Intel Quadcore Vs. AMD Octacore - Gaming and future octacore-optimized development.

[prankstare]

Hey,

So we all know Intel's architecture is much better and energy/performance efficient per thread/core but how about multi-tasking performance? Also, do you think that, in the near future perhaps, not only games but also most computer programs will all benefit from using 8 actual cores like next-gen consoles are doing for games?

The reason I'm asking this is because I'm a bit torn between buying "faster" but expensive Intel's quadcore solution i5 3570k or "slower" but much cheaper AMD's octacore FX-8350. However, if the future say 8-12 months from now will be eight-core optimized sofware all the way (including games and overall multi-tasking), then I think such "slower" (for now) AMD solution is worth it.

So, any ideas?

Thanks!

 

[firemedictj]

Spoiler

What about other upgrade problems like newer graphics cards that make use of dx12 vs dx11, or PCI4 vs PCI3 sure the socket on your 5yr old MB is the same and the CPU will fit but it may not be able to make use of the latest technology.

There is no DX12...I am a game developer and there's been no word of DX12 anytime soon. OpenGL has incoming updates still...but DX11 seems to be pretty much where we're going to be for a while. PCIe 3.0 isn't even utilized in 98% of GPUs out right now...that's still a year or so out before widespread adoption. 3 years from now those may be concerns at some point...but right now they're not even remotely an issue.

I was just reading on another thread that at least one user has that exact problem right not with pci2 on his board and no pci3 and dx10 vs dx11, means that he cannot achieve what would be possible with a new board. so just because you dont have to upgrade the board to get the cpu to fit doesnt mean you dont need to upgrade the board to get other featers, most notably and probably going to be the most prevalent of them is USB3.0......

PCIe 2.0 Cards run DX11 unless he is using a HD 6XXX series card or a Nvidia GTX 5XX series card. He just needs to buy a newer card. PCIe 2.0 Cards support DX11.

Sure AMD competes from a price standpoint but by the time we actually get really well coded programs that efficiently use all 8 cores, i guarantee you that both AMD and Intel will be much more efficient per clock, per core, and the one no one seems to account for power.

Because power is not a concern for 99.999% of the free world...I pay $0.11 kw/hr...why on earth would I sweat $20/yr when I saved $80-100 up front in my build?

If both chips can be purchased for the same price 8350 and what ever AMD comes out with in 3 years time..... which one costs more? The 8350 because it takes 125w to get that level of performance, and most likely that will be cut in half in 3 years to 60w. So what you have effectively done is spent slightly less money now to achieve something that is effectively going to cost you more in the long run to operate, not including all the aforementioned other potential issues.

But you can't buy them for the same money...the AMD setup is consistently a minimum of $60 cheaper with CPU and MB. So that means I can run the AMD setup for 3 years before I break even on it...if I don't upgrade in 2 years.

Why are you giong to upgrade in two years after you just got done telling me that basically all this stuff is here to stay for at least 3+ years......... Nifty quoting technique btw.

Because I can afford to go to steamroller when it comes out, and that may be before 2 years is up. If Steamroller is as advertised...then it will be worth upgrading out of cycle for...

so you have $200 to upgrade out of cycle, but your worried about $100 now????

I could not justify the difference in performance for the cost. 2-3 FPS is not worth a combined $80 increase in price. Likewise...if I were already running SB and my upgrade cycle came up on Haswell (hasfail)...I would just skip that cycle and keep what I had because the combined performance increase from IB and Hasfail is less then it's worth spending the money for...

EDIT: I am looking at performance/$ value. Overall cost bothers me less than what I am getting for my dollars. I cannot justify spending more money on intel for marginally better performance. (makes sense...?)

Lets try this another way. You spend $200 now for 8350 and $200 again a year from now for steamroller. = $400 ...... why not buy an I7 get the albeit more expensive intel board, pocket the $100 and skip the next cycle as you suggested...

 

[NappySlapper]

Why would you drop down to that motherboard? It lacks CF and/or SLI support. I thought we were sticking with similar boards? I thought about using PCpartpicker or other sites, but I felt it would change things to much. Sales always come and go. Being near a Microcenter will change things to. (As will being in a state that you would get charged tax for.) Newegg seems to be the general all around cheapest (usually) for most items. So unless you want to buy your parts from 6 different stores... Things we list here and now will always be wrong next week when a sale starts/stops.

I was going to say seeing as your board still has only PCIe 2.0 and no CF/SLI support you should get this instead.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128512
GA-Z68XP-UD3 CF/SLI support, $90 after shipping and rebate. Better board then the one you listed and now the price difference is what? AMD is $6 cheaper if you still with Newegg, $15 or so with your new board. I think I'd take the better board and 3570K still.

I don't understand why you are still ignoring my points about the 8350 being much more cost effective in the future. Some people are too set on what is happening now to think about things later down the line I assume, but that is no problem if they do really want the best current performance.

Also it should be noted that the different costs from different countries will mean different opinions.

For example here in the UK my sabertooth 990fx cost me £110 and my 8350 £138 which totals basically £250

If I was to get the intel equivalent: z77 sabertooth costs £170 and 3570k costs £165 which totals £335
That is a difference of £85 , or $133 . And that is BEFORE the intel guy has to spend £100 upgrading their mobo later on (bringing the difference to £185 or $290)

Discuss.

What about other upgrade problems like newer graphics cards that make use of dx12 vs dx11, or PCI4 vs PCI3 sure the socket on your 5yr old MB is the same and the CPU will fit but it may not be able to make use of the latest technology.

I was just reading on another thread that at least one user has that exact problem right not with pci2 on his board and no pci3 and dx10 vs dx11, means that he cannot achieve what would be possible with a new board. so just because you dont have to upgrade the board to get the cpu to fit doesnt mean you dont need to upgrade the board to get other featers, most notably and probably going to be the most prevalent of them is USB3.0......

Sure AMD competes from a price standpoint but by the time we actually get really well coded programs that efficiently use all 8 cores, i guarantee you that both AMD and Intel will be much more efficient per clock, per core, and the one no one seems to account for power.

If both chips can be purchased for the same price 8350 and what ever AMD comes out with in 3 years time..... which one costs more? The 8350 because it takes 125w to get that level of performance, and most likely that will be cut in half in 3 years to 60w. So what you have effectively done is spent slightly less money now to achieve something that is effectively going to cost you more in the long run to operate, not including all the aforementioned other potential issues.

The sabertooth 990fx rev2 that im talking about is not 5 years old, it has all the features needed im pretty sure. Off the top of my head my mobo has 4 usb 3.0 ports but im not sure on that, could be more.

Nothing you said makes sense to me...

 

[8350rocks]

If you get the Sabertooth 990FX Gen3 R2.0 you even get PCIe 3.0

 

[firemedictj]

Why would you drop down to that motherboard? It lacks CF and/or SLI support. I thought we were sticking with similar boards? I thought about using PCpartpicker or other sites, but I felt it would change things to much. Sales always come and go. Being near a Microcenter will change things to. (As will being in a state that you would get charged tax for.) Newegg seems to be the general all around cheapest (usually) for most items. So unless you want to buy your parts from 6 different stores... Things we list here and now will always be wrong next week when a sale starts/stops.

I was going to say seeing as your board still has only PCIe 2.0 and no CF/SLI support you should get this instead.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128512
GA-Z68XP-UD3 CF/SLI support, $90 after shipping and rebate. Better board then the one you listed and now the price difference is what? AMD is $6 cheaper if you still with Newegg, $15 or so with your new board. I think I'd take the better board and 3570K still.

I don't understand why you are still ignoring my points about the 8350 being much more cost effective in the future. Some people are too set on what is happening now to think about things later down the line I assume, but that is no problem if they do really want the best current performance.

Also it should be noted that the different costs from different countries will mean different opinions.

For example here in the UK my sabertooth 990fx cost me £110 and my 8350 £138 which totals basically £250

If I was to get the intel equivalent: z77 sabertooth costs £170 and 3570k costs £165 which totals £335
That is a difference of £85 , or $133 . And that is BEFORE the intel guy has to spend £100 upgrading their mobo later on (bringing the difference to £185 or $290)

Discuss.

What about other upgrade problems like newer graphics cards that make use of dx12 vs dx11, or PCI4 vs PCI3 sure the socket on your 5yr old MB is the same and the CPU will fit but it may not be able to make use of the latest technology.

I was just reading on another thread that at least one user has that exact problem right not with pci2 on his board and no pci3 and dx10 vs dx11, means that he cannot achieve what would be possible with a new board. so just because you dont have to upgrade the board to get the cpu to fit doesnt mean you dont need to upgrade the board to get other featers, most notably and probably going to be the most prevalent of them is USB3.0......

Sure AMD competes from a price standpoint but by the time we actually get really well coded programs that efficiently use all 8 cores, i guarantee you that both AMD and Intel will be much more efficient per clock, per core, and the one no one seems to account for power.

If both chips can be purchased for the same price 8350 and what ever AMD comes out with in 3 years time..... which one costs more? The 8350 because it takes 125w to get that level of performance, and most likely that will be cut in half in 3 years to 60w. So what you have effectively done is spent slightly less money now to achieve something that is effectively going to cost you more in the long run to operate, not including all the aforementioned other potential issues.

The sabertooth 990fx rev2 that im talking about is not 5 years old, it has all the features needed im pretty sure. Off the top of my head my mobo has 4 usb 3.0 ports but im not sure on that, could be more.

Nothing you said makes sense to me...

In this particular case I am not speaking about your board in particular but in a broader sense that maybe not everybody operating and AMD based computer purchased a board around the time you did. I think the point that was trying to be made was that you should have an upgrade path... and the counter to that was IN THE FUTURE the limit to what you can do may not be limited by your CPU socket but by the board itself, thus meaning you would need to purchase a new board to attain those features, essentially nullifying the 8350 as a clear winner choice.

 

[8350rocks]

Spoiler

What about other upgrade problems like newer graphics cards that make use of dx12 vs dx11, or PCI4 vs PCI3 sure the socket on your 5yr old MB is the same and the CPU will fit but it may not be able to make use of the latest technology.

There is no DX12...I am a game developer and there's been no word of DX12 anytime soon. OpenGL has incoming updates still...but DX11 seems to be pretty much where we're going to be for a while. PCIe 3.0 isn't even utilized in 98% of GPUs out right now...that's still a year or so out before widespread adoption. 3 years from now those may be concerns at some point...but right now they're not even remotely an issue.

I was just reading on another thread that at least one user has that exact problem right not with pci2 on his board and no pci3 and dx10 vs dx11, means that he cannot achieve what would be possible with a new board. so just because you dont have to upgrade the board to get the cpu to fit doesnt mean you dont need to upgrade the board to get other featers, most notably and probably going to be the most prevalent of them is USB3.0......

PCIe 2.0 Cards run DX11 unless he is using a HD 6XXX series card or a Nvidia GTX 5XX series card. He just needs to buy a newer card. PCIe 2.0 Cards support DX11.

Sure AMD competes from a price standpoint but by the time we actually get really well coded programs that efficiently use all 8 cores, i guarantee you that both AMD and Intel will be much more efficient per clock, per core, and the one no one seems to account for power.

Because power is not a concern for 99.999% of the free world...I pay $0.11 kw/hr...why on earth would I sweat $20/yr when I saved $80-100 up front in my build?

If both chips can be purchased for the same price 8350 and what ever AMD comes out with in 3 years time..... which one costs more? The 8350 because it takes 125w to get that level of performance, and most likely that will be cut in half in 3 years to 60w. So what you have effectively done is spent slightly less money now to achieve something that is effectively going to cost you more in the long run to operate, not including all the aforementioned other potential issues.

But you can't buy them for the same money...the AMD setup is consistently a minimum of $60 cheaper with CPU and MB. So that means I can run the AMD setup for 3 years before I break even on it...if I don't upgrade in 2 years.

Why are you giong to upgrade in two years after you just got done telling me that basically all this stuff is here to stay for at least 3+ years......... Nifty quoting technique btw.

Because I can afford to go to steamroller when it comes out, and that may be before 2 years is up. If Steamroller is as advertised...then it will be worth upgrading out of cycle for...

so you have $200 to upgrade out of cycle, but your worried about $100 now????

I could not justify the difference in performance for the cost. 2-3 FPS is not worth a combined $80 increase in price. Likewise...if I were already running SB and my upgrade cycle came up on Haswell (hasfail)...I would just skip that cycle and keep what I had because the combined performance increase from IB and Hasfail is less then it's worth spending the money for...

EDIT: I am looking at performance/$ value. Overall cost bothers me less than what I am getting for my dollars. I cannot justify spending more money on intel for marginally better performance. (makes sense...?)

Lets try this another way. You spend $200 now for 8350 and $200 again a year from now for steamroller. = $400 ...... why not buy an I7 get the albeit more expensive intel board, pocket the $100 and skip the next cycle as you suggested...

Because the FX 8350 is about on par with the intel offerings now...hasfail didn't improve desktop at all. That means if steamroller hits, and it's really a 30% improvement...then I would have wasted $400 on intel for the same performance I got for $170 with the FX 8350, and I could have waited and got steamroller that blows the doors off both of those. Then I will skip the next cycle.

Hasfail was all about laptop/mobile...anyone who says anything differently is either a fanboy, or being paid by intel...or both.

EDIT: Look at the Linux benches...(one of my machines uses Ubuntu)...the FX8350 actually bests the 3770k in many areas on Linux...it's windows that's deficient in taking advantage of the performance of AMD hardware.

 

[firemedictj]

Spoiler

What about other upgrade problems like newer graphics cards that make use of dx12 vs dx11, or PCI4 vs PCI3 sure the socket on your 5yr old MB is the same and the CPU will fit but it may not be able to make use of the latest technology.

There is no DX12...I am a game developer and there's been no word of DX12 anytime soon. OpenGL has incoming updates still...but DX11 seems to be pretty much where we're going to be for a while. PCIe 3.0 isn't even utilized in 98% of GPUs out right now...that's still a year or so out before widespread adoption. 3 years from now those may be concerns at some point...but right now they're not even remotely an issue.

I was just reading on another thread that at least one user has that exact problem right not with pci2 on his board and no pci3 and dx10 vs dx11, means that he cannot achieve what would be possible with a new board. so just because you dont have to upgrade the board to get the cpu to fit doesnt mean you dont need to upgrade the board to get other featers, most notably and probably going to be the most prevalent of them is USB3.0......

PCIe 2.0 Cards run DX11 unless he is using a HD 6XXX series card or a Nvidia GTX 5XX series card. He just needs to buy a newer card. PCIe 2.0 Cards support DX11.

Sure AMD competes from a price standpoint but by the time we actually get really well coded programs that efficiently use all 8 cores, i guarantee you that both AMD and Intel will be much more efficient per clock, per core, and the one no one seems to account for power.

Because power is not a concern for 99.999% of the free world...I pay $0.11 kw/hr...why on earth would I sweat $20/yr when I saved $80-100 up front in my build?

If both chips can be purchased for the same price 8350 and what ever AMD comes out with in 3 years time..... which one costs more? The 8350 because it takes 125w to get that level of performance, and most likely that will be cut in half in 3 years to 60w. So what you have effectively done is spent slightly less money now to achieve something that is effectively going to cost you more in the long run to operate, not including all the aforementioned other potential issues.

But you can't buy them for the same money...the AMD setup is consistently a minimum of $60 cheaper with CPU and MB. So that means I can run the AMD setup for 3 years before I break even on it...if I don't upgrade in 2 years.

Why are you giong to upgrade in two years after you just got done telling me that basically all this stuff is here to stay for at least 3+ years......... Nifty quoting technique btw.

Because I can afford to go to steamroller when it comes out, and that may be before 2 years is up. If Steamroller is as advertised...then it will be worth upgrading out of cycle for...

so you have $200 to upgrade out of cycle, but your worried about $100 now????

I could not justify the difference in performance for the cost. 2-3 FPS is not worth a combined $80 increase in price. Likewise...if I were already running SB and my upgrade cycle came up on Haswell (hasfail)...I would just skip that cycle and keep what I had because the combined performance increase from IB and Hasfail is less then it's worth spending the money for...

EDIT: I am looking at performance/$ value. Overall cost bothers me less than what I am getting for my dollars. I cannot justify spending more money on intel for marginally better performance. (makes sense...?)

I think we have came to the same conclusion that AMD competes on price not raw performance.... Im too lazy to go find the quote of myself.

 

[NappySlapper]

It may be true that people who are on old boards cant benefit, but for buying now the amd side seems a better choice

 

[8350rocks]

Spoiler

[

quotemsg=11001783,0,1343039]

What about other upgrade problems like newer graphics cards that make use of dx12 vs dx11, or PCI4 vs PCI3 sure the socket on your 5yr old MB is the same and the CPU will fit but it may not be able to make use of the latest technology.

There is no DX12...I am a game developer and there's been no word of DX12 anytime soon. OpenGL has incoming updates still...but DX11 seems to be pretty much where we're going to be for a while. PCIe 3.0 isn't even utilized in 98% of GPUs out right now...that's still a year or so out before widespread adoption. 3 years from now those may be concerns at some point...but right now they're not even remotely an issue.

I was just reading on another thread that at least one user has that exact problem right not with pci2 on his board and no pci3 and dx10 vs dx11, means that he cannot achieve what would be possible with a new board. so just because you dont have to upgrade the board to get the cpu to fit doesnt mean you dont need to upgrade the board to get other featers, most notably and probably going to be the most prevalent of them is USB3.0......

PCIe 2.0 Cards run DX11 unless he is using a HD 6XXX series card or a Nvidia GTX 5XX series card. He just needs to buy a newer card. PCIe 2.0 Cards support DX11.

Sure AMD competes from a price standpoint but by the time we actually get really well coded programs that efficiently use all 8 cores, i guarantee you that both AMD and Intel will be much more efficient per clock, per core, and the one no one seems to account for power.

Because power is not a concern for 99.999% of the free world...I pay $0.11 kw/hr...why on earth would I sweat $20/yr when I saved $80-100 up front in my build?

If both chips can be purchased for the same price 8350 and what ever AMD comes out with in 3 years time..... which one costs more? The 8350 because it takes 125w to get that level of performance, and most likely that will be cut in half in 3 years to 60w. So what you have effectively done is spent slightly less money now to achieve something that is effectively going to cost you more in the long run to operate, not including all the aforementioned other potential issues.

But you can't buy them for the same money...the AMD setup is consistently a minimum of $60 cheaper with CPU and MB. So that means I can run the AMD setup for 3 years before I break even on it...if I don't upgrade in 2 years.

Why are you giong to upgrade in two years after you just got done telling me that basically all this stuff is here to stay for at least 3+ years......... Nifty quoting technique btw.

Because I can afford to go to steamroller when it comes out, and that may be before 2 years is up. If Steamroller is as advertised...then it will be worth upgrading out of cycle for...

so you have $200 to upgrade out of cycle, but your worried about $100 now????

I could not justify the difference in performance for the cost. 2-3 FPS is not worth a combined $80 increase in price. Likewise...if I were already running SB and my upgrade cycle came up on Haswell (hasfail)...I would just skip that cycle and keep what I had because the combined performance increase from IB and Hasfail is less then it's worth spending the money for...

EDIT: I am looking at performance/$ value. Overall cost bothers me less than what I am getting for my dollars. I cannot justify spending more money on intel for marginally better performance. (makes sense...?)

I think we have came to the same conclusion that AMD competes on price not raw performance.... Im too lazy to go find the quote of myself.[/quotemsg]

Well...when you can get 95% performance for 80% cost...that makes it a no brainer. Raw performance is competitive in many areas...it just depends on what metrics you're looking at.

 

[4745454b]

8350, for the most part you are looking at $20 for the CPU, then other $20 or so for the "more expensive" board. ~$40 difference for buying Intel. Hardly seems unreasonable to me. Someone else understood the "futureproof" fail when talking about needing $400+ to upgrade to steamroller. How is that a selling point?

Obviously yes. Foreign countries, states with tax, combo deals, microcenter, parts that can be reused, etc will change what's best for you. One reason I got the board I did was I got a $60 combo discount on it. I looked at the combos for the 3570K and found the best board I could afford that was in my price range after the discount. Made it $20 more then the Asrock Extreme 4 after discount. One should always buy what makes sense for them. If you have a board you can just pop the 8350 into, why spend $100+ when you don't need to?

 

[wh3resmycar]

an AMD vs intel thread that lasted 3 pages? where're the mods when you need them?

 

[Master467]

Look at the Linux benches...(one of my machines uses Ubuntu)...the FX8350 actually bests the 3770k in many areas on Linux...it's windows that's deficient in taking advantage of the performance of AMD hardware.

Name one single triple A tittle on linux. A single one, and if you do it i will buy and ship 4 FX8350's to your home overnight.
>Im on linux mint right now
Nothing good or even graphically demanding on steam for Linux, your point is so mute i had to highlight the damn text to read it. Linux is best for when windows goes boom and you need to pull files off it and in a VM or server. None of these, other then maybe a VM, needs a lot of CPU power.

an AMD vs intel thread that lasted 3 pages? where're the mods when you need them?

Uh.. B-bro... look up...

 

[8350rocks]

8350, for the most part you are looking at $20 for the CPU, then other $20 or so for the "more expensive" board. ~$40 difference for buying Intel. Hardly seems unreasonable to me. Someone else understood the "futureproof" fail when talking about needing $400+ to upgrade to steamroller. How is that a selling point?

Obviously yes. Foreign countries, states with tax, combo deals, microcenter, parts that can be reused, etc will change what's best for you. One reason I got the board I did was I got a $60 combo discount on it. I looked at the combos for the 3570K and found the best board I could afford that was in my price range after the discount. Made it $20 more then the Asrock Extreme 4 after discount. One should always buy what makes sense for them. If you have a board you can just pop the 8350 into, why spend $100+ when you don't need to?

Where do you come up with $400? Steamroller is AM3+ socket...it might be $250 (absolute max)...but that's for a potential 30% gain in performance...why would I spend $400 to gain 10%?

I agree about buying what makes sense, if you have a Z77 board and want to upgrade from i5-2500k, then a 4670k that performs exactly like a 3570k makes no sense. (Though the 3570k honestly makes no sense either)

 

[8350rocks]

Look at the Linux benches...(one of my machines uses Ubuntu)...the FX8350 actually bests the 3770k in many areas on Linux...it's windows that's deficient in taking advantage of the performance of AMD hardware.

Name one single triple A tittle on linux. A single one, and if you do it i will buy and ship 4 FX8350's to your home overnight.
>Im on linux mint right now
Nothing good or even graphically demanding on steam for Linux, your point is so mute i had to highlight the damn text to read it. Linux is best for when windows goes boom and you need to pull files off it and in a VM or server. None of these, other then maybe a VM, needs a lot of CPU power.

WINE means even Crysis 3 runs on Linux...want to run WoW, SW:TOR? Try WINE, want to run Bioshock Infinite, BF3? Try WINE...you can use PoL too if you want...it makes the config a little easier from what I hear.

There are over 1500 titles that play on linux with WINE or Play on Linux.

 

[4745454b]

Lets try this another way. You spend $200 now for 8350 and $200 again a year from now for steamroller. = $400

"Some" people have talked about how great AMD is because you have an upgrade path. That Intel changed sockets yet again and that you can pop a new Steamroller (SR) chip into your current board. Who cares? As someone else pointed out, you are going to spend ~$400 at current prices just to buy two CPUs. 30%? I've heard AMD claim this before....

 

[8350rocks]

Lets try this another way. You spend $200 now for 8350 and $200 again a year from now for steamroller. = $400

"Some" people have talked about how great AMD is because you have an upgrade path. That Intel changed sockets yet again and that you can pop a new Steamroller (SR) chip into your current board. Who cares? As someone else pointed out, you are going to spend ~$400 at current prices just to buy two CPUs. 30%? I've heard AMD claim this before....

Well, actually, my plan was to give the PC I have now to my wife, and instead of building her an APU system with Kaveri, just use the excuse to upgrade mine and give her my old machine. Since I was going to spend the money at some point anyway...and this system would last her until judgement day for what she uses it for. (I would probably yank a few things out and substitute lesser parts...for example she will never need a HD 7870XT)

 

[4745454b]

an AMD vs intel thread that lasted 3 pages? where're the mods when you need them?

As long as everything and everyone stays civil it can stay open. Don't worry, fingers are on triggers.

 

[maza90210]

Hey,

So we all know Intel's architecture is much better and energy/performance efficient per thread/core but how about multi-tasking performance? Also, do you think that, in the near future perhaps, not only games but also most computer programs will all benefit from using 8 actual cores like next-gen consoles are doing for games?

The reason I'm asking this is because I'm a bit torn between buying "faster" but expensive Intel's quadcore solution i5 3570k or "slower" but much cheaper AMD's octacore FX-8350. However, if the future say 8-12 months from now will be eight-core optimized sofware all the way (including games and overall multi-tasking), then I think such "slower" (for now) AMD solution is worth it.

So, any ideas?

Thanks!

I'm pretty sure there is going to be an 8 core haswell cpu, since the consoles are multicore, the more cores will be good, although you will have to wait for the release
http://www.techradar.com/news/computing-components/processors/intel-leak-reveals-plans-for-8-core-haswell-e-series-cpu-1159621

 

[firemedictj]

OK so you said that the 8350 is about on par with intels current offerings...... so why does 2 years old tech form intel beat the 8350? http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i7-2700K-vs-AMD-FX-8350

So what you are proposing is for some one buying now to buy two year old technology as it has an upgrade path....? Thats like demanding that your dvd player has VHS capability too, sure its nice but really how future proof is it when its already behind the tech curve?

Now onto another point you made about it not being $400 assuming the person is buying now.

i5-3570k ~$219 + Z77 Sabertooth ~$239 =$460
i7-3770k ~$319 + z77 Sabertooth ~$239 =$560
i5-4670k ~$239 + Z78 Sabertooth ~$257 =$497
i7-4770k ~$350 + z78 Sabertooth ~$257 =$607

FX8350 ~$200 + 990fx ~$180 = $380.
Wow thats the cheapest by a bunch except wait, according to your plan you should buy steamroller for a 30% upgrade in performance. Now since you can keep your mobo lets just add the cost of steamroller to your total existing build. (8350 goes to wife as you stated). Now im going to be generous here and say that steamroller will actually achieve 30% gains in performance, and typically from a publicly traded company that kind of tech comes at a premium but lets just assume they are doing for the good of consumers and price it at the same price of 8350 now for $200. So

Current Build $380 + Steamroller ~$200 = $580 Total
VS
i5-3570k ~$219 + Z77 Sabertooth ~$239 =$460
i7-3770k ~$319 + z77 Sabertooth ~$239 =$560
i5-4670k ~$239 + Z78 Sabertooth ~$257 =$497
i7-4770k ~$350 + z78 Sabertooth ~$257 =$607

So pretty much all of Intels offerings are cheaper than that including true quadcore i7 (logical octa core)

AMD is a full tick, tock cycle behind intel (probably why we get such mediocre gains year over year from intel; no competition). So now it comes down to weather or not your a betting man. I am.... and AMD has proven in the past when it come to processors they are not a good bet. For $30 or less, ill stick with the company on the bleeding edge, not the one a whole cycle behind.

Intels's R&D Budget $8.4 Billion
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/perfi/columnist/krantz/story/2012-03-20/apple-marketing--research-and-development-spending/53673126/1

Amd's R&D Budget $1.354 Billion
http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3AAMD&fstype=ii&ei=z0HDUYCvGqLslgP4cg

 

[8350rocks]

Actually...it's more like this:

AMD FX 8350 $169.99 (bought it on sale @ MC) + Asrock 970 Extreme3 $69.99 (Also on sale @ MC) = $239.98 + $200 Steamroller = $439.98

i5-3570k $219 + Z77 Sabertooth $239= $460

I am still cheaper than intel after the SR upgrade...

LOL. Nice try though.

EDIT: Even if it's $250 for the SR chip...that puts me @ $489.98 for a drastically superior CPU+MB vs. even the 3770k or 4770k.

Also, CPU Boss is not a very good site...look at CPU world. CPU Boss lists a Pentium something or other as one their top CPUs for performance...it's a joke really.

 

[firemedictj]

Actually...it's more like this:

AMD FX 8350 $169.99 (bought it on sale @ MC) + Asrock 970 Extreme3 $69.99 (Also on sale @ MC) = $239.98 + $200 Steamroller = $439.98

i5-3570 $219 + Z77 Sabertooth $239= $460

I am still cheaper than intel after the SR upgrade...

LOL. Nice try though.

Listen Im using newegg prices, if you want to use actual prices i paid for mine we can do that too.
i7-3770k $239 MC
Asus Sabertoot z77 $200 Frys = wait for it $439 Difference is i can have all my performance now with a good mobo to boot.

 

[NappySlapper]

The way you are arguing it is that the amd cpu would need to be upgraded and the intel would not.
If you needed to upgrade the 8350 , you would need to upgrade the i7 aswell I am quite sure.

Even if you don't have to upgrade the i7, you are saying that spending $50 (from figures above) is not worth it for what in this hypothetical situation is a 30 percent increase, yet you are recommending a 3570k over the 8350 when the i5 provides about 5-10 percent increase in performance for the same $50 more?

Edit: remember though, if you upgrade you can still sell your old cpu

 

[8350rocks]

LOL...ok...here are some of the things I do, programs I run...tell me what you recommend there firemedictj:

So, why should I spend more money on a 3570k again?

EDIT: I am a game developer, I don't just use my pc for gaming like so many others do. I know what I bought and why, and it made the most sense because I paid less for more performance relevant to what I do with it. There is no amount of arguments you can present that would change my mind on this subject. Nothing Intel has out presents enough performance increase across the board that the value of the expense is justifiable for my purposes.

 

[earl45]

LOL...ok...here are some of the things I do, programs I run...tell me what you recommend there firemedictj:

So, why should I spend more money on a 3570k again?

EDIT: I am a game developer, I don't just use my pc for gaming like so many others do. I know what I bought and why, and it made the most sense because I paid less for more performance relevant to what I do with it. There is no amount of arguments you can present that would change my mind on this subject. Nothing Intel has out presents enough performance increase across the board that the value of the expense is justifiable for my purposes.

The question is how long have you been working with these programs, would you say
about 3 year's or more, now if that's so you could of bought a 2600k 2 year's ago and
get the performance of your FX-3850 today.

 

[8350rocks]

Actually, my previous system was an 1100T BE OC'ed to 4.0 GHz, and I wouldn't have bought a 2600k then either as the 1100T was flat out better at everything there as well.

Thanks for playing though

EDIT: The 2600K is miles behind the 8350 in all of those applications...LOL...how on earth would I get the same performance?

 

[earl45]

Actually, my previous system was an 1100T BE OC'ed to 4.0 GHz, and I wouldn't have bought a 2600k then either as the 1100T was flat out better at everything there as well.

Thanks for playing though

EDIT: The 2600K is miles behind the 8350 in all of those applications...LOL...how on earth would I get the same performance?

I can see your 1100T BE and 8350 killing the 2600k in your mind only. lol
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/697?vs=287
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/203?vs=287
Lol. can we try this again.
You're right the 8350 still can't out pace the 2 year old 2600k.