This thread will go absolutely fucking nowhere. People will use anecdotal evidence back and forth, post heavily biased benchmarks, and come to either the semi intelligent response that both lines have their own use cases, or they'll come to the typical /g/ conclusion and call each other shills rather than refuting the original point.
>>45602570 >Intel: Best performance if you want to spend a lot of money > if you want to spend a lot of money >tfw you got a 2nd hand i5 2500k running at 4.3 ghz for only 135 euro including the motherboard
Advocate of many AMD processors and one Intel PC. My friend and I had nearly 100% similar builds - the CPU with my similarly priced amd CPU I got around 15fps less. Went out the next day and bought an i5. Admit it amd fags, you're defending yourselves because you're either too poor to join the Intel master race or you made a mistake and don't want to admit it
Amd's processors are total fucking trash in terms of single core performance.
Single core performance is still by far the most important thing when choosing a processor. This is what amdrones don't understand.
Having 6 or 8 cores doesn't mean shit when most applications and games don't know how to make use of them.
having a gazillion cores is nice for synthetic benchmarks but it doesn't translate well to real life performance
Amd processors aren't a bad choice when you are on tight budget, then it's better to spend the price difference on getting a better videocard which will make a bigger impact on your gaming experience. But if you have enough cash, picking up a decent i5 is well worth the money.
It will mean that you have a processor that performs excellent in ALL situations, unlike amd processors which only perform top in those rare situations where applications can make use of all those cores.
Also don't forget, unless you live in america where energy is dirt cheap, that cheaper amd processor will come to bite you in the ass at the end of the year when the energy bill comes in. Also, they often run so hot that they can fuck up the entire airflow of your system.
Tight on cash? Go for amd Enough money? Get intel.
It's funny how everyone on /G/ must be some sort of pizza roll eating man children who assume custom PCs are needed for gaming only.
News flash. Gaming isn't all that intensive on the CPU. If you want to talk gaming talk about GPUs. If you want to talk about running many programs side by side. Or rendering 3D animation. Then we can talk CPUs.
I literally bought an old dual core g7 server from HP which suposedly coulden't transcode 1080p in real time to other devices, and it could do it for 9 devices at the same time. So yeah before that I had a small atom core (4 cores) and it coulden't even handle the streaming much less transcoding.
What I have to complain about for AMD is that enthusuast performance has not improved at all for two whole years now (aside from a small clock bump) while Intel has managed to squeeze out 15-30% more clock for clock over that time. Also the AMD boards are 2 years out of date on features.
once again same thing happened with the P4 intel pretty much SHUT DOWN EVERYTHING and coasted on bad chips/mobo's for a year or two so they could use most of their resources to build a chip from the ground up ready to compete again.
so we went essentially from 90nm with two p4's on the same chip (lol celerons) to core 2 duos.
>>45603200 >there's a reason why both the Playstation 4 and the Xbox One both use AMD processors. Yeah there is, because it makes them cheap to produce >AMD is simply better for gaming. No it isn't, see >>45602984
My reason for choosing intel over amd is simple. Linux compatiblity. Granted I haven't had any experience with the newest amd setups, but I've always had issues that I just don't get with intel. Its also why I choose nvidia. Id rather pay a little more for something that works without much fuss.
>>45603231 >Take for example, AMD FX-6300 ($99) vs. Intel i3-4150 ($99) >The AMD processor absolutely destroys the Intel in gaming performance and application performance. Yeah nah, you're full of shit
>>45603174 They use AMD cores because that was the only company that would license both CPU and GPU to be put on the same chip. MS and Sony both had trouble with the licensing for PowerPC cores last time. And devs are still complaining that the individual cpus aren't good enough for AI.
You can cherry pick any game to show any particular cpu is better. In general performance, AMD chips are faster on the low end for gaming, because they're simply faster in general performance as well. Besides, CPU matters little in gaming performance, its a terrible metric for CPUs. It only matters when you specifically limit the GPU to bottle neck the CPU and expose the terrible optimized game's CPU performance. Games don't bother optimizing CPU usage because it matters so little.
For real applications that stress the CPU and are designed with CPU performance in mind, the AMD is better value.
>>45603376 >"CPU's hardly matter for gaming!" >Benchmark clearly shows a similar priced intel processor having higher frames per second at a noticable level on a high gaming resolution >amd damage control
>>45603383 >The AMD beats the Intel in 99% of games. Are you fucking retarded, where are you getting these numbers kid? All you've been able to come up with so far is synthetic benchmarks, and one benchmark of a game that is an outlier as it is designed to make us of more than 4 cores, in all other benchmarks the i3 shits over it
>99 percent of the games Fucking toppest of keks, keep dreaming
Sure, in one cherry picked benchmark. You can't argue that gaming benchmarks aren't a terrible metric for CPU performance. The GPU is always the limiting factor in real world usage. Game's CPU performance isn't optimized well because it doesn't matter. Intel happens to perform better for single core application. These days, any program that actually stresses the CPU is going to be optimized for multiple threads, and will likely preform better on AMD. (at the same price point).
>>45603432 >Sure, in one cherry picked benchmark Actualy 3 benchmarks were shown, in two the intel beats the fx 6300 >you can't argue that gaming benchmarks aren't a terrible metric for CPU performance Synthetic benchmarks are, gaming benchmarks are not.
I don't know why we are arguing about this, in terms of gaming performance you want the highest frames per second you can get, so if you test, and you keep all other factors equal and you see that there is almost a 20 percent difference in fps between two different cpu's, how can you claim 'cpu's don't matter' clearly they do
>>45603507 >AMD destroys the Intel in 99% of games No it doesn't See >>45603292 >>45603303 >That's why both the Xbox One and the PS4 use 8-core AMD processors No that's not why they use AMD processors, it's because: >>45603360 Learn to fucking read
I went from an athlon x4 desktop to an haslel i3 laptop and it's amazing the performance jump from an older quad core desktop cpu to a dual core mobile cpu.
I've been impressed so far, so much so that i've decided to get circumcised in support of Israel who gave us such processors. I then plan to move there and marry a qt Israeli girl so we can together go remove palestinians from the homeland. We will then have children and raise them to remove palestinians and amd from this earth.
Pic related is the average jewish male, so why the fuck haven't you waifud a qt jewess yet /g/?
I don't think anyone arguing that the i3 isn't faster for your cherry picked singled threaded games run on a cherry picked hardware and settings designed specifically to bottleneck the CPU.
Intel is faster in single core performance. Everyone knows that. But you cannot argue that the AMD isn't faster in multi threaded applications, it is by a wide margin.
Really though, there is little reason to get the i3 over the amd FX-6300 unless you really care about playing a handful of poorly optimized games on a poorly planned build with a disproportionate amount of GPU power.
>>45603529 >At this price point you need to consider gaming,if you wanted just something to browse cuckchan you would get somethign much cheaper This is why you need a better hobby. There is no happiness or fulfillment in high-end gaming, only wasted time and money.
>>45603596 I think you'll find that if you want to argue for the amd processor you will have to do the cherry picking, there are very little games outside of battlefield 4 that will benefit from all the extra cores offered by the amd cpu
You're missing the point. There are very little games that will benefit at all from going intel or amd or really any slightly better CPU. Only in benchmarks specifically set up to stress the CPU will there be a difference. And in that case, you're benchmarking a unoptimized process that was never designed with performance in mind. Its a terrible metric for CPU performance.
In real world usage, whether you buy an i3-4150 or fx-6300, will not matter one bit in gaming. But the 6300 will perform far better in any application where cpu performance actually matters.
I will say tho that in very shitty, poorly written games, mostly shit console ports, the intel is going to noticeable beat the AMD just due to shear single core power with no optimization. I don't think anyone is going to have trouble running console ports in 2014 tho.
>>45603625 High end is brutal shit like SLI 970/290X for 4K gaming , my build is a 4690k + 280X for 740 dollaros,and it can run most new games at a stable 60 fps on ultra. I don't really care for resolutions above 1080p,so this build will last me for quite some time.
>>45603779 >You're missing the point. There are very little games that will benefit at all from going intel or amd or really any slightly better CPU But you're wrong, and these pictures clearly show you are wrong >>45603292 >>45603303
No they don't. Those are benchmarks running games in 1080p on ultra with $99 cpus but top end graphics cards. They don't represent real world usage, where games are limited by the GPU and CPU performance matter very little. Reread my post, games never optimize CPU performance, its a terrible benchmark.
JS is single-threaded. If you browse the web all day you are better with intel. If you are playing good old games or emulate you are better with intel. If you use high-level languages you are better with intel because of abstractions overhead. That's all.
>>45604583 >>more expensive Sure. >>not much more efficient or faster Objectively wrong, it's much more efficient energy wise and offers better performance per core. AMD's top of the line CPU can only compete with the i5, and only if the application is heavily multithreaded. >>worse quality track record No. >>remote killswitch included so the nsa can kill your computer Wrong, you literally need to install this. >If you use Intel you are fucking stupid. Kill yourself and enjoy your housefires.
>>45604602 >Objectively wrong, it's much more efficient energy wise and offers better performance per core. AMD's top of the line CPU can only compete with the i5, and only if the application is heavily multithreaded. Wrong. You probably look at the intel-weighted bullshit benchmarks that have zero real-life weight. AMD can easily compete with anything Intel has. As I said, Intel will still slightly edge out because it is slightly faster, but not significantly enough to fucking matter in the slightest. >you need to install this Um, nope. It's fucking included in the goddamn chip and cannot be disabled. Sending a secure instruction is all it takes to shut down your PC for good.
>>45604437 How the fuck does that not represent real world usages? Many people with a good gpu game at 1080p ultra, including myself. It's probably the most used monitor resolution for gaming. So again, you are wrong, and the facts show it.
>>45604897 >CoD That thing hardly requires a powerful GPU, actually. I tried it out a while ago, runs smoothly at 4096x2160 on a single HD 7950; which as far as video games go basically means it doesn't tax at all.
Compare it to Metro: Last Light or Bioshock: Infinite for example, which runs at like 5 fps or something equally dogshit at this resolution.
>>45603210 Since when do people think video games must have a story? I don't want to watch a movie or read a book and follow cheesy character development and plot twists and all that bullshit, I want to fucking play a video game. When did video game designers became a poor man's storytellers? When did all video games become the equivalent of bland visual novels with shiny graphix?
Can some rich basement dweller from /g/ buy a range of Intel and AMD CPUs with similarly priced motherboards and all the rest and actually do some god damn reliable real world benchmarks? We might finally get a real answer.
Why the fuck are you retards actually arguing over this? Duel core processors are still a fucking minimal standard for a reason. If fucking video games run with only one to two fucking cores how many cores do you think will be used to run a fucking a spreadsheet?
>>45603049 inb4 the classic AMDrone response; "Well they're not good just now, but they will be soon, just wait and see!" Oh shit, too late. Been hearing this same argument for over 10 years now by the way, I guess any time soon now huh
>work at Best Buy >customer comes in and asks which computers have AMD processors >show him a few, but recommend him an Intel one >says the last computer he purchased was from a decade ago, but it crapped out so now he has to buy a new one >fixated on purchasing AMD because he insists his research from a decade ago is still accurate today >asks why there are no disk drives with most of these computers >says downloading software and drivers online is stupid >says touch screens are stupid >says Windows 8.1 is stupid and that XP is superior >says this is why he never shops at Best Buy >starts demanding compensation for his travel because we don't have a computer that fits his needs
i have an intel machine with an amd card, and an amd machine with a nvidia card.
they both do what i need them to do.
i won't go back to an amd cpu unless there's some significant change when i upgrade 2-3 years from now. they're good enough, but it's splitting hairs when a good GPU costs $200-$400 and a good gaming cpu tops out in the low-mid $200 range.
all this budget BS, cut corners somewhere besides the fucking CPU and GPU. hold off on that SSD. buy one stick of ram for now instead of two because you know you don't 'need' 16 gigs of ram. cheap out on windows. hold off on that new high res monitor.
there's little excuse in this day and age to bitch and moan about CPU prices. a hundred dollar amd or intel will be fast enough for your fancy GPU, and the $200 version will be fast enough for those retarded games that offload things to the cpu that have no business being on the cpu in the first place.
>>45607013 I think it's based on some quizes/surveys you have to do in order to gain points and "level up". This was in the summer though I think and you needed to work on one of the approved retail stores
holy jewry batman. there's really no point in going higher than rockstar.
what approved retails are these anyway, all i can assume is best buy and office depot/max, seems all other big box computer stores are dead and i know walmart doesn't give a shit if their employees know anything about compootahs.
>>45603360 The individual cores aren't that great for running one super-advanced AI or a bunch of shitty ones, but devs don't seem to fucking think about putting multiple AIs onto multiple cores because ??????? Devs are fucking retarded, if they would actually spread the weight of the game across the cores they would be doing much better.
>>45607172 This is a misconception. The problem is in older AM3+ socket motherboards without heat sinks on their vrm tend to burn out. The solution is spend more that 30$ on a motherboard with solid cap capacitors and heat sinks on vrm. Most of these Mobos are listed as NOT being compatible with 8core but poor fags gana poor.
I just advised my little bro to build an AMD APU rig. He hasn't bought anything yet. Did I do wrong, /g/? He wants something powerful and inexpensive. Should I have him go with an i3 or something instead?
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.