AMD... Why have you forsaken me?

I have been catching a lot of grief at work lately about being a AMD “fan boy”…
First off let me explain myself a little bit. I am in the I.S. industry. Previously I owned my own business at this time AMD was debuting their Athlon XP’s and Intel was debuting their P4 Hyper threading stuff. My AMD rep would often stop in and give us rebates, literature, and sometimes press kits with samples for us to “test” and give him some feedback. He also brought us lunch on occasion, and kept us educated on their product. This helped us sell systems and keep current on technology. On the other side of that, a Intel rep at a conference we went to gave us a stuffed Intel doll. So short of some of our distributers trying to push the expensive stuff down our throat we had very little interaction.
It seemed every time I would decide to build a Intel system, it’s around the time or right before they abandon a design and start fresh. I end up with a poor excuse for a over hyped system that Intel decided was garbage and went back to the drawing board. First example was a 2.4 HT P4. This cpu ran extremely hot and did not last long. My next was a Intel LGA775 P4 630, which was a 3.0 Prescott. This cpu got so hot and had such a poor heat sink design that the motherboard warped under the odd plastic clips. This cpu was rma-ed multiple times and was not stable.
My first AMD system was a 1800 T-bred. This thing was so stable, it was actually stable at like 40% over clock, Same with the 2500 Barton after that. Next was a disappointment the AMD 3200 754. Just because of the short lived socket and little support. I then built a FX57 this was the fastest single core x86 processor. I still use this computer as a Ubuntu media system almost 8 years later. I replaced that system with a AM2 Phenom 9950 black edition.
This brings me to what I am catching flack at work about. The Core 2 duo’s were out and the first Core I 7’s were coming out when I built this system. My AMD is a 65 nm processor with 512 (KB) L2, and 2048 (KB) L3. This is a joke compared to the Intel comparable systems from the same price and time period. 2007-2008 and Core2 duo e8600. I love my Phenom, and I work with core 2 duos and i5’s all day. I know they benchmark better, but my system just seems to run much better. Is this because my system is built with better components like WD 10k raptors, 8 gig corsair low latency xms ram, ASUS m3a motherboard, 2 Sapphire 1 gig HD Crossfire video cards, 1200w pc power and cooling psu. Or are the Intel’s really just a better system?
So I am at that point now where I am ready to build a new system again. I know the pros of Intel and I have read about AMD’s up and coming stuff. So do I wait or do I build a I core 7?
AMD has always done good for me and every Intel I have ever build absolutely sucked. But I want performance, faster than what I have now and something I won’t be upgrading for a long while.
I have already started buying some stuff for my new system, SSD’s case and PSU. So this is going to happen soon I hope. Any help would be amazing…

Thanks
26 answers Last reply
More about forsaken
  1. buy yourself a T 1100 ...

    computers these days are no longer all about the componets but the software that uses them ...

    todays software is lagging way way behind the techolongy of the day ( you can thank computer piracy for that )
  2. Well hardware still matters to me. What should I be reasearching to build?
  3. It really depends on what you intend to use your system for, when measuring performance. Then I would wait for the Bulldozer benchmarks and see how AMD's top performer does compared to the competition, which currently is the Sandy Bridge mainstream CPU. I get the impression you are ready to build in the next couple months, so I wouldn't bother waiting for the performance Sandy's which are due out in the 3rd quarter, or the Ivy Bridge (22 nm shrink of Sandy Bridge) which are due out in the 4th quarter.
  4. If you know the i5 quads, they're already overkill for a regular user. Nowadays the CPUs are ahead of the applications by quite a big margin so any quad will do the trick for you unless you run some very CPU heavy programs.
  5. @westernohiopc

    I hear ya man your past hardware track record is very similar to mine, I still remember the sting of my FX57 being dethroned by the Core 2 Duo, seeing as how before that build I had never spent that much money on hardware, but the FX57 was king of the hill for almost a year.

    Even at that it is a joke compared to what's out here today, but it was what it was in it's day!

    My AMD loyalty has long since been destroyed and honestly I'm seriously disgusted with both camps still after all this time doing the CPU clock three step dance, while we sit around happy for the crumbs falling from the tables of AMD and Intel.

    There is no fully justified reason both camps do not have a 4.0Ghz CPU on the market, they release a new platform and drop the introductory speed down to 2.8, 3.0, 3.2, 3.4, or maybe even 3.5ghz, are they all scared of 4.0ghz?

    I've been overclocking to 4.0ghz now and beyond for about 2 years, have you ever seen your desktop pop in at 4.0ghz, it's pretty impressive actually and as one of my good friends tells me I'm spoiled, and he is right!

    If you can take an AMD Black Edition CPU and overclock it stably to 4.0Ghz, and beyond, there's no reason it couldn't be actually released as a 4ghz CPU, even with a locked multiplier, so why the fear to breach 4.0ghz, and continue the CPU shuffle two steps forward one step back?

    I'm tired of waiting for AMD to pull a rabbit out of the hat, if they manage to do so after all this time, fine, I'll just build another machine and sell what I presently have, Maybe, or keep it and demote it to doing something else.

    If you want to build in the very near future, when the motherboard chipset fiasco is finished get yourself an Intel p67 chipset 1155 motherboard, a Sandy Bridge either i5 2500K or i7 2600K, and DDR3 memory to match the highest overclockable state the motherboard you choose will support and run.

    I'm presently running an i5 2500K overclocked to 4500mhz, at the 2500Ks default speed, it outperformed my AMD 965 BE that was overclocked to 4.2ghz, with the 2500K clocked to 4500mhz, it completely slaughters and buries the AMD 965 BE.

    That's my 2 cents! Ryan

    Below was all run in WinXP 32bit, using a EVGA 580GTX not overclocked:

    AMD X4 965BE default speed 3.4G overclocked to 4.2Ghz
    3DM06 > 22,957
    SM2 > 8,433
    SM3 > 11,587
    CPU > 6,254

    Intel 2500K stock at 3.3ghz
    3DM06 > 24,253
    SM2 > 9,192
    SM3 > 12,594
    CPU > 5,988

    Intel 2500K clocked to 4.5Ghz
    3DM06 > 32,125
    SM2 > 12,451
    SM3 > 15,732
    CPU > 8,571

    Intel 2500K clocked to 4.7Ghz
    3DM06 > 33,273
    SM2 > 12,968
    SM3 > 16,119
    CPU > 8,987
  6. I say just wait for Bulldozer, then decide.
  7. I would agree, wait if you can.
    If you felt abandoned by Intel in the past b/c they would move on to a new socket then that's certainly not looking like it will change in the future.
  8. Thank you EVERONE for the replys.

    Dadiggle,
    you are correct I am just a consumer at this point. The difference is, like most of us here we are not the average consumer. We research the product more than the average user. We dont just buy it cause the guy at best buy said its the best, and I may just be speaking for me but Honestly the systems I build for me are always the best of the best at the time that I build them. I have not used the full potential of a computer I have built since 2003 or earler. I do it because I like having a bad ass computer, faster than any of my tech friends. Not because I need a new system. :)
  9. Well the least you could do would be cure cancer by putting all that power into folding @ home. :lol:
    Don't worry, you can still stick it to your friends and tell them you're curing cancer faster than they are.
  10. Always wait for the Next-Gen Big Thing -- and then buy the best last-gen product you can get your hands on

    :)
  11. westernohiopc said:
    Thank you EVERONE for the replys.

    Dadiggle,
    you are correct I am just a consumer at this point. The difference is, like most of us here we are not the average consumer. We research the product more than the average user. We dont just buy it cause the guy at best buy said its the best, and I may just be speaking for me but Honestly the systems I build for me are always the best of the best at the time that I build them. I have not used the full potential of a computer I have built since 2003 or earler. I do it because I like having a bad ass computer, faster than any of my tech friends. Not because I need a new system. :)


    OK, so it's more of an epeen thing than a specific use :P. Also seems like money is no object, so in that case I would definitely wait and see how Bulldozer fares against the performance Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge CPUs this year. If I had an unlimited budget, I'd be looking at a 10-core SB or IB or 8-core BD setup with triple GTX-580's, so as to play that awesome Epic unreal engine at max settings: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/unreal-engine-next-generation-graphics,12324.html :D.
  12. fazers_on_stun said:
    I'd be looking at a 10-core SB or IB or 8-core BD setup with triple GTX-580's, so as to play that awesome Epic unreal engine at max settings


    Hey while we're building a fantasy system I think we should use an innovative cooling solution which basically consists of Halle Berry and Shakira bending over and blowing air over the motherboard.
  13. CopaMundial said:
    Hey while we're building a fantasy system I think we should use an innovative cooling solution which basically consists of Halle Berry and Shakira bending over and blowing air over the motherboard.


    LOL! Au naturelle, of course - can't get those lungs pumping when constrained by clothing..

    Of course, that would add immensely to the price, seeing as how those dastardly Kadhafi kids jacked up the going price (for private concerts anyway) to a million bucks for about an hour's worth of work..
  14. westernohiopc said:
    I have been catching a lot of grief at work lately about being a AMD “fan boy”…
    First off let me explain myself a little bit. I am in the I.S. industry. Previously I owned my own business at this time AMD was debuting their Athlon XP’s and Intel was debuting their P4 Hyper threading stuff. My AMD rep would often stop in and give us rebates, literature, and sometimes press kits with samples for us to “test” and give him some feedback. He also brought us lunch on occasion, and kept us educated on their product. This helped us sell systems and keep current on technology. On the other side of that, a Intel rep at a conference we went to gave us a stuffed Intel doll. So short of some of our distributers trying to push the expensive stuff down our throat we had very little interaction.
    It seemed every time I would decide to build a Intel system, it’s around the time or right before they abandon a design and start fresh. I end up with a poor excuse for a over hyped system that Intel decided was garbage and went back to the drawing board. First example was a 2.4 HT P4. This cpu ran extremely hot and did not last long. My next was a Intel LGA775 P4 630, which was a 3.0 Prescott. This cpu got so hot and had such a poor heat sink design that the motherboard warped under the odd plastic clips. This cpu was rma-ed multiple times and was not stable.
    My first AMD system was a 1800 T-bred. This thing was so stable, it was actually stable at like 40% over clock, Same with the 2500 Barton after that. Next was a disappointment the AMD 3200 754. Just because of the short lived socket and little support. I then built a FX57 this was the fastest single core x86 processor. I still use this computer as a Ubuntu media system almost 8 years later. I replaced that system with a AM2 Phenom 9950 black edition.
    This brings me to what I am catching flack at work about. The Core 2 duo’s were out and the first Core I 7’s were coming out when I built this system. My AMD is a 65 nm processor with 512 (KB) L2, and 2048 (KB) L3. This is a joke compared to the Intel comparable systems from the same price and time period. 2007-2008 and Core2 duo e8600. I love my Phenom, and I work with core 2 duos and i5’s all day. I know they benchmark better, but my system just seems to run much better. Is this because my system is built with better components like WD 10k raptors, 8 gig corsair low latency xms ram, ASUS m3a motherboard, 2 Sapphire 1 gig HD Crossfire video cards, 1200w pc power and cooling psu. Or are the Intel’s really just a better system?
    So I am at that point now where I am ready to build a new system again. I know the pros of Intel and I have read about AMD’s up and coming stuff. So do I wait or do I build a I core 7?
    AMD has always done good for me and every Intel I have ever build absolutely sucked. But I want performance, faster than what I have now and something I won’t be upgrading for a long while.
    I have already started buying some stuff for my new system, SSD’s case and PSU. So this is going to happen soon I hope. Any help would be amazing…

    Thanks


    A Pentium IV 2.4GHz Northwood with HT would have been a Northwood C. Northwood Cs had an 800Mhz FSB as well as Hyperthreading technology and 512KB of L2 Cache on die. These CPUs were also Socket 478 and did not run that hot at all (especially not compared to some of the oven we have today).

    The Prescott based Pentium IV processors were a waste of money IMHO. I have no idea what made you decide to buy one of those.

    Now that having been said...

    AMD is far far behind in terms of raw computational capabilities. They also lag behind in terms of Point to Point Interconnect technology as well as SIMD capabilities. If you care about Performance (as it appears you do)... then there is little reason to buy AMD nowadays but this is slated to change come Bulldozer in June/July 2011.

    Maybe wait till then and see?
  15. 4Ryan6 said:
    @westernohiopc

    I hear ya man your past hardware track record is very similar to mine, I still remember the sting of my FX57 being dethroned by the Core 2 Duo, seeing as how before that build I had never spent that much money on hardware, but the FX57 was king of the hill for almost a year.

    Even at that it is a joke compared to what's out here today, but it was what it was in it's day!

    My AMD loyalty has long since been destroyed and honestly I'm seriously disgusted with both camps still after all this time doing the CPU clock three step dance, while we sit around happy for the crumbs falling from the tables of AMD and Intel.

    There is no fully justified reason both camps do not have a 4.0Ghz CPU on the market, they release a new platform and drop the introductory speed down to 2.8, 3.0, 3.2, 3.4, or maybe even 3.5ghz, are they all scared of 4.0ghz?

    I've been overclocking to 4.0ghz now and beyond for about 2 years, have you ever seen your desktop pop in at 4.0ghz, it's pretty impressive actually and as one of my good friends tells me I'm spoiled, and he is right!

    If you can take an AMD Black Edition CPU and overclock it stably to 4.0Ghz, and beyond, there's no reason it couldn't be actually released as a 4ghz CPU, even with a locked multiplier, so why the fear to breach 4.0ghz, and continue the CPU shuffle two steps forward one step back?

    I'm tired of waiting for AMD to pull a rabbit out of the hat, if they manage to do so after all this time, fine, I'll just build another machine and sell what I presently have, Maybe, or keep it and demote it to doing something else.

    If you want to build in the very near future, when the motherboard chipset fiasco is finished get yourself an Intel p67 chipset 1155 motherboard, a Sandy Bridge either i5 2500K or i7 2600K, and DDR3 memory to match the highest overclockable state the motherboard you choose will support and run.

    I'm presently running an i5 2500K overclocked to 4500mhz, at the 2500Ks default speed, it outperformed my AMD 965 BE that was overclocked to 4.2ghz, with the 2500K clocked to 4500mhz, it completely slaughters and buries the AMD 965 BE.

    That's my 2 cents! Ryan

    Maybe they don't want to have a TDP of 200W(except maybe SB)? Not to mention the heatsink that would have to go with it. It really wouldn't be worth it for companies to have a high Ghz processor when we can just overclock it for the performance. You would have to fine tune the voltage when you first got the processor with it at stock 4ghz anyway.

    I think Intel is holding back until AMD brings out something; a 4ghz Sandy Bridge might end AMD before they can get BD out the door.
  16. Haserath said:
    Maybe they don't want to have a TDP of 200W(except maybe SB)? Not to mention the heatsink that would have to go with it. It really wouldn't be worth it for companies to have a high Ghz processor when we can just overclock it for the performance. You would have to fine tune the voltage when you first got the processor with it at stock 4ghz anyway.

    I think Intel is holding back until AMD brings out something; a 4ghz Sandy Bridge might end AMD before they can get BD out the door.


    I highly doubt a 32nm quad core at 4GHz would hit 200w TDP. A QX9650 @ 45nm running 4GHz bareley hit its 135w TDP. In fact it hit 127w I think.

    Most SBs right now out of the box with a nice after market air cooler hit 4.5GHz, some do 5GHz. No voltage tweaking for the 4.5GHz.

    Nice to see ya 4Ryan. been a while. I wish I could do 4GHz but 3GHz is fine for my Q6600.
  17. jimmysmitty said:
    I highly doubt a 32nm wuad core at 4GHz would hit 200w TDP. A QX9650 @ 45nm running 4GHz bareley hit its 135w TDP. In fact it hit 127w I think.

    Most SBs right now out of the box with a nice after market air cooler hit 4.5GHz, some do 5GHz. No voltage tweaking for the 4.5GHz.

    Nice to see ya 4Ryan. been a while. I wish I could do 4GHz but 3GHz is fine for my Q6600.

    I did add in 'except for Sandy Bridge' after that 200W TDP.

    But the old i7 9xx series consumed tons at 4ghz.
    http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2010/11/10/intel-core-i7-950-review/7
    Even the decent core i7 930 in that review that overclocked well would've used up quite a bit of juice at 4ghz.
  18. Quote:
    then I suggest you start getting into video editing and try out Adobe CS5. You will find that a big truck fitted with a ferrari engine ain't that fast.



    I use Adobe CS5, while burning blu rays and and streaming Tversity without a snag. Like I said I have no issues with my 9950 BE. Ialso can run Auto Cad and Solid Works 3d at same time without issues.

    Like I said This system is more than I will ever need,
    EXCEPT that I cant tell my tech friends MINES BIGGER THAN YOURS anymore......
  19. westernohiopc said:
    I use Adobe CS5, while burning blu rays and and streaming Tversity without a snag. Like I said I have no issues with my 9950 BE. Ialso can run Auto Cad and Solid Works 3d at same time without issues.

    Like I said This system is more than I will ever need,
    EXCEPT that I cant tell my tech friends MINES BIGGER THAN YOURS anymore......


    The Olde Original Phenoms weren't so bad -- except they wouldn't clock (certainly without the 'magic pins' of the sb710-50) and were 65nm 'heaters'.

    As with the PIIs you could get a nice bump in memory by upping the IMC/NB (but you could more readily fry the IMC with too much voltage as compared to the PIIs). If you got that 9950BE up past 3GHz you were running quite 'snappy'
  20. Wisecracker said:
    The Olde Original Phenoms weren't so bad -- except they wouldn't clock (certainly without the 'magic pins' of the sb710-50) and were 65nm 'heaters'.

    As with the PIIs you could get a nice bump in memory by upping the IMC/NB (but you could more readily fry the IMC with too much voltage as compared to the PIIs). If you got that 9950BE up past 3GHz you were running quite 'snappy'



    sb-71050? whats that about? I have yet to really get into OCing this I ahve played with it a little.
  21. westernohiopc said:
    sb-71050? whats that about? I have yet to really get into OCing this I ahve played with it a little.


    The Magic Pins !!! from TGDaily. Here is the THG forum discussion "AMD has an ace up its sleeve - magic 6 pins " from June, 2008.

    You are a big part of history --- and didn't even know it [:jaydeejohn:5]

    AMD 'Black Edition' processors have an unlocked CPU multiplier that can be raised in .5 increments. Your 9950BE at stock is clocked at 13x200MHz (that is, the CPU multiplier X the System Clock). You may raise the multiplier to '13.5' and your 9950BE will be running 2.7GHz ... 14x200MHz = 2.8GHz, right?

    Prior to the south bridge 7xx series, the original Phenoms had timing (or Phase-Locked Loop - PLL) issues and would not over-clock very well, even with the unlocked CPU multiplier. The '6 magic pins' on the Phenom CPUs worked with the sb7xx chipsets to improve the PLL timing and over-clocking. This was done in the system BIOS with something called Advanced Clock Calibration, or ACC.

    In addition to improving over-clocking, enthusiasts discovered some more magic --- ACC would unlock CPU cores on PhenomII and AthlonII dual- and triple-core processors, and turn single-core Sempron processors into dual-core AthonIIs.

    IIRC, the unlocking 'magic' first started on Biostar AM2/AM2+ motherboards -- and spread like wildfire. Folks today generally get P-O'd when they can't unlock their AMD CPUs


    :lol:
  22. I would like to revisit this if I may...

    I now have my corsair vengeance pc 1280 16 gig ddr3 memory, Intel 320 series SSD 120 gig hdd, 4 WD 1.5 TB drives, Lite-on optical dvd rw drives, and even a i5 2500k. "Micro Center actually begged me to buy it, I paid less than 180 us after rebate" Case, PSU etc...

    I am glad I purchased some of these early especially with HDD prices now...

    What I don’t have is a motherboard. I was recommended Asus mil speck 5 year warranty motherboard, but im not a big fan of Asus... Also the different chip-sets for these also kind of confuse me... 61, 67, z68???? I have not done the research to see what the differences are.


    So before I purchase a motherboard, I want to make sure that Intel is the way to go especially since the AMD "bulldozers" are out.

    Its not to late to build my wife the Intel and build me a nice AMD....

    I will also need to purchase video cards, but I guess that’s another tread.

    My ultimate goal is to build a reliable, stable, fast system. That after I build and set my raid up that I don’t have to work on and tweak.

    I want to build it and it be dummy proof. My wife claims to just press the power button and surf. Her famous line is, I dont know what happened. It just Blue Screened on me... I’m like, It never once ever blue screened on me... But now it wont post... lol.


    So it needs to be “wife proof” lolololol
    Im no longer worried about building a faster system than my friends, I just need it to run what I do well.

    Some of the apps I run are adobe CS5, Autocad, Solid works, Tversity, Office 2010, Dreamweaver, and an occasional flight sim game..
  23. forget AMD, they are dead to me now, i am a total converted Ex-AMD fan. the FX processors perform worse than the phenom II range. If a company can make their new product worse and charge more for it, i will have nothing to do with them. What you want is a core i5 2500k or i7 2600k if you take advantage of its extra threads, which cs5 probably would. if you dont want to overclock, go with the non-"K" versions. Z68 board is the go. Something from Asrock or MSI are what I would be looking at, the asrock is a good budget choice with new features, msi is more expensive but is a more trusted brand i suppose. Gigabyte is stuck with the old BIOS system rather than UEFI, and ASUS....well as far as i'm concearned their boards are running behind everyone else in terms of new features and are a little overpriced, but are generally reliable. I havn't looked into the raid capabilities of boards since i dont like the reliability of raid, so i wouldnt bother with it. A single SSD is fast enough.
  24. Quote:
    whats wrong with normal win32?


    A lot. Theres a lot of old, legacy stuff that does not work, or does not work well. Really, COM, MFC, .NET, all the same: Wrappers around Win32 messages. Thats all.

    Also, Win32 needs to die, the old 4GB [assuming you bother to set the LAA flag...] Address Space limitation needs to die. Start making x64 builds. While that won't stop crappy programming, it will make the effects of memory leaks far more minimal [due to needing to hit 16GB to finally fail a malloc statement...].

    .Net was actually a VERY good interface; theres a reason why C# is almost ready to pass C++ in popularity. Too bad MSFT is killing it in favor of Metro. Every time MSFT gets us to switch API's, they ditch it in favor of something else. Thats part of the reason why software is lagging so much.

    ...That, and C/C++ don't even have native threading libraries yet. That comes early next year, and should help a ton. [As if anyone would ever use those crappy POSIX standards for threading...]
  25. I really can't see any reason for an enthusiast to purchase an amd cpu over an intel cpu now. I can't believe amd's new arch couldn't in any measurable way improve over their previous. Hard not to be disappointed, but I am very happy with my 2500k. I still plan on getting their next gen video card though.
  26. jjtober1 said:
    I really can't see any reason for an enthusiast to purchase an amd cpu over an intel cpu now. I can't believe amd's new arch couldn't in any measurable way improve over their previous. Hard not to be disappointed, but I am very happy with my 2500k. I still plan on getting their next gen video card though.


    Again, BD was optimised for server loads, hence the focus on clocks, CMT, and Integer performance. Unfortunatly, other areas [FP performance, latency] took a hit leading to limited gains on the desktop.
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs AMD Intel Product