I would like to say these idiot sites did the same o thing they always do show games that are not modern i wonder if they really are getting paid to be intel lovers. This is the first time i ever claimed this but i'm sick of them not using new games. Watch dogs-Battlefield 4-Thief- so on. Its not hard to do this maybe they don't own these games or any modern game.
I notice all these sites refused to say newer engines use 8 threads now and most games will be made this way its not 2009 anymore. I would like to ask you guys looking for CPU reviews for games to search for things like "given title CPU benchmark''.
I would like to say these idiot sites did the same o thing they always do show games that are not modern i wonder if they really are getting paid to be intel lovers. This is the first time i ever claimed this but i'm sick of them not using new games. Watch dogs-Battlefield 4-Thief- so on. Its not hard to do this maybe they don't own these games or any modern game.
I notice all these sites refused to say newer engines use 8 threads now and most games will be made this way its not 2009 anymore. I would like to ask you guys looking for CPU reviews for games to search for things like "given title CPU benchmark''.
You predicted? I've been here since the year 2000 and I can't remember that. In all major threads, that is. I do remember you saying that games could not scale beyond 2 threads though. Like a million times you've mentioned it.
I remember each one of the million times where he said us that and when he predicted that 8-core processors from AMD would lose to Haswell i3 in new games such as BF4.
In any case, my point is that the eigth-core processors from AMD, including the new FX models presented last month, are a more powerfull choice over the FX-6000 series for well-threaded games. I cannot say the same of Intel eight-core Haswell, which loses to the six-core Haswell.
Please stop this madness the FX 6 core vs the FX 8 core running at the same clock speeds, yes
the two extra cores shine, just like the 5960X vs 4960X.
For general purpose, all around computing it's really hard to beat the FX6 series for value. They provide about the same overall computing power as an i5 but for a fraction of the cost. Put in a mid range $100~150 USD GDDR dGPU and a 970 board from ASRock and you've got a good quality value build.
*Note*
For value boards I pretty much always recommend ASRock as they are reasonably priced and have extremely good quality. Many motherboard makers will go super cheap on components in the value segment which results in all those trash 970's we hear about. The two parts that you should never, ever go cheap on are the PSU and the MB.
I would like to say these idiot sites did the same o thing they always do show games that are not modern i wonder if they really are getting paid to be intel lovers. This is the first time i ever claimed this but i'm sick of them not using new games. Watch dogs-Battlefield 4-Thief- so on. Its not hard to do this maybe they don't own these games or any modern game.
I notice all these sites refused to say newer engines use 8 threads now and most games will be made this way its not 2009 anymore. I would like to ask you guys looking for CPU reviews for games to search for things like "given title CPU benchmark''.
For general purpose, all around computing it's really hard to beat the FX6 series for value. They provide about the same overall computing power as an i5 but for a fraction of the cost. Put in a mid range $100~150 USD GDDR dGPU and a 970 board from ASRock and you've got a good quality value build.
*Note*
For value boards I pretty much always recommend ASRock as they are reasonably priced and have extremely good quality. Many motherboard makers will go super cheap on components in the value segment which results in all those trash 970's we hear about. The two parts that you should never, ever go cheap on are the PSU and the MB.
Very nice pick man asrock makes great boards i use them for almost every build actually i wish i had a ASRock 990FX Extreme9 over my board. The FX 6 core is winner for the price.
seems like i5 wins in price, gaming performance, efficiency, power consumption, integrated graphics ( no extra cost for those who don't game )
only thing it looses at is limited overclock but that won't matter much as it is already powerful enough
( note :- i chose ud3 because of 8 phase you can choose asus 990 6 phase too but price will still be higher than i5)
seems like i5 wins in price, gaming performance, efficiency, power consumption, integrated graphics ( no extra cost for those who don't game )
only thing it looses at is limited overclock but that won't matter much as it is already powerful enough
( note :- i chose ud3 because of 8 phase you can choose asus 990 6 phase too but price will still be higher than i5)
Please i had 8 drinks tonight and even i know better. Again for the 100th time you don't need a 990FX board and a 212+ is not needed unless you are overclocking. You think i'm making this up a locked I5 is nothing in modern games compared to a 8350fx.
You predicted? I've been here since the year 2000 and I can't remember that. In all major threads, that is. I do remember you saying that games could not scale beyond 2 threads though. Like a million times you've mentioned it.
I remember each one of the million times where he said us that and when he predicted that 8-core processors from AMD would lose to Haswell i3 in new games such as BF4.
In any case, my point is that the eigth-core processors from AMD, including the new FX models presented last month, are a more powerfull choice over the FX-6000 series for well-threaded games. I cannot say the same of Intel eight-core Haswell, which loses to the six-core Haswell.
Please stop this madness the FX 6 core vs the FX 8 core running at the same clock speeds, yes
the two extra cores shine, just like the 5960X vs 4960X.
Didn't even tested the six-core Haswell, but the 8-core loses to quad-core Haswell in BF4. Will you mention me any review of the 5960x?
Then don't forget PCgamer review which shows the octo-core HW losing against quad-core HW and against six-core IB.
More interesting is Eurogamer review, because they tested CPU utilization for OC octo-core HW. The first number is average, the second is max CPU utilization:
Battlefield 4...............32%..............37%
Crysis 3......................37%.............49%
Metro Last Light........35%............43%
Tomb Raider ............15%.............17%
BioShock Infinite.......15%............18%
Unsurprisingly, a sixteen threads CPU is used at less than 50% load even by modern well-threaded games.
seems like i5 wins in price, gaming performance, efficiency, power consumption, integrated graphics ( no extra cost for those who don't game )
only thing it looses at is limited overclock but that won't matter much as it is already powerful enough
( note :- i chose ud3 because of 8 phase you can choose asus 990 6 phase too but price will still be higher than i5)
Please i had 8 drinks tonight and even i know better. Again for the 100th time you don't need a 990FX board and a 212+ is not needed unless you are overclocking. You think i'm making this up a locked I5 is nothing in modern games compared to a 8350fx.
in that case, i5 don't need 8 phase , 4 dimm, crossfire/sli either
still fx8 not able to prove its vfm
in some games gx6/8 may win and i5 in other ( majority i think ), and i5 wins in every less threaded tasks
and i am sure that next thing you will be doing in above fx setup is undervolting to run it below 80'c at load or to prevent board from catching fire
and you loose sata 3 ( 6gbps in fx board)
you may think that overclocking fx8 to something like fx9 will twist the plot then its not true ( i think locked i5 are also overclockable by multiplier but only by 2-4 multiplier ) http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1198?vs=1289
( note :- since 4440 or 4460 wasn't in the list and 4670k lacks many benches thus i included 4690 )
though fx6 is a bit more vfm but not enough to justify its purchase over i5 http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1281?vs=1198
thus even lower end i5 are better overall in terms of many things
btw you big boys have enough monies to spend on drinks, clubs, girls, cars etc
and here i don't even have enough to perform some cheap experiments ( though whenever i get some bucks then my pc starts to love me and demands for upgrade ) , glad i don't drink or go to clubs or have any girl to spend upon
and why in this hell GTA5 is taking this much time to arive
^^ if you're gonna go by microcenter prices, amd cpus are even cheaper. and they offer bundles with el cheapo, Free motherboards (or price so low that it never registers ).
now, fx8350's competition is mid range intel i5 in terms of price. fx8320 and fx6300 compete with core i3 cpus. http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2014/2014090301_AMD_slashes_prices_of_FX_CPUs.html
i remember championing lga115x cpus against fx because fx doesn't have igpu. that still holds, only for fx8350. as for the 8320 and 6300, these got so cheap that compared to haswell/refresh core i3, overall application performance is too good for the price. i'll even overlook the tdp and power use, requirement of 3rd party cooler, discreet gfx et al. even gaming. when it comes to gaming, intel's igpu advantage evaporates and favors the two fx cpus.
hsw/refresh i3 are overpriced and worthless, so are h81/87/97 chipsets. however, those have their own niche but that's for the intel thread.
the dual module fx are still bad buys, try the kaveri athlon x4 and a88x motherboards instead.
For general purpose, all around computing it's really hard to beat the FX6 series for value. They provide about the same overall computing power as an i5 but for a fraction of the cost. Put in a mid range $100~150 USD GDDR dGPU and a 970 board from ASRock and you've got a good quality value build.
*Note*
For value boards I pretty much always recommend ASRock as they are reasonably priced and have extremely good quality. Many motherboard makers will go super cheap on components in the value segment which results in all those trash 970's we hear about. The two parts that you should never, ever go cheap on are the PSU and the MB.
I am picky, for FX 6300 , I would probably want a 970a-UD3p if going with a 970 board and intending to try for a decent overclock. I had a friend that used the Biostar TA970 for a build. At the time it was the best board that fit into the budget of the person he was building for. He said that board did well. The 970 extreme4 is a decent board for a 6300, though, as it is the only 970 board that supports SLI, that I would trust using. The MSI board that supports it is known for VRM issues.
The last time I saw significant GCC vs MSVC benchies was in early 2013. At that time, MSVC was about 10% faster then GCC, when both were using optimum switches for a given processor arch. And this was across a couple dozen benchmarks, not just one. Not saying the situation has changed, but its not something that's benched often.
EDIT
I should not a late version of GCC 3.x.x was tested, so I wouldn't be shocked if GCC caught up in the 4.x.x branch.
And it goes without saying, ICC wins even without optimizations.
Whichever is important to you drives which one you use.
That explains a lot then. I did my testing with GCC 4.7.3. I don't think Blender Foundation is using latest MSVC, but at the time I think 4.8 was latest GCC. Right now it's up to 4.9.1 in Gentoo overlays. The mid 4.x releases for GCC saw a lot of performance improvements brought to it, like auto-vectorization. It also didn't have link time optimization for a long while, but it does now. I think GCC's problem is that it is slower to adopt technology like auto-vectorization but it has the benefit of being accessible to anyone, which is why it has so much support for different ISAs. Which is probably another reason why GCC can be a bit behind.
GCC supports a ton of architectures. https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.9.1/gcc/ See 3.17 Hardware Modles and Configurations. 56 different architectures. MSVC only has x86 (and ARM for WinRT) on Windows to support.
jdwii :
I would like to say these idiot sites did the same o thing they always do show games that are not modern i wonder if they really are getting paid to be intel lovers. This is the first time i ever claimed this but i'm sick of them not using new games. Watch dogs-Battlefield 4-Thief- so on. Its not hard to do this maybe they don't own these games or any modern game.
I notice all these sites refused to say newer engines use 8 threads now and most games will be made this way its not 2009 anymore. I would like to ask you guys looking for CPU reviews for games to search for things like "given title CPU benchmark''.
It's because they re-use old benchmark numbers. The sites with a ton of products in a benchmark don't test every single product in that benchmark when they are doing the review. They just use old numbers (on older drivers and such) and copy paste them with the new results.
The better reviews actually have a handful of devices tested because they're far more likely to have actually ran the benchmark on all the hardware being shown than to re-use old numbers.
seems like i5 wins in price, gaming performance, efficiency, power consumption, integrated graphics ( no extra cost for those who don't game )
only thing it looses at is limited overclock but that won't matter much as it is already powerful enough
( note :- i chose ud3 because of 8 phase you can choose asus 990 6 phase too but price will still be higher than i5)
Please i had 8 drinks tonight and even i know better. Again for the 100th time you don't need a 990FX board and a 212+ is not needed unless you are overclocking. You think i'm making this up a locked I5 is nothing in modern games compared to a 8350fx.
in that case, i5 don't need 8 phase , 4 dimm, crossfire/sli either
still fx8 not able to prove its vfm
in some games gx6/8 may win and i5 in other ( majority i think ), and i5 wins in every less threaded tasks
and i am sure that next thing you will be doing in above fx setup is undervolting to run it below 80'c at load or to prevent board from catching fire
and you loose sata 3 ( 6gbps in fx board)
you may think that overclocking fx8 to something like fx9 will twist the plot then its not true ( i think locked i5 are also overclockable by multiplier but only by 2-4 multiplier ) http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1198?vs=1289
( note :- since 4440 or 4460 wasn't in the list and 4670k lacks many benches thus i included 4690 )
though fx6 is a bit more vfm but not enough to justify its purchase over i5 http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1281?vs=1198
thus even lower end i5 are better overall in terms of many things
btw you big boys have enough monies to spend on drinks, clubs, girls, cars etc
and here i don't even have enough to perform some cheap experiments ( though whenever i get some bucks then my pc starts to love me and demands for upgrade ) , glad i don't drink or go to clubs or have any girl to spend upon
and why in this hell GTA5 is taking this much time to arive
Ok i will give you one thing Amd's boards do cost more to get the similar features compared to intel. For just 50$ you can get a decent intel board were it cost 70$ for Amd.
If you even take a look at simcity a game that uses 4 cores only (i actually get a slight speed boost when i set windows 8 affinity to 0,2,4,6) you will notice that a 8350fx at 4.0ghz is 8% slower than a I5 at 3.2ghz.
Bolded part lol yeah i don't go to clubs or anything but i love hanging out with friends and drink talk about geek things and maybe watch the tek or some other show.
Edit
We have so many cool games coming out this year i can't wait for GTA5 or farcry 4 those 2 games have me pretty excited but i was upset to hear this from ubisoft. Sims 4 i will try out and try to love it i only like playing the sims to build up my own house start off very poor buy the biggest lot and build a 1 bedroom house and expand to i'm rich.
http://mrgamesofficial.com/far-cry-4-ps4-and-xbox-one-graphics-to-be-equivalent-with-pc-ultra-high/
I loved 3 so much it defines a close to perfect game in my opinion.
The last time I saw significant GCC vs MSVC benchies was in early 2013. At that time, MSVC was about 10% faster then GCC, when both were using optimum switches for a given processor arch. And this was across a couple dozen benchmarks, not just one. Not saying the situation has changed, but its not something that's benched often.
EDIT
I should not a late version of GCC 3.x.x was tested, so I wouldn't be shocked if GCC caught up in the 4.x.x branch.
And it goes without saying, ICC wins even without optimizations.
Whichever is important to you drives which one you use.
That explains a lot then. I did my testing with GCC 4.7.3. I don't think Blender Foundation is using latest MSVC, but at the time I think 4.8 was latest GCC. Right now it's up to 4.9.1 in Gentoo overlays. The mid 4.x releases for GCC saw a lot of performance improvements brought to it, like auto-vectorization. It also didn't have link time optimization for a long while, but it does now. I think GCC's problem is that it is slower to adopt technology like auto-vectorization but it has the benefit of being accessible to anyone, which is why it has so much support for different ISAs. Which is probably another reason why GCC can be a bit behind.
GCC supports a ton of architectures. https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.9.1/gcc/ See 3.17 Hardware Modles and Configurations. 56 different architectures. MSVC only has x86 (and ARM for WinRT) on Windows to support.
jdwii :
I would like to say these idiot sites did the same o thing they always do show games that are not modern i wonder if they really are getting paid to be intel lovers. This is the first time i ever claimed this but i'm sick of them not using new games. Watch dogs-Battlefield 4-Thief- so on. Its not hard to do this maybe they don't own these games or any modern game.
I notice all these sites refused to say newer engines use 8 threads now and most games will be made this way its not 2009 anymore. I would like to ask you guys looking for CPU reviews for games to search for things like "given title CPU benchmark''.
It's because they re-use old benchmark numbers. The sites with a ton of products in a benchmark don't test every single product in that benchmark when they are doing the review. They just use old numbers (on older drivers and such) and copy paste them with the new results.
The better reviews actually have a handful of devices tested because they're far more likely to have actually ran the benchmark on all the hardware being shown than to re-use old numbers.
Well they should at least update their game profile every year or every 6 months unless its really no point to even include it in the results. I guess smarter people would actually research newer games and type cpu benchmark after it and they will get accurate results. What would we do without techspot.
The last time I saw significant GCC vs MSVC benchies was in early 2013. At that time, MSVC was about 10% faster then GCC, when both were using optimum switches for a given processor arch. And this was across a couple dozen benchmarks, not just one. Not saying the situation has changed, but its not something that's benched often.
EDIT
I should not a late version of GCC 3.x.x was tested, so I wouldn't be shocked if GCC caught up in the 4.x.x branch.
And it goes without saying, ICC wins even without optimizations.
Whichever is important to you drives which one you use.
That explains a lot then. I did my testing with GCC 4.7.3. I don't think Blender Foundation is using latest MSVC, but at the time I think 4.8 was latest GCC. Right now it's up to 4.9.1 in Gentoo overlays. The mid 4.x releases for GCC saw a lot of performance improvements brought to it, like auto-vectorization. It also didn't have link time optimization for a long while, but it does now. I think GCC's problem is that it is slower to adopt technology like auto-vectorization but it has the benefit of being accessible to anyone, which is why it has so much support for different ISAs. Which is probably another reason why GCC can be a bit behind.
GCC supports a ton of architectures. https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.9.1/gcc/ See 3.17 Hardware Modles and Configurations. 56 different architectures. MSVC only has x86 (and ARM for WinRT) on Windows to support.
jdwii :
I would like to say these idiot sites did the same o thing they always do show games that are not modern i wonder if they really are getting paid to be intel lovers. This is the first time i ever claimed this but i'm sick of them not using new games. Watch dogs-Battlefield 4-Thief- so on. Its not hard to do this maybe they don't own these games or any modern game.
I notice all these sites refused to say newer engines use 8 threads now and most games will be made this way its not 2009 anymore. I would like to ask you guys looking for CPU reviews for games to search for things like "given title CPU benchmark''.
It's because they re-use old benchmark numbers. The sites with a ton of products in a benchmark don't test every single product in that benchmark when they are doing the review. They just use old numbers (on older drivers and such) and copy paste them with the new results.
The better reviews actually have a handful of devices tested because they're far more likely to have actually ran the benchmark on all the hardware being shown than to re-use old numbers.
Well they should at least update their game profile every year or every 6 months unless its really no point to even include it in the results. I guess smarter people would actually research newer games and type cpu benchmark after it and they will get accurate results. What would we do without techspot.
Problem is that people are using these same benchmarks in recommending GPU and arguing there opinions.
The last time I saw significant GCC vs MSVC benchies was in early 2013. At that time, MSVC was about 10% faster then GCC, when both were using optimum switches for a given processor arch. And this was across a couple dozen benchmarks, not just one. Not saying the situation has changed, but its not something that's benched often.
EDIT
I should not a late version of GCC 3.x.x was tested, so I wouldn't be shocked if GCC caught up in the 4.x.x branch.
And it goes without saying, ICC wins even without optimizations.
Whichever is important to you drives which one you use.
That explains a lot then. I did my testing with GCC 4.7.3. I don't think Blender Foundation is using latest MSVC, but at the time I think 4.8 was latest GCC. Right now it's up to 4.9.1 in Gentoo overlays. The mid 4.x releases for GCC saw a lot of performance improvements brought to it, like auto-vectorization. It also didn't have link time optimization for a long while, but it does now. I think GCC's problem is that it is slower to adopt technology like auto-vectorization but it has the benefit of being accessible to anyone, which is why it has so much support for different ISAs. Which is probably another reason why GCC can be a bit behind.
GCC supports a ton of architectures. https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.9.1/gcc/ See 3.17 Hardware Modles and Configurations. 56 different architectures. MSVC only has x86 (and ARM for WinRT) on Windows to support.
jdwii :
I would like to say these idiot sites did the same o thing they always do show games that are not modern i wonder if they really are getting paid to be intel lovers. This is the first time i ever claimed this but i'm sick of them not using new games. Watch dogs-Battlefield 4-Thief- so on. Its not hard to do this maybe they don't own these games or any modern game.
I notice all these sites refused to say newer engines use 8 threads now and most games will be made this way its not 2009 anymore. I would like to ask you guys looking for CPU reviews for games to search for things like "given title CPU benchmark''.
It's because they re-use old benchmark numbers. The sites with a ton of products in a benchmark don't test every single product in that benchmark when they are doing the review. They just use old numbers (on older drivers and such) and copy paste them with the new results.
The better reviews actually have a handful of devices tested because they're far more likely to have actually ran the benchmark on all the hardware being shown than to re-use old numbers.
Well they should at least update their game profile every year or every 6 months unless its really no point to even include it in the results. I guess smarter people would actually research newer games and type cpu benchmark after it and they will get accurate results. What would we do without techspot.
Problem is that people are using these same benchmarks in recommending GPU and arguing there opinions.
TH just did the R9-285 review and discovered (unsurprisingly) that their old assessment of the GTX760 was actually overstating the performance against the R9-270X across the board.
Amazing what happens when you go back and look at something for a second time...
The last time I saw significant GCC vs MSVC benchies was in early 2013. At that time, MSVC was about 10% faster then GCC, when both were using optimum switches for a given processor arch. And this was across a couple dozen benchmarks, not just one. Not saying the situation has changed, but its not something that's benched often.
EDIT
I should not a late version of GCC 3.x.x was tested, so I wouldn't be shocked if GCC caught up in the 4.x.x branch.
And it goes without saying, ICC wins even without optimizations.
Whichever is important to you drives which one you use.
That explains a lot then. I did my testing with GCC 4.7.3. I don't think Blender Foundation is using latest MSVC, but at the time I think 4.8 was latest GCC. Right now it's up to 4.9.1 in Gentoo overlays. The mid 4.x releases for GCC saw a lot of performance improvements brought to it, like auto-vectorization. It also didn't have link time optimization for a long while, but it does now. I think GCC's problem is that it is slower to adopt technology like auto-vectorization but it has the benefit of being accessible to anyone, which is why it has so much support for different ISAs. Which is probably another reason why GCC can be a bit behind.
GCC supports a ton of architectures. https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.9.1/gcc/ See 3.17 Hardware Modles and Configurations. 56 different architectures. MSVC only has x86 (and ARM for WinRT) on Windows to support.
jdwii :
I would like to say these idiot sites did the same o thing they always do show games that are not modern i wonder if they really are getting paid to be intel lovers. This is the first time i ever claimed this but i'm sick of them not using new games. Watch dogs-Battlefield 4-Thief- so on. Its not hard to do this maybe they don't own these games or any modern game.
I notice all these sites refused to say newer engines use 8 threads now and most games will be made this way its not 2009 anymore. I would like to ask you guys looking for CPU reviews for games to search for things like "given title CPU benchmark''.
It's because they re-use old benchmark numbers. The sites with a ton of products in a benchmark don't test every single product in that benchmark when they are doing the review. They just use old numbers (on older drivers and such) and copy paste them with the new results.
The better reviews actually have a handful of devices tested because they're far more likely to have actually ran the benchmark on all the hardware being shown than to re-use old numbers.
Well they should at least update their game profile every year or every 6 months unless its really no point to even include it in the results. I guess smarter people would actually research newer games and type cpu benchmark after it and they will get accurate results. What would we do without techspot.
Problem is that people are using these same benchmarks in recommending GPU and arguing there opinions.
The thing is it shouldn't be a opinion it should be a fact when you benchmark products use current software its quite odd they even have to discuss it or at least show new games and old games. Techpowerup is pretty good at doing this but it seems like the only ones and they don't review CPU's often.
The above Intel vs AMD price war above is interesting but people in other places are speculating and doing expert conjectures (PUN intended) about the future of AMD. This is an excerpt of an interesting discussion in another forum:
Qualcomm - has own CPU and own GPU
Nvidia - has own CPU and own GPU
Intel - has own CPU and own GPU
Imagination - has own CPU (MIPS) and own GPU
Samsung - doesn't own either one. It buys them from ARM
Why Samsung needs AMD:
■GPU technology especially, which I'm pretty sure can be easily adopted for mobile, just like Nvidia's Kepler. AMD is already spearheading heterogenous computing and "down to the metal" (or should I say Mantle?) GPU computing
■ARMv8-based K12 core coming soonish (2016) - could be good, and would spare Samsung the research/effort
■x86 APUs can give Samsung somewhat better synergy/lower costs in its laptop business
■Samsung, like Apple, can control its future regarding its processors, and be much more integrated
Why AMD needs Samsung:
■foundry highly competitive with TSMC, which they can use to dump GloFlo, which is holding AMD back - something AMD doesn't need right now, as it has enough problems. AMD definitely needs to use a more competitive foundry before it even dreams about competing either with Intel or in mobile
■instant placing in millions of new laptops and in 10-100x more mobile devices
■a ton of R&D cash - something AMD could definitely use a lot more of to be competitive not just in PCs, but in mobile too, otherwise it doesn't have much of a future
■mobile chip experience from Samsung's own mobile chip division
I should say I'm not a huge fan of Samsung these days, but I think these two just need each other too much, and they would match pretty well.
Whereas this thread is again filled with another Intel vs AMD price war: -Intel is cheaper, -no, AMD is cheaper,- no, Intel is more cheaper, -no, AMD is much more cheaper...
people in other places are speculating and doing expert conjectures about the future of AMD. This is an excerpt of an interesting discussion:
Qualcomm - has own CPU and own GPU
Nvidia - has own CPU and own GPU
Intel - has own CPU and own GPU
Imagination - has own CPU (MIPS) and own GPU
Samsung - doesn't own either one. It buys them from ARM
Why Samsung needs AMD:
■GPU technology especially, which I'm pretty sure can be easily adopted for mobile, just like Nvidia's Kepler. AMD is already spearheading heterogenous computing and "down to the metal" (or should I say Mantle?) GPU computing
■ARMv8-based K12 core coming soonish (2016) - could be good, and would spare Samsung the research/effort
■x86 APUs can give Samsung somewhat better synergy/lower costs in its laptop business
■Samsung, like Apple, can control its future regarding its processors, and be much more integrated
Why AMD needs Samsung:
■foundry highly competitive with TSMC, which they can use to dump GloFlo, which is holding AMD back - something AMD doesn't need right now, as it has enough problems. AMD definitely needs to use a more competitive foundry before it even dreams about competing either with Intel or in mobile
■instant placing in millions of new laptops and in 10-100x more mobile devices
■a ton of R&D cash - something AMD could definitely use a lot more of to be competitive not just in PCs, but in mobile too, otherwise it doesn't have much of a future
■mobile chip experience from Samsung's own mobile chip division
I should say I'm not a huge fan of Samsung these days, but I think these two just need each other too much, and they would match pretty well.
"GPU technology especially, which I'm pretty sure can be easily adopted for mobile, just like Nvidia's Kepler. AMD is already spearheading heterogenous computing and "down to the metal" (or should I say Mantle?) GPU computing".
Not really. GCN might scale well, but I'm pretty sure it's not designed to scale down. AMD sold ATI's low power tech patents to Qualcomm, remember?
"ARMv8-based K12 core coming soonish (2016) - could be good, and would spare Samsung the research/effort"
Why? Exynos SoCs are pretty darn good. Samsung has nothing to envy AMD from a design point of view. Even more, I'd say Samsung has more experience with low power than AMD in terms of ARM development.
"x86 APUs can give Samsung somewhat better synergy/lower costs in its laptop business"
Intel might object. That's enough risk and cost to Samsung to consider it twice or more.
"Samsung, like Apple, can control its future regarding its processors, and be much more integrated"
They already are. AMD has little to nothing to add, as bad as it sounds.
--
Let's see the other way around.
"foundry highly competitive with TSMC, which they can use to dump GloFlo, which is holding AMD back - something AMD doesn't need right now, as it has enough problems. AMD definitely needs to use a more competitive foundry before it even dreams about competing either with Intel or in mobile"
They just got rid of one, why would they want a Fab back? Even more, through a Merge with Samsung? I'm pretty sure GF has more experience than Samsung in that department. It would be even better to buy the Dresden factory back in that case. Was it Dresden? xD
"instant placing in millions of new laptops and in 10-100x more mobile devices"
Mobile, totally agreed. Laptops? Samsung creates/builds laptops, but using Intel mostly.
"a ton of R&D cash - something AMD could definitely use a lot more of to be competitive not just in PCs, but in mobile too, otherwise it doesn't have much of a future"
Yes, they need more cash for R&D.
"mobile chip experience from Samsung's own mobile chip division"
Yes, plus all the patents in low power tech they own.
--
Overall, I'd say AMD needs Samsung more than the other way around, but I don't think Intel would let Samsung snag AMD that easily. They'd either put a lot of fear factor in a possible merger/buyout through the X86 license or they'd buy them themselves (this would be... interesting).
Thinking it in another way. Between AMD or VIA, I'd say VIA is more attractive.
seems like i5 wins in price, gaming performance, efficiency, power consumption, integrated graphics ( no extra cost for those who don't game )
only thing it looses at is limited overclock but that won't matter much as it is already powerful enough
( note :- i chose ud3 because of 8 phase you can choose asus 990 6 phase too but price will still be higher than i5)
Please i had 8 drinks tonight and even i know better. Again for the 100th time you don't need a 990FX board and a 212+ is not needed unless you are overclocking. You think i'm making this up a locked I5 is nothing in modern games compared to a 8350fx.
in that case, i5 don't need 8 phase , 4 dimm, crossfire/sli either
still fx8 not able to prove its vfm
in some games gx6/8 may win and i5 in other ( majority i think ), and i5 wins in every less threaded tasks
and i am sure that next thing you will be doing in above fx setup is undervolting to run it below 80'c at load or to prevent board from catching fire
and you loose sata 3 ( 6gbps in fx board)
you may think that overclocking fx8 to something like fx9 will twist the plot then its not true ( i think locked i5 are also overclockable by multiplier but only by 2-4 multiplier ) http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1198?vs=1289
( note :- since 4440 or 4460 wasn't in the list and 4670k lacks many benches thus i included 4690 )
though fx6 is a bit more vfm but not enough to justify its purchase over i5 http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1281?vs=1198
thus even lower end i5 are better overall in terms of many things
btw you big boys have enough monies to spend on drinks, clubs, girls, cars etc
and here i don't even have enough to perform some cheap experiments ( though whenever i get some bucks then my pc starts to love me and demands for upgrade ) , glad i don't drink or go to clubs or have any girl to spend upon
and why in this hell GTA5 is taking this much time to arive
Ok i will give you one thing Amd's boards do cost more to get the similar features compared to intel. For just 50$ you can get a decent intel board were it cost 70$ for Amd.
If you even take a look at simcity a game that uses 4 cores only (i actually get a slight speed boost when i set windows 8 affinity to 0,2,4,6) you will notice that a 8350fx at 4.0ghz is 8% slower than a I5 at 3.2ghz.
Bolded part lol yeah i don't go to clubs or anything but i love hanging out with friends and drink talk about geek things and maybe watch the tek or some other show.
Edit
We have so many cool games coming out this year i can't wait for GTA5 or farcry 4 those 2 games have me pretty excited but i was upset to hear this from ubisoft. Sims 4 i will try out and try to love it i only like playing the sims to build up my own house start off very poor buy the biggest lot and build a 1 bedroom house and expand to i'm rich.
http://mrgamesofficial.com/far-cry-4-ps4-and-xbox-one-graphics-to-be-equivalent-with-pc-ultra-high/
I loved 3 so much it defines a close to perfect game in my opinion.
Not really. On the feature level Intel will have more but the quality of the board's components will be the same. A $50 USD board will have the quality of components of any other $50 USD board, which isn't very good. They get the prices that low by going with less layers, cheaper capacitors, VRM's and overall workmanship. These things have nothing to do with the CPU the board supports or the chipsets being used but on the components used for construction and the engineer manhours used for the design. PSU's run into the exact same situation, cheaper ones will use cheaper components which result in lower lifespans, more leakage and instabilities.
I can't state strongly enough that nobody should ever skimp out on PSUs or the MB. Never buy a $50 USD motherboard and never buy a $25 USD PSU. Save / borrow / spend the money for a highly quality product from a manufacturer known for good workmanship.
seems like i5 wins in price, gaming performance, efficiency, power consumption, integrated graphics ( no extra cost for those who don't game )
only thing it looses at is limited overclock but that won't matter much as it is already powerful enough
( note :- i chose ud3 because of 8 phase you can choose asus 990 6 phase too but price will still be higher than i5)
Please i had 8 drinks tonight and even i know better. Again for the 100th time you don't need a 990FX board and a 212+ is not needed unless you are overclocking. You think i'm making this up a locked I5 is nothing in modern games compared to a 8350fx.
in that case, i5 don't need 8 phase , 4 dimm, crossfire/sli either
still fx8 not able to prove its vfm
in some games gx6/8 may win and i5 in other ( majority i think ), and i5 wins in every less threaded tasks
and i am sure that next thing you will be doing in above fx setup is undervolting to run it below 80'c at load or to prevent board from catching fire
and you loose sata 3 ( 6gbps in fx board)
you may think that overclocking fx8 to something like fx9 will twist the plot then its not true ( i think locked i5 are also overclockable by multiplier but only by 2-4 multiplier ) http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1198?vs=1289
( note :- since 4440 or 4460 wasn't in the list and 4670k lacks many benches thus i included 4690 )
though fx6 is a bit more vfm but not enough to justify its purchase over i5 http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1281?vs=1198
thus even lower end i5 are better overall in terms of many things
btw you big boys have enough monies to spend on drinks, clubs, girls, cars etc
and here i don't even have enough to perform some cheap experiments ( though whenever i get some bucks then my pc starts to love me and demands for upgrade ) , glad i don't drink or go to clubs or have any girl to spend upon
and why in this hell GTA5 is taking this much time to arive
Ok i will give you one thing Amd's boards do cost more to get the similar features compared to intel. For just 50$ you can get a decent intel board were it cost 70$ for Amd.
If you even take a look at simcity a game that uses 4 cores only (i actually get a slight speed boost when i set windows 8 affinity to 0,2,4,6) you will notice that a 8350fx at 4.0ghz is 8% slower than a I5 at 3.2ghz.
Bolded part lol yeah i don't go to clubs or anything but i love hanging out with friends and drink talk about geek things and maybe watch the tek or some other show.
Edit
We have so many cool games coming out this year i can't wait for GTA5 or farcry 4 those 2 games have me pretty excited but i was upset to hear this from ubisoft. Sims 4 i will try out and try to love it i only like playing the sims to build up my own house start off very poor buy the biggest lot and build a 1 bedroom house and expand to i'm rich.
http://mrgamesofficial.com/far-cry-4-ps4-and-xbox-one-graphics-to-be-equivalent-with-pc-ultra-high/
I loved 3 so much it defines a close to perfect game in my opinion.
Not really. On the feature level Intel will have more but the quality of the board's components will be the same. A $50 USD board will have the quality of components of any other $50 USD board, which isn't very good. They get the prices that low by going with less layers, cheaper capacitors, VRM's and overall workmanship. These things have nothing to do with the CPU the board supports or the chipsets being used but on the components used for construction and the engineer manhours used for the design. PSU's run into the exact same situation, cheaper ones will use cheaper components which result in lower lifespans, more leakage and instabilities.
I can't state strongly enough that nobody should ever skimp out on PSUs or the MB. Never buy a $50 USD motherboard and never buy a $25 USD PSU. Save / borrow / spend the money for a highly quality product from a manufacturer known for good workmanship.
Well i have to agree some what but a 50$ board i use for several builds for Intel and they all have solid caps for example plus Intel doesn't need lots of power unlike Amd which requires a better board. The never thing has been happening for several builds now to allow a bigger budget for a CPU or GPU. Also where were you when Amd was claiming to have such a great deal with a APU+board+ram for 100$? Edit i do agree on PSU however i stick with Antec 450 watt or corsair 430 watt usually no more than 45$.
for the GTA V hopefuls:
Sources hint at GTA V release date for PC, PS4 and Xbox One
http://hexus.net/gaming/news/industry/74093-sources-hint-gta-v-release-date-pc-ps4-xbox-one/
in november. +NaCl
( though whenever i get some bucks then my pc starts to love me and demands for upgrade 
) , glad i don't drink or go to clubs or have any girl to spend upon 
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram