This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

FX-6300 and R7 260x

#51reincarnator07Posted 7/22/2014 12:42:42 PM
Pengu1n posted...
reincarnator07 posted...
Pengu1n posted...
I used to use intel CPU's as well i have also used nVidia GPU's as well. When i switched from Intel to AMD i went from a Pentium 4 2.53Ghz to an Athlon 64 running at 2.2ghz and that and the motherboard were the only 2 new parts. i was using the same PSU, the same GPU the same OS the same RAM the same amount of RAM everything and my performance in games wasn't affected the computer didn't crash any more than it did with the P4. I didn't have any driver issues or anything like that either despite people telling me i had made a bad choice and should have stuck with intel.


Back then, AMD did perform better (and cooler too!). That was the best part of a decade ago. Things have changed massively. Also, I don't know why you keep bringing up stability. Assuming you don't get something faulty, AMD processors work perfectly fine, and no one has hinted otherwise.


That's what i was saying though. Intel fanboys constantly bang on that AMD is no good for gaming, that their CPU's require their own nuclear reactor to run and that their GPU's constantly have driver issues. Their only defence is the benchmark scores but they never backup any of their claims that AMD is bad for gaming and people who actually own AMD CPU's and GPU's always tend to disagree.

The only things that have changed is that more and more people that run magazines, youtube channels and websites are being paid by Intel to fake benchmark scores to make it look like Intel is the superior product and even a dual core i3 can outperform anything made by AMD by miles.


So you're telling me that Intel is paying off virtually everyone who does gaming benchmarks? You can bury your head in the sand all you want, it doesn't change the fact that Intel currently has AMD beat at every price point in performance apart from APUs. AMD processors may just about get the job done, but Intel processors are still better in gaming,
---
Fan of metal? Don't mind covers? Check out my youtube and give me some feedback
http://www.youtube.com/sircaballero
#52mycousinvinniePosted 7/22/2014 12:46:15 PM
iiFroZenHeAveNz posted...
Haha what? You called the guy out and said he was an AMD fanboy. You really are uneducated. Please save your money and at least get some community college in. You really do need some.
In fact off of what you read, you accused my argument with anger. It's called debate, boy. Reread your post and see if you DIDN'T bash someone. However, I'm done coddling little single minded fools like you. Rebuttle if you wish but I don't have time for it.

TC: Whatever you do. Do not listen to these Intel fanboys. If you have the money go for an Intel CPU if you wish. I would suggest getting the 4770k but if you are on a budget, there's nothing wrong with going AMD.


"tips fedora"
#53ISDcaptain01Posted 7/22/2014 3:35:58 PM
I use an AMD FX6350 @ 3.9GHz and R7 260X 2GB and have no problems whatsoever.
---
My game programming portfolio:
aasimsgamelab.weebly.com
#54DarkZV2BetaPosted 7/22/2014 6:45:42 PM
Pengu1n posted...
reincarnator07 posted...
Pengu1n posted...
I used to use intel CPU's as well i have also used nVidia GPU's as well. When i switched from Intel to AMD i went from a Pentium 4 2.53Ghz to an Athlon 64 running at 2.2ghz and that and the motherboard were the only 2 new parts. i was using the same PSU, the same GPU the same OS the same RAM the same amount of RAM everything and my performance in games wasn't affected the computer didn't crash any more than it did with the P4. I didn't have any driver issues or anything like that either despite people telling me i had made a bad choice and should have stuck with intel.


Back then, AMD did perform better (and cooler too!). That was the best part of a decade ago. Things have changed massively. Also, I don't know why you keep bringing up stability. Assuming you don't get something faulty, AMD processors work perfectly fine, and no one has hinted otherwise.


That's what i was saying though. Intel fanboys constantly bang on that AMD is no good for gaming, that their CPU's require their own nuclear reactor to run and that their GPU's constantly have driver issues. Their only defence is the benchmark scores but they never backup any of their claims that AMD is bad for gaming and people who actually own AMD CPU's and GPU's always tend to disagree.

The only things that have changed is that more and more people that run magazines, youtube channels and websites are being paid by Intel to fake benchmark scores to make it look like Intel is the superior product and even a dual core i3 can outperform anything made by AMD by miles.


Kind of like how you AMD fanboys claim intel shoots puppies, funds neo-nazis and chinese triads, and wants to enslave the human race?
---
god invented extension cords. -elchris79
Starcraft 2 has no depth or challenge -GoreGross
#55Pengu1nPosted 7/24/2014 9:55:53 AM
Kind of like how you AMD fanboys claim intel shoots puppies, funds neo-nazis and chinese triads, and wants to enslave the human race?


You know that doesn't happen.

So you're telling me that Intel is paying off virtually everyone who does gaming benchmarks? You can bury your head in the sand all you want, it doesn't change the fact that Intel currently has AMD beat at every price point in performance apart from APUs. AMD processors may just about get the job done, but Intel processors are still better in gaming
.

Pretty much. I have posted the link to that blog numeorus times where it showed that Intel had been paying people to insert their compiler into various software programs and games that was designed to deliberately cripple performance on AMD hardware.

My FX 6300 cost me just under 100 (although they can be bought now for under 80 from amazon) i bought it last year and to date it has never let me down. I can play all the latest games at 1080p and get usually around 60fps (although some run as low as 30fps due to poor optimization on games like wolfenstein the new order) But TBH everything else runs perfect.

Intel was questioned about it by the guy but constantly denied it and no magazine would do an article on it because they were getting money from Intel at the time.

In reality Intel is better and some stuff and AMD is better at others but in each case the difference is hardly noticeable a game might run at 2 or 3 fps more on Intel than AMD for instance. But when people bang on about how a dual core i3 can outperform an 8 core 8350 (Linustech couldn't even get BF3 to run on a dual core PC) and everything intel does is better than AMD then that just shows how people can be bought and how easily fooled people are. The guy who owns the monster cable company is rolling in cash from charging $100+ for HDMI cables when all HDMI leads are the same. He just puts a load of BS on the packaging and some people actually fall for it and pay the money and it's the same with Intel.

You are paying upto $100 more for a quad core intel CPU and they too put a load of BS on the box to make you think it's worth it. Hyperthreading for instance isn't even used by anything so why waste cash on an i7 when an i5 is the same CPU except without hyperthreading?

The bottom line is that intel fanboys constanly bash AMD with made up facts yet the people who use them will always prove them wrong.
---
FX 6300, HYPER 212 EVO, 16GB DDR3, 7870 GHZ 2GB, 2TB HDD, 64 GB SATA III SSD, 12X BLU RAY, 750W PSU, X-FI FATAL1TY,WINDOWS 7
#56reincarnator07Posted 7/24/2014 12:15:02 PM
Pengu1n posted...
So you're telling me that Intel is paying off virtually everyone who does gaming benchmarks? You can bury your head in the sand all you want, it doesn't change the fact that Intel currently has AMD beat at every price point in performance apart from APUs. AMD processors may just about get the job done, but Intel processors are still better in gaming
.

Pretty much. I have posted the link to that blog numeorus times where it showed that Intel had been paying people to insert their compiler into various software programs and games that was designed to deliberately cripple performance on AMD hardware.

My FX 6300 cost me just under 100 (although they can be bought now for under 80 from amazon) i bought it last year and to date it has never let me down. I can play all the latest games at 1080p and get usually around 60fps (although some run as low as 30fps due to poor optimization on games like wolfenstein the new order) But TBH everything else runs perfect.

Intel was questioned about it by the guy but constantly denied it and no magazine would do an article on it because they were getting money from Intel at the time.

In reality Intel is better and some stuff and AMD is better at others but in each case the difference is hardly noticeable a game might run at 2 or 3 fps more on Intel than AMD for instance. But when people bang on about how a dual core i3 can outperform an 8 core 8350 (Linustech couldn't even get BF3 to run on a dual core PC) and everything intel does is better than AMD then that just shows how people can be bought and how easily fooled people are. The guy who owns the monster cable company is rolling in cash from charging $100+ for HDMI cables when all HDMI leads are the same. He just puts a load of BS on the packaging and some people actually fall for it and pay the money and it's the same with Intel.

You are paying upto $100 more for a quad core intel CPU and they too put a load of BS on the box to make you think it's worth it. Hyperthreading for instance isn't even used by anything so why waste cash on an i7 when an i5 is the same CPU except without hyperthreading?

The bottom line is that intel fanboys constanly bash AMD with made up facts yet the people who use them will always prove them wrong.


Did you post a link to that blog in this topic? I might just be blind, but I cannot see it.

At this point, screw the i3 for budget gaming, Intel recently released an overclockable Pentium and it overclocks like a beast. Once overclocked, it actually comes pretty close to an i5 in performance in some titles and for a fraction of the price. It's only in the last year that games are really getting some use out of more than 2 cores, and it's still sadly a small portion of games. When you can't gain performance from more cores, single threaded performance is all that matters, and Intel stomps AMD in this department. Also, Linus did indeed get it BF3 to work on 2 cores (although it had an NPC that didn't spawn for some reason).

I seldom see people claiming that AMD < Intel in all areas on this forum. Many benchmarks show AMD processors performing pretty well considering their price in non gaming tasks. However, since this is a gaming forum, gaming performance is naturally more important to many here.

I don't know why you keep comparing Intel to Monster digital cables. Those cables don't partially work or perform okayish, they either work perfectly or not at all. Processors using the same architecture can vary massively in performance. Also, Hyper Threading is pretty useful outside of gaming.

Finally, let me emphasize that no one says that AMD processors don't work or are complete pieces of garbage. We just point out that Intel currently offers better price:performance across the board.
---
Fan of metal? Don't mind covers? Check out my youtube and give me some feedback
http://www.youtube.com/sircaballero
#57DarkZV2BetaPosted 7/24/2014 12:38:27 PM
Pengu1n posted...
Kind of like how you AMD fanboys claim intel shoots puppies, funds neo-nazis and chinese triads, and wants to enslave the human race?


You know that doesn't happen.


Of course, only "intel fanboys" can ever be unreasonable, right?
---
god invented extension cords. -elchris79
Starcraft 2 has no depth or challenge -GoreGross
#58Pengu1nPosted 7/25/2014 2:43:44 AM
DarkZV2Beta posted...
Pengu1n posted...
Kind of like how you AMD fanboys claim intel shoots puppies, funds neo-nazis and chinese triads, and wants to enslave the human race?


You know that doesn't happen.



Of course, only "intel fanboys" can ever be unreasonable, right?


No but it's always Intel fanboys like yourself that spout out BS about AMD like AMD stuff is useless for gaming and they need mega PSU's to run or run at hotter temps etc.

I'm running my PC with a corsair HX750 PSU i could have easily used a lower wattage but i wanted some extra headroom in case i ever decided to crossfire with another 7870.

Did you post a link to that blog in this topic? I might just be blind, but I cannot see it.

At this point, screw the i3 for budget gaming, Intel recently released an overclockable Pentium and it overclocks like a beast. Once overclocked, it actually comes pretty close to an i5 in performance in some titles and for a fraction of the price. It's only in the last year that games are really getting some use out of more than 2 cores, and it's still sadly a small portion of games. When you can't gain performance from more cores, single threaded performance is all that matters, and Intel stomps AMD in this department. Also, Linus did indeed get it BF3 to work on 2 cores (although it had an NPC that didn't spawn for some reason).

I seldom see people claiming that AMD < Intel in all areas on this forum. Many benchmarks show AMD processors performing pretty well considering their price in non gaming tasks. However, since this is a gaming forum, gaming performance is naturally more important to many here.

I don't know why you keep comparing Intel to Monster digital cables. Those cables don't partially work or perform okayish, they either work perfectly or not at all. Processors using the same architecture can vary massively in performance. Also, Hyper Threading is pretty useful outside of gaming.

Finally, let me emphasize that no one says that AMD processors don't work or are complete pieces of garbage. We just point out that Intel currently offers better price:performance across the board.


http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=49

No you don't. The attitude i have seen from a lot of users on here is clouded in pure BS, lies and all round anti-AMD hatred. I have seen people get trolled for either owning AMD stuff or wanting to buy AMD stuff and have seen numerous times where people have gone on about how AMD is no good for gaming or that a core i3 can outperform an 8350.

And i compare intel to monster because they to like to make people think that their stuff is better by miles and that by spending a tonne of extra money on a CPU you are going to see a huge performance difference over AMD which is not true. Intel is faster and better and some stuff than AMD and vice-versa but it depends on the application/game and whenever each is faster it's only by a couple of FPS in BF4 for instance or a few seconds quicker on a video render but to say that everything will run so much faster on intel like BF4 will run at 200fps on intel and 15fps on AMD is just wrong.
---
FX 6300, HYPER 212 EVO, 16GB DDR3, 7870 GHZ 2GB, 2TB HDD, 64 GB SATA III SSD, 12X BLU RAY, 750W PSU, X-FI FATAL1TY,WINDOWS 7
#59DarkZV2BetaPosted 7/25/2014 4:00:05 AM
Pengu1n posted...
DarkZV2Beta posted...
Pengu1n posted...
Kind of like how you AMD fanboys claim intel shoots puppies, funds neo-nazis and chinese triads, and wants to enslave the human race?


You know that doesn't happen.



Of course, only "intel fanboys" can ever be unreasonable, right?


No but it's always Intel fanboys like yourself that spout out BS about AMD like AMD stuff is useless for gaming and they need mega PSU's to run or run at hotter temps etc.

I'm running my PC with a corsair HX750 PSU i could have easily used a lower wattage but i wanted some extra headroom in case i ever decided to crossfire with another 7870.


No, it's only you AMD fanboys that spout useless BS like all intel fanboys just spout useless BS about AMD, bla bla bla and AMD is just as good bla bla bla.

Do you not see the irony here? You're the one guiltiest of everything you complain about.
---
god invented extension cords. -elchris79
Starcraft 2 has no depth or challenge -GoreGross
#60reincarnator07Posted 7/25/2014 5:29:18 AM
Pengu1n posted...
http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=49

No you don't. The attitude i have seen from a lot of users on here is clouded in pure BS, lies and all round anti-AMD hatred. I have seen people get trolled for either owning AMD stuff or wanting to buy AMD stuff and have seen numerous times where people have gone on about how AMD is no good for gaming or that a core i3 can outperform an 8350.

And i compare intel to monster because they to like to make people think that their stuff is better by miles and that by spending a tonne of extra money on a CPU you are going to see a huge performance difference over AMD which is not true. Intel is faster and better and some stuff than AMD and vice-versa but it depends on the application/game and whenever each is faster it's only by a couple of FPS in BF4 for instance or a few seconds quicker on a video render but to say that everything will run so much faster on intel like BF4 will run at 200fps on intel and 15fps on AMD is just wrong.


That blog hasn't been updated in over a year. In addition, the issues seem to arise from their compiler. A far cry from buying off everyone. I do agree that Intel having such a large portion of the market is bad for everyone though.

It's gamefaqs, I've been trolled for "only" having an i5 and a 7870. In addition, there are benchmarks where an i3 does indeed outperform an 8350 in certain games and applications. Again, no one (worth listening to) says that AMD processors are outright terrible, only that Intel is better.

Monster HDMI cables are identical in form, function and performance to unbranded cables. It's not even doing things differently to obtain a similar result, they're literally identical. Intel processors vs AMD are different in many ways, even to other processors in the same family. It's a terrible analogy.

Usually what I see in most topics is user asks for advice on an AMD build > user gets recommended to go with intel due to better gaming performance > user wants to stick with AMD regardless > other users get frustrated by user insisting on using a product that is inferior > trolls troll trolls. As you say, it's not like AMD performs a fraction as well as intel, but unless you're bound by your motherboard or somehow compensated by going with AMD, why go for the even slightly inferior product?
---
Fan of metal? Don't mind covers? Check out my youtube and give me some feedback
http://www.youtube.com/sircaballero