Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Does AMD Radeon GPU Mean AMD CPU?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 18, 2012 7:58:21 PM

Hello,

If I get a motherboard with PCI-E 3.0, then I'll probably want to buy a graphics card to go with it, which proably means going with AMD.

If I buy a high-end AMD GPU, is there any benefit to buying an AMD CPU to go with it?

I had been leaning toward the i7-3930k with an nVidia card, but now I'm not so sure about the graphics card.

Thank you,
~Steve

More about : amd radeon gpu amd cpu

March 18, 2012 8:06:10 PM

there is no benefit to go with amd gpu and cpu. it doesnt matter if you go with amd or intel cpu.
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 79 à CPUs
a b U Graphics card
March 18, 2012 8:07:10 PM

doesn't matter if you mix cpu and gpu brands.
PCI-E 3.0 has only just got a bandwidth benefit for modern cards. This may change to a bigger benefit on the GTX680.

Share
Related resources
March 18, 2012 8:20:52 PM

No. There is no benefit. Go with an Intel CPU. Even an Intel i3 beats the high end AMD CPU's.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b U Graphics card
March 18, 2012 9:15:03 PM

thenerdal said:
No. There is no benefit. Go with an Intel CPU. Even an Intel i3 beats the high end AMD CPU's.



Hi :) 

No it doesnt.... my 1100T as an example....

All the best Brett :) 
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
March 18, 2012 9:24:58 PM

thenerdal said:
No. There is no benefit. Go with an Intel CPU. Even an Intel i3 beats the high end AMD CPU's.



and here we gooo.....again.....
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
March 18, 2012 9:34:24 PM

Brett928S2 said:
Hi :) 

No it doesnt.... my 1100T as an example....

All the best Brett :) 


it doens necessarily beat it hands down


if a task could use all the cores then the 1100t would be faster but and i5 would be better for games and things than the 1100t


and the socket 1155 is regarded as the best platform for games at the moment


especially as the soon to be released ivy bridge cpu's are going to use the same socket
m
0
l
March 18, 2012 9:58:10 PM

thenerdal, that depends on the task as well, i3 doesnt beat amd in everything, also a slightly overclocked phenom x4 cand outgame a stock i3, but remember the good AMDs, like phenom II and athlon II, are much older than a sandy bridge cpu. lik, i think they came out just a little while after core 2's and a bit before the lga 1156
core i's. anyone have a bit more exact time frame than that?
m
0
l
a c 185 à CPUs
a c 109 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
March 18, 2012 10:03:48 PM

Phenoms are on par with core 2 duo/quad
m
0
l
March 18, 2012 10:08:22 PM

AMD CPU are cheap and they may not be as good in bechmarks as intel but AMD CPUS are the best all rounders.
IF you go with AMD cpu, you can get a motherboard with pci 3 for a price much lower than the intel ones.
And AMD cpus can over clock like a beast.
m
0
l
a c 145 à CPUs
a c 147 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
March 18, 2012 10:37:24 PM

The Intel i5-2500K, at $200, is by far the best deal that exists for a gamer.

You can of course spend a little more but I wouldn't go with AMD or get a cheaper CPU.

As for the GRAPHICS CARD there are several choices. NVidia's new GTX6xx series still isn't released but IMO the following is the card to beat at the high end:

Sapphire Tech HD7950 OC

(this card is about $490, has a dual bios for overclocking, a really awesome and quiet cooling solution and has been overclocked by up to 45%!! I recommend no more than 25% though and do your research on BOTH the Wattage requirement for the system and the AMP requirement for an OVERCLOCKED version of this card. A slightly overclocked HD7950 OC needs about 50Amps but I'd get at least 60Amps on the +12V rail).

SUMMARY:
- Intel CPU's for gamers only
- Graphics Cards (recommend HD7xxx or GTX6xx)
- PCIe 3.0 for new motherboards (does not require Ivy Bridge. I saw a great Asus 1155 board for $180 with PCIe 3)
- BALANCE FOR GAMING (too cheap a CPU and it's a bottleneck. Too much money spent on a CPU and you're not spending that on Graphics).

*High-end CPU/GPU balance for price:
- Intel CPU $200 to $350
- AMD/NVidia Graphics $200 to $500

**It's okay to buy a $300 Intel CPU and "ONLY" a $200 graphics card. Many games will still be maxed out. This CPU will be used for video conversion but it also means you CAN buy a much better graphics card in the future.

So building a balanced system is not just about what you want to do with it NOW but also in the future (so don't buy a cheap CPU that you will end up replacing soon).
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b U Graphics card
March 18, 2012 10:38:49 PM

Hi :) 

I dont know where you all get this I3 beats everything rubbish...

An 1100T beats ALL I3`s .....almost all I5`s and some i7`s ....

All the best Brett :) 
m
0
l
March 18, 2012 10:50:35 PM

Man o man, How the hell can a intel i5 2500 k which costs 200 $beat a 8 core AMD 8120 which costs 150$
Guys did u look at the bechmarks , all these CPU give you a frame rate of more than 50 FPS, what else do u need.
Those 50 $ + 50 $ cheaper motherboard can be spent on a Graphics card and will give you much better performance.
This is a fact. Please explain me if I am wrong.
m
0
l
a c 145 à CPUs
a c 147 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
March 18, 2012 10:54:15 PM

i5-2500K vs 1100T:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPw3gPpekxs

*The i5-2500K blows the 1100T away for gaming (about half way through the video).

**If you want a great gaming system with price in mind the i5-2500K is likely best. If you want to spend a little more (especially if spending $500 on a graphics card) I recommend the i7-2600K.
m
0
l
a c 145 à CPUs
a c 147 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
March 18, 2012 11:05:29 PM

mitunchidamparam said:
Man o man, How the hell can a intel i5 2500 k which costs 200 $beat a 8 core AMD 8120 which costs 150$
Guys did u look at the bechmarks , all these CPU give you a frame rate of more than 50 FPS, what else do u need.
Those 50 $ + 50 $ cheaper motherboard can be spent on a Graphics card and will give you much better performance.
This is a fact. Please explain me if I am wrong.


"Intel i5 2500K did beat the FX-8120 with more than three times better results in some tests and throughout our tests it showed better or similar performance. As they are both priced similarly around 200USD, it may be hard to justify a reason why you should buy the FX-8120."

*I also believe that there is an issue with Windows not yet properly supporting 8 physical cores. This shouldn't affect gaming benchmarks.
m
0
l
March 18, 2012 11:15:16 PM

If you want to run SLI, don't use AMD. The lucid chip, to me anyways, seems to hold back the true performance of a Nvidia GPU's in SLI with a AMD CPU.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b U Graphics card
March 19, 2012 12:15:49 AM

photonboy said:
i5-2500K vs 1100T:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPw3gPpekxs

*The i5-2500K blows the 1100T away for gaming (about half way through the video).

**If you want a great gaming system with price in mind the i5-2500K is likely best. If you want to spend a little more (especially if spending $500 on a graphics card) I recommend the i7-2600K.



Hi :) 

Perhaps you should look at this....

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

All the best Brett :) 
m
0
l
a c 145 à CPUs
a c 147 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
March 19, 2012 12:34:31 AM

You can buy motherboards that support both Crossfire and SLI.
(Until they solve micro-stuter and the periodic frame rate drop issue I'll never invest in two cards.)

Basically gamers should get Intel CPU's such as the i5-2500K or the i7-2600K. There are no gaming benchmarks for good gaming systems that are better with AMD.

If I was building a system today, I would personally build like this:

1. Motherboard:
1155 motherboard (P8Z68-V Pro Asus) that supports PCIe v3 (it's not Ivy Bridge)

2. CPU:
Intel i7-2500K

3. Graphics:
- Sapphire Tech HD7950 OC, or
- GTX680

For #3 we're still awaiting benchmarks. Will also have to factor in overclocking (HD7950 got unofficial 45% over stock), CUDA, PhysX v3 etc.

*NOTE: NVidia has a new PhysX v3 coming. Only the GTX6xx (and higher) support this fully. No PhysX v3 games have been created yet. This simply means more physics calculations. I'm not sure how big a deal this is.

NVidia or AMD?
I have an HD5870, but I'm leaning towards an NVidia GTX680. I'm going to compare it to the HD7950 OC from Sapphire Tech but basically NVidia has my nod for driver support, PhysX and CUDA. However, that was the deal when I bought my HD5870 and the GTX4xx series ran so hot I didn't go with NVIDIA.

(so I'm buying NVidia unless the screw up somehow)
m
0
l
a c 145 à CPUs
a c 147 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
March 19, 2012 12:41:04 AM

Brett928S2 said:
Hi :) 

Perhaps you should look at this....

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

All the best Brett :) 


WATCH. THE. VIDEO.
(as mentioned, synthetic benchmarks are not a good judge of gaming potential. To do that, you need to run games and benchmark them.)
m
0
l
a c 145 à CPUs
a c 147 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
March 19, 2012 12:57:24 AM

"SLI and CF are actually really great bro IMO experience with them the only difference was allot more performance and the need to DL some hot fix drivers to enable the dual cards in some Brand new games when they first came out. PS would you even use CUDA if going to Nvidia ? and how many games that you own actually have Physx ? and AMD drivers are really solid I have just as many issues with my Nvidias. "

- SLI/Crossfire. It can work okay but just be aware there are PROS and CONS to this. For myself the Cons outweight the Pros. Here's a really great article: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-geforce-stut...

*Note that the new HD7xxx cards can turn off almost 100% of the second card (or the second GPU for a dual-GPU card).

- DRIVER SUPPORT. The general consensus appears to be that NVidia is quicker for new games and in general is a little better. I've been very happy with my HD5870 so, I guess... whatever. They are both pretty good.

- PHYSX.
No. I don't use it (I have an HD5870). In fact, since PhysX has a big hit on performance I wouldn't have used it in any game that brought my frame rate below 60FPS. If I can get 60FPS and PhysX adds a little eye candy then sure, I'd then use it.

Basically, everything being equal, PhysX would tip the balance. (I'd rather have it and not need it then need it and not have it.)

- CUDA:
I convert a lot of videos. I have several thousand of raw conversion hours of work left to do and my CPU (i7-860) uses all 8 threads at 100% when converting. So I'm hoping a GTX680 will be a huge help.

FYI, the OPENCL initiative is still progressing (basically about using both the CPU and GPU for processing at the same time). I've seen no indication that a good video conversion program will be ready in the next two years using OpenCL so the main option still seems to be CUDA (and Kepler supports OpenCL as well).
m
0
l
March 19, 2012 1:51:52 AM

Thank you all for your comments.

I didn't mean to start any arguments over AMD v. Intel, but I suppose that's bound to happen. I just wanted to know if getting an AMD GPU means I should get an AMD CPU and I think I have enough information to go on. So, again, thank you all.

~Steve
m
0
l
a c 145 à CPUs
a c 147 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
March 19, 2012 5:39:23 AM

to summarize:
wait for the GTX6xx series benchmarks before deciding. The current card to beat for value is the HD7950 OC from Sapphire tech IMO.

And make sure your PSU supplies enough AMPS for the +12V rail. The above HD7950 can easily use 60AMPS if its overclocked (and it has been unofficially by 45% over a stock HD7950).
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
March 19, 2012 6:33:47 AM

60 amps lol? Even 7950 crossfire doesn't use anywhere near that.
m
0
l
a c 145 à CPUs
a c 147 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
March 19, 2012 1:38:18 PM

Quote:
Agreed whom says that 7950 uses 60amps buhahaha


OKAY. I'm pretty sure that I'm incorrect here after more research.

Maybe the source accidentally quoted a Crossfire value.

I'm going to contact Sapphire Tech and see if they can send me the actual requirement for their HD7950 OC both at their native overclock and overclocked by 45% above a stock card (which has been done).

It would be NICE if you and others would refrain from being rude. It degrades us all. How about "I believe you are misinformed..." and quote the PROPER values? Does that work for you?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
March 19, 2012 1:40:13 PM

How about you check your values before posting and stop being offended by people pointing out you were wrong. Does that work for you? :lol: 
m
0
l
a c 145 à CPUs
a c 147 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
March 19, 2012 1:50:20 PM

stosterud said:
Hello,

If I get a motherboard with PCI-E 3.0, then I'll probably want to buy a graphics card to go with it, which proably means going with AMD.

If I buy a high-end AMD GPU, is there any benefit to buying an AMD CPU to go with it?

I had been leaning toward the i7-3930k with an nVidia card, but now I'm not so sure about the graphics card.

Thank you,
~Steve


To summarize:
Your choice of parts is probably about the best value. Building a gaming system is about BALANCE. There's no point in spending $100 on a CPU and $500 on a graphics card.

The core components are:
- Motherboard
- CPU
- Graphics Card

Making further recommendations depends on the games you wish to play and how much you are willing to spend. For example, a GTX560Ti is still a really good graphics card for roughly $200 on sale. You can get a half decent motherboard for $150, and an Intel i5-2500K for about $200.
That's $550.

On the other hand you could spend a lot more such as $350 for an Intel i7-2600K, $200 for an Asus 1155 Sandy Bridge with PCIe v3 support and $490 for a Sapphire Tech HD7950 OC.

There's also the option of waiting and buying both an Ivy Bridge motherboard and the new 22nm CPU for it.

*BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THE VALUE FOR YOUR BUDGET.
m
0
l
March 29, 2012 12:49:49 AM

Best answer selected by stosterud.
m
0
l
!