I used the 8350 as thats whats in the chart andy, I can not compare it to the 8320 as its not there. If its such a bad purchase surely the charts would of used the 8320 instead? Would people still on old i7 920 / 930 rigs see any noticeable gain upgrading either andy? as the much fangled 6300 you mensioned gives basically the exact same fps as a 4 year old cpu. Most 920s / 930s were happy at 4ghz np. Even the i5 760 at stock can do 55 fps min, That chip could easily hit 3.5 - 3.8ghz which would take it above the 60fps min thats required for stable gaming. The only 4chips you would not buy and have the exact same experience with btw are the 2 I3s and the 2 fx 4000 chips. all are sub 60fps. Which means they basically have no value as they would all offer a substanded play experience.
AMD did not send out 8320 review samples. They only sent 8350. That's why you won't see them in charts, much as the same reason you won't see Pentiums or Celerons. The 8320 is the overclocker's choice. The absolute worst I've seen out of one is 4.6ghz. The top boy Centurion does 4.7ghz on 8 cores.. As the yanks would say, do the math you're getting what AMD wanted £900 for for £116. Many CPUs like the I7s flourish with this new support. Mainly because it uses not only the four cores of an I7, but the four extra threads. Any way have a look at this one. Top end 990FX board with 8+2 VRMs (sky's the limit) with top end ram. Cost? £20 more than the I7 it's up there chinning. See also - AMD FX 6300 rig that costs £20 less than just the 4670k CPU yet is chinning the 4670k.
Erm sorry thats wrong about pcie 3.0 theres gpu scaling because of the extra bandwidth at higher resolutions
AMD are not being bullied, these are companies with products we are talking about, not children. there is no moral highground to be had, you make a good product or you don't, simple as. As I stated, nobody has disagreed with you that under the right circumstances AMD CPUs can shine, but not by the margin you like to state and only in less than ~20 (if that) of situations. Yes this may change in the future but until then it is only speculation. If it does change then so will the buying advice we all give. These boards don't really have fanboyism and that's one reason we all like it, we a re more objective. We are not hypocritical, if AMD CPUs become better then I'm sure you will see everyone buying them. We all want a competative CPU market, for both the advancement of tech and prices. Being a fanboy only loses you credability and it shows you have been seduced by marketing. Until AMD is better or at least as good as Intel in most tasks, then it remains hard to recommend then to those with a bigger budget. I, as well as others, really want this to change however so we are excited that change could be afoot but to pretend that AMD is suddenly ahead of the curve is deluded.
Then I will accept I am wrong I stand by my performance data though, unless some one has better data that shows PCIE 3.0 in a better light?
AMD not being bullied? what about this then? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_v._Intel Intel's restraints According to AMD, Intel will refrain from these practices: • Offering inducements to customers in exchange for their agreement to buy all of their microprocessor needs from Intel, whether on a geographic, market segment, or any other basis • Offering inducements to customers in exchange for their agreement to limit or delay their purchase of microprocessors from AMD, whether on a geographic, market segment, or any other basis • Offering inducements to customers in exchange for their agreement to limit their engagement with AMD or their promotion or distribution of products containing AMD microprocessors, whether on a geographic, channel, market segment, or any other basis • Offering inducements to customers in exchange for their agreement to abstain from or delay their participation in AMD product launches, announcements, advertising, or other promotional activities • Offering inducements to customers or others to delay or forebear in the development or release of computer systems or platforms containing AMD microprocessors, whether on a geographic, market segment, or any other basis • Offering inducements to retailers or distributors to limit or delay their purchase or distribution of computer systems or platforms containing AMD microprocessors, whether on a geographic, market segment, or any other basis • Withholding any benefit or threatening retaliation against anyone for their refusal to enter into a prohibited arrangement such as the ones listed above http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-10396188-92.html You know the funny part? Back in 1999 I used to run and manage a PC store. We had an Intel rep that refused to let us stock the incoming P4, nor the only psu that they had given the green light to, unless we refused to stock the AMD range of CPUs. He used to turn up every month and grease our palms with silver. It wasn't until he left the company that we told them to bugger off. We then stocked Athlons, as they were doing a real good job against the P3. Right now on Linus' forums Intel have 'hired' what they call the Intel Response Squad. For proof please see here - They're not paid, just given access to competitions and prize draws from Intel. They will turn up wherever they can, trying desperately to convince people not to use AMD and to use Intel CPUs. Note how that guy's reply was voted best answer. Intel have not stopped the way they go about things. They've just stopped the more obvious and blatant tactics, yet, are still pulling off some pretty dirty tricks.
No one's forcing you to either read it or post in it, mate. There's been some bloody good discussion going on yet people want to make it go away. Weird.
Heard all these sort of arguments before as a reason not to buy Apple. 90% of them are plain wrong the rest are invalid. You also can not say 100% that AMD do not do a similar thing. If companies are willing to accept the terms of a writen contract that is there silly faults for doing such a thing, If AMD was more competitive then they may not feel so inclined to agree to stupid terms and conditions as well. Everyone here wants a more competitive CPU market. 4770k has no competition so is priced acordingly, If AMD cpus could compete agaist it, it would be under £200 guarenteed. Thats a win for us as consumers. AMD can say what they want really but ive personally grown a bit bored of the whole they are priced cheaper crap. They might be but if I was looking to upgrade id only buy 1 cpu today and that would be that 4770k. As its far and away the best price to performance cpu on the market. Gaming is not the only thing a pc is used for much to popular feelings. You would think it is judging by some of the posts ive saw in the last few days. AMD in what is slowly becoming a GPU company is good in games is not a big shock in truth, They have one of the best price to performance gpus on the market with the 7970 currently. Proof is in what you also sell as some would say. If AMD can compete with Nvidia and they do regulary then AMD can surely compete with Intel and maybe finally give us a CPU market that is not priced into the upper reaches of space if you actually want a cpu for something other than gaming.
Good choice exactly the same board i choose but the Evo version, cant go wrong its my second asus for about 4yrs now
What's the price difference between the Intel at 2nd spot and AMD at 3rd spot? That's where I find it interesting, considering the pounding AMD has been taking. If it were something like £200 less for the AMD then that's what I'd buy, because I only play games.
That's not bullying, that is being a business and working within regulations to outdo your competitor. That is why we have regulations. Now if you want to debate why regulations don't work and the government are paid off, well then, that's another thread. If you have a competitve product then this would not be so possible either.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Ivy_Bridge_PCI-Express_Scaling/3.html and http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Ivy_Bridge_PCI-Express_Scaling/6.html Z87 allows for pcie 3.0 16x/16x , so as long as you have enough horsepower behind it , you`ll get scaling on sli as well. ofc I got it switched around - lower res needs the bandwidth
The Haswell undercuts the Piledriver by about £15 based on current Amazon.co.uk prices, but they generally trade blows. AMD Intel Ignore the RRPs and discount percentages, it'd be ludicrous to buy either of these chips at full price.
Sorry man, you seem to have taken my post a bit too seriously. I'm not trying to stop any discussion - my point is that a lot of enthusiasts would be better served just enjoying their PC rather than labouring the point about how much more awesome their kit is compared to someone else. Peace
On AMD Asus are the only choice IMO. They make some stunning boards, and they really put some thought into them too. Some of the boards out there are pretty shocking. Look the part, specced nice, high price, FX support... 4+1 vrms can't even hold stock clocks without throttling.
The thread was posted to show how BF4 fares on any CPU. It did really well on AMD, something to be celebrated, given how cheaply you can build the systems in question. The rest can be put into a top end GPU. BF4 is another milestone IMO, very very exciting.
My experience with anyone but gigabyte and Asus had lead me to the conclusion that everyone else is a bit ****. Worst experiences have been with MSI. Random freezes during boot. Drives disappearing. Common across all the MSI boards I've used since uefi. In the future I predict a move to eight cores. When that happens I'll either make do with a sidestep to a 3770k or consider the CPUs around at the time. I don't think the future holds and secret sauce for either company. More cores yes... But in a years time a six core 12 thread Intel core might be the norm at £170 multiplier unlocked and until AMD up their single core performance we'll keep seeing this unpredictable performance from AMD. In the meantime, most of us own AMD CPUs for one reason or another. It is not like any of us are boycotting AMD. I have one PC at home with a i5 and two using AMD CPUs. They get the job done and that is all I require. Tbh, intel might have the response squad, but we have something similar going on here. The AMD response squad. Far as I'm aware they ain't paid either!
