• 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.

Why AMD?

Well the benchmarks are indication of its performance, if it out muscles the 3570k in situations, then its obviously competing with it, price aside.

You can't say "Intel is faster" (Meaning the 3570k) as it isn't in all situations, nor can you say the FX8350 is the faster CPU (Sure, it's got the more raw power, but it isn't utilised constantly) you pick the CPU that fits your CPU load, the 3570k will not always be the best, and you'd be wrong to then say Intel is faster.

The Intel overall isn't faster, because both CPU's going at it would see the 3570k trailing behind, it's software that makes the FX8350 slower, but as I've said before, Intel know this, they could turn the tide anytime they wanted to, but that's talking about something that doesn't exist.

You may not be a fanboy, but your ability at comprehensive thinking is lacking somewhat.

Arguably the 7970 GHZ edition can compete and best the GTX680, what's more expensive? The GTX680, price doesn't always have to indicate end performance. That doesn't to say I believe the FX8350 should be more expensive, due to its inconsistent performance its current price point seems fine, stock versus stock it can compete with the similar priced locked i5, but it can also taken on the unlocked i5 chip, and even get close to the 3770k in some situations.

If you recall AMD tried pricing the FX8150 at the same price as the 2600k, that didn't really work too well and it dropped like a brick.

As I said, there's enough CPU's in differing price segments to offer the consumer the CPU they need for their budget and their workload.

I won't deny that Intel have the superior CPU's, as that's obvious, the 3970k is much greater than the FX8350.

EDIT : I'm not even sure why I'm trying to argue with you, I won't be buying any Piledriver CPU's for myself, but I'm not going to throw blanket statements in the air and maintain a single line record.
 
Last edited:
you used that software currently doesnt use the 8350 to its strongest points so if the software isnt going to happen which it wont why say about it .

you don't buy and hope that the software is made for your machine you buy for what you know is better and works and is in existence ;)

if intel hold the majority market why would software makers buck that and design soley for a lesser share ? they wont so you arguing a mute point.

the intel is for todays user faster than amd you cant argue this nore can any other.

amd cpus can as i said do things good for a decent price but they aren't faster than intel no matter how many lines of jargon you try and type. this is why the price reflects it and isnt a blanket statement its just a straight truth .

its like saying a car that runs on a mystical fuel is faster than a car on normal fuel even though the mystical fuel wont be used by anyone or available by anyone . talking hypothetical nonsense of what ifs . look its all about money its simple that all you need to look at and not silly benchmarks .
 
Intel hold the marketshare of GPU's, should games not get ported to PC's for the minority that are discrete GPU owners? That's before even stepping in that the FX8 series aren't the only 8 cores in existence, and being able to have that amount of cores is nothing new.

The Intel is faster in X load, the AMD faster in Y load, that's in todays software, that is fact, you pick the CPU to suit your workload, and AMD can offer both better price/performance but also better end performance in those areas at the "mainstream" segment of the market (3570K included)

Your "Intel is better" is a blanket statement, and isn't true. In gaming, unanimously the 3570k is the better CPU, but gaming doesn't account for every users load.

I have no reason to argue with you, as I'd just pick each argument apart separately, offer a counter point, and then you'd just give me some rhetoric as a reply.

EDIT : And for silly benchmarks? Lol, they're a representation of the real world performance, at least those benchmarked with real world applications, unless of course you're suggesting the situations AMD wins, the Intel is still faster?
 
Last edited:
Sasahara said:
If your using it for folding or any other 24/7 full load tasks and you taking costs into account you need to look at running costs too.

This is where the cheap AMD falls down as the saving is lost in increased energy consumption after a years use.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/11/06/amd-fx-8350-review/7

So the 3770K may cost £90 more, but the overclocked FX-8350 using 120 W more power run 24/7 over a year will cost £115 more compared to an overclocked 3770K. (11 pence per kWh used)

Both on stock the FX-8350 will cost £45 more to power.

The i7-2700K at £199.99 also has a £45-50 saving per year. (based on 2600k results)

If you PSU isn't as efficient (85%+) the cost differences could be even higher.
Click to expand...

I don't pay for my electric.
 
uscool said:
Hi, i just built a AMD system with the FX 8350 and a ATI 7950 and loving the performance , my mates got a i7 and honestly when playing games cannot see any difference , thats games on highest settings at 1080p
Click to expand...

From reading this post, people appear to be more obsessed with benchmarking. Personally, my FX6100 has been a gem of a purchase and unless I was doing pure gaming, I'd stick with AMD not Intel. Intel may dominate the market, but it's not everyones cup of tea. Steamroller looks promising and I have no use for integrated graphics. Unless someone is building a HTPC, it seems pointless. It's just my view.

The power consumption may turn me to Intel if the electric prices soar, but until then, I'l happy with it. Need a new PSU however, not as efficient as some of the better ones out there.

Merry Christmas to you all :D

humbug said:
I don't like crumpets......
Click to expand...

:eek::eek: NOOO!!!!!
 
Pure gaming I would(and did) go Intel last year, currently I wouldn't because Steamroller has, 8 cores, is AM3+, will have a huge single thread performance boost, and most crucially, will be heavily optimised for from 2014 onwards due to the console domination AMD will have, meaning their biggest weak spot, gaming, will become probably their strongest and will continue to have better multithreaded performance as more and most software can make use of it. The optimisation alone will mean AMD will almost certainly be better for gaming with a similarly powerful chip. The other things are just bonuses, if Intel had a 8 core coming around the same time, or werent' moving to a soldered down, non upgradable platform(from many sources now), then I'd recommend Intel. Buying today, you won't notice much difference and if you upgrade in a 12-18 months I think Steamroller will just simply offer more performance in almost any situation.

Why Intel are positioning themselves with quad cores + IGP's alone in the low-midrange brackets, while AMD will have the option of APU's with vastly superior IGP's, or full 8 core cpu's, I don't know. Its almost the exact reverse of normal ,with AMD usually suffering because they can't fill different market segments effectively while Intel could afford to make more products easily.

They are terrified of losing a sale of a £450 hexcore with high end mobo and trip/quad channel memory to a midrange £250 hex core but the reality is 99% of people who would buy a hexcore go with a cheaper £150 2500k or equivalent, if there was a £250 hexcore a lot of those people would stump up the extra £100, but not the current extra £500 to go with a hexcore setup.
 
and what ive been posting just been done today

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-performance-comparison,3370-18.html

exactly what i said :D if you want the faster cpu you buy a intel .

also as i said the rival to the 8350 is the 3570 (not k version )

quote " benchmarks we've already run show that the flagship FX-8350 goes up against Intel's Core i5-3570 "

haha martin 1-0 !
 
Last edited:
To be honest, I just fancy a change. Intel has pretty dominated most of my decisions when it comes to what processors to buy since 2004.

It's the same reason why people buy Lexus' instead of buying BMWs or Audis.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom