Jump to content



Photo

Can someone explain why I shouldn't get an AMD FX CPU?


  • Please log in to reply
76 replies to this topic

#46 Luc2k

Luc2k

    Neowinian

  • Tech Issues Solved: 4
  • Joined: 16-May 09

Posted 09 February 2013 - 22:42

And given that the 2500k is about the same price as the 8350 that argument is null and void and was before you even wasted the effort on typing.

Complete fallacy. Motherboards absolutely have an effect on system performance.


How about the 8320? That one is cheaper and can be overclocked to 8350 levels and beyond.

As for motherboard performance, show some proof. Differences are less than 3% unless its defective.


#47 Javik

Javik

    #GamerGate

  • Tech Issues Solved: 2
  • Joined: 21-May 12

Posted 09 February 2013 - 22:43

No, what I'm doing is advising the guy to buy the product that fits his needs better in his price range. The 2500k is a better gaming CPU than the 8350 and it's the same price, which makes it a better choice for him. I've owned AMD and Intel products in the past so I am actually pretty objective here.

If there are 2 products in a price range and one performs better than another for a user's needs then it's not bloody rocket science, you advise the user to buy what suits their needs.

#48 Crisp

Crisp

    To infinity and beyond

  • Tech Issues Solved: 2
  • Joined: 06-May 10
  • Location: 127.0.0.1

Posted 09 February 2013 - 22:44

How about the 8320? That one is cheaper and can be overclocked to 8350 levels and beyond.

As for motherboard performance, show some proof. Differences are less than 3% unless its defective.


But, but, but... the FX chip runs at 9000+ watts moar than Intels!!
Don't you just love when people pull "facts" from their rear.

The Intel fanboyism is strong in this thread.

#49 Arceles

Arceles

    Time Craymel

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 28-November 09
  • Location: 4th dimmension.
  • OS: Win 7 Ultimate / Win 8.1 Pro (With Start Menu Start8, otherwise is UNUSABLE) / Android 4.1.2 Jelly Bean
  • Phone: XT890 Motorola RAZRi (x86 processor)

Posted 09 February 2013 - 22:44

No, what I'm doing is advising the guy to buy the product that fits his needs better in his price range. The 2500k is a better gaming CPU than the 8350 and it's the same price, which makes it a better choice for him. I've owned AMD and Intel products in the past so I am actually pretty objective here.

If there are 2 products in a price range and one performs better than another for a user's needs then it's not bloody rocket science, you advise the user to buy what suits their needs.


Yeah..... no, you always say that in all your post.

#50 Javik

Javik

    #GamerGate

  • Tech Issues Solved: 2
  • Joined: 21-May 12

Posted 09 February 2013 - 22:46

How about the 8320? That one is cheaper and can be overclocked to 8350 levels and beyond.

As for motherboard performance, show some proof. Differences are less than 3% unless its defective.


I'd advise learning to read. The OP said he doesn't like to overclock which makes that completely irrelevant.

#51 Detection

Detection

    Detecting stuff...

  • Joined: 30-October 10
  • Location: UK
  • OS: 7 SP1 x64

Posted 09 February 2013 - 22:46

No, what I'm doing is advising the guy to buy the product that fits his needs better in his price range. The 2500k is a better gaming CPU than the 8350 and it's the same price, which makes it a better choice for him. I've owned AMD and Intel products in the past so I am actually pretty objective here.

If there are 2 products in a price range and one performs better than another for a user's needs then it's not bloody rocket science, you advise the user to buy what suits their needs.


What you are doing is trying to scare OP away from AMD and convince him into Intel,

What we are doing is giving stats and experiences of alternatives.

#52 Javik

Javik

    #GamerGate

  • Tech Issues Solved: 2
  • Joined: 21-May 12

Posted 09 February 2013 - 22:53

What you are doing is trying to scare OP away from AMD and convince him into Intel,

What we are doing is giving stats and experiences of alternatives.


http://www.bit-tech....x-8350-review/6

Gaming:

2500k: Skyrim at 1080p 127 fps average, minimum 71
8350: minimum 50, average 103

Shogun 2 1080p

2500k: Min 18, average 26
8350: Min 17, average 22

I'm not being dishonest in any way. He asked why he shouldn't get an FX processor, I'm giving an answer.

#53 Luc2k

Luc2k

    Neowinian

  • Tech Issues Solved: 4
  • Joined: 16-May 09

Posted 09 February 2013 - 22:57

I'd advise learning to read. The OP said he doesn't like to overclock which makes that completely irrelevant.


Why buy the K then?

Problem is you're presenting a lot of bad info like power usage, mobo performance etc.

#54 Detection

Detection

    Detecting stuff...

  • Joined: 30-October 10
  • Location: UK
  • OS: 7 SP1 x64

Posted 09 February 2013 - 22:58

http://www.bit-tech....x-8350-review/6

Gaming:

2500k: Skyrim at 1080p 127 fps average, minimum 71
8350: minimum 50, average 103

Shogun 2 1080p

2500k: Min 18, average 26
8350: Min 17, average 22

I'm not being dishonest in any way. He asked why he shouldn't get an FX processor, I'm giving an answer.


And that is fine, that is what he is looking for, stats, not bad mouthing the competition

All anyone was trying to do here was give their opinion of hardware they have experience with, not shoot the other guy down

#55 Arceles

Arceles

    Time Craymel

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 28-November 09
  • Location: 4th dimmension.
  • OS: Win 7 Ultimate / Win 8.1 Pro (With Start Menu Start8, otherwise is UNUSABLE) / Android 4.1.2 Jelly Bean
  • Phone: XT890 Motorola RAZRi (x86 processor)

Posted 09 February 2013 - 22:58

http://www.bit-tech....x-8350-review/6

Gaming:

2500k: Skyrim at 1080p 127 fps average, minimum 71
8350: minimum 50, average 103

Shogun 2 1080p

2500k: Min 18, average 26
8350: Min 17, average 22

I'm not being dishonest in any way. He asked why he shouldn't get an FX processor, I'm giving an answer.


You are being dishonest because while you are mentioning such benchmarks, you don't mention that he has 4 cores more to do anything he wishes for, multitasking is becoming mainstream in gaming (and it will be more with the nextgen consoles), programs are also taking advantage of this.

Selective information is just as bad as lying.

#56 Javik

Javik

    #GamerGate

  • Tech Issues Solved: 2
  • Joined: 21-May 12

Posted 09 February 2013 - 23:03

And that is fine, that is what he is looking for, stats, not bad mouthing the competition

All anyone was trying to do here was give their opinion of hardware they have experience with, not shoot the other guy down


Oh please cut the crap. I'm trying to tell him that one product works better than another in his price range and you're essentially accusing me of being an Intel fantard because I'm trying to give him good advice. Stop being such a damn hypocrite. In fact given that I said i'd be advising him to use the AMD processor if he'd been programming or rendering i'd suggest practicising what you preach and being actually objective.

You are being dishonest because while you are mentioning such benchmarks, you don't mention that he has 4 cores more to do anything he wishes for, multitasking is becoming mainstream in gaming (and it will be more with the nextgen consoles), programs are also taking advantage of this.

Selective information is just as bad as lying.


It's not selective information, nobody who actually understood how hardware works would make an argument like yours. AMD pack more cores onto their processors for a reason: Because they're inefficient and do not do as much work per clock cycle as Intel's processors do. Have you never actually stopped to ask yourself why, despite having twice as many cores and operating at a higher clock speed they barely manage to break even with their Intel counterparts in most performance tests? It's you that is being selectively dishonest because when a person is gaming having 4 cores sitting idle wouldn't exactly be a great deal of use to him anyway, being that very few sane gamers run intensive background tasks and game at the same time.

#57 Arceles

Arceles

    Time Craymel

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 28-November 09
  • Location: 4th dimmension.
  • OS: Win 7 Ultimate / Win 8.1 Pro (With Start Menu Start8, otherwise is UNUSABLE) / Android 4.1.2 Jelly Bean
  • Phone: XT890 Motorola RAZRi (x86 processor)

Posted 09 February 2013 - 23:06

Oh please cut the crap. I'm trying to tell him that one product works better than another in his price range and you're essentially accusing me of being an Intel fantard because I'm trying to give him good advice. Stop being such a damn hypocrite. In fact given that I said i'd be advising him to use the AMD processor if he'd been programming or rendering i'd suggest practicising what you preach and being actually objective.



It's not selective information, nobody who actually understood how hardware works would make an argument like yours. AMD pack more cores onto their processors for a reason: Because they're inefficient and do not do as much work per clock cycle as Intel's processors do. Have you never actually stopped to ask yourself why, despite having twice as many cores they barely manage to break even with their Intel counterparts in most performance tests? It's you that is being selectively dishonest because when a person is gaming having 4 cores sitting idle wouldn't exactly be a great deal of use to him anyway, being that very few sane gamers run intensive background tasks and game at the same time.


I actually program on OpenCL and I can tell you, I love my AMD platform for something.

#58 Detection

Detection

    Detecting stuff...

  • Joined: 30-October 10
  • Location: UK
  • OS: 7 SP1 x64

Posted 09 February 2013 - 23:06

Oh please cut the crap. I'm trying to tell him that one product works better than another in his price range and you're essentially accusing me of being an Intel fantard because I'm trying to give him good advice. Stop being such a damn hypocrite. In fact given that I said i'd be advising him to use the AMD processor if he'd been programming or rendering i'd suggest practicising what you preach and being actually objective.


Ok bud, you're doing so well on your own I`ll leave you to it ;)

#59 Javik

Javik

    #GamerGate

  • Tech Issues Solved: 2
  • Joined: 21-May 12

Posted 09 February 2013 - 23:08

I actually program on OpenCL and I can tell you, I love my AMD platform for something.


The starter of this thread is building a gaming rig, not a programming rig. If he'd actually been a programmer your advice would be relevant, but as he specifically said he wants it for gaming your advice isn't.

#60 Blackhearted

Blackhearted

    .....

  • Joined: 26-February 04
  • Location: Ohio
  • Phone: Samsung Galaxy S2 (VM)

Posted 09 February 2013 - 23:09

You are being dishonest because while you are mentioning such benchmarks, you don't mention that he has 4 cores more to do anything he wishes for, multitasking is becoming mainstream in gaming (and it will be more with the nextgen consoles), programs are also taking advantage of this.

Selective information is just as bad as lying.


Ya know, contrary to what marketing tells you, the fx cpus like the 8000 line technically aren't octa-core cpus.