• 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.

Thinking of switching from Intel to AMD

Still following this thread and getting a good laugh at you guys getting all emotional over cpu's. What was the op thread about again.......oh yes 'Thinking of switching from Intel to AMD' . So am I and I have to say a lot of what you guys have posted is irrelevant, to me anyway. I cant afford top of the range mainboards or cpus from Intel, period. I cant afford the top of the range AM3+ mainboard either. I can afford the FX8320 with the Msi 990FXA-GD65 and before you all jump in with the usual Asus this and that I did research all possibilities for my budget and that is the best I can do. For £197 I think it will do me fine, what overclock I will get from the mb and cpu we shall see but I suspect as time passes I will see better returns than if I stay with my sandy 2500K. I have looked hard at staying intel, 2600K, 3770K etc and as I will not buy 2nd hand or new from dodgy sites I think this is the best play for me. I play mostly first person shooters and feel I will get the most out of the 8320 bang for buck and I have no time for willie waving and have to say that some of the statements from the intel supporters are quite frankly ludicrous, ie rape, destroy etc, seriously you guys need to take a step back and realise for most Pc users its 'bang for buck' not benchmark this or that. For us the few fps here or there are meaningless, over 50\60fps who cares who's winning, the game is playable at good settings then its a win for all. I will of course, just out of interest mind, post some results from both my 2500K\8320 setups for comparison and then the willie waving can start all over again. LOL ;)
 
If the few FPS here or there is meaningless, why would you even jump from an i5 2500K when you don't know how the 2500K will cope in future games?

It's not like you're jumping from one generation to a bang/buck of the next, you're jumping from one dead platform to another dead platform that have existed at the same time.

You probably will get a better return out of the FX83 in the future, but in the future you could have bought X or Y CPU from either camp superior to your "future proofed" CPU, so I find it somewhat a fallacy.
 
I'm pretty sure my set up is a little borked, but ;

DSC_0028.jpg


Anyway, I'm going to a 21st, so I'm going to start pre drinking, so excuse any horrific spelling mistakes lol
 
Last edited:
Martini1991 said:
Don't be coy, factually you've got the better system and it shows :p
Click to expand...

Monitoring CPU use, it's only hitting one thread hard (80-90%), about half are only 10-30%. But nvidia sponsored games never do as well on AMD systems, sometimes by quite a lot so that plays a part too. PhysX offloaded to AMD CPUs will be absolutely awful.
 
Martini1991 said:
If the few FPS here or there is meaningless, why would you even jump from an i5 2500K when you don't know how the 2500K will cope in future games?

It's not like you're jumping from one generation to a bang/buck of the next, you're jumping from one dead platform to another dead platform that have existed at the same time.

You probably will get a better return out of the FX83 in the future, but in the future you could have bought X or Y CPU from either camp superior to your "future proofed" CPU, so I find it somewhat a fallacy.
Click to expand...

Thought you might. Currently I have a mainboard and cpu going out of warranty and as I am a bit strapped for cash and in order to have a setup where I'm warranted, so to speak, I've decided my best option is to go for the Amd setup. I will re-assess in 2-3yrs and see where to go then. I tend to take a good look at the current and future gaming situations and feel Amd are well positioned to take advantage. As I said a few fps here or there are irrelevant to me as its more about 'bang for buck'. What can I get from Intel for £115 cpu wise? My xfire 7950 give me Titan performance for less than half the cost. At the moment intel\Nvidia are too expensive and I will not buy their parts. I do not upgrade every new release, I don't have to, I wish I could but........:)
 
Last edited:
teppic said:
Monitoring CPU use, it's only hitting one thread hard (80-90%), about half are only 10-30%. But nvidia sponsored games never do as well on AMD systems, sometimes by quite a lot so that plays a part too. PhysX offloaded to AMD CPUs will be absolutely awful.
Click to expand...

OK. Now it's time to pick a different game that may favour an AMD CPU to balance it out..

any suggestions? ;)
 
The benchmark may be the CPU implementation of physx if you're using a none NVIDIA gpu.

Either way, I can't see it being that bad, as my i5 would crap its pants at PhysX.
 
CPU PhysX uses x87 instructions, which are obsolete and perform very badly on AMD CPUs.

A benchmark that should favour AMD over a 2500K would be Metro 2033. Games like BF4 and Crysis 3 don't have in game benchmarks, but they come out better too. These are a bit more relevant to people though than a Crysis 1 CPU benchmark (which is just a series of millions of explosions).
 
I still don't buy the 2033 to be honest :p
Unless it's like BF3 where the i5 sucks with dual GPU (Although that's limited to MP)

It came out before Thuban, 8 threaded CPU's were sooooo rare when it launched (And only available from Intel at a massive price)

It launched after the 5870, the best CPU at the time were the 1366 CPU's, so the most popular CPU's were generally Core 2 Quads or Phenom II X4's at enthusiast level.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom