SNAR :
getochkn :
When you look at the anandtech link you posted, in most of the games and the multi-core tests, the results aren't that far off. Most games are getting better at multi-core now. Single core for core, the intel crushes. In things that can use all the cores, it's a lot closer race. As said, the way AMD does cores is more 8-core-ish. lol.
So, in future, when games and softwares start using multi cores, AMD will emerge as winner? So it is future proof than Intel?
Nope not at all actually. It will be a LONG time before games actually properly use 8 cores. Maybe in 4 years buying a new 8 core CPU will be a good investment for the late future, but for the current foreseeable future and how BRAND NEW games being released this year still prefer strong single core performance, I doubt very seriously that an 8-core AMD CPU (actually only really a quad core) will be better than or even equal to a 4 core intel.
I mean there are brand new games being released today where an i3 beats an 8350.
Until AMD can equal Intel in per-core performance, I very seriously doubt that they will be better for gaming or general use.
Even in games like BF4 that can use more cores, where the 8350 performs well, it STILL gets lower minimum FPS (what you feel) than an intel i3, even if the 8350 gets slightly more average FPS. So, even though it gets slightly more FPS average, it will be less smooth and have more dips/spikes than an i3 simply because the i3 has much stronger per-core performance.
It is always important to look at minimum FPS. And even in games where an 8350 is equal to an i5 in average FPS, it will loose to even an i3 in minimum FPS, meaning intel gives a much smoother experience.