Great Gaming on AMD

N

narsbars

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
2,797
Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 board bought used, $100.00 six months ago.
7850 Twin Frozr on sale at $160.00
965 BE I have had for years.
Sold the previous rig for a hundred bucks, and just ordered an 8350, and will sell the 965 for $70.00 bringing the 8350 down to $110.00
This has been my upgrade strategy for a long time, since the 486 DX100.
If you want to game you can game, if you want bragging rights this rig won't cut it.

Don't give a BLEEP about Intel when you compare this rig to any Intel rig for single screen, single GPU performance using a similar GPU. I saved a fortune, can game at great frame rates with eye candy and still be able to afford some good beer.

All of that said, sad to say, this looks to be the end of the road for me and AMD. I don't think they will ever come out with another performance CPU. Now it is buy a new Intel CPU and be forced to buy a new MB. Intel stinks if you want to save money.
 
I really like my 8350. It looks like the next upgrade is on schedule for the end of the year so hopefully we'll see another amd chip that is decent q1 2014
 
narsbars said:
Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 board bought used, $100.00 six months ago.
7850 Twin Frozr on sale at $160.00
965 BE I have had for years.
Sold the previous rig for a hundred bucks, and just ordered an 8350, and will sell the 965 for $70.00 bringing the 8350 down to $110.00
This has been my upgrade strategy for a long time, since the 486 DX100.
If you want to game you can game, if you want bragging rights this rig won't cut it.

Don't give a BLEEP about Intel when you compare this rig to any Intel rig for single screen, single GPU performance using a similar GPU. I saved a fortune, can game at great frame rates with eye candy and still be able to afford some good beer.

All of that said, sad to say, this looks to be the end of the road for me and AMD. I don't think they will ever come out with another performance CPU. Now it is buy a new Intel CPU and be forced to buy a new MB. Intel stinks if you want to save money.
Click to expand...

Your upgrade path is similar to mine. I sold my 965 for a FX-6100 and was very happy. I had the 965 paired with a 6970 at one point and was very happy. I am always happy to read about AMD upgrades. I wouldn't give up on AMD, they may pump out more gaming grade CPUs in the future. I plan on going to an 8350 hopefully before years end.
 
narsbars said:
All of that said, sad to say, this looks to be the end of the road for me and AMD. I don't think they will ever come out with another performance CPU. Now it is buy a new Intel CPU and be forced to buy a new MB. Intel stinks if you want to save money.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't give up on them quite yet. They just rehired their old chip designer that put them out ahead of Intel when they were. Steamroller should be pretty good, and even if they don't try to outperform Intel's biggest and baddest, they'll still need good cores for their APU's, which means that their desktop CPU's should remain viable for the bang-for-your-buck sub $200 crowd. Just my two cents.
 
Some exaggeration in the OP, that's for sure...

1) No one ever claimed you cannot game on AMD
2) You didn't save a "fortune"
 
Well if he's not looking for bragging rights, and he mentions gaming then we can look at the i5 for comparative purposes which is a $20 difference... Like I said, an exaggeration. I'm glad he's happy with his system and it's performing to his satisfaction, but these "feel good threads" can get pretty ridiculous... Like calling $20 a "fortune"
 
I think the OP was complaining mainly about having to get a new motherboard.

My $50 to $75 estimate was the cost of selling the current motherboard and purchasing a new lga1155 board.
 
I am looking forward to an AMD comeback. I would love an all AMD system.

9350 (or whatever steamroller is) + 8950 (whatever next gen radeon is)

I hope they tweak power/ipc a little bit. I could live with the current 8350 ipc...but the power usage is a bit much.
 
Sorry to anyone if I was not clear. I was generally addressing the generic posts from benchmark snobs and Intel fanboys. To the Intel guys......performance.......you won, no need to be rude. To the benchmark guys............good for you............means little in single screen, single player, gaming.

To answer several threads. The money I saved is a "big deal" to me. If anyone here doesn't think $75.00 is a bunch of cash, I will send you my paypal account and you can send it there to prove your point:)
Someone else said that part of the complaint was having to buy a new MB. Yes. Intel is far worse on that aspect than AMD has been.
I hear some hopeful comments about AMD's future, but even with the complaints I have with Intel, I am expecting the next rig to be Intel.

I don't need bragging rights but for now I can play anything out there and not feel bad if I am a few fps short of a 7990 or a Titan.
 
If anyone here doesn't think $75.00 is a bunch of cash
Click to expand...

To me this is a nice dinner with my wife. In the past when I went out to bars, $75 was 2 nights out if I did not buy the ladies any drinks, 1 if I did...
 
Last edited:
For us married folks, $75 is a dinner and a movie followed by 2 days of less nagging.
 
narsbars said:
To answer several threads. The money I saved is a "big deal" to me. If anyone here doesn't think $75.00 is a bunch of cash, I will send you my paypal account and you can send it there to prove your point:)
Click to expand...

You said you saved a "fortune" I personally don't think $75 is a bunch of cash, but not sending it to you doesn't prove anyone's point because we are talking about actually getting something in return, not charitable donations. For us single folks, $75 won't even get you a private lap dance.
 
It's like comparing cars and that can go on endlessly (faster? does it matter if it just cruises at 60 or is on streets? repair costs? efficiency? interior?). Just get what you're comfortable with.

The $40-75 savings are definitely an edge if they're applied to the GPU for gaming. The $139 8320 at MC is ridonkulous.
 
I love my a105800k... its actually a very powerful quadcore for its intended purpose.
 
I have a Phobia from going from 8-6 cores to 4 =) I could get a 6 core Intel but $$$$$

Frame rates hardly matter from what I seen for games but applications matter it's done on the graphics card for the most part but changing CPUS is fun.

I sold a FX-6100 for a FX-6300

I would go FX- 8350 but I want a cooler that won't block all my Ram.



I'm looking at Haswell but the problem is you don't get to keep your Motherboard for more then one upgrade.......No fun =)

I rather see my AMD roast all it's cores =)
 
Last edited:
I'll take 4 quarters over 8 nickels any day with no such phobia. Such as the case with Intel's quads vs AMD's 8 cores. =)
 
Last edited:
RamonGTP said:
I'll take 4 quarters over 8 nickels any day with no such Phobia. Such as the case with Intel's quads vs AMD's 8 cores. =)
Click to expand...

Lol, nice comparison and good point.

And don't the benchmarks show Intel's four are better than AMD's eight most of the time?

I hope AMD comes out with something great within the next year, maybe even two. And by great I mean run with and/or beat Intel's best. I'd love to run AMD as my primary machine again. Unfortunately I doubt that'll happen.
 
RamonGTP said:
I'll take 4 quarters over 8 nickels any day with no such Phobia. Such as the case with Intel's quads vs AMD's 8 cores. =)
Click to expand...

Terrible comparison, but then again, to be expected. :rolleyes: Enjoy spending your money on what you want but, please keep your this crap in the intel forum where it belongs.

I would rather have 7 quarters than 4 any day myself. :)
 
xTrident said:
Lol, nice comparison and good point.

And don't the benchmarks show Intel's four are better than AMD's eight most of the time?

I hope AMD comes out with something great within the next year, maybe even two. And by great I mean run with and/or beat Intel's best. I'd love to run AMD as my primary machine again. Unfortunately I doubt that'll happen.
Click to expand...

Well, goody goody gumdrops for you. :rolleyes: Thankfully, we do not roll by your drumbeat here on H, we decide what is best for ourselves and what works well, not what some canned benchmark online says we should buy. :D
 
narsbars said:
Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 board bought used, $100.00 six months ago.
7850 Twin Frozr on sale at $160.00
965 BE I have had for years.
Sold the previous rig for a hundred bucks, and just ordered an 8350, and will sell the 965 for $70.00 bringing the 8350 down to $110.00
This has been my upgrade strategy for a long time, since the 486 DX100.
If you want to game you can game, if you want bragging rights this rig won't cut it.

Don't give a BLEEP about Intel when you compare this rig to any Intel rig for single screen, single GPU performance using a similar GPU. I saved a fortune, can game at great frame rates with eye candy and still be able to afford some good beer.

All of that said, sad to say, this looks to be the end of the road for me and AMD. I don't think they will ever come out with another performance CPU. Now it is buy a new Intel CPU and be forced to buy a new MB. Intel stinks if you want to save money.
Click to expand...

You made some fantastic choices there. :) Did you already upgrade it and if so, how is it running? Did you do any overclocking yet? Just curious how it is working. :D
 
ManofGod said:
Well, goody goody gumdrops for you. :rolleyes: Thankfully, we do not roll by your drumbeat here on H, we decide what is best for ourselves and what works well, not what some canned benchmark online says we should buy. :D
Click to expand...

Really? H is all about using benchmarks to test what is best... Kind of a dick comment considering I was replying Ramon, who was replying another guy stating he has a problem going from a 6-8 "module core" AMD to a quad core Intel. Point behind the benchmarks is that there is no reason to have that "phobia" when Intel is proven better. That was it, not that he shouldn't go with AMD. :rolleyes:

Also note the AMD build I also have. You talk to me like I'm a fanboi, when I'm not. I've made it perfectly clear in other threads that my AMD rig would easily get me by with what I do, but I do note that I can tell a difference in speed with the Intel. As dumb as the saying goes, it is what it is. You and everyone else can roll with a different "drumbeat" but don't get pissy just because I stated a fact, or at the very least have a different opinion.
 
xTrident said:
Really? H is all about using benchmarks to test what is best... Kind of a dick comment considering I was replying Ramon, who was replying another guy stating he has a problem going from a 6-8 "module core" AMD to a quad core Intel. Point behind the benchmarks is that there is no reason to have that "phobia" when Intel is proven better. That was it, not that he shouldn't go with AMD. :rolleyes:

Also note the AMD build I also have. You talk to me like I'm a fanboi, when I'm not. I've made it perfectly clear in other threads that my AMD rig would easily get me by with what I do, but I do note that I can tell a difference in speed with the Intel. As dumb as the saying goes, it is what it is. You and everyone else can roll with a different "drumbeat" but don't get pissy just because I stated a fact, or at the very least have a different opinion.
Click to expand...

If you would like to state these "facts", then go to the intel forum and have at it. You clearly said you would not use AMD in your main rig and that is all you said. (You did not say in this thread that you use AMD at all so, it is what it is.) Sorry man, but what you said is what you said and will not change no matter how much you want it too.

Having a different opinion is fine but when it comes across as disrespectful, what do you expect, candy? I use a FX 8350 as my main rig and it does more than just get me buy, it is super fast and fluid. That said, the intel machines I have worked on recently were also quite fast as well.
 
I have an old 1090T gaming system I like to fiddle around with. I guess you could call it my test rig.
 
ManofGod said:
If you would like to state these "facts", then go to the intel forum and have at it. You clearly said you would not use AMD in your main rig and that is all you said. (You did not say in this thread that you use AMD at all so, it is what it is.) Sorry man, but what you said is what you said and will not change no matter how much you want it too.

Having a different opinion is fine but when it comes across as disrespectful, what do you expect, candy? I use a FX 8350 as my main rig and it does more than just get me buy, it is super fast and fluid. That said, the intel machines I have worked on recently were also quite fast as well.
Click to expand...

What does it matter where I state such "facts" if they are correct? Is it any kind of secret that Intel has been ahead of AMD for years now? I doubt it. AMD fanbois have got to stop taking such a statement as "hating", or disrespectful. The context in which my original reply was being made wasn't off base either. It was relevant to who I was replying. And no, as of right now I wouldn't go AMD because Intel still has much better offerings. It was the same case when I built my current primary machine. Sandy Bridge and Bulldozer weren't out yet. The one thing AMD had going for them strongly when I built my i7 was a great budget build in the way of a quad core Athlon II. I will state AMD has always seemed much easier on the wallet.

So now, if I were to build a new rig I'd still be in somewhat of the same situation only Intel now has some great budget offerings, and better high end. Yeah, you're right, I posted ONE comment in this thread and didn't state I used AMD... But it's clearly written in my signature. Come on, man. I'm not trying to, nor am I changing what I said. I simply stated what was already there. And for the record, I didn't say that I stated using AMD in this thread, but in other threads.

How in the hell was I disrespectful? All I did was agree with Ramon, and mention benchmarks showing Intel bests AMD most of the time? I even said, most of the time! I already covered AMD getting me by, but I don't doubt for a second from the time I built my primary rig and what was availablefrom AMD's side that my i7 (granted it doesn't puke out on me) will last me longer than a Phenom II.
 
fullvietFX said:
I have an old 1090T gaming system I like to fiddle around with. I guess you could call it my test rig.
Click to expand...

Cool. :D I used to have a 1090T but could not get it above 3.8GHz overclocked. Then I switched to a FX 8120 which was better in the system I have at 4.3GHz or so. Now I am running a FX 8350 which I have at 4.5GHz stable on a Asrock Extreme 4 990FX Board. (This board is holding it back though and is the same board I used for the other processors.)
 
ManofGod said:
Cool. :D I used to have a 1090T but could not get it above 3.8GHz overclocked. Then I switched to a FX 8120 which was better in the system I have at 4.3GHz or so. Now I am running a FX 8350 which I have at 4.5GHz stable on a Asrock Extreme 4 990FX Board. (This board is holding it back though and is the same board I used for the other processors.)
Click to expand...

When you overclocked the 1090T did that disable the "throttling" function? I used to have a Phenom II 720 and I tried overclocking it and it wouldn't throttle itself at all.
 
xTrident said:
When you overclocked the 1090T did that disable the "throttling" function? I used to have a Phenom II 720 and I tried overclocking it and it wouldn't throttle itself at all.
Click to expand...

Yep but, I did screw up and did not adjust the LLC setting but left it on auto. For some reason, I even after having that board for one year, I did not realize what LLC did. (At least not until I got my FX 8120.) There is a chance that I could have gotten it to 4.0GHz stably if I had adjusted the LLC. :eek:

Just goes to show I do not know everything and will always have new things to learn. (One of the reasons I love being in IT.)
 
ManofGod said:
Yep but, I did screw up and did not adjust the LLC setting but left it on auto. For some reason, I even after having that board for one year, I did not realize what LLC did. (At least not until I got my FX 8120.) There is a chance that I could have gotten it to 4.0GHz stably if I had adjusted the LLC. :eek:

Just goes to show I do not know everything and will always have new things to learn. (One of the reasons I love being in IT.)
Click to expand...

I actually just looked up LLC because I didn't know. ;)

Is there any way to turn the throttling feature back on that you're aware of? I really like that function. My i7 still throttles but because I adjusted the "bus speed" and multiplier it now throttles to 2.4GHz compared to its stock 1.6GHz. I wish these boards or CPU's would allow us to adjust the throttling as well. I'd try to drop my i7 down to 800MHz like AMD does.
 
ManofGod said:
Well, goody goody gumdrops for you. :rolleyes: Thankfully, we do not roll by your drumbeat here on H, we decide what is best for ourselves and what works well, not what some canned benchmark online says we should buy. :D
Click to expand...

You're right, everyone decides for themselves. We all make mistakes though. What you should be thankful for is your ability to learn from them. Or you can decide to make the same mistakes over again. :)
 
xTrident said:
I actually just looked up LLC because I didn't know. ;)

Is there any way to turn the throttling feature back on that you're aware of? I really like that function. My i7 still throttles but because I adjusted the "bus speed" and multiplier it now throttles to 2.4GHz compared to its stock 1.6GHz. I wish these boards or CPU's would allow us to adjust the throttling as well. I'd try to drop my i7 down to 800MHz like AMD does.
Click to expand...

I have the Cool and Quiet setting turned on in the bios. (I am pretty sure that is what you mean.) However, I have Application Power Management and the CPU Thermal Throttle turned off in the bios.

This way, the CPU does go down to 1.4GHz at idle then up to 4.5GHz at full load. Is that what you meant? Oh, and speaking of LLC, I wish I had purchased the ASUS 990FX board instead since they have better overclocking headroom. I like my board though but, live and learn I guess. :)
 
RamonGTP said:
You're right, everyone decides for themselves. We all make mistakes though. What you should be thankful for is your ability to learn from them. Or you can decide to make the same mistakes over again. :)
Click to expand...

:D Ok, ok.
 
ManofGod said:
I have the Cool and Quiet setting turned on in the bios. (I am pretty sure that is what you mean.) However, I have Application Power Management and the CPU Thermal Throttle turned off in the bios.

This way, the CPU does go down to 1.4GHz at idle then up to 4.5GHz at full load. Is that what you meant? Oh, and speaking of LLC, I wish I had purchased the ASUS 990FX board instead since they have better overclocking headroom. I like my board though but, live and learn I guess. :)
Click to expand...

Cool and Quiet, yes. I "thought" that's what it was it called, but wasn't 100%. Anyway maybe I'll try an overclock on the 1055T up to 3.2GHz or something and see if I can keep it so it doesn't run at 3.2GHz all the time.

Hopefully my MB which isn't AM3+ certified will have something similar. I briefly looked through it when I did the OC on the 720, but I wasn't dying to OC that proc so I just set it back to default and left it alone. I'm not looking for a massive overclock on this, just a modest 3.2/3.4GHz.
 
What if neither the FX 8350 nor the Ivy Bridge chips changed in real-world gameplay performance, but Vishera won more benchmarks?

What if they're dead even, neck and neck in a new game optimized for as many cores as possible. 1-2 FPS difference, max min or 99th. But in the benchmarks the 8350 pulls ahead. Then people are sold on the "better" CPU if that's their game they sink 300+ hours into.

Food for thought.
 
singe_101 said:
What if neither the FX 8350 nor the Ivy Bridge chips changed in real-world gameplay performance, but Vishera won more benchmarks?

What if they're dead even, neck and neck in a new game optimized for as many cores as possible. 1-2 FPS difference, max min or 99th. But in the benchmarks the 8350 pulls ahead. Then people are sold on the "better" CPU if that's their game they sink 300+ hours into.

Food for thought.
Click to expand...

I'd be more inclined to go with AMD if that were the case. I'm the type of PC builder that goes for longevity. One thing that bums me out with my i7 is that Intel didn't stick with socket 1366 nearly long, imo. I was a bit late to get in the game with that architecture, but it would have been nice if Intel would go just half as long as AMD goes with theirs. At any rate, getting a 930 allowed me room to upgrade to a six-core in the future. At this point, two years down the road and having to find the 1366 six cores on places like ebay and what not... I'll probably wind up skipping this CPU socket and jumping to an entirely new architecture. I have no idea what that will be at this point either as I'm thinking at least two more years on this build.

But that's why I hope AMD is able to come out with something more intriguing because I like the socket support they offer as well as their prices.
 
xTrident said:
But that's why I hope AMD is able to come out with something more intriguing because I like the socket support they offer as well as their prices.
Click to expand...

Which would in turn force Intel to lower it's prices to compete, which is what we need. I get excited every time AMD announces they are bringing a new chip to market, and they promise performance on-par or exceeding Intel's offerings. As soon as the benchmarks are released though, my excitement crumbles...

Intel knows it has the market cornered for most PC enthusiasts, which is why we see such high CPU prices and willingness to throw a new socket at us every, if not every other, CPU generation.

I don't think I would go back to AMD (a Q6600 was my first Intel CPU, and I've been consistently using them since), but I think we all would welcome the competition.
 
AMD socket support is not all it is cracked up to be. It's still dependent on the motherboard manufacturer to ensure socket compatibility. For example, despite what AMD said about AM3+ Bulldozer CPUs working in AM3 motherboards, no Bulldozer CPU works with my version of the Gigabyte GA-890GPA-UD3H, a mid-range AM3 mobo at one point in time. I Have seen enough similar cases to mine here on the forums to figure out that you really should not rely on the promise of AMD CPU support.
 
mavrocket said:
Which would in turn force Intel to lower it's prices to compete, which is what we need. I get excited every time AMD announces they are bringing a new chip to market, and they promise performance on-par or exceeding Intel's offerings. As soon as the benchmarks are released though, my excitement crumbles...

Intel knows it has the market cornered for most PC enthusiasts, which is why we see such high CPU prices and willingness to throw a new socket at us every, if not every other, CPU generation.

I don't think I would go back to AMD (a Q6600 was my first Intel CPU, and I've been consistently using them since), but I think we all would welcome the competition.
Click to expand...

I missed quite a few generations from my upgrade. I went from an Athlon 3200+ single core Barton to my i7 in 2010. I was desperately in need of an upgrade at that point. It's a real shame to me that I missed out on the beginning of 64-bit processors as well as the beginning dual/quad-core cpu's. Had I upgraded from the Barton to one of those other generations there's a really good chance I would have gone AMD for at least one or two of those generations. I jumped to Intel and have been waiting for AMD since...
 
Leaving aside the AMD vs Intel debate and the comparisons of one processor to another... I've been extremely happy with how well my AMD 965 BE has held up. It's gotten some hard use and just keeps right on chugging without any issues.

Is it getting dated? Yeah, sure. But it's still "good enough" that I'll probably wait until 2014 to upgrade (at which point I'll likely go Intel). It's meeting my needs despite its age and regardless of everything else that means it was a damn good buy at the time.

:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top