• 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.

Haswell -E Core i7-5960X, 5930K, 5820K specifications

Hey I was excited for the greenlit guys like you :D

Someone should totally make a band with neon green costumes and call themselves The Greenlit Guys now.

Anyway on topic:

qNHnVsAl.jpg
 
vsg28 said:
Hey I was excited for the greenlit guys like you :D

Someone should totally make a band with neon green costumes and call themselves The Greenlit Guys now.

Anyway on topic:

qNHnVsAl.jpg
Click to expand...

I'm guessing the sweet spot with this combo will be somewhere between 2600 and 3200 for a well tuned system without ramming too much voltage through the CPU, but will see!
 
Ya, but you can't hack those 3 5960x chips in front :D

Steiger Dynamics is also a ridiculous HTPC company- the price they sell their products at, I bet they do have all that in there.
 
I need money :-D...After holiday days Im almost without cash :-/. So it will be very, very hard save some money for 5960x+DDR4
 
LambChop said:
Andy, have you posted anything positive since you joined up on this thread ?
Click to expand...

Why would I if I don't see anything positive?

Hmm, actually.....

I guess at least Intel are releasing a Haswell that's properly soldered.

At least they're finally releasing an 8 core unlocked CPU.... But charging £900+ for it.

Sorry dude, it's just close to impossible.
 
When the i3's and i5's can beat AMD's best CPU's. Intel can charge what they like for their higher end CPU's. It's only fair to be mad at AMD as well for not bringing any competition in the high end CPU space. Intel prices would be a lot more competitive in that space if AMD had anything to offer as an alternative.

Hopefully AMD's rumored 2016 new architecture will once again be able to challenge Intel. Until then i5 / i7 is the best performance / price there is. If you want the best, you have the pay the price unfortunately. For everything else there is i5 and i7.
 
Boomstick777 said:
When the i3's and i5's can beat AMD's best CPU's. Intel can charge what they like for their higher end CPU's. It's only fair to be mad at AMD as well for not bringing any competition in the high end CPU space. Intel prices would be a lot more competitive in that space if AMD had anything to offer as an alternative.

Hopefully AMD's rumored 2016 new architecture will once again be able to challenge Intel. Until then i5 / i7 is the best performance / price there is. If you want the best, you have the pay the price unfortunately. For everything else there is i5 and i7.
Click to expand...

Jesus christ how do I even begin to address that mountain of BS?

Firstly. No I3 or I5 can beat a high clocked AMD FX 8. Well, not unless we derp the benchmarks and cheat by running things that don't support the entire CPU. My tests you'll see soon are running an entire CPU.

Sorry Boom, I gave up raving about bits of a CPU ages ago. If you want to sit and bang on about one to four cores? be my guest, but trust me, when I smash out the info I've been collecting for the past few days you're going to end up with egg on your boat race.

Times have changed. Software has changed, no one has noticed because they're too obsessed with their quad core CPUs.

As for price and performance? Hmm. Right now as far as I see it the only thing Intel are selling that's actually worth the price of admission is that Pentium Anniversary thing. And that's only because you can pair it with a low end discrete GPU and actually compete with AMD at the lower end of the performance spectrum (where they absolutely dominate and are raking it in).

Intel cut out the rest of the market by locking up pretty much everything and only allowing unlocks if you pay for them.

Anything else? The I7 is the only CPU that can, when everything is fair, completely beat an AMD FX 8. And at £230 that's over double what the AMD costs, so weighing in the price and the performance? sorry man, still no cigar.

Here, let me show you the sort of tricks people pull to make AMD look bad.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2014/06/24/intel-pentium-g3258-review/1

Let's use that review as an example. OK, so what we do first is run a test that is absolutely assured to run like dog poo on AMD...

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2014/06/24/intel-pentium-g3258-review/5

OK. Skyrim and Shogun 2. Both games only use two cores, both games want IPC. So what you do is clock up the AMD because you know in this test the Intel will probably win due to the crap software.

Please take careful note... AMD FX 8320 @ 4.8ghz. OK? got it? right, now look at this page..

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2014/06/24/intel-pentium-g3258-review/6

Cinebench R15. AMD FX 8350 @... Hmm, hang on !!!! 4ghz.

Wait. What happened there?!?!

I'll explain.

Intel release a CPU and the butt rammers need to make the AMD look bad so they can make Intel look like knights in shining armor. So what they do is overclock the AMD in a test that they know it has no chance of winning to make the AMD look bad. Then, they revert the AMD back to stock in R15 to make it look bad.

Every one knows that an AMD 8350 will absolutely maul a crap little Intel dual core in Cinebench. But that site have made that incredibly muddy and have deliberately warped the results to make the Intel look good.

You see, this is the sort of thing you need to pay attention to. I know first hand that had they used multi threaded software in that test the poxy poo little dual core Intel, regardless of the fact you can overclock it, would have gotten absolutely slaughtered.

Any game that actually uses cores would have flown on AMD.

And this, Boom, is the sort of media twisted rubbish that I take exception to.

It's nothing to do with being a fan boy. It's everything to do with not allowing myself to be conned by con men.
 
If I could be bothered, I'd digest your post and "beat" you Andy (As a lot of it is twisting and BS as per)
But you're not worth it frankly, so I'll go for a hit and run.

The FX83 shows its results at stock AND 4.8GHZ (As all the CPU's in that chart do) in Cinebench.

Now I bow out, on my high horse (I expect a twisted and long winded reply, don't bother)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom