My Views on AMD vs Intel

infernox said:
It can barely Run source
Click to expand...

You think you have issues?
Don't even ask about my rig then :p

OnTopic:

Ive always played both sides, Ive had pretty much every combo one can think of.

Shortly Ill be going for a AMD/ATi new system - mainly because the pricing is so much better for the performance given. Secondly because Ive found ATi cards to last longer and clock better. Thirdly because of the longevity of AMD sockets.
 
For games there isn't a huge amount of difference, no. It's when it comes to things like video encoding/editing, developing, using virtual machines, and other things like that, that the differences really begin to show.
 
Gaming is not very cpu intensive. If you look at a high end, overclocked quad core processor from either side, you will indeed see no difference, as either is overspecified for the task.

If you run f@h, fea or cad software, video encoding (or is it transcoding?) there is a very much a difference.

I'd be most interested if anyone has a reference to why clock-for-clock performance varies considerably between processors. C2Q to X58's i7 featured an improved cache system, another channel for memory, hyperthreading and changing from fsb to qpi. I spent some time researching this around X58's release, but I have no idea whatsoever how amd's architecture compares to any of Intel's.

I can't work out how to google for "why is intel architecture faster than amd"
 
Si105 said:
I'm pretty sure a lot of people go for the i7's because they are better for SLi/xfire, thats what I heard anyway.
Click to expand...

i7 can run two 16x lanes and using usb3/sata3 has no impact on the lanes.

i5 can run two 8x lanes (or one 16x lane). Use one 16x lane whilst using usb3/sata3 and that lane becomes 8x due to the way the chip works.

This reduction to 8x makes zero difference unless you have a monster of a graphics card (minimum 5870, and even then it may not be noticeable).

Therefore running SLI or X-Fire with high end cards and wanting usb3/sata3 means an i5 is not really what you want.

I consider my rig to be very very fast, but I can't justify the £££ to have a 2 GPU rig, so aside from HT and a tiny performance increase from 3 channel ram I am not really missing out.


EDIT: As for the Intel/AMD and NVIDIA/ATI arguement, I simply don't care who I buy I just want good value for money. AMD have the hex chips at a good price, the i5/i7 is fairly well priced too but I won't be buying a new NVIDIA card at those prices as I simply cannot justify that much on what is just a pcb with a fan:p.
 
Last edited:
infernox said:
For curiosity im going to ask Cookeh... tell me if you can get worse than my athlon :P
Click to expand...

Intel P4 @3.2 (currently running at 2.95GHz - most recent overclock did it no good, as far as I can tell)
2GB DDR1 PC-3200 400MHz RAM
Asus P4C-800E Deluxe Mobo (very expensive, what, 9 years ago?)
Sapphire HD3850 512MB - stupidly limited by RAM and CPU (was a nVidia Ti4400 before hand).
OS: The stupidly annoying and massively RAM consuming Vista Home Premium

I get average 18fps in TF2 in dx8 everything lowest at 1440x900 with an fps config in 8vs8 games :(.
That means that 6 vs 6 is just about playable in the competitive side of TF2.

I believe thats worse. Cant even run NFS:MostWanted at a playable fps :p
 
Mine :

AMD Athlon 2400+ @ 2.01Ghz
768 DDR 400 Ram
9200 Pro


All I can say is atleast you can launch Most wanted ... mine just says error has to close on every new game :P
 
Well my PSU atm is a trust 480W upgrading to OcZ 500w so wont really be much of a difference in terms of power usage seen as my trust will pull about 550w from the wall anyway or something like that
 
Cookeh said:
You wha? :confused:
When was the last time you looked at some benchmarks? :p
Click to expand...

he didnt the same as the majority of people who say amd are massively behind or amd can only run games.

the x6 are barely behind the 930's in pretty much everything its not a big difference like people make out and the amd motherboards generally have better features for sometimes half the cost of an intel chipset
 
infernox said:
Here I go,
To be honest people now a days all go for Intel's New i7 for Gaming because its Flashy and Brand New. When i can see no difference in gaming between the i7 and AMD's Phenom 955 both overclocked to 4.00ghz and i cannot see a spec of difference aswell as every upgrade intel do they bring out a different socket and such, but buy a AMD AM3 and your set for a good 3-4 years

As well as your average 955 will retail at about £120 but an i7 nearing £200...

can please someone enlighten me on your views and what you think ...

Thanks

Me being AMD/ATI fanboy my brother brought this on being in love with Nvidia/Intel


-Infernox
Click to expand...
Actually you are a bit mistaken. Although Phenom II X4 955 at stock speed 3.2GHz is quite a bit slower than a i7 920 at stock speed 2.66GHz (even Phenom II 965BE at 3.4GHz is a bit slower than i7 920 at 2.66GHz), but let's pretend they are the same speed for the moment. Phenom II X4 955BE overclock from 3.2GHz to 4.0GHz is 25% overclock, whereas the i7 920 overclock to 4.0GHz is 50% overclock. What this mean is a Phenom II 955BE at 4.0GHz (25% overclock) is a bit slower than a i7 920 at 3.33GHz (25% overclock).

A Phenom II X4 955BE at 4GHz would just fast enough to keep up with a 5970 or CF5850, beyond that the CPU would start to bottleneck. Whereas for i7 920 overclocked to 4.0-4.2GHz would be fast enough to crossfiring a 5970 with a 5850/5870. But for most people that planning on using a single 5850 or 5870 for a long time and not planning on upgrading to a graphic card faster than a 5970 anytime soon, a Phenom II X4 955BE at 4.0GHz would be more than enough and cheaper than going Intel.

The reason why Intel sockets going EOL so quickly is because they moving forward at a much faster pace than AMD tech wise, and designing CPUs with new architecture to maximise performance. The reason why AMD changing socket at at slower pace is because their current aging K10 architecture is only a tweaked version of the ancient K8 architecture that dates back to 2003.

Sure Intel is bringing out new sockets, and the 1156 and 1366 sockets going EOL, but it doesn't mean people have to upgrade just because new products are out. In theory a system with i5 750 or i7 920 overclocked to 4.0GHz would pretty much last until average gaming require graphic processing power of around three 5850, whereas the AMD X4 would only last till the point of average gaming require graphic processing power of around two 5850.

You probably hear lots of people saying AMD got a better upgrade path because the AMD Bullozor CPU that is coming next year would be compatable with the AM3 socket. Let's assume that is the case...but can anyone guarantee that the AMD Bullozor would overclock well with the current motherboards of 700/800 chipsets? They would most likely release new chipset that is optimised for the AMD Bullozor...a 900 chipset may be for their business partners to deliver a new range of motherboards, and any enthusiasts would most likely ditch their old AM3 boards and buy the boards with the new chipset. To sum it up, while it is not neccessary for people to change their current AM3 motherboards to 'use' the AMD Bullozor CPU, to overclock it well they would most likely need to change their board...so in a sense the situation is not much different from Intel's socket 1156 and 1366 going EOL.
 
Last edited:
Wow, Thanks for a well explained answer... much appreciated but my answer stays the same as i7's are for encoding and editing and the Phenom 955 is better for gaming,

but thank you for for answer enlightening me on this subject :D
 
infernox said:
Wow, Thanks for a well explained answer... much appreciated but my answer stays the same as i7's are for encoding and editing and the Phenom 955 is better for gaming,

but thank you for for answer enlightening me on this subject :D
Click to expand...

They are not 'better' for gaming in any way, just not as far behind. Though the price-performance argument stands.


- Ordokai
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom