LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksI don't get it why people who dismiss AMD CPUs often insist on NVIDIA graphics?
One thing that makes me more or less permanent as an AMD GPU user is RadeonPro, as it's so brilliant.
I don't get it why people who dismiss AMD CPUs often insist on NVIDIA graphics?
One thing that makes me more or less permanent as an AMD GPU user is RadeonPro, as it's so brilliant.
I don't think there's any correlation to be honest. The GPU war is entirely independent of the CPU war. I'm happily running Intel and AMD for example.Originally Posted by teppic
Me too. I'd switch between AMD and Intel depending on circumstances, but I'd always prefer AMD for graphics because of RadeonPro, at least as things stand. I just see quite a lot of people saying they only want Intel CPUs and only NVIDIA graphics.
Not what I've seen in some places TBH; as thought it's somehow 'cool' to go with Nvidia/Intel. Funnily, a lot of those types see Intel and Nvidia as best of friends, which isn't exactly true is it?
It seems in one of their threads some are predicting that the AMD console sales are going to be ultra low margin(10% to 20%) and are not going to really help the company. In fact the company might be worse off,even though Sony and MS footed development costs. At least give it a year,chaps!!intel sales go down , AMD go up.... ofc they wont be happy with that
Well at least it is an improvement on the same lot saying AMD would probably be bankrupt by now,a year ago, and would never win any console contracts.
Maybe,I should stop reading Anandtech forums,but I do need my dose of tech comedy at times.
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 19-07-2013 at 07:17 PM.
Not what I've seen in some places TBH; as thought it's somehow 'cool' to go with Nvidia/Intel. Funnily, a lot of those types see Intel and Nvidia as best of friends, which isn't exactly true is it?Why do either of you care? AMD, Nvidia and Intel are companies and they are all as good or as bad as each other in their own ways. Frothing at the mouth fanboys will always exist and bad advice on the internet is just as common as it is at pubs.It seems in one of their threads some are predicting that the AMD console sales are going to be ultra low margin(10% to 20%) and are not going to really help the company. In fact the company might be worse off,even though Sony and MS footed development costs. At least give it a year,chaps!!
Well at least it is an improvement on the same lot saying AMD would probably be bankrupt by now,a year ago, and would never win any console contracts.
Maybe,I should stop reading Anandtech forums,but I do need my dose of tech comedy at times.
"In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."
Because fanboys posting utter nonsense about companies can hurt competition when it's as one-sided as it is in some places. Intel, and to a lesser extent, Nvidia, are in stronger market positions anyway, and both seem to have the very worst fanboys, and more of them.
I'm under no illusions, I understand they're all out to make money etc (although Intel seem by far the worst for anti-competitive practices TBH), but lack of competition and/or monopolistic behaviour hurts *all* consumers, whichever company you buy from.
Back to the old example of the P4 - at the time AMD had a far better offering in the CPU space, and yet Intel still held the vast majority of market share.
Do I care that company A is making more money than company B (reasons aside for now)? Of course not, not directly at least; I don't gamble in shares etc. But indirectly it all means worse value for money as a consumer, and in that way I think it's important to all of us.
True.
However,its more the case,I have seen there sentiment used to warn people off buying AMD when it makes sense to buy them in that situation.
Ultimately,we need competition between the companies to give us better value for money,so that is the only reason I do care since I am a tight arse!!
Honestly, beyond that it does not really interest too much how much money they make,although I wish in any case they make enough money(and not losses),so that people are not fired, are in employment and stay solvent. However,that is my general sentiment.
Its like with Apple. The only reason I have been negative against them is their use in the 1980s and more recently of patent system loop holes to damage the competition,which serves to only affect VFM and that directlty affects me. Other companies also do it,but Apple were taking the mickey IMHO. Outside that,I don't really care or have any dislike or like Apple for any reason.
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 20-07-2013 at 12:30 PM.
I saw this over on XS:
http://www.gigabyte.com/support-down....aspx?pid=4611
A possible new stepping for the FM2 CPUs??
I've just posted on a forum where several people have told someone wanting advice on an FX-8320 for gaming that he'd be completely wasting his money and needs to switch to Intel, that nothing AMD has can compare at the same cost. I'm the only person challenging this (with actual benchmarks rather than plain fanboyism), but it's a losing battle when it largely goes unchallenged.
Just another case of people following the crowd rather than thinking for themselves. Unfortunately, some people will ultimately, unquestionably believe what they read in places like that and end up just as bad themselves.
It's demoralising when someone has explicitly said that they'd prefer an 8320 because of its low cost, and they're being told to spend more on a 3570K because they're an idiot otherwise. Anything I say is dismissed because I have a few hundred posts, where most have a few thousand, but there isn't much I can do about that.
Shhh, don't wake the Sheeple
I may have been taken in by intel fanboys, but I feel this generation at least AMD has a comparatively weak product in the fx line and I don't see many cases where I can wholeheartedly recommend it. Even though the 8320 is cheaper up front, it needs a more powerful motherboard, cooler and psu, it will cost more on your electricity bill to run it and in most cases (particularly gaming) intel's stronger single threaded performance will beat it. It's a decent overclocker, but overclocking only exacerbates the power and cooling issues.
AMD does have a good product in trinity/richland and I remain hopeful that steamroller and kaveri will deliver (if only because having intel dominate so much is bad for consumers) but with the 8 core 125w fx chips in particular I find myself siding with intel fanboys. AMD aren't helping their image much by releasing ridiculous things like fx9* series either.
My posts above weren't referring to any threads on hexus, in case that wasn't clear.
A typical 8350 system running at 4.8GHz uses about 200W absolutely full out. The power thing isn't a a major issue really, as people don't run stress tests 24/7, and normal gaming would never use as much power.
The 8320 does need a reasonably good board, but then you'd be paying more for a similarly high end Intel board (the £45 Intel boards are hardly great, even if they do work with higher end processors). It doesn't need expensive cooling unless you're looking at over 4.5GHz. Same for the PSU really, a decent 500W one is fine.
I think what someone should get is dependent on circumstances. An 8320 offers the best overall gaming performance for price if you want something for FPS type games. If you prefer strategy games you'd be better off with one of the i5s. If you want maximum flexibility and don't mind the price, an i5 4760K.
You like Trinity, yet the FX series which is the trinity CPU with L3 cache, more threads and hence faster you are not impressed with? That isn't consistent.
There are currently 45 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 45 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote