Intel CPU Pricing

koooowweeee · 6 Mar 2017 at 18:10

Problem with AMD is there's always problems. GPUs have always had driver issues and now the new CPU has problems. With Intel and nvidia they have always just worked for me.

humbug · 6 Mar 2017 at 18:20

koooowweeee said:
Problem with AMD is there's always problems. GPUs have always had driver issues and now the new CPU has problems. With Intel and nvidia they have always just worked for me.

That's in your head, i have had a GTX 970 for getting on 2 years, great GPU and flawless with its Drivers, i had an R9 290 for 2 years before it, also a great GPU and its drivers have been just as flawless.

Honestly when i see people go on about AMD drivers these days i think they are just regurgitating what is a popular way for brand loyalists to troll AMD, its getting really transparent and tiresome.

I would by an AMD GPU tomorrow if they had one competitive in the range i'm looking for, as it is they don't, so i'm just as happy to buy a GTX 1070, if you want to hate on AMD don't follow on the same old worn out crap, be critical of the fact that thier top of the line GPU currently is the £200 RX 480, then you would be right.

koooowweeee · 6 Mar 2017 at 18:35

humbug said:
That's in your head, i have had a GTX 970 for getting on 2 years, great GPU and flawless with its Drivers, i had an R9 290 for 2 years before it, also a great GPU and its drivers have been just as flawless.

Honestly when i see people go on about AMD drivers these days i think they are just regurgitating what is a popular way for brand loyalists to troll AMD, its getting really transparent and tiresome.

I would by an AMD GPU tomorrow if they had one competitive in the range i'm looking for, as it is they don't, so i'm just as happy to buy a GTX 1070, if you want to hate on AMD don't follow on the same old worn out crap, be critical of the fact that thier top of the line GPU currently is the £200 RX 480, then you would be right.

Defiantly not in my head. It's from many of AMD fans posts. The one time I did buy a AMD GPU I had problems with the drivers straight away. Built a PC for someone and the same thing again. Maybe it's not as common as it's made out to be but they have had many of problems in the past.

Cyber-Mav · 6 Mar 2017 at 18:35

Rx 480 has issues itself with throttling and instability. Not a case of amd being competitive. Amd will always be cheaper since they provide a poor quality product, service and user experience compared to the competition.

awaybreaktoday · 6 Mar 2017 at 18:35

Firestar_3x said:
Clock speed isn't a measurement of performance?, so if we had one 4690k operating at 3ghz and another operating at 4ghz the performance would be the same?

I understand what you are saying, architecture and efficiency matter, the 1700 isn't efficient enough to make up its core frequency deficit in games like FSX, single core performance is king and for this reason the 7700k is the best choice over a 1700.

Your previous comment about failing to understand why someone would pick a 7700k vs a 17000 is ignorant.

How long has FSX been around? How long has the 7700K been around? How was FSX played when the 7700K did not exist? I had no problem playing FSX on a i7 [email protected] on 3 1920x1200 monitors. Should I not have been playing any games before the waste of money 7700K came out.

i7 920 to i7 4790K = Awesome performance increase all round
i7 4790K to Ryzen = Gaming (3440x1440), stream (1080P HD), record games (1440P HD) all at same time, let me leave my torrent vm running in back ground. core count, kubernetes/coreos testing, windows 2016 server kubernetes testing, CI testing. 8 cores is bloody awesome for productivity, can also game on it to.
i7 4790K to 7700K = ????? why would you need to do that?

Drollic · 6 Mar 2017 at 18:43

Cyber-Mav said:
Rx 480 has issues itself with throttling and instability. Not a case of amd being competitive. Amd will always be cheaper since they provide a poor quality product, service and user experience compared to the competition.

That's strange as Nvidia took months to sort out proper 144hz support just recently. Desktop flicker, black screen upon exiting certain games etc. This is on over £1100+ worth of gpu and monitor at current prices

humbug · 6 Mar 2017 at 18:48

koooowweeee said:
Defiantly not in my head. It's from many of AMD fans posts. The one time I did buy a AMD GPU I had problems with the drivers straight away. Built a PC for someone and the same thing again. Maybe it's not as common as it's made out to be but they have had many of problems in the past.

Cyber-Mav said:
Rx 480 has issues itself with throttling and instability. Not a case of amd being competitive. Amd will always be cheaper since they provide a poor quality product, service and user experience compared to the competition.

You are turning this into an AMD bashing thread, don't buy AMD because they always have problems, because they are cheaply made, because they are always this and that....

Making blanket statements and outright bashing the vendor is typically the default fall-back when their agenda fails in an intelligent debate, you're now just running the thread into the gutter and off topic.

Debate the CPUs at hand, don't make up a whole lot of crap to detract because you can't fault the subject of our debate. that is what you are doing and you can deny it until you're blue in the face while continuing to do it.
If you do carry on i'll start RTM'ing, stop bashing, stick to the topic.

Firestar_3x · 6 Mar 2017 at 19:01

awaybreaktoday said:
How long has FSX been around? How long has the 7700K been around? How was FSX played when the 7700K did not exist? I had no problem playing FSX on a i7 [email protected] on 3 1920x1200 monitors. Should I not have been playing any games before the waste of money 7700K came out.

I think you miss the point somewhat so instead of a proper answer have this one:

Probably the same way Farcry and Crysis was played when it came out.........

koooowweeee · 6 Mar 2017 at 20:03

humbug said:
You are turning this into an AMD bashing thread, don't buy AMD because they always have problems, because they are cheaply made, because they are always this and that....

Making blanket statements and outright bashing the vendor is typically the default fall-back when their agenda fails in an intelligent debate, you're now just running the thread into the gutter and off topic.

Debate the CPUs at hand, don't make up a whole lot of crap to detract because you can't fault the subject of our debate. that is what you are doing and you can deny it until you're blue in the face while continuing to do it.
If you do carry on i'll start RTM'ing, stop bashing, stick to the topic.

Not at all. Have a read back. I'm just replying to people commenting on what I said.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 6 Mar 2017 at 20:46

humbug said:
It has Broadwell - Haswell - Devils Canoyn +3% IPC, it is a tad better than Haswell, every benchmark outside of Games show exactly that, you have been reading the same stuff i have about wrong PStates, treating Virtual cores as Logical, parking the wrong cores and so on.... when less than all threads are loaded.

Teething problems CAT, give it time to mature and get all the necessary fixes and patching.

X99 was similarly problematic in its infancy.

Unfortunately looking at more testing of one or two games I play,its more like Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge level,and some people on forums even tried Windows 7,disabling SMT and using one CCX. The issue is I didn't expect AMD to match Intel in these titles,but at the same time I did expect it to be faster than what I have.

I might just wait for Zen 2 TBH.

Troezar · 6 Mar 2017 at 21:24

Drollic said:
That's strange as Nvidia took months to sort out proper 144hz support just recently. Desktop flicker, black screen upon exiting certain games etc. This is on over £1100+ worth of gpu and monitor at current prices

I have to say as good as my 1070 is I've had a lot more game crashing on Nvidia than I did with xf 7970s.

sprite1275 · 6 Mar 2017 at 21:43

The old AMD gpu crap drivers quote. Love it.

My 290X lightning must be an nvidea card in disguise as I've had zero problems with it for 2 years.

Panos · 6 Mar 2017 at 22:37

Drollic said:
That's strange as Nvidia took months to sort out proper 144hz support just recently. Desktop flicker, black screen upon exiting certain games etc. This is on over £1100+ worth of gpu and monitor at current prices

Ahh 6 months took Nvidia to resolve this issue with my GTX1080
And still remembering the rage posts in the official forums.

But who forgot also the 5 drivers in 7 days last october? breaking everything even Facebook browsing?
(due to the gif issues).

On the contrary both the 295X2 and the Nano, run without issue, while the latter has received a humongous perf boost of 10% between 16.8.3 and 17.2.2 alone.

As to those who say AMD is cheap, I urge them to pay a visit at the big long discussion in the Cuda programming forum at the official Nvidia website.
And see the dismay of the people there using the nvidia SMI and the bandwith benchmark, showing the true performance of the Nvidia cheap crap VRAM is using on their cards, including the 1080 and the TXP.

humbug · 6 Mar 2017 at 23:22

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Unfortunately looking at more testing of one or two games I play,its more like Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge level,and some people on forums even tried Windows 7,disabling SMT and using one CCX. The issue is I didn't expect AMD to match Intel in these titles,but at the same time I did expect it to be faster than what I have.

I might just wait for Zen 2 TBH.

You didn't read what you quoted before replying to it, here it is again....

humbug said:
It has Broadwell - Haswell - Devils Canoyn +3% IPC, it is a tad better than Haswell, every benchmark outside of Games show exactly that, you have been reading the same stuff i have about wrong PStates, treating Virtual cores as Logical, parking the wrong cores and so on.... when less than all threads are loaded.

Teething problems CAT, give it time to mature and get all the necessary fixes and patching.

X99 was similarly problematic in its infancy.

Stanners · 6 Mar 2017 at 23:34

Let's leave the AMD/Nvidia rubbish out of this.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 7 Mar 2017 at 00:47

humbug said:
You didn't read what you quoted before replying to it, here it is again....

People have tried testing under Windows 7,with SMT off,using one CCX,etc in one or two games I am interested in,and it confirms what I have seen in some reviews - my IB Xeon E3 1230 V2,seems to be faster(or no worse) in these games. They seem to be some of the worst for Ryzen I think. If I want more performance I think I need to get a SKL/KL CPU it seems - when Ryzen has poor performance in games,it regresses to SB to IB level at times. Sadly it is in a game or two I do play,so for me to buy one not really improve performance,unless the dev can find some way of doing it and sadly I think they won't bother going from history!

The issue is outside of Mass Effect:Andromeda,there is not much I will be that bothered about this year,well not enough for me to upgrade the system for. Even then even though it is a Frostbite 3 based title,Dragonage:Inquistion was fine with my CPU,so I expect Mass Effect:Andromeda should just about be OK.

I think I will probably just wait until next year TBH,when Ryzen 2 and Coffee Lake are out. Hopefully by then,we will have another Piledriver level or Phenom II level IPC increase over the initial CPU in the series,a more mature platform and hopefully more windows and games updates so Ryzen can perform better.

humbug · 7 Mar 2017 at 01:01

You're focusing on one thing, SMT, its not the only teething problem Zen has, do you think there is some sort of "game extension" that AMD is weak with? no.... the IPC is there in everything but games, there is no hardware reason why a CPU should be as good at productivity but fall behind in games only, if there was it would not beat the 6900K in both integer and floating point.

The only thing i can think of is some issue with the communication between the CPU and PCIe lanes, that would cause draw call latency which will reduce gaming performance, its likely given that this the first desktop CPU with SOC PCIe controllers and perhaps motherboard vendors need more time to understand the miscrocode.

Akagi · 7 Mar 2017 at 01:15

Intel have actually reduced their prices a bit haven't they? Not a representative amount, but a little bit.

humbug · 7 Mar 2017 at 01:33

Acme said:
Intel have actually reduced their prices a bit haven't they? Not a representative amount, but a little bit.

Dunno, good question.

FrozenShivers · 7 Mar 2017 at 02:00

Acme said:
Intel have actually reduced their prices a bit haven't they? Not a representative amount, but a little bit.

I thought that was select vendors, as opposed to Intel themselves (could be wrong though).