AMD FX-9370 vs. Intel Core i7-4770K: A dilemma of more than just numbers; The requiem of a broke gamer

[Beezy]

I"m glad i replaced those junk FX chips with Phenoms , wow i could sell my phenoms now for 40 dollars more than i payed for them , here are some examples
I bought the x4 965 for 78 dollars (just the cpu ) on ebay , during this time newegg was phasing out the new ones with heatsink at 94.99
I checked ebay and cheapest x4 965 sells for 125.00 i could make 47 dollars on the 965 over what i paid for it

I bought the x4 955 for 71 dollars (just the cpu) this is including shipping btw , Checked cheapest one , south korean seller has them for 106.50 total shipped , thats roughly 35 dollars i could make on the 955 over what i paid for it.

Now the lovely (HAMMER) Phenom II x6 1090T , I payed 148.00 total for this one when i bought it , cheapest one on ebay is going for 189.00 now thats a whopping 41 dollars i can make on the 1090T this cpu was i believe in the 200-220 range when it debut in late 2009 early 2010 so its held a great residual value thru time.

So i indeed must not be the only one who prefers Amds old Gems over their new trash

a lot of people see value in the old still, clearly, but i wouldnt use the ebay economy to prove that.

 

[teknobug]

I still love my Phenom II X6 1090T, keeps up with the FX 6300 in many cases.

 

[Matt087_48]

OMG this is crazy , i just benched my Xeon x3360 aka (q9550). I overclocked it to 3.33 ghz making it equal to 2 stock core 2 duo e8600's fused together . It benchmarked 5122 on cpu mark , a guy listed his FX 4100 overclocked at 4.33 ghz and it benchmarked 44 points lower than mine at 5078. Now folks my x3360 is a LGA 775 2008 cpu the fx 4100 is a 2011 AM3+ cpu and it was clocked 1GHZ higher than my 2008 xeon and it still fell short of mine. THATS how said FX chips really are, i mean thats pathetic

 

[Beezy]

Intel wins in IPC, yes

 

[Matt087_48]

i just checked wikipedia Xeon x3360 came out Jan 2008, FX 4100 October 2012 , correction 2012 not 2011 , that really makes the chip look really really sad , nearly 5 years newer FX 4100 overclocked 1GHZ higher than a Q9550 clone and falls short. That just sums up FX . what happened to AMD did they want to just give up or we're they in a bind and just wanted to ripoff people.

 

[Matt087_48]

I still love my Phenom II X6 1090T, keeps up with the FX 6300 in many cases.

I still Love all 4 of the Phenoms i use my 1090T, 955,965 and 720 thats currently unlocked comparable to a x4 945.

When Amd were pumping out phenoms they still had some balls they were seriously wanting to compete with intel , and 2008-2010 they had some good stuff to do so. But this FX is like they hit a brick wall and they said ah well lets just throw some trash together and say that we're still here.

 

[Beezy]

Haha no man, you are really really sad. That xeon only costed like 3 x as much as the 4100 did but delivers similar performance accoridng to benchmarks. I think ur point makes the fx look like an even better value. Age doesnt make a huge diffrerence to me, idc if took and 5 years to catch up they got into the game later than Intel did.

 

[Matt087_48]

Haha no man, you are really really sad. That xeon only costed like 3 x as much as the 4100 did but delivers similar performance accoridng to benchmarks. I think ur point makes the fx look like an even better value. Age doesnt make a huge diffrerence to me, idc if took and 5 years to catch up they got into the game later than Intel did.



really dude , i actually payed only 86 bucks for the 3360 the used FX 4100 cost around 78-80 bucks so 6 dollars isn't really 3x more expensive now is it

 

[Beezy]

Your argument isn't very good. What we can say is that Intel delivers more efficiency while AMD delivers a better price performance ratio. espeically with their FX line. The i5 4440 has about 25% better single core performance and the 4670 is about 50% better on single threaded apps. But in many other respects the fx 8320 has the i5 beat .

 

[Matt087_48]

and how about this if this don't point blank prove the FX was AMD Going backwards, The August 2009 Phenom II x4 965 is 2 tiers higher than the October 2012 FX 4100 in gaming cpu heirchy chart. And my 965 at 3.8GHZ scores higher than that dudes 4.3 GHZ FX 4100. SO theres AMD vs AMD , The 965 was a value chip in its day. So beezy your point is simply POINTLESS .

 

[AshyCFC]

FX-*1** Chips sucked.

FX-*3** Chips are decent but not high end.

 

[Matt087_48]

FX =FALSE ECONOMY. PERIOD

 

[Beezy]

And I'm talking about Msrp, dude. Like the price at launch, dude. Doesn't take a genius to see that prices NOW are more reflective of demand. Meaning that xeon u snagged was 6 bucks chepaer because its less desirable = less cost. Basic supply demand economic kinda logic. Some people have no trouble understanding that ..but others...

 

[Matt087_48]

well i didn't say 6 bucks cheaper i said i only payed 6 dollars more . but nonetheless . The price is more reflective of the age of the architecture btw genius

 

[Matt087_48]

yes if you want to do the launch price we can , the xeon was actually roughly 5x higher $530 in 2008 the fx launched at $109 in 2012. But who am I to question the genius

 

[Matt087_48]

i'll admit i'm a pessimist when it comes to AMD ,I like several of amds older offerings, but this Fx junk i just assume flush it down the toilet and take a dump on it before doing so.

 

[Beezy]

Phenoms are true cores and fx isn't true core. That 4100 is 2 modules working like 4 cores. The prices at launch reflected that too. Fx holds its own for the price its at. You can't prove that wrong Lol.

 

[Beezy]

Biased not pessimistic

 

[Matt087_48]

I owned previously 2 FX chips the 4100 and 6300 and i personally took a big loss on ebay to get rid of them as fast i possibly could they flat out sucked , the 6300 was aihh better but boy that 1090T i replaced it with with 50 more bucks sure shines and the 955 well i only payed about 15 more for it than what i sold the 4100 for , and that was 15 dollars very very very very well spent . Btw how could i be biased if i'm comparing 2009 amd chips to 2012 amd chips i'm just simply saying AMD made good stuff back in the day and they just nosedived later on

 

[Beezy]

You had a poorly optimized rig, I'm sorry you had a bad fx experience but its a solid chip and at the price AMD offers it at its far from a reason to hate..

 

[Matt087_48]

garbage is not worth a penny. So the price AMD offers them for is way way too high

 

[Beezy]

Yes very compelling argument, calling things garbage because you didn't know how to make it work right

 

[Beezy]

Youre stuck on bulldozer that's how I know ur argument is totally biased in your bad experience. The piledriver architecture is 10% better and you fail to mention the updated microarchitecture anywere in your moot points

 

[JOOK-D]

Chill out ladies, try answering OP's question.

 

[Matt087_48]

intel is playing cat and mouse with amd now they are not threatened by amd making these little 10% improvements on their original blunder known as bulldozer. Amd is pushing these 4.4 and 4.7ghz cpus now that use 220 watts and require you to have some superduty cooler just to run the things. Thats just spells disaster. "Clustered Integer Core" micro-architecture, an architecture developed by DEC in 1996 with the RISC microprocessor Alpha 21264". THis tech is grasping for straws from an era when pentium II's were present. Sounds like a disaster to me. I'm 34 now i was a sophmore in high school when the Alpha 21264 came out. And Amd is wanting to design cpus in 2014 based of a 1996 prototype. How about them apples.