They actually make great budget CPUs. Things like web browsing or using microsoft word don't need uber i7 single thread performance. In fact not all vydias are unoptimized pieces of shit like arma 3 and an 860K is enough for them.
Their unlocked A8 APUs also BTFO any intel CPU + GPU combo for the ~$90 price tag.
AMD and Nvidia are pretty similar in terms of size and how many chips they crank out yearly. Intel on the other hand dwarfs every other IC manufacturer by at least 3:1, in AMD's case it's more like 10:1.
>>52561776 >>OC'd CPUs are better than non-OC'd ones I never even implied that senpai. No need to push your 860K to 4.6 GHz just to browse the web.
>Enjoy wearing down your CPU. AMD gets better performance when you OC, that's about the only advantage it has against a non-OC'd Intel CPU. You don't even need to overclock your CPU for most uses. If you're only gonna play arma 3 for life then you might as well stop fucking around and buy an i7
>I know people who use nothing but AMD CPUS, they OC and they go through them every two or three years. Sounds like they don't cool them down enough. An OC'd CPU that never goes past 72°C will last longer than one that goes up to 90°C. Those people are obviously not component overclockers.
Anyway I only said AMD makes great budget CPUs. They are obviously dogshit for very CPU intensive applications like HEVC encoding and ray tracing. Zen is suppose to fix that.
>>52562025 No, not really. If you don't care about vydia gaems or doing a fuckton of CPU-intensive tasks then you don't need anything more than an 860K. Hell, maybe an athlon 5150 is enough to satisfy your needs.
Point is AMD is currently the best option for those on a budget, not in need of great single thread performance, or who don't do CPU-intensive tasks.
Zen is gonna change that btw (hopefully). If an 8-core zen can at least match stock i7-5960X performance then people will literally have 0 reason to chose intel except for a meager 10% better single thread performance.
>mfw getting almost 40 fps playing bf4 at low 1080p settings with an a8 You gotta admit, amd makes some pretty fucking based apus. I could even crossfire this fucker with a used r7 240 and get almost twice the fps. Probably just gonna buy an r7 360 though.
>>52561963 >An OC'd CPU that never goes past 72°C will last longer than one that goes up to 90°C No, nigger. Voltage kills CPUs, not just heat. If that was the case, half of the Xeons at my old job would have kicked the bucket years ago. They're almost 8 years old now and are still kicking at 88 degrees.
>>52562591 Overclocking alone wont do much. Heat is a factor but the main issue is pushing the voltage too far. If you push the clock speed too far then eventually there wont be enough power to keep the CPU running 100% so it will become unstable and crash. To remedy this you need to increase the voltage so there's more power being supplied to the CPU, the problem is if you give too much power to the CPU then it will just short out and die. Increasing the power can also cause more heat to be generated though
>>52562709 >arma 3 Gamers don't game on Pentiums. In your every day use-case scenario, a Pentium offers much faster performance than an Athlon or APU. APUs are for poorfag MOBA niggers and welfare children.
>>52562741 >Gamers don't game on Pentiums. In your every day use-case scenario, a Pentium offers much faster performance than an Athlon or APU. You're not being very subtle about your trolling you know.
>>52562680 It might have better single thread performance but that doesn't really matter outside of playing vydias. Multi core performance-wise, the pentium and Athlon 860K have pretty much the same performance at equal frequencies.
So using a web browser like chrome which can efficiently use multiple threads, using a pentium won't improve jack shit.
(Assuming your OS properly supports all the cores/threads)
Additional cores basically always help as long as there are more processes/threads than there are cores. Even foreground tasks that aren't multithreaded can benefit from more cores because they wont have to share a core with background task(s). It's basically equivalent to giving the foreground task greater priority over other tasks but at the same time those other tasks won't have to suffer a performance penalty.
>>52563355 I usually don't agree with statements like that but I feel this is different. /g/ considers AMD "bad" because they failed to best a company 10x their size with like 100x their budget and complete access to their own manufacturing capabilities. AMD is a little company they don't have all of the best facilities and they're fighting chipzilla.
Are AMD processors really bad or Intel's just fucking ridiculously good?
>>52561431 They're both decent. I'm not an expert, but i think some bad decisions and Intel doing the impossible to fuck them is what damaged AMD. Even when AMD chips were better, Intel still sold better (better marketing and some deals with machine builders (is that the name?)).
Has it already been long enough that people don't remember AMD bought ATI and their graphics card division is basically a separate company within? I mean nowadays i'm sure they're more integrated and share resources and all, but I'm inclined to believe that there's still a bit of independence over in that side of the company.
people in this thread talking like AMD always made radeons. makes me sick desu senpai.
>>52564575 >people in this thread talking like AMD always made radeons I think people here remember ATI. The thing is ATI as an entity hasn't existed since 2006 when they were officially acquired.
AMD pretty much forced ATI to join up with their CPU division to work on APUs and they've been working close up until recently. Within the last few months AMD has given the GPU side their autonomy back and they formed the Radeon Technologies Group, a separate division with Raja Koduri as the head.
>>52564945 >inb4 3.5GB meme Good on ya for making your own decisions Anon. Don't listen to the AMD/Nvidia shills on here. I have a 780 Ti, and am quite happy with it even though it really is just a gimped 970 these days.
Of course your Haswell or Skymeme Quad is still more efficient, since it's faster, but considering the 8320's significantly cheaper price, it might not be a bad option - especially with some voltage tweaking/oc around stock voltage.
>>52565188 >Actually the 8320e can still consume over 200 watts if you push it past ~4ghz
Did you even read my link properly? It didn't even push past 200w complete system power consumption until 4.2/4.3. Of course every sample is different, but that can go both ways.
I also mentioned voltage tweaking, as AMD chips are usually quite conservative with it. You can see the 8320E going to 3.7 with barely drawing more than stock, that is quite a leap to the 8350 already.
And we're talking about efficiency here, of course a 4790k or 6700k is going to beat it, but not by a huge amount - and significant overclocking increases power consumption regardless. The 8320e is 122$, a 4790K goes for 349, the 6700K for 399$. Even a 4690K goes for 226$ as of currently, and will suffer on performance from the lack of HTT in rendering tasks. The motherboard needed is also likely to be more expensive (Z-Chipset required) Well, we have BCLK OC on Skymeme so you could technically go with a 6400, but it deactivates C-states and is still more expensive :^)
>>52561963 AMD makes very shit CPUs. If you wanna get decent performence you need to OC the fuck out of it. To do that you need good motherboard and good cooling. At that point you might as well get an i5, so even for the price it's shit
An excavator CPU has ~10% better IPC compared to steamroller (aka kaveri). So at ~4.2 GHz a quad-core excavator CPU would match i5-2500k (3.3-3.7 GHz) performance.
Now give it 40% better ipc and you have zen. So zen will have at minimum haswell performance if we actually get the 40% better ipc (might be more like 30% though which would still be enough to btfo jewtel).
>>52564511 >I hear Zen is going balls out and including HBM on their APUs
CPUs have been more memory bottlenecked as time goes on. They simply hide it. Most of the time, the CPU sits idle. It can cost 400 or more cycles to get items from memory. This is why CPUs have a L1/L2 and L3 cache. The cpu "guesses" what will be needed next, and calls into memory to "cache" that data. If it guesses wrong, and it often does thanks to poorly optimized programs, then it has to sit and wait for those 400 cycles for the next bit of memory.
The CPU hides this partly by being so fast, and partly by doing more than one thing at once, in addition to hyperthreading. It basically computes multiple paths of a program, and hopes that it actually did work that will be used.
If HBM is used as a replacement to for say L3 cache, say 1GB, the CPU would need to redesign its memory retreival logic to account for it to see the most benefit, but it could average out as a net benefit. If it were used in addition to L3, the only changes would be interconnects.
It could also be used in place of system memory, but this would be the end of modular, upgradable systems.
I already dislike the fact that memory is so high priced, and it shouldn't be.
I can buy a computer for my pocket with 4GB of memory for $200. Why are most cheap systems still shipping with 4GB, 8GB if you are lucky? And 16GB is $100? Since we are clearly making more memory than ever before, and cost to produce should go down with such scale, why are those prices so high?
Speaking of price, how much more expensive will this memory be to produce, with the lower clock speed requirements, it should lower the price, but the new form factor will raise it until it is mass produced.
What the fuck are you smoking? It's clearly for their integrated graphics, which have been bottlenecked even since Llano by DDR3. Quad-Channel DDR4 can help, but will require four modules with adequate speeds, which can add up to the price point. Now, HBM will do that too, but gives even higher bandwidth speeds, eventually enable AMD to throw in some integrated middle-class GPU solution in one package for minimal form-factor builds. Cooling can be dealt with liquid.
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.