Intel over AMD, after AM3+ ending?

[thedude300]

I was considering going AMD and getting the 8350 but now after AMD's announcement of them discontinuing the AM3, AM3+ sockets I find maybe it isn't the best route to go any more. Am I correct by that? If so, which INTEL should I get in the next 4 months?

My current build:

Gigabyte GTX 670 OC WINDFORCE X3 2GB
AMD 1090T 3.8ghz OC Hyper 212+
Corsair Vengeance series 8GB 1333mhz (Due to MOBO)
Corsair Stealth2 700W PSU
ASUS M4A89GTD PRO/USB3 (latest BIOS)


I'm for sure going to get a new MOBO also when I get this chip and most likely will SLI in the future. Also, I'd like to get another motherboard that will "Last" at least 3 years like the one I have currently has. But this is more of a general CPU question on forgetting AMD and going Intel for the first time since the Q6600.

 

[logainofhades]

Where did you see they were doing this and when are they doing this. I know it is planned to eventually change, but AMD has stated before that we would get one more CPU for AM3+. Many have speculated that it would be early Steamroller chips.

 

[jaguarskx]

The last I heard socket AM3+ is expected to survive into 2015. That means Steamroller and Excavator will be socket AM3+. Although Intel's socket 1155 is considered dead because they have stopped manufacturing Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge CPUs, it is still a viable socket since Ivy Bridge CPUs are still considered very powerful.

Haswell is Intel's current generation CPU and it is socket 1150. It is expected to be last into 2015. That means the refresh of Haswell coming in 2014 will also be socket 1150.

In 2015 both AMD and Intel are expected to have new sockets. For AMD, it should be whatever CPU is coming after Excavator; it may even come out in 2016. Too distant in the future to know. In 2015 Intel is expected to release Skylake and it will be a major change in CPU architecture. It has been speculated that Skylake will offer a large improvement over Haswell.

 

[thedude300]

I think I read it here or during a PAX event. I wasn't too sure, but as of now my 1090T isn't preforming how I'd like it too. Games like METRO 2033 and last night also the new ROME 2 TOTAL and Battlefield 3 arent going to run the greatest on it.


Really i Just want to know if I should go INTEL or AMD at this point. Maybe a new MOBO like the Gigabyte UD3 or 5 will give me a performance boost on my 1090T and GTX 670 over my dated MOBO and I can upgrade one more time to the newer steamroller or excavator chips if they are worth it but I rather not drop to much money on a new motherboard for amd if the new chips won't be par to the intel.

Really I don't mean I want it to last as in it won't work with the new chips in 2016 that doesn't bother me. I just want a CPU that will give me great performance over the next 3 years with some over clocking of course.

 

[jaguarskx]

A new motherboard is not going to make too much of a difference. It's been sometime since I really read any in depth motherboard reviews, but I think the typical performance difference between an average motherboard and a premium motherboard may be around 3% - 4%. Also just because the motherboard is new that does not automatically mean you are going to get better performance compared to the mobo you currently have. The only way to know is to have an apples to apples performance comparison.

Intel CPUs are generally better at games than AMD CPUs. While AMD may have more cores, each individual Intel CPU core is significantly more powerful than each individual AMD core. That is why a quad core Intel i5-4670k @ 3.4GHz (and prior generation Intel CPUs) can beat an AMD FX-3850 @ 4.0GHz in game benchmarks. Skyrim is a somewhat extreme example of game that will simply perform better on an i5-4670k running at stock speed compared to a overclocked AMD FX-8350. The more Skyrim mods you install that taxes the CPU, the wider the performance gap.

People state that AMD will be better at games than Intel because both PS4 and Xbox One has 8 core AMD CPUs. The issue is that it will generally take time for developers to be able to design their games to use all 8 or most cores. It is far easier to say that they will develop games that does so compared to actually coding the game to leverage the 8 cores.

While developers figure out how take advantage of all the cores and figure out how to efficiently use them, Intel will continue to improve the performance of their cores. One member stated that one of the game he was playing was using all the core in the FX-8350 I forgot which game, but I found a CPU performance comparison that showed the 6 core FX-6350 and 8 core FX-8350 had the same performance for that particular game. That just means that the load was spread across all the cores. Since the performance (FPS) was the same that just meant the each core in the FX-8350 was doing less work than each core in the FX-6350. Needless to say Intel's quad core i5 CPU beat both CPUs.

 

[logainofhades]

The only way a new motherboard would be any performance improvement is if your current one is holding you back on your overclock.

 

[thedude300]

I for sure feel like something is holding me back I don't know what but I'm scoreing less on bench marks like Futuremark 3DMARK 11 then other people with similar setups.. I can't seem to pass 3.812mhz on my 1090T without it crashing even though its under 62 C 99% of the time. What are somethings that can hold back CPU over clocking?