Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Evening Tech Bits

View
31 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

31. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 11, 2012, 19:11 Mordecai Walfish
 
It is worrying seeing the struggle AMD is going through right now, also being a customer of theirs for the past ~10 years.

The price/performance gap is closing rapidly with newer intel processors, and like was linked below, it seems the 3470/3570k are honestly the best buys out there right now for performance/price. You easily get 30%+ performance increase clock for clock, and thats not to mention the massive overclocking potential their new chips have with low power envelopes.

I currently have an AMD Phenom 2 555 BE that I paid ~$70 for when I got it, and has been unlocked to a quad core that runs at 3.6ghz stable 24/7 (from a stock of 3.2ghz on 2 cores). Coupled with a GTX480 I am really happy with this setup, and because SLI boards are so cheap on the AMD side, I plan on just dropping in another GTX480 when I need an increase in performance. EVGA even changed their return/exchange policy recently to include any damage including sane overclocking, so my card runs with a 133mhz core boost and 170mhz memory boost (833mhz core/1666mhz shader/2020memory) all runs on air cooling with a streamlined airflow setup and massively outperforms what the stock setup would be. This is one of the reasons I have been an AMD customer for processors.. great potential for the price.

For video cards I will always stick with nVidia. I had considered some ATI cards in the past, but after experiencing their driver issues first hand working on friends/family members' computers.. I can safely say I will not be buying one of their cards. It is very rare that I have an issue with nVidia's drivers.. and their support and 3rd party stuff (nvidia inspector, etc) is not rivaled in the AMD camp. The premium in price is worth that for me.


My next processor will be an Intel, the way things are going though.. and I know this sentiment is echoed by many of their core audience. For gamers alone the minimum framerate increase you'll get from using an ivy/sandy bridge is totally worth it, IMO.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
30. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 21:55 eRe4s3r
 
I got a 6core AMD cpu @ 3.2ghz .. I do render stuff, and what gets me every time when I consider buying Intel CPU's got me here as well, I7 + mobo I wanted = 350

That was more than the price for the whole upgrade, mobo, 16gb ram, and cpu from AMD so yeah It was a 6 core AMD cpu for me I saved like 150 compared to the Intel switch (I previously had a Dual Core and then Quad Core Intel Core2) The quad core is now my 2nd pc ;p

But I wanted 6 cores for rendering, couldn't have guessed intel throws out the I7 with 8 threads and pwns everything. It is afaik more than 30% faster than my CPU with 2 less cores. That hurts.
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 20:31 Sepharo
 
The last non-AMD CPU I had was the 66MHz Pentium in my IBM Aptiva.
And the only non-ATI cards I've owned are the Voodoo 3 3000 and Nvidia Ti 4200
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 19:56 HorrorScope
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Sep 7, 2012, 17:32:
Well my view is obviously jaded by what cards I had over the years and I never upgraded into dead technologies, thankfully ;p My upgrades always lasted me 4+ years.. and it seems the 460GTX is lasting longer than that even, because of the slow increase in hardware demands lately.

Agreed, I'm not sure what your CPU is, but if it is an older dual or quad, then updating that could wield much smoother game play then updating the video card.
 
Avatar 17232
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
27. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 19:53 HorrorScope
 
Prez wrote on Sep 7, 2012, 11:13:
I don't find the price performance ratio that different at all, in fact I see better price performance with Intel right now. I'll have to drum up some links where they make plot graphs showing this. AMD is all well below right now.

I'd actually like to see such comparisons - it would give me a reason to try Intel cpu's. If the bang for the buck is indeed on Intel's side, it's news to me and I thank you for bringing it to my attention.


Put the two lines together, I couldn't post it all together, the forum thru an error at me.

http://techreport.com/review/
23246/inside-the-second-gaming-performance-with-today-cpus/8

Results:
For overclockers: 2500k or 3570k are optimal.
For non overclockers throw in: 2400 and 3470.
For newest Architecture which has a few other advantages: 3820.

I am upgrading my wife's old dual core to a i5 3450 MB/Proc for $225, she has a 460 GPU in it now. That will be a massive massive improvement and for example not doing MB/CPU and say upgrading a 460 to a 660 would only be a fraction of the upgrade vs upgrading the CPU instead. IMO times have changed. Now grant you upgrading both is would be amazing. But $225 is much more justifiable for me then $525 at this time for her.

My personal thoughts: I do prefer the compatibility of Intel/Nvidia. However I have had both AMD procs and ATI cards in the past. I am price/performance driven. So if AMD has a real lead over intel/nvidia, I wouldn't hesitate to go that way. Intel right now is > AMD. However Nvidia vs ATI is very close, but then I lean towards Nvidia compatibility with games and choose Nvidia today.

This comment was edited on Sep 7, 2012, 21:14.
 
Avatar 17232
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 18:07 Matshock
 
I wonder what kind of external GPU solution one could make out of a pair of USB 3.0 connections?

I was looking at AMD & Intel integrated GPU benchmarks- they're a step up but they're barley usable for modern games at low resolutions.

Desktops are on the way down now though, no doubt.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 17:32 eRe4s3r
 
Well my view is obviously jaded by what cards I had over the years and I never upgraded into dead technologies, thankfully ;p My upgrades always lasted me 4+ years.. and it seems the 460GTX is lasting longer than that even, because of the slow increase in hardware demands lately.  
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 17:29 bhcompy
 
Creston wrote on Sep 7, 2012, 12:35:
Prez wrote on Sep 7, 2012, 11:13:
I don't find the price performance ratio that different at all, in fact I see better price performance with Intel right now. I'll have to drum up some links where they make plot graphs showing this. AMD is all well below right now.

I'd actually like to see such comparisons - it would give me a reason to try Intel cpu's. If the bang for the buck is indeed on Intel's side, it's news to me and I thank you for bringing it to my attention.

The i2500K, because of its absurd overclocking abilities, currently just destroys any other processor on the planet, AMD and Intel alike, if you're talking about bang for the buck. I'm pretty sure that basically any processor comparison article will tell you so.

Creston

One of the bigger "hidden" costs that is overlooked occasionally is the price of Intel chipset mobos. You can get AM3+ mobos from Asus and such with USB3/FW2/SATA3 that are SLI/Crossfire ready(that is 2 or more higher bandwidth PCIe slots) for under $100. It's a bit harder to find similarly apportioned boards of similar quality for Intel chipsets at that price(plus there's the whole myriad of chipsets you have to deal with, but that's another story.. upgrade paths aren't necessarily included in cost equations).

avianflu wrote on Sep 7, 2012, 14:21:
the underlying issue is that the intel 4000 GPU encroaches upon dedicated GPU's for the first time for real in 20 years. Manufacturers are happy with the simplicity of an integrated GPU on laptops. And desktop sales contune downward. Not a great time for either nvidia or AMD.

Obviously the 4000 will never, ever, touch what a $200 GPU can do but the functionality of the 4000 is power conservative and cheap to manufacture and it handles all directx TandL calls, etc.

Do AMD APUs not exist in your world?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 14:21 avianflu
 
the underlying issue is that the intel 4000 GPU encroaches upon dedicated GPU's for the first time for real in 20 years. Manufacturers are happy with the simplicity of an integrated GPU on laptops. And desktop sales contune downward. Not a great time for either nvidia or AMD.

Obviously the 4000 will never, ever, touch what a $200 GPU can do but the functionality of the 4000 is power conservative and cheap to manufacture and it handles all directx TandL calls, etc.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 12:39 Matshock
 
Not to mention noise- going from a Phenom 9500 to an i3 I went from a vacuum cleaner HSF to a dinky Intel stock HSF that works just fine. I even get to turn down my case fans.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 12:35 Creston
 
Prez wrote on Sep 7, 2012, 11:13:
I don't find the price performance ratio that different at all, in fact I see better price performance with Intel right now. I'll have to drum up some links where they make plot graphs showing this. AMD is all well below right now.

I'd actually like to see such comparisons - it would give me a reason to try Intel cpu's. If the bang for the buck is indeed on Intel's side, it's news to me and I thank you for bringing it to my attention.

The i2500K, because of its absurd overclocking abilities, currently just destroys any other processor on the planet, AMD and Intel alike, if you're talking about bang for the buck. I'm pretty sure that basically any processor comparison article will tell you so.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 12:32 Matshock
 
Prez wrote on Sep 7, 2012, 11:13:
I don't find the price performance ratio that different at all, in fact I see better price performance with Intel right now. I'll have to drum up some links where they make plot graphs showing this. AMD is all well below right now.

I'd actually like to see such comparisons - it would give me a reason to try Intel cpu's. If the bang for the buck is indeed on Intel's side, it's news to me and I thank you for bringing it to my attention.

With the i3 it was the case when I bought some new guts for my case last week.

Plus one of the reasons that AMD is in such trouble is that they have to use 8 cores to accomplish little more than what Intel is doing with 2 and much less than what they are doing with 4.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 12:30 Creston
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Sep 6, 2012, 22:48:
Let's hope so, Intel made a superb CPU with the I7 and the I5 and AMD doesn't seem to be recuperating from that in a way that's healthy.

And ATI.. well let's just say, that ATI is ATI .. ATI didn't make the 460GTX ... that was Nvidia. And it was the standard pwns-everything-at-its-price card. Before that, nvidia made the 6600gt and the 8800gt , the back then pwns-everything-at-its-price cards.

How many of these cards from Ati do you know? Apart from the Radeon 9700 which was the 1 and ONLY card from ATI that totally pwned nvidia, for a short, a very short, while.

Right now AMD/ATI is on fairly even par with Nvidia. They both release staggered compared to each other, so each takes the performance crown for awhile until the other guy releases the next card. When I got my 5850HD, it was by far the best performing card for its price. Three months later, Nvidia took that crown back.

You also seem to forget the first release of the Fermi architecture, which was an unmitigated disaster. Nvidia cards drew twice as much power, ran 50% hotter and couldn't even SNIFF Radeon's performance at that particular point in time.

It's a bit one-sided, and quite untrue, to say that Nvidia just "pwns" ATI. Also, for all the complaints about ATI's drivers, they've never released a driver that just caused graphics card to fucking MELT.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 12:22 Creston
 
If it ever looked like AMD might genuinely go out of business, the president needs to bail them out.

AMD is far more important to the economy than fucking General Motors. (only by virtue of being the sole competition for Intel, which would otherwise raise their prices to $9700 per processor, but still.)

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 11:14 avianflu
 
We've had endless "catalyst" driver issue with their video cards over the years and still do. Multi-monitor issues are rampant because the catalyst driver overrides the windows monitor settings but only in certain ways, and vice versa. And catalyst requires .Net, which means chronic security patches for .Net for a freakin driver. Linux support of AMD is not robust. YMMV.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 11:13 Prez
 
I don't find the price performance ratio that different at all, in fact I see better price performance with Intel right now. I'll have to drum up some links where they make plot graphs showing this. AMD is all well below right now.

I'd actually like to see such comparisons - it would give me a reason to try Intel cpu's. If the bang for the buck is indeed on Intel's side, it's news to me and I thank you for bringing it to my attention.
 
Avatar 17185
 
Goodbye my Monte boy. May you rest in the peace you never knew in life.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 11:06 HorrorScope
 
Prez wrote on Sep 7, 2012, 03:54:
but I prefer AMD procs hands down. Sure Intel cpu's are faster but I tend not to care when 1) the mark-up is so drastic, and 2) The processor, while important, doesn't matter nearly as much as the videocard when it comes to gaming performance. I believe it's best to save the money on the cpu and buy that much better of a videocard.

I don't find the price performance ratio that different at all, in fact I see better price performance with Intel right now. I'll have to drum up some links where they make plot graphs showing this. AMD is all well below right now.

As for CPU vs Videocard. At one time it was all about the videocard, but from my experience CPU's to me seem equal if not even more important right now. GPU's to me are a bit overrated, meaning I can get more surprising results with a strong CPU with a weak GPU vs Weak CPU and a strong GPU. I feel it's flip flopped and CPU being as or if not more important.
 
Avatar 17232
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 05:52 jdreyer
 
I agree, Prez. At this point, very few games are affected by having an AMD proc instead of an intel one.

On my to-do list is build a little mini PC for the kids using an AMD A8-3870K. I love that they built an actual GPU into the proc (well, good enough for the kids). I should be able to put the whole thing together for under $300 and attach an old LCD I've got lying around.
 
Avatar 22024
 
"It's just a bunch of mystic bovine scatology to me." - 1badmf
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 03:54 Prez
 
As an ultra-frugal PC builder I'd hate to see a world without AMD. I tend to prefer Nvidia cards over ATI (not brand loyalty- it just always seems I buy Nvidia because it seems to always win the price to performance comparison when I am in the market for a new card) but I prefer AMD procs hands down. Sure Intel cpu's are faster but I tend not to care when 1) the mark-up is so drastic, and 2) The processor, while important, doesn't matter nearly as much as the videocard when it comes to gaming performance. I believe it's best to save the money on the cpu and buy that much better of a videocard. AMD's are plenty fast enough despite being slower than Intel's cpu's.

Of course, as is usually the case in journalism, the title of the headline is sensationalist melodrama - the author makes it clear he doesn't think there's a chance that AMD is going out of business.
 
Avatar 17185
 
Goodbye my Monte boy. May you rest in the peace you never knew in life.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
12. Re: Evening Tech Bits Sep 7, 2012, 03:37 InBlack
 
Read the article lazy fuckers. ATI isnt going under any time soon.  
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
31 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo