Go Back   Hardware Canucks > NEWS & REVIEWS > Reviews & Articles from the Web

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21 (permalink)  
Old October 4, 2012, 03:48 PM
CMetaphor's Avatar
Quadfather
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 4,997

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soultribunal View Post
Exactally, and I have told people time and time again that I want all companies to do well because the second there is no competition, we all end up losing.

-ST
Oh my Darwin, its Enlightenment!
__________________
"Backed by common sense and physics!" -Squeetard
Opteron Server for Sale! http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...ade-ideas.html
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old October 4, 2012, 04:03 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: midland, ontario
Posts: 519
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AkG View Post
Here is my problem with the whole "AMD is good enough" argument. To kick the dead mule car analogy one last time....you have car A it has a 120HP and gets 20MPG. It costs 18,900. You have car B. It has a 180HP, gets 35MPG and costs 20,000. To me car A is a bad value. Sure it will get you from A to B, but it will cost you more in gas and has the acceleration of a pregnant yak. Good enough is usually just code word for cheap crap. BUT it has to be a lot cheaper than the competition or it aint -by very definition- GOOD ENOUGH.#1

"AMDs right now run hot"#2, eat more power and are less powerful. That is a bad combination. Call me an Intel sheep all you want but that is the cold hard facts. When AMD had the best I ran AMD. Intel are better NOW. This 'good enough' argument is simply pandering to the fanbois.
1# Maybe it would be more ..... A) is a 2 door 4 person 200 hp turbo'ed 4 cylinder $16000 30 mpg car vs B) 4 door 4 person 200 hp'ed naturaly aspired 4 cylinder $20000 29 mpg car. A is cheaper, less doors but cant accelerate like B might but preform almost the same.

2# when you factor in aftermarket cooling .... there is not a substantial amount of heat diffrence between intel/amd ... even at load in various senario's. Not to mention what about the whole ivy bridge heatspreader issue & those chips running warmer then normal cause of it ...
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old October 4, 2012, 04:12 PM
AkG's Avatar
AkG AkG is offline
Hardware Canucks Reviewer
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,332
Default

You really are dreaming if you think AMDs 8 series is even CLOSE to Intel's. The amount of heat is significantly more. The power draw is HIGHER and the power per clock cycle sucks. That doesnt even include the whole PR disaster on what a core really means.

Outside of a couple wonky special case scenarios the new and 'improved' AMD chips do not match Intel's last gen let alone the latest kit. Hell AMDs old PII holds its own against them. They are crap. Overpriced, overheating, power eating crap. If budgets are mega tight sure, they can be considered 'good enough' but outside of the mega cheap budget builds they are simply outclassed by Intels last gen kit. AMD were a day late and a dollar short. It was delayed way, way to long and when it finally landed it really was the Duke Nukem Forever of CPUs: all sizzle no steak.

Hopefully, their next APU will start to turn things around, but meh I wont hold my breath. Wake me up when I can get TRIM on RAID'ed SSDs and then I might get excited about their gear again.
__________________
"If you ever start taking things too seriously, just remember that we are talking monkeys on an organic spaceship flying through the universe." -JR

“if your opponent has a conscience, then follow Gandhi. But if you enemy has no conscience, like Hitler, then follow Bonhoeffer.” - Dr. MLK jr
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old October 4, 2012, 04:21 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: midland, ontario
Posts: 519
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CMetaphor View Post
Just to throw my $0.02 into the fray... Crosshair IV motherboard. Used it with my 1090T and got 4Ghz stable. Using it now with my 8150, and I've got two threads extra and 4.5Ghz stable. That seems like longevity to me and a pretty decent offering.

Granted FM1 didn't last long, but it was also the first desktop board ever for APUs, which are a pretty new thing. To err is to be human and AMD has err'd in the past, but they fix their issues and I don't seem them changing sockets again so quickly on the APU side.

Between AMD and Intel for gaming, the best point there is ther over 60fps comment. Once you've above that mark, who gives a crap? I play all the time with Intel users and notice no difference for games. Sure, there are things Intel does better, but the are some that AMD does better too (like integrated graphics / APUs).

At the end of the day it doesnt really matter who you pick. But just remember that if Everyone picks Intel, AMD could die. If AMD dies, longevity of the platform or not... we're all screwed. Intel has fixed prices before in order to try to bury AMD when they were "ahead", then got slapped with a billion dollar fine for it. You really think they wouldn't do it again?

Food for thought.
My head hurts.
Dam.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soultribunal View Post
Exactally, and I have told people time and time again that I want all companies to do well because the second there is no competition, we all end up losing.

-ST
And these are the points i've only ever tried to make peaple see/realize ...... Once you kinda get past the i guess what i feel is the whole e-penile thing .... we are technicaly at a point right now where I feel the staunchest of intel supporters at times like to make this preformance diffrence a mountain from a molehill metaphore. I mean this is like saying like we use to say back in the day how terrible cyrix cpu's where vs AMD/Intel ones at the time .. And to me i dont see nothing from amd only being 50% of the preformance of the intel equivelent.

To me this isnt AMD or whomever tryin to "dummy" peaple down ... this is simply the reality of technoligy that things are no longer becoming about the power of the cores themselves but the amount of cores & how they do so. Just look at the trinity scores vs 2 core + 2 thread intels ..
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old October 4, 2012, 04:37 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: midland, ontario
Posts: 519
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AkG View Post
You really are dreaming if you think AMDs 8 series is even CLOSE to Intel's. The amount of heat is significantly more. The power draw is HIGHER and the power per clock cycle sucks. That doesnt even include the whole PR disaster on what a core really means.

Outside of a couple wonky special case scenarios the new and 'improved' AMD chips do not match Intel's last gen let alone the latest kit. Hell AMDs old PII holds its own against them. They are crap. Overpriced, overheating, power eating crap. If budgets are mega tight sure, they can be considered 'good enough' but outside of the mega cheap budget builds they are simply outclassed by Intels last gen kit. AMD were a day late and a dollar short. It was delayed way, way to long and when it finally landed it really was the Duke Nukem Forever of CPUs: all sizzle no steak.

Hopefully, their next APU will start to turn things around, but meh I wont hold my breath. Wake me up when I can get TRIM on RAID'ed SSDs and then I might get excited about their gear again.
So, you mean to tell me that .... you'd sugest to someone to build a Core i3 box for internet/business processing/production/light gaming vs a A10 5800k FM2 box ...... cause of suposivly some big benefit from the i3's apu + having trim in raid ? ....... if so ........ wow ... ....
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old October 4, 2012, 06:26 PM
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Ontario
Posts: 1,383

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by terrybear View Post
So, you mean to tell me that .... you'd sugest to someone to build a Core i3 box for internet/business processing/production/light gaming vs a A10 5800k FM2 box ...... cause of suposivly some big benefit from the i3's apu + having trim in raid ? ....... if so ........ wow ... ....
Well if you are running a budget home server you probably want RAID... The main reason I would recommend the i3 is because there is an upgrade path... You take that A10 and find it isn't enough now you are replacing your motherboard and your processor. Honestly do I recommend intel for every build my friends make? Not necessarily but if they want to spend $1000 I'm not putting anything less than an i5 in their rig unless they really want that AMD chip. I know AMD needs to make money too so they can continue to produce chips and keep intel in line but when you lose in every single comparison other than price you still have a problem.

I don't want AMD to die, if AMD starts to make better chips than intel for what my friends want to do I will recommend them instead. Until then this is the way business works, the companies with the best products or who sell their products the best come out ahead and right now AMD doesn't sell their products as well and their products are not better therefore they don't get my business. Will I send them business in the scenarios where they do come out on top (HTPC's and super low budget builds)? yes. But don't tell me they are "good enough" when better things can be had for the money.

Think of it this way... you can have computer A. Which is less powerful but good enough for what you need to do and you have computer B. that is also good enough for what you need to do. Computer A is slightly cheaper lets say $100, but computer B uses less power, is more upgradable, has more performance and runs cooler and therefore more quietly (unless you buy an aftermarket cooler in which case you are shrinking your margin). Which one do you buy? I don't know about you but I like computer B. and I am an AMD fanboy.

Edit: Is a $36,000 a year job good enough to live off of? Yes. Do I want to make more than $36,000 if I can? Yes.

Edit 2: Good enough puts you where RIM is, good enough leaves you unemployed when things get rough and good enough leaves you forever in second place. My summer job was good enough when I got hired at $200 per day guess what I worked 2.5 days... Guess my job wasn't good enough was it?

Last edited by JJThomp; October 4, 2012 at 06:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old October 4, 2012, 06:54 PM
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Markham
Posts: 1,569

My System Specs

Default

Just look at the pricing and you know AMD can barely compete. (which makes me sadface)

8150's have seen the $150 mark - 2500K's never dropped past $180 and 3570K's aren't going far in terms of pricing
Then you have the $100 price gap between a 3570K/2500K and a 3770K/2600K which are almost 2 identical pieces of silicon. (minus binning and HT)
Pretty obvious AMD can't compete above the $150 market.

Now for the sub $150 market - ALL of Intel's offerings are dual cores competing against quad cores on the AMD side and holding their own in most everyday scenarios. (though AMD does demolish them in a few key areas)
So AMD has to charge less for more silicon in the most important price brackets - higher costs and lower profits for them just to stay in the game. If that keeps up, everybody but Intel loses.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old October 4, 2012, 07:40 PM
great_big_abyss's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,211

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AkG View Post
Hopefully, their next APU will start to turn things around, but meh I wont hold my breath. Wake me up when I can get TRIM on RAID'ed SSDs and then I might get excited about their gear again.
I'm not sure in what situation you would have RAID'ed SSDs when running an APU. I mean, an APU is typically speaking a budget application, whereas an SSD RAID array is usually big money. If you can afford one of those, you're probably not even going to be considering an AMD APU. And at this point, any HTPC/server that would use a RAID array these days (combined with an AMD APU) would probably be using RAID HDD anyways...

Correct me if I'm wrong...

Anyways, yeah, I agree AMD has a long way to go with their processors. But I'll still be rooting for them as an underdog. And supporting them, too. I'm one of those guys who will probably still buy and support AMD, at least for the next couple of generations (although if Steamroller still doesn't improve upon Phenom II, then I'm switching!)

And, nobody is saying that Intel products aren't better in every conceivable and measurable way. But, for the low end (web surfing, word document writing, minecraft playing machines), AMD is actually a pretty good choice. You can't just look at the price of the processor itself, but at the platform as a whole. AMD motherboards are typically a few bucks cheaper than the equivalent Intel variant.

And yes, upgradeability is a huge factor. Okay, the FM1 to FM2 socket change was unfortunate. And I'm actually quite peeved at that seeing as I just picked up a 1st gen APU. But I'm guessing the reason for the change was that the technology is still maturing and they probably made some major changes to the chipset. I'm fairly confident that the 3rd generation of APUs will be FM2 compatible. Wouldn't it be nice to just be able to buy a $100 chip, throw it into your existing system, and have a 15-25% boost in performance?

Anyways, you fellows are all entitled to buy whatever products and support whatever companies you wish. If you want to support AMD for whatever misguided reason (like me) then so be it. If you want to support Intel, all the power to you!
__________________



HTPC: Z77A-G45; 3770K; Coolermaster GeminII; 2x4GB Kingston HyperX 1600Mhz; MSI R7-260X; 2x 128GB Crucial M4 SSD; 1TB WD Green, 2x 2TB WD Green; PC P&C 750W PS; Fractal Design Node 605;
Son's Rig: M5A97; 1055T; CNPS20LQ; 2x4GB Corsair Vengeance 1600Mhz; ASUS GTX650Ti Boost; 80GB Intel 520 SSD; 320GB WD Black HDD; SPI 700W; Bitfenix Shinobi;
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old October 4, 2012, 08:29 PM
AkG's Avatar
AkG AkG is offline
Hardware Canucks Reviewer
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,332
Default

Most web surfing rigs dont do any gaming more strenuous than JAVA games. A 'gaming' apu is overkill, a HD 2x00 is more than enough. If peeps need more...they go discrete as both camps suck for 'real' games. BUT the storage device is ALWAYS the bottleneck. IMHO I will take a 120gb SSD + i3 over a AMD + Vraptor any day of the week.

Peeps also forget that a lot of non-enthusiasts can not afford a large ssd upfront. They get say a 120GB now...and then save up for a second one later. Try doing that on AMD and you are in for a world of hurt. Intel...all it took was a driver update. So seriously tell me how that level of hassle factor is 'good enough' on the AMD side of things?

It honestly amazes me how certain peeps can say in one breathe how 'bad' Intel is for 'forcing' a new mobo w/ every gen (cough...BS...cough... its usually every TWO gens...ie tick buy new /tock upgrade ...tick time for new mobo) and then in the next forgive AMD for doing the exact same thing. Here is a tip for fanbois....both companies do their damnedest to MAKE you upgrade your mobo as often as they can. Its how they make money.
__________________
"If you ever start taking things too seriously, just remember that we are talking monkeys on an organic spaceship flying through the universe." -JR

“if your opponent has a conscience, then follow Gandhi. But if you enemy has no conscience, like Hitler, then follow Bonhoeffer.” - Dr. MLK jr
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old October 5, 2012, 04:22 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: midland, ontario
Posts: 519
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AkG View Post
Most web surfing rigs dont do any gaming more strenuous than JAVA games. A 'gaming' apu is overkill, a HD 2x00 is more than enough. If peeps need more...they go discrete as both camps suck for 'real' games. BUT the storage device is ALWAYS the bottleneck. IMHO I will take a 120gb SSD + i3 over a AMD + Vraptor any day of the week.

Peeps also forget that a lot of non-enthusiasts can not afford a large ssd upfront. They get say a 120GB now...and then save up for a second one later. Try doing that on AMD and you are in for a world of hurt. Intel...all it took was a driver update. So seriously tell me how that level of hassle factor is 'good enough' on the AMD side of things?

It honestly amazes me how certain peeps can say in one breathe how 'bad' Intel is for 'forcing' a new mobo w/ every gen (cough...BS...cough... its usually every TWO gens...ie tick buy new /tock upgrade ...tick time for new mobo) and then in the next forgive AMD for doing the exact same thing. Here is a tip for fanbois....both companies do their damnedest to MAKE you upgrade your mobo as often as they can. Its how they make money.
I read what I have bolded & all i can say is ....... WOW ..... are YOU for real? Do you ACTUALY read things & use stuff in real time to be able to formulate these "views" you have?

Also your "theory" on this how both companies try to make you upgrade your motherboard .. Pardon me but WHOM makes the motherboards? NEITHER company does !! Its the board makers themselves that try to do so by not putting bios's out on older products that might support a newer cpu.

Your other argument is also flawed with the fact that how long is ivy bridge 1155 out for ... ohhhh till next year to be replaces by 1150 OHHH & its nothing real new as it's STILL based on the Core's architechure ("Haswell processors or the fourth generation Core processors as some like to call them") .... meanwhile FM2's supported for the next few years ... OH but there's no value in that ...

Im sorry but I dont understand why ya bother to reply to anything amd cpu/board based cause quite honestly you show no ability to see any positives in them & refuse to accept anyone whom puts/see's a positive aspect on things on the platform. Trying to discuss/debate things in reguards to the amd platform in general is about as sucessful as tryin to demolish a brick wall with a rubber sledgehammer. I believe you have given your reasons in the past ... but if your unwilling to be able to talk about both the positives & negatives about it ... why waste your time or anyone elses then ?

All i know is my stance at the end of the day is AGAIN based on US the consumer ..... no amd & we are back to the late 90's pricing & no motivation to advance/evolve. I also dont see having to have "trim" enabled in a chipset as some MAJOR reason for the average joe consumer to choose intel over a amd solution especialy if the ssd's do so on there own in themselves. And more so, no one in there right mind is gonna be thinking about "raid" on a i3 configuration

Sorry but again i dont see the current landscape as like per back in the days of socket 7 like how your refering to current amd cpu's like the cyrix/ibm's of back then vs intels like the AMD/intels of that era ..

Last edited by terrybear; October 5, 2012 at 04:28 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"BF3.3" Level 10 GT Case Mod is "Locked and Loaded" Mnpctech Cases 2 July 12, 2012 12:18 PM
Keyboard types "w " when i press "w" matthew2180 Troubleshooting 14 December 20, 2011 09:21 AM
How do i know if my "Drive Controller" is running in "AHCI mode"? Teo3201 Storage 2 October 8, 2011 09:54 PM
3d Vision goes from "gimmick" to "ubiquitous" The RealRollo Video Cards 28 October 21, 2010 03:55 PM
The LG P300 13.3" laptop for gaming...what's your opinion? iggiepop Mobile Computing 3 September 7, 2008 05:22 PM