AMD is getting better than INTEL ???? Future GAMING ******************

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
H

Hitman_4761

Honorable
Jan 15, 2013
39
0
10,540
So, as you might have heard that AMD FX8350 comes with 8 core !!which is good for movie editing and modeling
where as Intel i5 4670K has 4 core !! and is good for gaming

the main fact is that the present games don't require more than 4 core and the single core performance of FX is lower than I5 that is why I5 is better in gaming ..

but if you look at the future , you will see that more demanding games will be developed such as crysis 3 and need for speed

my question is that should i buy I5 or FX
i want my computer to manage next 5 years !!
and Fx is lower in prize

looking at the future i think there will be more games that require more than 4 core

IS FX really better choice for the future
 
Solution
AnEwG
I would personally get the i5. The FX chips single threaded performance is pathetic, even the Phenom II CPUs are stronger clock by clock, and while AMD only widened the gap between their products and Intel's in single threaded performance, Intel has been closing in, in heavily threaded performance quite rapidly. Also the K series i5 can be overclocked in the future in case you needed to squeeze more juice out of it.

JOHNN93: Haswell is about 47% faster in single threading, so it is more like the FX cores have 2/3 the performance of an Intel Haswell core i5.
Sort by date Sort by votes
Bad_Kitty13

Bad_Kitty13

Admirable
Feb 26, 2014
2,471
1
6,460
got the money go x79 best of both worlds, thats why their expensive, and most likely the next series after maxwell i think skylake is going to have a 6 core i7 in its z87ish line up whatever they are going to call it. as for your issue i would go with 4770k as the games that will support more than 4 cores will by then probably support hyper threading to imo
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
AnEwG

AnEwG

Honorable
Dec 31, 2013
1,190
0
11,460
I would personally get the i5. The FX chips single threaded performance is pathetic, even the Phenom II CPUs are stronger clock by clock, and while AMD only widened the gap between their products and Intel's in single threaded performance, Intel has been closing in, in heavily threaded performance quite rapidly. Also the K series i5 can be overclocked in the future in case you needed to squeeze more juice out of it.

JOHNN93: Haswell is about 47% faster in single threading, so it is more like the FX cores have 2/3 the performance of an Intel Haswell core i5.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
H

HEXiT

Champion
Mar 13, 2011
10,957
13
51,965
lol the fx is a 4 module cpu not an 8 core. yes it has 8 compute cores but shares 4 float units between them. which means it has a similar overall functionality as an intel quad with hyperthreading and thats where you should make the comparison.

also make comparisons on clock for clock basis because the fx runs faster by default just to keep up. the difference between the 2 architectures is such that you can drop down from the 4670 to the 2600k and because of the 2600k's hyper threading it will keep up and punish the 8350 in most scenarios not just gaming. where the fx does get a win it scrapes it but when the intel gets a win the margin is often pretty decent.

this reasoning is why intels still cost more even though they run slower out the box, there just more efficient generally.
if your on a budget then you cant go wrong with an fx 8350 as it will perform very well but if you can afford the intel you will get the same work done faster in most cases for less power usage, less waste heat and quieter operating.

in the future amd may well steal a lead but its not gonna be with the current fx lineup. why? because amd dont seem to be afraid to try something new. they were the first to implement x86 and hammered intel with there athons back in 2002-2005 the same could very well happen again if intel dont pull there thumbs out and give us innovation rather than iteration.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
P

pc 1

Distinguished
Sep 10, 2008
121
0
18,710
if you look at thief benchmarks, a game that was released a couple of days ago for pc and consoles, all of the benchmarks show intel beating amd even the i3 beats the fx-8350, i always see people saying 8 cores is the future because consoles use 8 cores but that doesn't seem right after seeing many benchmarks, here are thief benchmarks

http--www.gamegpu.ru-images-stories-Test_GPU-Action-Thief_-test-proz.jpg


http--www.gamegpu.ru-images-stories-Test_GPU-Action-Thief_-test-intel.jpg


http--www.gamegpu.ru-images-stories-Test_GPU-Action-Thief_-test-amd.jpg


CPU_01.png
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Bad_Kitty13

Bad_Kitty13

Admirable
Feb 26, 2014
2,471
1
6,460


HAHAHA... thats like getting your a$$ kicked by your sister while your friends are watching
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
4Ryan6

4Ryan6

Champion
Apr 14, 2002
20,610
6
52,915
:lol: Has this question ever been asked before?

You get what you pay for, simple as that, and for myself AMD would have to have a major historical upset to ever get me to spend another penny of my money on AMD anything!

And that's being said by a past AMD fan!

However, IMO, AMD has let me down with all their claims that turned into useless dribble, and has lost a loyal customer!

Now if in the future somehow AMD can pull a rabbit out of the hat, I may reconsider, but for what's available now?

It will be a cold day in Hell before AMD gets my money!

I like the performance Intel is delivering, simple as that! :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
H

Hitman_4761

Honorable
Jan 15, 2013
39
0
10,540
this solves everything !!

Core I5 is much better than FX-8350

yeah , you guy opened my eyes ! LOL
i was counting the core numbers
and i was not counting the performance "games"

ok that is it
i Will buy a Core I5 this month

but WHICH ONE ??
is Intel i5 4670K a good choice
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
AnEwG

AnEwG

Honorable
Dec 31, 2013
1,190
0
11,460
It is obvious that the game is not well optimized to run on more than 4 cores/threads as illustrated by the fact that a hyper threaded hexa core i7 delivers the same performance as a Quad core i5 Intel. Simply put the game is not optimized for AMD platforms with higher cores/thread count. That is actually more of the developers mistake. AMD compete quite well in better multi threaded titles. But since it is not certain whether more other titles in the future would be optimizing higher than 4 threads efficiently, Intel is the right choice right now.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Z

zielritter

Honorable
Nov 4, 2013
80
0
10,660


Same sentiments here. I owned an Athlon XP all the way up through the 8350. The 8350 even running at near 9590 speeds just couldn't keep any modern gpu fed on most of the games I play. I'm not going to drop $400 on a gpu just to have it hamstrung at 70% by my "octo core" Amd cpu.

Switched to a 3570k, oveclocked it to 4.3 on stock voltage and never looked back. Heck, even added another gpu and it happily keeps both at 85% usage or better all the damn time.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
vmN

vmN

Honorable
Oct 27, 2013
1,666
0
12,160
It is not about the number of cores, unless it is specifically optimize for that.

Haswell really have some potential if optimize correctly, and I believe intel will follow that path, which could mean that all haswell processors could bring out more processing power if developers start using massive AVX2 SIMD arrays.(1 example)

If developers is going to start utilizing the newer instructions sets supported by haswell, haswell could actually get much much betetr performance, we are talking about 30-60% is certain applications over ivy-bridge. NOTE: But my guesses would be that it would remain rather untouched on gaming.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
4Ryan6

4Ryan6

Champion
Apr 14, 2002
20,610
6
52,915


Before that becomes a real concern, you'll probably be already upgraded to a platform past what you're asking about now, hardware has far surpassed softwares ability to take advantage of what's already here.

Even with CPUs sporting hyper threading capabilities allowing illusionary split core use allowing the false illusion of doubling your cores, when in some games it doesn't add any performance gains at all, and it some games and applications it actually hurts performance.

You originally asked about Crysis3 being coming? but Crysis3 is old news, and gaming is actually going to be more critical with the GPU you game with.

There's your next question!?

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
RobCrezz

RobCrezz

Expert
Ambassador
Mar 14, 2013
19,080
99
75,190


Its far less than that even, I think Steam said that around 50% are still on dual cores.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
vmN

vmN

Honorable
Oct 27, 2013
1,666
0
12,160
Games would need to be optimized for weak 8 cores, to actually have a benefit over an I5.
Game-developers wont do that, future applications would require more and stronger cores, and that is no where the near future we are talking alot of years ahead.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

AshyCFC

Honorable
Oct 12, 2013
2,514
0
13,460
Dual cores are VERY common, i3's/pentiums are common and not to mention dual core celerons floating about.

Core count really is not relative to gaming performance, I mean look at the FX-4100/4300 they are quad core and get trashed by the i3 4130 which is a dual core.

In terms of future proof it's a whole NOBODY KNOWS. Future proofing questions are some of the hardest to answer.

Whenever you buy a piece of tech keep in mind in 2-3 years it may be outdated, it lasts you longer be proud.

My mum has been using an old single core pentium for about 10years.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
AnEwG

AnEwG

Honorable
Dec 31, 2013
1,190
0
11,460
Weaker cores or not, if is is not well multi-threaded going with a higher core count won't improve performance regardless of the platform. The charts above prove that, even for Intel processors. On the other hand a well-multi threaded title will show real difference in performance when running on a 6/8 core chip whether from Intel or AMD.

i3-4130 is a 4 threads processor with the same FPU count as the two FX quad chips which are older and are/were priced lower than their i3 SB/IB counterparts.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ewok93

ewok93

Dignified
Mar 18, 2013
4,634
0
16,960
Sorry, I meant of gamers. One large company probably has about 500 people using similar computers, most likely with dual cores. Schools often provide students with laptops with dual cores, but these are not for gaming. There isn't much future proofing with CPUs as by the time games have progressed to using more cores, you'll want a new CPU anyway. Get what is best NOW for what you need. If you're playing games that run just as well on an 8320 as an i7 like BF4 and Crysis 3 can, get that and save some money. More realistically, if you're playing an assortment of games, some that run awfully on an 8320 and really well on an i5, get an i5. Just get what you need.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom