 5?
There's none in this thread that I can see (Then again, half of this thread is on my ignore list)

From all I can see it certainly is up there with the FX83/Lower/High depending on the testing methodology, which if you've got any common sense, is to be expected......... (As it is in *some* other games, but I certainly wouldn't ever recommend anyone buy an i3 over an FX83, in the same way you'll get the odd game which has an i5/FX83 parity, but the i5's still superior) But it's certainly not getting piledrivered (LOL)

Also, frame rates aren't the be all and end all. But apparently I'm one of the only people who mentions it (Despite my "alleged" bias)

 

[gpuerrilla]

Defending something is very different in its intent than attacking it, which is all dave does. I find it disappointing you think people defending these attacks are somehow worse than those doing the attacking. TBH that just doesnt make much sense to me. Are we supposed to just let dave's over exaggerated opinions go without question, even though they appear to be misguided?

Absolutely spot on Scurb! Martini seems a bit

I think Martini has just admitted he holds a grudge against AMD with his lack of products for them quite obvious. I too own a 290X and am happy enough even though I can see other people have issues making it far from perfect.

Before you get all 'defensive' though I too have a Surface Pro 3, two intel based latops and a C2D. I gave my nephew an i5 system I built - but hey none of this matters! I am an AMD 'defender' - really LOL.

Then again, half of this thread is on my ignore list)

Fantastic!

 

[Martini1991]

I don't have a grudge against AMD, they just have no products for me to buy. And you are an AMD defender (Although I can find you somewhat troll like, you seemingly love to bait, as you've just done). You seemingly pretend your FX83 holds parity with an i5.

 

[spoffle]

I don't even want an ultra high performance part, AMD can offer me nothing over a mainstream i7 (Stretching perhaps, but they've not got an i5 equivalent I can use either,), they can't get their CPU's in anything that'll rival my Surface 3 Pro, or my Ultrabook.
Barring the "current" (As I know how much you hate the "Next gen" saying ) consoles, we haven't gotten any AMD devices, not through any Intel bias, but from a lack of equivalent products. We did have 2 AMD devices, an old tablet (Stolen, replaced with an Intel ; as there was nothing from AMD to compete) and an AMD Laptop (Which broke, and the replacement from Acer was an Intel)

Of course they have had 1 (2 if you're stretching) Ultrabooks in the past few years, but not now (And those had caveats that made a purchase moot)

I'd certainly much prefer an AMD set up in something like a Surface (I've got a Samsung ATIV Pro at the moment) because the graphics would be much better, it's really a shame there isn't anything available.

On the GPU side, I own a 290X, but AMD has their own bag of crap to deal with, while not as bad as Nvidia, AMD are far and away from a "good" image with me. But I can fully accept that AMD have the inferior GPU's, and unlike some in the GPU forum, I don't need to pretend my 290X is better than it is. Finding it fairly old hat to be honest now.

I'm not saying AMD don't have their problems, it's more that the stuff nVidia gets up to often looks like it's malicious. I don't really have a problem when companies make mistakes when it looks like it's a mistake but most of the time the stuff nVidia does doesn't really look accidental.

As for old hat, I'm not really sure what you mean. The Titan X is really the only graphics card that's actually an upgrade to a 290X in terms of it being noticeable, unless it's for a specific game.

 

[ALXAndy]

Defending something is very different in its intent than attacking it, which is all dave does. I find it disappointing you think people defending these attacks are somehow worse than those doing the attacking. TBH that just doesnt make much sense to me. Are we supposed to just let dave's over exaggerated opinions go without question, even though they appear to be misguided?

I mean, even I was mislead by his first post, as it appeared an i3 was viable cheaper alternative for this game and out classed the AMD's. It seems this just isnt the case. I for one don't appreciate misinformation, which I think that is what dave often gives regarding amd cpus.

I don't think any of the defenders have done anything other than call dave out for his bias opinion and often dishonest tactics. IMO rightly so.

It's nothing new. It's why I very rarely even check the CPU portion of the forums now because it's always the same. Some Intel Witness posts a thread ****ging off AMD again and the users call it out, here we go again.

Why it's allowed to continue is just beyond me.

Can someone give me some benchmarks of an i3 getting smashed by GTA 5?
There's none in this thread that I can see (Then again, half of this thread is on my ignore list)

There are very few I3 gamers on this forum given that the I3 is derped and unable to overclock. I strongly doubt you will find any one to come along and run benchmarks for you.

I think those that bought the 6300 instead will be well versed by now and would have realised that the opening post was a nice big serving of BS again from an Intel Witness.

 

[gpuerrilla]

I certainly wouldn't ever recommend anyone buy an i3 over an FX83, ... But it's certainly not getting piledrivered (LOL)

Also, frame rates aren't the be all and end all.

This is all I said against Dave!

All you have highlighted is the usual i5 > FX which is not what this thread was about..

 

[ALXAndy]

I wonder how many I3s Dave has bought.