AMD cpu that is comparable to...

[Roland00Address]

If you look at the topic, i was the first one to recommend the Core i5 4690K so spare me the BS about fanboysm. I merely replied to your misinformed commend.

My comment was not misinformed, you either misread what I wrote or did not understand my point. By going with AMD now you are effectively getting 3.5 year old Intel technology which is barely better than his 5 year old processor. It does not matter if the AMD technology is 19 months old it performs worse than the 3.5 year old 2600k at stock speeds.

I never brought up IPC or efficency. I never brought up over clocking. I compared total end result performance from i7 950 vs i7 2600 vs AMD 8350. Part of the end result difference between i7 950 and 2600k was the increase in clock speed.

The point about prices was comparing Intel old 2600k price at its release compared to AMD current price. What did you gain by waiting 3.5 years by that technology now vs then. A savings of 140 dollars of 2011 money.

Lastly I did not call you a fanboy for you did not recommend AMD fx8350 but instead the i5 Hassell. If you did recommend the AMD like another poster in this thread I did an original response to then you would be a fanboy, for he tried to argue the 8350 is still an improvement over the i7 950. That is a reading comprehension fail on your part.

 

[Datafiend]

Ty again guys. I did save around $150 by going with the 290 over the 780 so I should be able to get the 4790k. Thanks again for the feedback and helping me.

 

[tential]

Ty again guys. I did save around $150 by going with the 290 over the 780 so I should be able to get the 4790k. Thanks again for the feedback and helping me.

The 4790k is probably the best gaming CPU out there. At 5Ghz+ OCs that are expected, it's definitely worth the cash. Every 4770k owner right now is jealous and confused as I doubt anyone expected the Haswell Refresh to give such a large jump in clock speeds/OC performance.

 

[scannall]

Save your money, and keep your current CPU. Spend the savings on better video cards and maybe a nice SSD. That's much better bang for your buck, and will hold you over for quite a while. At least until DDR4 comes down in price for the next generation.

 

[Arkadrel]

If you look at cinebench scores it shows how bad off AMD is.


I7-4790 (compaired to 8350):

Single threaded performance is ~69% higher than the 8350 from AMD.
Multi threaded performance is ~27% higher than the 8350 from AMD.

In games the single threaded performance will show, even today games arnt that well optimised for multi threading.


So yeah if you have to buy a cpu for gameing, Id def. say something like a i7-4790 is the way to go.

 

[aigomorla]

If you switch the comparison to the i7 2600k, intels top cpu 3 years ago it is not even close. 2600 is faster in single threaded, faster in 4 thread workloads, tied in 8 thread workloads, uses less power, has a built in GPU, takes less die space, both built on 32nm, and came out 3 years earlier. The question you should be asking is thank god I waited so I can get the 8350 for 190 instead of 330 but I had to wait 40 months to do so.

ROFL!!

The 4790k is probably the best gaming CPU out there. At 5Ghz+ OCs that are expected, it's definitely worth the cash. Every 4770k owner right now is jealous and confused as I doubt anyone expected the Haswell Refresh to give such a large jump in clock speeds/OC performance.

they are even more pissed that intel decided to fix the IHS Solder on the CPU which gives it better thermals.

 

[AtenRa]

If you look at cinebench scores it shows how bad off AMD is.


I7-4790 (compaired to 8350):

Single threaded performance is ~69% higher than the 8350 from AMD.
Multi threaded performance is ~27% higher than the 8350 from AMD.

In games the single threaded performance will show, even today games arnt that well optimised for multi threading.


So yeah if you have to buy a cpu for gameing, Id def. say something like a i7-4790 is the way to go.

And if you look at x264 HD Encode Test - 2nd pass - x264 0.59.819 you will see how fast the FX8350 is.

Im not trying to imply that FX8350 is faster than Core i7 4770K but only looking at Cinebench doesnt tell the whole story.

 

[2is]

And if you look at x264 HD Encode Test - 2nd pass - x264 0.59.819 you will see how fast the FX8350 is.

Im not trying to imply that FX8350 is faster than Core i7 4770K but only looking at Cinebench doesnt tell the whole story.

True, there's a lot we can look at, and most of them don't show the 8350 as competitive at all. If we had a list, one labeled competitive and one labled not even close, there would be more apps that aren't even close than there would be in the competitive column. It's only "fast" if you cherry pick tests. If you look at it as a whole, it has a tough time matching up to a 2600k

 

[AtenRa]

True, there's a lot we can look at, and most of them don't show the 8350 as competitive at all. If we had a list, one labeled competitive and one labled not even close, there would be more apps that aren't even close than there would be in the competitive column. It's only "fast" if you cherry pick tests. If you look at it as a whole, it has a tough time matching up to a 2600k

Performance related, the FX8350 is very competitive against Core i7 2600K and in cases even 3770K. People dislike it only because it has lower performance in games and of the higher power consumption.
Again, im not implying it is better than Ivy or Haswell, but it has a nice performance/price if you not only in to Gaming.
Even for today's standards, the performance/price (excluding gaming) is very nice if you dont care about higher power consumption especially for the FX8320 + OC to 4GHz.


http://techreport.com/review/23750/amd-fx-8350-processor-reviewed

 

[Erenhardt]

I bet A10-7850k gives a run i7-4790k

 

[Insert_Nickname]

I bet A10-7850k gives a run i7-4790k

Depends on how you look at it. CPU performance? No. IGP performance? Certainly...

 

[Erenhardt]

actually, I was thinking about both at the same time (HSA):

 

[2is]

Performance related, the FX8350 is very competitive against Core i7 2600K and in cases even 3770K. People dislike it only because it has lower performance in games and of the higher power consumption.
Again, im not implying it is better than Ivy or Haswell, but it has a nice performance/price if you not only in to Gaming.
Even for today's standards, the performance/price (excluding gaming) is very nice if you dont care about higher power consumption especially for the FX8320 + OC to 4GHz.


http://techreport.com/review/23750/amd-fx-8350-processor-reviewed

You don't ever get tired of playing this game that you cannot win do you? How often have you posted best-case AMD benchmarks, only to be schooled over and over again buy triple that amount that it does poorly in?

Here's the problem with your cherry picked tests. In best-case benchmarks, AMD is competitive, in everything else, it isn't. There is no such benchmark that a 2600k isn't competitive in. It's either right there or WAY ahead.

We both know this is true, but only one of us doesn't want to let the cat out of the bag.

For a more "complete" picture...

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/2

 

[2is]

I bet A10-7850k gives a run i7-4790k

I hope for your sake, you mean the iGPU and not the CPU.

 

[Roland00Address]

actually, I was thinking about both at the same time (HSA):

Maybe in the future but right now there is very little software that takes advantage of hsa or opencl.

And AMD has been claiming that software that runs on the gpu is coming right around the corner, for years now with their "fusion" push, yet it still has barely materialized.

Part of that is
1) We didn't have enough interconnection between the cpu, gpu, and ram memory
2) We didn't have good software tools (opencl, hsa, etc) to run software on the gpu
3) It is damn hard to run software on the gpu. Gpus may have thousand of calculation units but these units are very basic, and it is hard to program to these specialized units. Second most software can't be paralyzed to thousands of units for software is serial in nature most of the time, or the results of one problem needs information from other problems and thus you can't serialize it.

Number 3 is never going to go away. 1 and 2 might.

 

[AtenRa]

You don't ever get tired of playing this game that you cannot win do you? How often have you posted best-case AMD benchmarks, only to be schooled over and over again buy triple that amount that it does poorly in?

Here's the problem with your cherry picked tests. In best-case benchmarks, AMD is competitive, in everything else, it isn't. There is no such benchmark that a 2600k isn't competitive in. It's either right there or WAY ahead.

We both know this is true, but only one of us doesn't want to let the cat out of the bag.

For a more "complete" picture...

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/2

I gave you 10 benchmarks, those are almost an entire review by themselves and you are talking about cherry picked ???

Also, AT review doesnt include the Core i7 2600K for some reason :whiste:
Not to mention that the AT review you quoted, runs almost the same "cherry picked" benchmarks i posted above

 

[tential]

ROFL!!



At OP did u seriously think there was a AMD counterpart to intel's next flag ship on the LGA1150 platform?

The 4790K will destory anything AMD has, and it will spank it so hard, that people will feel sorry for AMD.



they are even more pissed that intel decided to fix the IHS Solder on the CPU which gives it better thermals.

Thanks for rubbing it in brah.

Seriously would upgrade from the 4770k at under $100 if I actually had Dolphin Emulator setup lol. I've just been so lazy recently and any money I get now I just buy hard drives.

 

[2is]

I gave you 10 benchmarks, those are almost an entire review by themselves and you are talking about cherry picked ???

Also, AT review doesnt include the Core i7 2600K for some reason :whiste:
Not to mention that the AT review you quoted, runs almost the same "cherry picked" benchmarks i posted above

They have a 2500k in there which is slower than a 2600k and out performed a 8350 more often than not. They also had a 3770k in there. And if you think they were the same benches, you need to learn how to read or learn how to get to the next several pages of the review.

When you leave out benches that AMD falls behind in, which is way more than it keeps up in, that's cherry picking. Partial info = cherry picking. Something you seem to be incapable of not doing. You can fill your posts with all the eye rolls you want and it won't change the fact that a 3 generation old CPU from Intel outperforms a current gen CPU from AMD.

 

[AtenRa]

They have a 2500k in there which is slower than a 2600k and out performed a 8350 more often than not.

AT Review
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested

7zip : FX8350 faster
win 8 kraken : 2500K faster
Per 2 : FX8350 faster
Excel 2007 : FX8350 faster
win 8 x264 HD5.0.1 pass 1 : FX8350 faster
win 8 x264 HD5.0.1 pass 2 : FX8350 faster
win 8 visual studio : tie
Photoshop CS4 : 2500K Faster
Pov-Ray : FX8350 faster
Cinebench 11.5 : FX8350 faster

Out of 9 applications (x264 count as one), FX8350 is faster than 2500K in 6, tie in one and loose in 2.

They also had a 3770k in there. And if you think they were the same benches, you need to learn how to read or learn how to get to the next several pages of the review.

I believe you know how to read, my commend was for non gaming benchmarks from the start. From those 9 applications on AT review, 5 are the same as in the review i posted.

ps: we were talking about 2600K here, not 3770K. I have linked 10 benchmarks that show how close FX8350 and 2600K really are, you havent provided not even a single one. :whiste:

When you leave out benches that AMD falls behind in, which is way more than it keeps up in, that's cherry picking. Partial info = cherry picking. Something you seem to be incapable of not doing. You can fill your posts with all the eye rolls you want and it won't change the fact that a 3 generation old CPU from Intel outperforms a current gen CPU from AMD.

Again you have to learn to read what others are typing here,

Even for today's standards, the performance/price (excluding gaming) is very nice if you dont care about higher power consumption especially for the FX8320 + OC to 4GHz.

Maybe you should read more carefully the next time you accuse someone of cherry picking when he provides 10 benchmark graphs proving his claims and you provide non.

 

[2is]

AT Review
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested

7zip : FX8350 faster
win 8 kraken : 2500K faster
Per 2 : FX8350 faster
Excel 2007 : FX8350 faster
win 8 x264 HD5.0.1 pass 1 : FX8350 faster
win 8 x264 HD5.0.1 pass 2 : FX8350 faster
win 8 visual studio : tie
Photoshop CS4 : 2500K Faster
Pov-Ray : FX8350 faster
Cinebench 11.5 : FX8350 faster

Out of 9 applications (x264 count as one), FX8350 is faster than 2500K in 6, tie in one and loose in 2.



I believe you know how to read, my commend was for non gaming benchmarks from the start. From those 9 applications on AT review, 5 are the same as in the review i posted.

ps: we were talking about 2600K here, not 3770K. I have linked 10 benchmarks that show how close FX8350 and 2600K really are, you havent provided not even a single one. :whiste:



Again you have to learn to read what others are typing here,



Maybe you should read more carefully the next time you accuse someone of cherry picking when he provides 10 benchmark graphs proving his claims and you provide non.

Wait... Are you trying to say a i7-4790k is only better than a 8350 when it comes to gaming????

You are cherry picking. It's not an accusation, it's a fact. There's a difference. I love the fact that AMD's performance (or lack thereof) has relegated you to comparing them to a 3 generation old i5, and still not coming out on top. I count 15 tests where the i5 2500k bested it. So you either don't know how to count and read, or you're cherry picking. There is no other option. Or a flat out liar, I suppose that's an option too. The link is right there for anyone to see, so I'm not sure what you're trying to prove beyond sheer ignorance.

I'd love to know the answer to opening question though, because you seem to imply that in your first reply, and in this latest reply. A simple yes or no will suffice. Anything other than a yes or no is just you trying to talk yourself out of a misguided comment you know to be complete BS. Since you seem to have a problem remembering what you have read (you magically turned 15 victories to 3) I'll close by asking the question again...

Are you trying to say a i7-4790k is only better than a 8350 when it comes to gaming?

 

[aigomorla]

Out of 9 applications (x264 count as one), FX8350 is faster than 2500K in 6, tie in one and loose in 2.

but the i7-4790k is the flag ship of intel on the next platform.
its not like a 2500k which has no hyper threading.
its like the 2600k with a base clock of 4ghz out of the box + a turbo of 4.4ghz.

http://ark.intel.com/products/80807/Intel-Core-i7-4790K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_40-GHz

On top they fixed the IHS problem proned by the 4770K so it should easily overclock 20-50% more then its turbo clock. (but lets ignore overclocking)

Now compare that to a i7 2600k used on those charts.
http://ark.intel.com/products/52214

3.4ghz base clock with a tubro of 3.8ghz.


I dont think an i7-2600k has a chance against a i7-4790K.
Infact i think even a i7-3770k will lose to it:
http://ark.intel.com/products/65523

Its essentially the same processor of a i7-3770K with a higher base clock.

Processor Number i7-3770K
# of Cores 4
# of Threads 8
Clock Speed 3.5 GHz
Max Turbo Frequency 3.9 GHz
DMI 8 MB
DMI 5 GT/s

vs

Processor Number i7-4790K
# of Cores 4
# of Threads 8
Clock Speed 4 GHz
Max Turbo Frequency 4.4 GHz
DMI2 8 MB
DMI2 5 GT/s

so you should be comparing to the i7-3770k on those charts you linked, because the only processor we can ignore is the 3960X which is a hexcore.
And even that 1 benchmark where the AMD processors wins, with the higher base clock on the 4790K over the 3770K, im fairly certain, it would lose to that as well if we look at clock speed scaling between the i7's.

actually, I was thinking about both at the same time (HSA):

http://ark.intel.com/products/75049/Intel-Core-i5-4670S-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_80-GHz

How can you say that processor is even comparable to a i7-4790K.
The OP specifically ASKS in regards to a 4790K, why are you guys all trying to handicap intel by bringing out lower grade processors to this mix?
There is a hugh scaling difference between a i5-4670S vs a i7-4790K

Lets relook at what the OP is asking people.

The Intel i7-4790k. I'm looking to upgrade from my i7 950 next month and I was looking at the newly announced i7-4790k but I'm not fond of that price, so I was wondering if AMD has something that offers similar performance for a lower price? Any help would be greatly appreciated.