Report: Intel Looking for Access to Mantle API

[meat_loaf]

And since AMD dominates the gaming industry from their move to into Consoles, there is absolutely no business logic in giving Intel their hardwork in Mantle.

 

[BleedingEdgeTek]

"AMD isn't sharing it yet because its in beta. If they did and it failed that could hurt it's adoption. They are getting it right first"

That is wrong. AMD isn't giving intel the Mantle API its because Intel repeatedly have done dirty underhanded tactics towards AMD. Intel has bought off Cinebench and whole bunch of other CPU benchmark software and rigged the coding so that Intel CPU appears to be king when in reality they could be losing to AMD. Intel compiler was made so that "If intel cpu feed X code, if other feed Y code" which Y code has a lot of junk in them making the process slower.

So why would AMD give Intel the benefit of their R&D when Intel has not put in a single cent into it when all they do is sit on the sideline and play their bias game?

This is has nothing to do whether Mantle is still in beta or in improvement process. AMD has no interest in giving its rival any advantage.

If what you said is true, then why in all tests (not benchmarks, real world tests) does Intel win? No one cares about what synthetic benchmarks say, but when you compare actual results from real world applications, Intel still wins. If what you said was true, then it would be the opposite.

 

[meat_loaf]

"AMD isn't sharing it yet because its in beta. If they did and it failed that could hurt it's adoption. They are getting it right first"

That is wrong. AMD isn't giving intel the Mantle API its because Intel repeatedly have done dirty underhanded tactics towards AMD. Intel has bought off Cinebench and whole bunch of other CPU benchmark software and rigged the coding so that Intel CPU appears to be king when in reality they could be losing to AMD. Intel compiler was made so that "If intel cpu feed X code, if other feed Y code" which Y code has a lot of junk in them making the process slower.

So why would AMD give Intel the benefit of their R&D when Intel has not put in a single cent into it when all they do is sit on the sideline and play their bias game?

This is has nothing to do whether Mantle is still in beta or in improvement process. AMD has no interest in giving its rival any advantage.

If what you said is true, then why in all tests (not benchmarks, real world tests) does Intel win? No one cares about what synthetic benchmarks say, but when you compare actual results from real world applications, Intel still wins. If what you said was true, then it would be the opposite.

Intel only wins in floating point calculations and that is important in heavy rendering work. But AMD is on equal par in other calculations and even beats Intel in terms of video rendering/editing.

Those benchmarks are not synthetic benchmarks. They just feed the cpu a bunch of codes and let the cpu work it out and determine how fast it can work under stress. Its as real as doing an actual test running a program.

Intel does not beat AMD and that is a terrible misconception. Intel is only better at some stuff and AMD is better at other stuff. This is why some people like you needs to do some research and actual thinking.

 

[BleedingEdgeTek]

"AMD isn't sharing it yet because its in beta. If they did and it failed that could hurt it's adoption. They are getting it right first"

That is wrong. AMD isn't giving intel the Mantle API its because Intel repeatedly have done dirty underhanded tactics towards AMD. Intel has bought off Cinebench and whole bunch of other CPU benchmark software and rigged the coding so that Intel CPU appears to be king when in reality they could be losing to AMD. Intel compiler was made so that "If intel cpu feed X code, if other feed Y code" which Y code has a lot of junk in them making the process slower.

So why would AMD give Intel the benefit of their R&D when Intel has not put in a single cent into it when all they do is sit on the sideline and play their bias game?

This is has nothing to do whether Mantle is still in beta or in improvement process. AMD has no interest in giving its rival any advantage.

If what you said is true, then why in all tests (not benchmarks, real world tests) does Intel win? No one cares about what synthetic benchmarks say, but when you compare actual results from real world applications, Intel still wins. If what you said was true, then it would be the opposite.

Intel only wins in floating point calculations and that is important in heavy rendering work. But AMD is on equal par in other calculations and even beats Intel in terms of video rendering/editing.

Those benchmarks are not synthetic benchmarks. They just feed the cpu a bunch of codes and let the cpu work it out and determine how fast it can work under stress. Its as real as doing an actual test running a program.

Intel does not beat AMD and that is a terrible misconception. Intel is only better at some stuff and AMD is better at other stuff. This is why some people like you needs to do some research and actual thinking.

Intel is better in almost everything except price/performance. There's no question there.

http://youtu.be/26UKz42uQ1Y

AMD is fine for budget systems, but not when you want the best performance and efficiency.

And yes, Cinebench is by definition a synthetic benchmark lol

 

[meat_loaf]

"AMD isn't sharing it yet because its in beta. If they did and it failed that could hurt it's adoption. They are getting it right first"

That is wrong. AMD isn't giving intel the Mantle API its because Intel repeatedly have done dirty underhanded tactics towards AMD. Intel has bought off Cinebench and whole bunch of other CPU benchmark software and rigged the coding so that Intel CPU appears to be king when in reality they could be losing to AMD. Intel compiler was made so that "If intel cpu feed X code, if other feed Y code" which Y code has a lot of junk in them making the process slower.

So why would AMD give Intel the benefit of their R&D when Intel has not put in a single cent into it when all they do is sit on the sideline and play their bias game?

This is has nothing to do whether Mantle is still in beta or in improvement process. AMD has no interest in giving its rival any advantage.

If what you said is true, then why in all tests (not benchmarks, real world tests) does Intel win? No one cares about what synthetic benchmarks say, but when you compare actual results from real world applications, Intel still wins. If what you said was true, then it would be the opposite.

Intel only wins in floating point calculations and that is important in heavy rendering work. But AMD is on equal par in other calculations and even beats Intel in terms of video rendering/editing.

Those benchmarks are not synthetic benchmarks. They just feed the cpu a bunch of codes and let the cpu work it out and determine how fast it can work under stress. Its as real as doing an actual test running a program.

Intel does not beat AMD and that is a terrible misconception. Intel is only better at some stuff and AMD is better at other stuff. This is why some people like you needs to do some research and actual thinking.

Intel is better in almost everything except price/performance. There's no question there.

http://youtu.be/26UKz42uQ1Y

AMD is fine for budget systems, but not when you want the best performance and efficiency.

And yes, Cinebench is by definition a synthetic benchmark lol

AMD is budget for the good performance over that expensive Intel. Its also a retarded argument when people say you need to spend a lot for the performance and efficiency.....I've seen too many people ridiculously justify how good i7 4770k is and buy them for gaming and then they have extremely crap gpus >_>.

So don't tell me about efficiency and performance talk. Also its not very argumentable in terms of efficieny on TDP for Intel. It might use lower TDP but it takes at least more than 6-7 yrs to recoup that energy efficieny over AMD.

Intel might be better for some stuff, but performance and efficiency is questionable when in gaming and do other stuff compared to AMD.

 

[BleedingEdgeTek]

"AMD isn't sharing it yet because its in beta. If they did and it failed that could hurt it's adoption. They are getting it right first"

That is wrong. AMD isn't giving intel the Mantle API its because Intel repeatedly have done dirty underhanded tactics towards AMD. Intel has bought off Cinebench and whole bunch of other CPU benchmark software and rigged the coding so that Intel CPU appears to be king when in reality they could be losing to AMD. Intel compiler was made so that "If intel cpu feed X code, if other feed Y code" which Y code has a lot of junk in them making the process slower.

So why would AMD give Intel the benefit of their R&D when Intel has not put in a single cent into it when all they do is sit on the sideline and play their bias game?

This is has nothing to do whether Mantle is still in beta or in improvement process. AMD has no interest in giving its rival any advantage.

If what you said is true, then why in all tests (not benchmarks, real world tests) does Intel win? No one cares about what synthetic benchmarks say, but when you compare actual results from real world applications, Intel still wins. If what you said was true, then it would be the opposite.

Intel only wins in floating point calculations and that is important in heavy rendering work. But AMD is on equal par in other calculations and even beats Intel in terms of video rendering/editing.

Those benchmarks are not synthetic benchmarks. They just feed the cpu a bunch of codes and let the cpu work it out and determine how fast it can work under stress. Its as real as doing an actual test running a program.

Intel does not beat AMD and that is a terrible misconception. Intel is only better at some stuff and AMD is better at other stuff. This is why some people like you needs to do some research and actual thinking.

Intel is better in almost everything except price/performance. There's no question there.

http://youtu.be/26UKz42uQ1Y

AMD is fine for budget systems, but not when you want the best performance and efficiency.

And yes, Cinebench is by definition a synthetic benchmark lol

AMD is budget for the good performance over that expensive Intel. Its also a retarded argument when people say you need to spend a lot for the performance and efficiency.....I've seen too many people ridiculously justify how good i7 4770k is and buy them for gaming and then they have extremely crap gpus >_>.

So don't tell me about efficiency and performance talk. Also its not very argumentable in terms of efficieny on TDP for Intel. It might use lower TDP but it takes at least more than 6-7 yrs to recoup that energy efficieny over AMD.

Intel might be better for some stuff, but performance and efficiency is questionable when in gaming and do other stuff compared to AMD.

An i7 is pointless for gaming, I agree there. But when an i3 (a dual core) can outperform the 8320/8350 (8-core) in gaming, there is no doubt at all that Intel has better performance. You can buy a locked i5 for only slightly more expensive than an 8320, but that will perform better.

 

[meat_loaf]

"AMD isn't sharing it yet because its in beta. If they did and it failed that could hurt it's adoption. They are getting it right first"

That is wrong. AMD isn't giving intel the Mantle API its because Intel repeatedly have done dirty underhanded tactics towards AMD. Intel has bought off Cinebench and whole bunch of other CPU benchmark software and rigged the coding so that Intel CPU appears to be king when in reality they could be losing to AMD. Intel compiler was made so that "If intel cpu feed X code, if other feed Y code" which Y code has a lot of junk in them making the process slower.

So why would AMD give Intel the benefit of their R&D when Intel has not put in a single cent into it when all they do is sit on the sideline and play their bias game?

This is has nothing to do whether Mantle is still in beta or in improvement process. AMD has no interest in giving its rival any advantage.

If what you said is true, then why in all tests (not benchmarks, real world tests) does Intel win? No one cares about what synthetic benchmarks say, but when you compare actual results from real world applications, Intel still wins. If what you said was true, then it would be the opposite.

Intel only wins in floating point calculations and that is important in heavy rendering work. But AMD is on equal par in other calculations and even beats Intel in terms of video rendering/editing.

Those benchmarks are not synthetic benchmarks. They just feed the cpu a bunch of codes and let the cpu work it out and determine how fast it can work under stress. Its as real as doing an actual test running a program.

Intel does not beat AMD and that is a terrible misconception. Intel is only better at some stuff and AMD is better at other stuff. This is why some people like you needs to do some research and actual thinking.

Intel is better in almost everything except price/performance. There's no question there.

http://youtu.be/26UKz42uQ1Y

AMD is fine for budget systems, but not when you want the best performance and efficiency.

And yes, Cinebench is by definition a synthetic benchmark lol

AMD is budget for the good performance over that expensive Intel. Its also a retarded argument when people say you need to spend a lot for the performance and efficiency.....I've seen too many people ridiculously justify how good i7 4770k is and buy them for gaming and then they have extremely crap gpus >_>.

So don't tell me about efficiency and performance talk. Also its not very argumentable in terms of efficieny on TDP for Intel. It might use lower TDP but it takes at least more than 6-7 yrs to recoup that energy efficieny over AMD.

Intel might be better for some stuff, but performance and efficiency is questionable when in gaming and do other stuff compared to AMD.

An i7 is pointless for gaming, I agree there. But when an i3 (a dual core) can outperform the 8320/8350 (8-core) in gaming, there is no doubt at all that Intel has better performance. You can buy a locked i5 for only slightly more expensive than an 8320, but that will perform better.

I would disagree that i3 dual core > than 8350. JayZTwoCents already did a comparison. Even the i5 3770k cannot match the performance in gaming compared to a stock 8320. 8350 is comparable in real floating calculations with i5 4670k. 8350 = i7 4770k in gaming.

Also don't be delusional. A dual core cannot beat an 8 core. Even a phenom series can beat the i3...

 

[BleedingEdgeTek]

I'm sorry, did you completely miss the 20 some minute video showing how the i5 beats an overclocked 8350 in pretty much everything, with much better minimum frame rates - especially in multiplayer gaming. This has been mirrored by almost everyone except Tek Syndicate's video. Not sure how he tested an 8350 getting double the performance in ARMA, which has always been known to get better performance on Intel chips.

To say AMD is better than Intel for gaming is insane, plain and simple. Even in rendering Intel is better. Taking away price/performance, there is no reason to get AMD

 

[wurkfur]

I'm sorry, did you completely miss the 20 some minute video showing how the i5 beats an overclocked 8350 in pretty much everything, with much better minimum frame rates - especially in multiplayer gaming. This has been mirrored by almost everyone except Tek Syndicate's video. Not sure how he tested an 8350 getting double the performance in ARMA, which has always been known to get better performance on Intel chips.

To say AMD is better than Intel for gaming is insane, plain and simple. Even in rendering Intel is better. Taking away price/performance, there is no reason to get AMD

Do you remember in the early 2000's when AMD was handing Intel their own ass? Shortly thereafter Intel used illegal anti-competitive actions to secure profitability in spite of this. Intel was found guilty on multiple continents and had to pay millions, but the damage was done.

Their revenue stream allow for greater developments in architecture, fabrication, and integration. AMD got a big pile of money but it doesn't mean much in the technology world when you are behind.

Intel does have the better high end parts. But they do so because they "cheated". Look at the last few generations of Intel's offerings. There have been no ground breaking or revolutionary advancements in YEARS. This is because Intel has no competition on high end desktop or mobile parts. They don't NEED to push the envelope.

If you continue to purchase Intel instead of considering other offerings that may also suite your needs, this will only continue. The best progress comes from healthy competition. Competition that Intel couldn't initially keep up with and so they tried to snuff it out.

I refuse to do business with companies that stifle competition instead of simply making the best product they can and letting the market sort it out. It is YOU the consumer that gets hurt. But people are stupid and have short term memories.

F*** Intel...

 

[mitch074]

Now, I've been an AMD fan for a long time (Duron 950 fine-tuned enough to run Doom 3, Athlon64 X2 3800+ powering through everything for 4 years, O/C'ed X4 620 as a spare heater), yet their x86 cores currently leave a lot to be desired. Moreover, AMD did acknowledge pure x86 power isn't their primary focus anymore : they are focusing on HSA, reaching very impressive performance-per-watt levels on HSA-enabled tasks, all on x86-compatible SoC that Intel is still dreaming to create : I'm impatiently waiting for Kaveri-powered laptops, which will FINALLY allow light gaming, but also productivity tasks such as video or 3D rendering on laptops deserving of the name (i.e. not cooking your knees nor lasting 30 minutes or less on battery).

For pure x86-based, desktop-run applications, anything from the i5 up buries AMD's offerings in terms of speed and comfort. On mobile devices where versatility and power sipping are key, AMD has a very interesting strategy.

 

[meat_loaf]

I'm sorry, did you completely miss the 20 some minute video showing how the i5 beats an overclocked 8350 in pretty much everything, with much better minimum frame rates - especially in multiplayer gaming. This has been mirrored by almost everyone except Tek Syndicate's video. Not sure how he tested an 8350 getting double the performance in ARMA, which has always been known to get better performance on Intel chips.

To say AMD is better than Intel for gaming is insane, plain and simple. Even in rendering Intel is better. Taking away price/performance, there is no reason to get AMD

The ignorance is strong with this one.

 

[BleedingEdgeTek]

With me? You've given no proof to backup what you've said, and in this case the proof needs to come from you. It's pretty much a universal truth that Intel is better, maybe for bad business reasons, but still better. Then out of nowhere you come and say that it takes an i7 to equal the 8350 in gaming? That right there shows your ignorance, not mine. If AMD was, in fact, better, there would be absolutely zero reason to buy Intel CPUs, seeing as how they are always more expensive. Your argument has no ground.

 

[meat_loaf]

With me? You've given no proof to backup what you've said, and in this case the proof needs to come from you. It's pretty much a universal truth that Intel is better, maybe for bad business reasons, but still better. Then out of nowhere you come and say that it takes an i7 to equal the 8350 in gaming? That right there shows your ignorance, not mine. If AMD was, in fact, better, there would be absolutely zero reason to buy Intel CPUs, seeing as how they are always more expensive. Your argument has no ground.

I really don't need proof because when you immediately claim that "all intel > amd" that is pretty evident you are delusional intel fanboy. Even if I prove it to you in actual testing you wouldn't believe it. This is why the gaming and tech industry is going downhill. It harbors too much retards like you.

Sure lets all buy intel and nvidia and let them continue charging us ridiculous prices and marketing bullshit like that Titan Z and devil cannon.

 

[skit75]

With me? You've given no proof to backup what you've said, and in this case the proof needs to come from you. It's pretty much a universal truth that Intel is better, maybe for bad business reasons, but still better. Then out of nowhere you come and say that it takes an i7 to equal the 8350 in gaming? That right there shows your ignorance, not mine. If AMD was, in fact, better, there would be absolutely zero reason to buy Intel CPUs, seeing as how they are always more expensive. Your argument has no ground.

I really don't need proof because when you immediately claim that "all intel > amd" that is pretty evident you are delusional intel fanboy. Even if I prove it to you in actual testing you wouldn't believe it. This is why the gaming and tech industry is going downhill. It harbors too much retards like you.

Sure lets all buy intel and nvidia and let them continue charging us ridiculous prices and marketing bullshit like that Titan Z and devil cannon.

Well, you did make some claim to topics that just aren't what the community generally sees. The onus is on you to provide sources if you want your argument to hold credibility. Just saying it, doesn't give it validity.

Look, both sides massage their drivers to produce better results in benchmark utilities. This has been known and well documented for years. I absolutely loved my AMD 700Mhz Slot A Thunderbird, back in the day. I've had an i-7 for the past 5 years and see no great reason to "upgrade".

Provide sources or don't. Just don't get upset when you're challenged on claims with nothing to back them up.

 

[meat_loaf]

With me? You've given no proof to backup what you've said, and in this case the proof needs to come from you. It's pretty much a universal truth that Intel is better, maybe for bad business reasons, but still better. Then out of nowhere you come and say that it takes an i7 to equal the 8350 in gaming? That right there shows your ignorance, not mine. If AMD was, in fact, better, there would be absolutely zero reason to buy Intel CPUs, seeing as how they are always more expensive. Your argument has no ground.

I really don't need proof because when you immediately claim that "all intel > amd" that is pretty evident you are delusional intel fanboy. Even if I prove it to you in actual testing you wouldn't believe it. This is why the gaming and tech industry is going downhill. It harbors too much retards like you.

Sure lets all buy intel and nvidia and let them continue charging us ridiculous prices and marketing bullshit like that Titan Z and devil cannon.

Well, you did make some claim to topics that just aren't what the community generally sees. The onus is on you to provide sources if you want your argument to hold credibility. Just saying it, doesn't give it validity.

Look, both sides massage their drivers to produce better results in benchmark utilities. This has been known and well documented for years. I absolutely loved my AMD 700Mhz Slot A Thunderbird, back in the day. I've had an i-7 for the past 5 years and see no great reason to "upgrade".

Provide sources or don't. Just don't get upset when you're challenged on claims with nothing to back them up.

I'm not upset when I'm challenged, because I love being challenged. But in this case it is pointless to prove it to people that outright claims "intel destroys everything that AMD has" which is plain ignorance. It is like talking to console fanboys on whether PS4 or xbone is better or those people that claim Nvidia outperforms Radeon.

These articles explains the reasons why intel is not necessarily better when it comes to real cock fights between CPU performance in real settings.

http://www.techspot.com/review/712-arma-3-benchmarks/page5.html
http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/451/AMD_FX-Series_FX-8350_vs_Intel_Core_i7_i7-4770K.html
http://www.extremetech.com/computing/170023-amd-vs-intel-the-ultimate-gaming-showdown-5ghz-fx-9590-vs-i7-4960x/2

Looking at techspots review on FX 8350 vs i7 4770k on Arma 3, which is an extremely terrible optimized game that performs better with single core performance, the FX 8350 is equal to i7 and beats it logically considering the fact i7 + mobo cost at least $250 more than what you can build for AMD.

So to Mr.Delusional BleedingEdgeTech, he is so wrong and biased on his claims that i7 beats all.

 

[BleedingEdgeTek]

With me? You've given no proof to backup what you've said, and in this case the proof needs to come from you. It's pretty much a universal truth that Intel is better, maybe for bad business reasons, but still better. Then out of nowhere you come and say that it takes an i7 to equal the 8350 in gaming? That right there shows your ignorance, not mine. If AMD was, in fact, better, there would be absolutely zero reason to buy Intel CPUs, seeing as how they are always more expensive. Your argument has no ground.

I really don't need proof because when you immediately claim that "all intel > amd" that is pretty evident you are delusional intel fanboy. Even if I prove it to you in actual testing you wouldn't believe it. This is why the gaming and tech industry is going downhill. It harbors too much retards like you.

Sure lets all buy intel and nvidia and let them continue charging us ridiculous prices and marketing bullshit like that Titan Z and devil cannon.

I said Intel wins because they do. It's not being a fan boy when it's a fact. Like I said, if you take out price to performance, Intel wins. Taking into consideration price to performance, AMD wins pretty much every time. If you want the the best performance, it has been proven time and time again that Intel performs better. If you want the best performance for your dollar, AMD is the best.

Gaming is going downhill because people like you see an '8-core CPU with 8GB of GDDR5 RAM' and think that's amazing performance, while the real gaming community gets held down with it.

You can call me a fan boy all you want, but there is plenty of evidence everywhere to back it up, while there is no backup to what you're claiming, except random tests that are very skeptical to begin with (again, getting double the performance in ARMA with an 8350 just does not happen, so not sure where that came from).

 

[meat_loaf]

With me? You've given no proof to backup what you've said, and in this case the proof needs to come from you. It's pretty much a universal truth that Intel is better, maybe for bad business reasons, but still better. Then out of nowhere you come and say that it takes an i7 to equal the 8350 in gaming? That right there shows your ignorance, not mine. If AMD was, in fact, better, there would be absolutely zero reason to buy Intel CPUs, seeing as how they are always more expensive. Your argument has no ground.

I really don't need proof because when you immediately claim that "all intel > amd" that is pretty evident you are delusional intel fanboy. Even if I prove it to you in actual testing you wouldn't believe it. This is why the gaming and tech industry is going downhill. It harbors too much retards like you.

Sure lets all buy intel and nvidia and let them continue charging us ridiculous prices and marketing bullshit like that Titan Z and devil cannon.

I said Intel wins because they do. It's not being a fan boy when it's a fact. Like I said, if you take out price to performance, Intel wins. Taking into consideration price to performance, AMD wins pretty much every time. If you want the the best performance, it has been proven time and time again that Intel performs better. If you want the best performance for your dollar, AMD is the best.

Gaming is going downhill because people like you see an '8-core CPU with 8GB of GDDR5 RAM' and think that's amazing performance, while the real gaming community gets held down with it.

You can call me a fan boy all you want, but there is plenty of evidence everywhere to back it up, while there is no backup to what you're claiming, except random tests that are very skeptical to begin with (again, getting double the performance in ARMA with an 8350 just does not happen, so not sure where that came from).

And ladies and gentleman of Tomshardware, I hereby present this Darwin Award to Mr.BleedingEdgeTek for a fasntastic reply in proving my point delusional people will disprove any sort of "evidence" you provide when they are so f*cking stuck up their own asses.

You can deny you are not delusional or not a fanboy, but REALITY stands. You ask for evidence, i provide you with it and then you quickly turn around to disprove it because you dislike the fact you are wrong.

Mhmm, thank you god for making inbred retards, it really helps others to distinguish between what mental illness is and what is normal

 

[BleedingEdgeTek]

With me? You've given no proof to backup what you've said, and in this case the proof needs to come from you. It's pretty much a universal truth that Intel is better, maybe for bad business reasons, but still better. Then out of nowhere you come and say that it takes an i7 to equal the 8350 in gaming? That right there shows your ignorance, not mine. If AMD was, in fact, better, there would be absolutely zero reason to buy Intel CPUs, seeing as how they are always more expensive. Your argument has no ground.

I really don't need proof because when you immediately claim that "all intel > amd" that is pretty evident you are delusional intel fanboy. Even if I prove it to you in actual testing you wouldn't believe it. This is why the gaming and tech industry is going downhill. It harbors too much retards like you.

Sure lets all buy intel and nvidia and let them continue charging us ridiculous prices and marketing bullshit like that Titan Z and devil cannon.

I said Intel wins because they do. It's not being a fan boy when it's a fact. Like I said, if you take out price to performance, Intel wins. Taking into consideration price to performance, AMD wins pretty much every time. If you want the the best performance, it has been proven time and time again that Intel performs better. If you want the best performance for your dollar, AMD is the best.

Gaming is going downhill because people like you see an '8-core CPU with 8GB of GDDR5 RAM' and think that's amazing performance, while the real gaming community gets held down with it.

You can call me a fan boy all you want, but there is plenty of evidence everywhere to back it up, while there is no backup to what you're claiming, except random tests that are very skeptical to begin with (again, getting double the performance in ARMA with an 8350 just does not happen, so not sure where that came from).

And ladies and gentleman of Tomshardware, I hereby present this Darwin Award to Mr.BleedingEdgeTek for a fasntastic reply in proving my point delusional people will disprove any sort of "evidence" you provide when they are so f*cking stuck up their own asses.

You can deny you are not delusional or not a fanboy, but REALITY stands. You ask for evidence, i provide you with it and then you quickly turn around to disprove it because you dislike the fact you are wrong.

Mhmm, thank you god for making inbred retards, it really helps others to distinguish between what mental illness is and what is normal

You do realize I'm the only one who has actually provided any backup for what I've said right? All you've contributed is stupid little insults. So by your logic, you're the inbred moron here, not me.

 

[meat_loaf]

With me? You've given no proof to backup what you've said, and in this case the proof needs to come from you. It's pretty much a universal truth that Intel is better, maybe for bad business reasons, but still better. Then out of nowhere you come and say that it takes an i7 to equal the 8350 in gaming? That right there shows your ignorance, not mine. If AMD was, in fact, better, there would be absolutely zero reason to buy Intel CPUs, seeing as how they are always more expensive. Your argument has no ground.

I really don't need proof because when you immediately claim that "all intel > amd" that is pretty evident you are delusional intel fanboy. Even if I prove it to you in actual testing you wouldn't believe it. This is why the gaming and tech industry is going downhill. It harbors too much retards like you.

Sure lets all buy intel and nvidia and let them continue charging us ridiculous prices and marketing bullshit like that Titan Z and devil cannon.

I said Intel wins because they do. It's not being a fan boy when it's a fact. Like I said, if you take out price to performance, Intel wins. Taking into consideration price to performance, AMD wins pretty much every time. If you want the the best performance, it has been proven time and time again that Intel performs better. If you want the best performance for your dollar, AMD is the best.

Gaming is going downhill because people like you see an '8-core CPU with 8GB of GDDR5 RAM' and think that's amazing performance, while the real gaming community gets held down with it.

You can call me a fan boy all you want, but there is plenty of evidence everywhere to back it up, while there is no backup to what you're claiming, except random tests that are very skeptical to begin with (again, getting double the performance in ARMA with an 8350 just does not happen, so not sure where that came from).

And ladies and gentleman of Tomshardware, I hereby present this Darwin Award to Mr.BleedingEdgeTek for a fasntastic reply in proving my point delusional people will disprove any sort of "evidence" you provide when they are so f*cking stuck up their own asses.

You can deny you are not delusional or not a fanboy, but REALITY stands. You ask for evidence, i provide you with it and then you quickly turn around to disprove it because you dislike the fact you are wrong.

Mhmm, thank you god for making inbred retards, it really helps others to distinguish between what mental illness is and what is normal

You do realize I'm the only one who has actually provided any backup for what I've said right? All you've contributed is stupid little insults. So by your logic, you're the inbred moron here, not me.

Oh so im the inbred moron when I've provided to you that i7 is not necessaily better when FX 8350 rivals it in performance. But you come back and say some stupid shit like "it doesnt make sense, don't know where you get this info".

Its not me shitting on the facts, its you denying it. End of story.

And further talk with you will give me brain cancer from your stupidity.

 

[BleedingEdgeTek]

With me? You've given no proof to backup what you've said, and in this case the proof needs to come from you. It's pretty much a universal truth that Intel is better, maybe for bad business reasons, but still better. Then out of nowhere you come and say that it takes an i7 to equal the 8350 in gaming? That right there shows your ignorance, not mine. If AMD was, in fact, better, there would be absolutely zero reason to buy Intel CPUs, seeing as how they are always more expensive. Your argument has no ground.

I really don't need proof because when you immediately claim that "all intel > amd" that is pretty evident you are delusional intel fanboy. Even if I prove it to you in actual testing you wouldn't believe it. This is why the gaming and tech industry is going downhill. It harbors too much retards like you.

Sure lets all buy intel and nvidia and let them continue charging us ridiculous prices and marketing bullshit like that Titan Z and devil cannon.

I said Intel wins because they do. It's not being a fan boy when it's a fact. Like I said, if you take out price to performance, Intel wins. Taking into consideration price to performance, AMD wins pretty much every time. If you want the the best performance, it has been proven time and time again that Intel performs better. If you want the best performance for your dollar, AMD is the best.

Gaming is going downhill because people like you see an '8-core CPU with 8GB of GDDR5 RAM' and think that's amazing performance, while the real gaming community gets held down with it.

You can call me a fan boy all you want, but there is plenty of evidence everywhere to back it up, while there is no backup to what you're claiming, except random tests that are very skeptical to begin with (again, getting double the performance in ARMA with an 8350 just does not happen, so not sure where that came from).

And ladies and gentleman of Tomshardware, I hereby present this Darwin Award to Mr.BleedingEdgeTek for a fasntastic reply in proving my point delusional people will disprove any sort of "evidence" you provide when they are so f*cking stuck up their own asses.

You can deny you are not delusional or not a fanboy, but REALITY stands. You ask for evidence, i provide you with it and then you quickly turn around to disprove it because you dislike the fact you are wrong.

Mhmm, thank you god for making inbred retards, it really helps others to distinguish between what mental illness is and what is normal

You do realize I'm the only one who has actually provided any backup for what I've said right? All you've contributed is stupid little insults. So by your logic, you're the inbred moron here, not me.

Oh so im the inbred moron when I've provided to you that i7 is not necessaily better when FX 8350 rivals it in performance. But you come back and say some stupid shit like "it doesnt make sense, don't know where you get this info".

Its not me shitting on the facts, its you denying it. End of story.

And further talk with you will give me brain cancer from your stupidity.

Again, nowhere in your posts have you cited anything other than the 8350 beating an i3. I, however, have cited a multitude of real world tests showing the i5 beat the 8350 (let alone an i7) in almost every one.

And you're going to get brain cancer from me? Lol. You've given zero evidence to back your claim, and I've had to say this multiple times now and you still haven't come up with anything. You're the immature one spewing insults for no reason.

 

[wurkfur]

With me? You've given no proof to backup what you've said, and in this case the proof needs to come from you. It's pretty much a universal truth that Intel is better, maybe for bad business reasons, but still better. Then out of nowhere you come and say that it takes an i7 to equal the 8350 in gaming? That right there shows your ignorance, not mine. If AMD was, in fact, better, there would be absolutely zero reason to buy Intel CPUs, seeing as how they are always more expensive. Your argument has no ground.

I really don't need proof because when you immediately claim that "all intel > amd" that is pretty evident you are delusional intel fanboy. Even if I prove it to you in actual testing you wouldn't believe it. This is why the gaming and tech industry is going downhill. It harbors too much retards like you.

Sure lets all buy intel and nvidia and let them continue charging us ridiculous prices and marketing bullshit like that Titan Z and devil cannon.

I said Intel wins because they do. It's not being a fan boy when it's a fact. Like I said, if you take out price to performance, Intel wins. Taking into consideration price to performance, AMD wins pretty much every time. If you want the the best performance, it has been proven time and time again that Intel performs better. If you want the best performance for your dollar, AMD is the best.

Gaming is going downhill because people like you see an '8-core CPU with 8GB of GDDR5 RAM' and think that's amazing performance, while the real gaming community gets held down with it.

You can call me a fan boy all you want, but there is plenty of evidence everywhere to back it up, while there is no backup to what you're claiming, except random tests that are very skeptical to begin with (again, getting double the performance in ARMA with an 8350 just does not happen, so not sure where that came from).

And ladies and gentleman of Tomshardware, I hereby present this Darwin Award to Mr.BleedingEdgeTek for a fasntastic reply in proving my point delusional people will disprove any sort of "evidence" you provide when they are so f*cking stuck up their own asses.

You can deny you are not delusional or not a fanboy, but REALITY stands. You ask for evidence, i provide you with it and then you quickly turn around to disprove it because you dislike the fact you are wrong.

Mhmm, thank you god for making inbred retards, it really helps others to distinguish between what mental illness is and what is normal

You do realize I'm the only one who has actually provided any backup for what I've said right? All you've contributed is stupid little insults. So by your logic, you're the inbred moron here, not me.

Oh so im the inbred moron when I've provided to you that i7 is not necessaily better when FX 8350 rivals it in performance. But you come back and say some stupid shit like "it doesnt make sense, don't know where you get this info".

Its not me shitting on the facts, its you denying it. End of story.

And further talk with you will give me brain cancer from your stupidity.

Again, nowhere in your posts have you cited anything other than the 8350 beating an i3. I, however, have cited a multitude of real world tests showing the i5 beat the 8350 (let alone an i7) in almost every one.

And you're going to get brain cancer from me? Lol. You've given zero evidence to back your claim, and I've had to say this multiple times now and you still haven't come up with anything. You're the immature one spewing insults for no reason.

Per Tom's own testing, the 8350 hung with the i5 new games like Watch Dogs. This is due to the fact that developers need to take advantage of many threads in order to deal with the 8 piss-ant Jaguar cores of the Xbone and the PS4. This will only escalate going forward. AMD owns this generation of consoles with both CPU and GPU architectures. The gamble paid off.

Intel is a company that currently has the best products and as an AMD enthusiast, I will easily admit this. However, I will not let a single dollar of my money go to Intel if I can get an AMD product that meets my needs. The alternative is letting Intel and Nvidia charge whatever they want because they have no competition.

F*** Intel and their anti-competitive tactics that they've been convicted of on multiple continents.

 

[skit75]

With me? You've given no proof to backup what you've said, and in this case the proof needs to come from you. It's pretty much a universal truth that Intel is better, maybe for bad business reasons, but still better. Then out of nowhere you come and say that it takes an i7 to equal the 8350 in gaming? That right there shows your ignorance, not mine. If AMD was, in fact, better, there would be absolutely zero reason to buy Intel CPUs, seeing as how they are always more expensive. Your argument has no ground.

I really don't need proof because when you immediately claim that "all intel > amd" that is pretty evident you are delusional intel fanboy. Even if I prove it to you in actual testing you wouldn't believe it. This is why the gaming and tech industry is going downhill. It harbors too much retards like you.

Sure lets all buy intel and nvidia and let them continue charging us ridiculous prices and marketing bullshit like that Titan Z and devil cannon.

I said Intel wins because they do. It's not being a fan boy when it's a fact. Like I said, if you take out price to performance, Intel wins. Taking into consideration price to performance, AMD wins pretty much every time. If you want the the best performance, it has been proven time and time again that Intel performs better. If you want the best performance for your dollar, AMD is the best.

Gaming is going downhill because people like you see an '8-core CPU with 8GB of GDDR5 RAM' and think that's amazing performance, while the real gaming community gets held down with it.

You can call me a fan boy all you want, but there is plenty of evidence everywhere to back it up, while there is no backup to what you're claiming, except random tests that are very skeptical to begin with (again, getting double the performance in ARMA with an 8350 just does not happen, so not sure where that came from).

And ladies and gentleman of Tomshardware, I hereby present this Darwin Award to Mr.BleedingEdgeTek for a fasntastic reply in proving my point delusional people will disprove any sort of "evidence" you provide when they are so f*cking stuck up their own asses.

You can deny you are not delusional or not a fanboy, but REALITY stands. You ask for evidence, i provide you with it and then you quickly turn around to disprove it because you dislike the fact you are wrong.

Mhmm, thank you god for making inbred retards, it really helps others to distinguish between what mental illness is and what is normal

You do realize I'm the only one who has actually provided any backup for what I've said right? All you've contributed is stupid little insults. So by your logic, you're the inbred moron here, not me.

Oh so im the inbred moron when I've provided to you that i7 is not necessaily better when FX 8350 rivals it in performance. But you come back and say some stupid shit like "it doesnt make sense, don't know where you get this info".

Its not me shitting on the facts, its you denying it. End of story.

And further talk with you will give me brain cancer from your stupidity.

It is pretty easy to find conflicting information, especially with a narrow scope. Generally, if you have a fat wallet and want top performance, [strike]you[/strike]... we are buying Intel. Resorting to the childish name calling does nothing for your case.

 

[meat_loaf]

With me? You've given no proof to backup what you've said, and in this case the proof needs to come from you. It's pretty much a universal truth that Intel is better, maybe for bad business reasons, but still better. Then out of nowhere you come and say that it takes an i7 to equal the 8350 in gaming? That right there shows your ignorance, not mine. If AMD was, in fact, better, there would be absolutely zero reason to buy Intel CPUs, seeing as how they are always more expensive. Your argument has no ground.

I really don't need proof because when you immediately claim that "all intel > amd" that is pretty evident you are delusional intel fanboy. Even if I prove it to you in actual testing you wouldn't believe it. This is why the gaming and tech industry is going downhill. It harbors too much retards like you.

Sure lets all buy intel and nvidia and let them continue charging us ridiculous prices and marketing bullshit like that Titan Z and devil cannon.

I said Intel wins because they do. It's not being a fan boy when it's a fact. Like I said, if you take out price to performance, Intel wins. Taking into consideration price to performance, AMD wins pretty much every time. If you want the the best performance, it has been proven time and time again that Intel performs better. If you want the best performance for your dollar, AMD is the best.

Gaming is going downhill because people like you see an '8-core CPU with 8GB of GDDR5 RAM' and think that's amazing performance, while the real gaming community gets held down with it.

You can call me a fan boy all you want, but there is plenty of evidence everywhere to back it up, while there is no backup to what you're claiming, except random tests that are very skeptical to begin with (again, getting double the performance in ARMA with an 8350 just does not happen, so not sure where that came from).

And ladies and gentleman of Tomshardware, I hereby present this Darwin Award to Mr.BleedingEdgeTek for a fasntastic reply in proving my point delusional people will disprove any sort of "evidence" you provide when they are so f*cking stuck up their own asses.

You can deny you are not delusional or not a fanboy, but REALITY stands. You ask for evidence, i provide you with it and then you quickly turn around to disprove it because you dislike the fact you are wrong.

Mhmm, thank you god for making inbred retards, it really helps others to distinguish between what mental illness is and what is normal

You do realize I'm the only one who has actually provided any backup for what I've said right? All you've contributed is stupid little insults. So by your logic, you're the inbred moron here, not me.

Oh so im the inbred moron when I've provided to you that i7 is not necessaily better when FX 8350 rivals it in performance. But you come back and say some stupid shit like "it doesnt make sense, don't know where you get this info".

Its not me shitting on the facts, its you denying it. End of story.

And further talk with you will give me brain cancer from your stupidity.

It is pretty easy to find conflicting information, especially with a narrow scope. Generally, if you have a fat wallet and want top performance, [strike]you[/strike]... we are buying Intel. Resorting to the childish name calling does nothing for your case.

Rofl, its not about confliction information, its about his ignorance to immediately deny. I like you people trying to justify your i7 like intel marketers.

 

[skit75]

I'm not trying to justify the i-7. Just about every review and OC tutorial I read before purchasing the i-7 did that for me. I over-payed, granted, and have done next to nothing to justify the expense of the i7-920 at the time which was about $280~ or so in May of 2009. The performance and longevity of this chip has exceeded my expectations. BTW, the 8350 would beat out the i-7 920 in a majority, if not most of benchmarks today. This is a 1st Gen QC and it is the bottom of the product line in that generation.

 

[meat_loaf]

I'm not trying to justify the i-7. Just about every review and OC tutorial I read before purchasing the i-7 did that for me. I over-payed, granted, and have done next to nothing to justify the expense of the i7-920 at the time which was about $280~ or so in May of 2009. The performance and longevity of this chip has exceeded my expectations. BTW, the 8350 would beat out the i-7 920 in a majority, if not most of benchmarks today. This is a 1st Gen QC and it is the bottom of the product line in that generation.

Almost every 1st gen of things are on the bottom as both intel and AMD revise the CPU version.
Just like how Phenom II 955 was between the C2 and C3 versions.

But my argument isn't the fact intel isn't good, as I've owned serveral of pentiums that did better than AMD until Athlon came into the picture. But my argument is towards people like BleedingEdgeTek that only thinks of intel is the sole winner when obviously that is not the case and many of the actual results other than the benchmarks.

Those people are like religious extremists that are terribly narrow sighted.