So with this test they're running everything at once? http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2013/06/01/intel-core-i7-4770k-cpu-review/6 Would that not serve an advantage to the AMDs increased core count?
lmao Skyrim. It uses an adaptation of the engine Fallout 3 and New Vegas used. Sure, it's prettier, but it only uses 2 or 4 cores, can't remember which. I've no idea on Shogun, but I do know that it fares very well on Intel, as does Skyrim, because Skyrim is a crusty old engine that only supports 2 or 4 cores. I know in Fallout you had to hack the INI to stop it using 4 cores because it kept crashing. IWnumthreads = 2 or something like that. Where's Crysis in Bit tech's reviews? where the hell was Crysis 2? and Battlefield 3? Deliberately left out? who knows? all *I* know is that it's a lame review and doesn't demonstrate *any* of the FX's strengths. For example, game streaming. Those 8 cores just kick all ass when they're streaming. Seriously wtf.
Law It was just to show you our new system that we have built in conjunction with Asus. I have said many time in this post and Rollo can back me up on this in other posts the 2011 Intel chips are far better than anything AMD has to offer. But comparing a £900 Intel CPU against a £100 AMD CPU does not quite stack up. The argument here is that at the budget range AMD is better value than Intel CPUs
You haven't answered my question, have they run that game whilst running all the other bumpf in the background? Or is it a simple average FPS from playing the same mission on both setups? There seems to be a lack of clarity over exactly how these people benchmark.
I have no idea how Bit tech do their reviews. All I know is that two ageing games is no way to test a CPU. Especially games that really don't like the CPU at hand and would like to poo down its neck. It's like I said earlier in the thread. I could do a review of the 83x0 CPU and make it look better in everything, omitting what Intel shine at. And the same can easily be done in reverse, as it usually was. The ONLY review I have seen of the FX Piledrivers that - A. Made any sense. B. Was completely fair and unbiased Was this one. http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Proces...cessor-Review-Vishera-Breaks-Cover/Conclusion From the guys who found out that Crossfire was buggered and got it fixed for the whole world. In that review he states - So what do we actually get with this release? Well, it is a bittersweet release for AMD. The pricing on these parts is not only competitive, it undercuts Intel by a significant amount across the board. The 8350 is very competitive with the 3570K, and it can be had for $30 less. The 6300 will walk all over the Intel products that exist at the $132 price point, and in fact is more competitive in terms of performance with the $185 Intel products. Again, we get a nice $50 discount for essentially the same performance. In these cases though, expect the AMD CPU to consume more power. Would it be enough to make one nervous about energy bills? Not reall Honestly if you bought anything less than the 6300 in this day and age (and at the prices AMD charge for it) you'd be pretty mad. Nothing Intel make under the 4670k can compete, and even the 4670k is easily beaten with the 8320 in the right circumstances. Which leaves just the 4770k as a clear winner, but you'll pay the price for it.
So you've found one review that makes it look equivalent, whilst the rest (such as this one) make it look poor? http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2013/06/12/intel-core-i5-4670k-haswell-cpu-review/5 I find that difficult to digest in my opinion. edit: Worth mentioning I'm on about using a dedicated GPU, I don't care about integrated graphics.
to be fair, Bit-tech don't use Windows 8 in that test. But then, neither does PCPEr or whatever it is called. And I do think their whole CPU reviews in general need a bit of a shake up. Using their benchmark, two games and cinebench doesn't tell us much.
That review is a waste of text. Seriously I'm not being funny but what use it using bloody old games for a brand new CPU? Again, where is Crysis 2? Where is Sleeping Dogs? Hitman : Absolution, Battlefield 3 for god's sake. Honestly how can you review a CPU that will be used for overclocking and gaming and not include BF3??!?! that's pure madness. Who says "Oh I think I need a CPU for Skyrim and other old games !". What matters are current games, and, the ones coming. I'm seriously getting tempted to do a review of the 8320 using all of the apps and games it loves. I think that would prove my point ! in anything new the 8320 can beat the 4670k.
We are discussing 2 different markets. The market for a 4960k is not even looking at the AMD chips end of really.
^ This. Because PCPER reviewed them before the fixes came out for Win 7. They still did OK though ! even with an OS that had no idea what was going on (see links). http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2645594 http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2646060 Even with those though Windows 8 is superior. It's basically because those ^ are just bodges and 8 had the support natively. It isn't just two games dude. In BF3 the 6300 can best the 2500k because it has six cores (the limit for BF3) that are working really well. Hell, even the 6100 can put in a decent showing ! These games and apps are growing in numbers as the days pass. The first one I noticed that loved the AMD was Firestrike. The 8320, even with eight cores, has no business beating any I5 ! the I5s were all £170+. The problem is that no one is going back to try again. To them it's conclusive. Ho hum.
Amd in a way suffers a similar issue in gpus. The 7970 whilst quick was slower than a 680. Now after nearly 2 years of drivers its faster than a 680 in certain games. Very few review sites have retested the older AMD stuff though. Reviewers are not paid to rereview though.
I know, but it had a pretty decent list of all Intel chips and the two AMD ones that we're talking about. I like that they're dedicated enough to carry on patching to get things working. That's fair enough then, the reason I'm being so pedantic is because I want to build an ITX system and I'm seriously considering getting an AMD chip and a GTX780. For that reason I'd be pretty annoyed if the CPU bottled it! Also though I do run windows 8, so I've got that working out for me. I do genuinely just game though, it's all I do and all I will ever do on my home PC.
http://anandtech.com/show/6985/choosing-a-gaming-cpu-at-1440p-adding-in-haswell-/2 They have Core Parking in there as well.
No they didn't go back which was a shame ! however, when the ghz Radeons hit* people soon spread the word around that the clocks and new drivers made them better than the 680. * Many (me included) saw Nvidia's boost as cheating really. It made their cards look better than they were but they were eating into the overclocking headroom that would have been left out usually. I know AMD do it now, and fair's fair when the 7970 is a ghz and boosts it's faster than the 680. It's funny really. It was far easier spreading the word when the 7970 and 7950 'came of age'. Yet when you try and do it with AMD's CPUs? chit man, it's nigh on impossible ! people just want to defend Intel and slag off AMD completely dismissing them. The way things are going though you'd have to be a complete helmet to ignore what's happening. It's a costly mistake buying a locked Intel CPU now. And then the best part? the absolute awesome part of the FX? it overclocks. Not a little, but a bloody lot. It's tons of fun to clock too, given that AMD have not bloody derped it. You've got your voltage, bus, multi... All of it. The overclocking thread on the OCUK CPU forums is one of the best I've ever had the pleasure of being involved with. The guys there are really having tons of fun pushing them to the limits.
That's actually an incredible review and is of the most help! Looks like an AMD CPU is the choice if you're only bothering with one GPU then. Seeing as 70fps is more than enough for me!
http://www.amazon.co.uk/AMD-FX6300-...e=UTF8&qid=1383153140&sr=8-1&keywords=fx+6300 Is half the price of a 4670k. Does it perform half as good? haha they're EPIC value. Apparently they're coming with games soon, so hold on a bit there you could get 2 free games worth £50 http://www.amazon.co.uk/M5A99X-R2-0...TF8&qid=1383153196&sr=8-4&keywords=asus+990fx You'll want one of those entry level. 8+2 is a must for FX or you'll be heavily limited. I know it's quite expensive, but the CPU has just cost you half of a 4670k. Then you need a decent cooler. Cheap http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HS-021-CS Cheaper. http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HS-022-CS Both will see you to 5ghz so long as the chip has it in it
http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/battlefield-4-test-gpu.html Shameless repost but another resounding victory for AMD. The 6300 just begs belief, nuts !
