Do high end user use AMD instead of Intel?

[2is]

What i said was that QuickSync doesnt have the same quality with software. All the rest is your words not mine. I never said Quicksync is not faster but if you want the same quality the software provides you have to raise the bit-rate and that will increase the file size and affect the speed.

I already mentioned the bit rate. What I'm doing know is letting you know the effect of the file size isn't double and the speed doesn't drop to the extent you're suggesting. You're still 200-300% faster and that's comparing HD4000 to a i7 3770k, meaning compared to an FX8, it's even greater than that. Try as you might to dance around the subject, it won't change the reality that someone with an i3 is going to finish their encode a LOT faster than someone with an FX8 and still be able to use their PC without appreciably slowing down the encode process.

Hang on to that WinRAR achievement as tight as you can.

 

[B-Riz]

I already mentioned the bit rate. What I'm doing know is letting you know the effect of the file size isn't double and the speed doesn't drop to the extent you're suggesting. You're still 200-300% faster and that's comparing HD4000 to a i7 3770k, meaning compared to an FX8, it's even greater than that. Try as you might to dance around the subject, it won't change the reality that someone with an i3 is going to finish their encode a LOT faster than someone with an FX8 and still be able to use their PC without appreciably slowing down the encode process.

Hang on to that WinRAR achievement as tight as you can.

So someone can "defend" a product, pointing out it's not complete crap, but over-zealousness about a 3770K is acceptable???

8320E and 8370E are quite nice for the money.

 

[2is]

So someone can "defend" a product, pointing out it's not complete crap, but over-zealousness about a 3770K is acceptable???

8320E and 8370E are quite nice for the money.

I suggest you read from the beginning. This isn't about a 3770k. This is about a claim that someone's FX8 is faster than an i3 at encoding. It isn't. The only reason the 3770k is even being mentioned is because someone else provided very misleading figures for QuickSync performance and the 3770k is only being used for comparative purposes.

Next time, it would be best to understand what the subject is about before you decide to "contribute" to it.

 

[B-Riz]

I suggest you read from the beginning. This isn't about a 3770k. This is about a claim that someone's FX8 is faster than an i3 at encoding. It isn't. The only reason the 3770k is even being mentioned is because someone else provided very misleading figures for QuickSync performance and the 3770k is only being used for comparative purposes.

Next time, it would be best to understand what the subject is about before you decide to "contribute" to it.

Bro, do you even computer???

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1402?vs=1197

Imma go to Micro Center tonight, buy an 8320E, LOL at the i3's and live the goood cheap MT life.

Objectivity is more helpful in the forum than arguing and trying to win benchmark wars.

 

[Headfoot]

I'm entirely sure the AMD defense force spends more time talking about how great FX8 is at encoding than they do actually encoding with FX8

 

[2is]

Bro, do you even computer???

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1402?vs=1197

Imma go to Micro Center tonight, buy an 8320E, LOL at the i3's and live the goood cheap MT life.

Objectivity is more helpful in the forum than arguing and trying to win benchmark wars.

As I stated, read the thread. The fact that you just linked this comparison tells me one of two things.

1) You still haven't read what this is about but think you have it all figured out
2) You read what this is about and haven't figured it out.

i3 has QS FX8 does not. QS makes it many times faster at encoding, which is where this little debate originated.

If you had bothered reading instead of running off at the mouth thinking you had it all figured out, you'd have known this already, then maybe if you still decided to contribute, it would have had some relevance.

Objectivity is great, just think how much more helpful it would be if you actually knew what the discussion was about?

What's more sad? Even the link you posted has the i3 winning more often then not, and in some instances by >100% so in addition to failing to read the topic being discussed, looks like you failed to adequately analyze your own source of information. Enjoy your FX, looks like the i3 users will have more LOLs than you.

 

[B-Riz]

As I stated, read the thread. The fact that you just linked this comparison tells me one of two things.

1) You still haven't read what this is about but think you have it all figured out
2) You read what this is about and haven't figured it out.

i3 has QS FX8 does not. QS makes it many times faster at encoding, which is where this little debate originated.

If you had bothered reading instead of running off at the mouth thinking you had it all figured out, you'd have known this already, then maybe if you still decided to contribute, it would have had some relevance.

Objectivity is great, just think how much more helpful it would be if you actually knew what the discussion was about?

Or you could not jump to conclusions so quickly and find my posts; I stated that anyone asking the question OP did is stirring the pot.

AT does awesome reviews of new stuff, along with many other sites.

Thanks for being near impossible about a minor thing, GG.

 

[2is]

Or you could not jump to conclusions so quickly and find my posts; I stated that anyone asking the question OP did is stirring the pot.

AT does awesome reviews of new stuff, along with many other sites.

Thanks for being near impossible about a minor thing, GG.

There was no conclusion jumping on my part and just like your last few posts, this one has no relevance here. You started by assuming I'm defending a 3770k. I wasn't. I suggested you read the thread (at the very least read how THIS debate started), you didn't and came back with an AT link that still had nothing to do with the topic. oh and by the way, i3 wins 43/62 times in your own link, so thanks for that additional reference of just how crappy an FX8 is.

Your response to the OP clearly didn't help you understand what THIS debate was about, so I'm not sure why you're even bringing it up. Having posted at the start of this thread doesn't equate to you being fully apprised of what's going on at post #~250.

Finally, you come in here preaching about jumping to conclusions when that's all you've been doing for the last 3 or 4 posts and talking about the OP stirring the pot? Again, something you have been doing for the last 3 or 4 posts. So what exactly is your contribution here? Trolling and entering a conversation mid way through not having any idea what it's about?

 

[B-Riz]

There was no conclusion jumping on my part and just like your last few posts, this one has no relevance here. You started by assuming I'm defending a 3770k. I wasn't. I suggested you read the thread (at the very least read how THIS debate started), you didn't and came back with an AT link that still had nothing to do with the topic. oh and by the way, i3 wins 43/62 times in your own link, so thanks for that additional reference of just how crappy an FX8 is.

Your response to the OP clearly didn't help you understand what THIS debate was about, so I'm not sure why you're even bringing it up. Having posted at the start of this thread doesn't equate to you being fully apprised of what's going on at post #~250.

Finally, you come in here preaching about jumping to conclusions when that's all you've been doing for the last 3 or 4 posts and talking about the OP stirring the pot? Again, something you have been doing for the last 3 or 4 posts. So what exactly is your contribution here? Trolling and entering a conversation mid way through not having any idea what it's about?

Thank you, please, sell us all Intel CPU's.

 

[2is]

No... Thank YOU for the AT product comparison link.

And you've already got one, check your sig.

 

[potzocalli]

Haha, we have totally deviated from the OP's topic.

I, while using AMD since the 486 DX40 days and defending it til my last breath because competition lowers prices and increases performance for us end users, understand that for the last couple of years, Intel has dominated the high end market.

If you want the fastest PC possible then Intel is probably your choice. Remember memory, video card, motherboard all impact the performance numbers if that is what you are interested in (the highest possible score).

I decided a long time ago to game comfortably and have high end video cards with good CPUs. Staying at the top costs a lot of $$$ so my rule is to update when I see performace drops.

Again, the best CPU for you depends on what you want to use it for.

Alas, let the battle continue..........

 

[B-Riz]

Haha, we have totally deviated from the OP's topic.

I, while using AMD since the 486 DX40 days and defending it til my last breath because competition lowers prices and increases performance for us end users, understand that for the last couple of years, Intel has dominated the high end market.

If you want the fastest PC possible then Intel is probably your choice. Remember memory, video card, motherboard all impact the performance numbers if that is what you are interested in (the highest possible score).

I decided a long time ago to game comfortably and have high end video cards with good CPUs. Staying at the top costs a lot of $$$ so my rule is to update when I see performace drops.

Again, the best CPU for you depends on what you want to use it for.

Alas, let the battle continue..........

:thumbsup:

I have long ago conceded benchmark victory to Intel, but, inexpensive / good value, AMD still has a place in my heart.

 

[soccerballtux]

As I stated, read the thread. The fact that you just linked this comparison tells me one of two things.

1) You still haven't read what this is about but think you have it all figured out
2) You read what this is about and haven't figured it out.

i3 has QS FX8 does not. QS makes it many times faster at encoding, which is where this little debate originated.

If you had bothered reading instead of running off at the mouth thinking you had it all figured out, you'd have known this already, then maybe if you still decided to contribute, it would have had some relevance.

Objectivity is great, just think how much more helpful it would be if you actually knew what the discussion was about?

What's more sad? Even the link you posted has the i3 winning more often then not, and in some instances by >100% so in addition to failing to read the topic being discussed, looks like you failed to adequately analyze your own source of information. Enjoy your FX, looks like the i3 users will have more LOLs than you.

quicksync is not an acceptable option

 

[potzocalli]

B-Riz, totally agree with you. AMD is still my gaming platform of choice because its good value and affordable upgrades allow me to save $$ for my next video card.

AMD CPUs are fast enough as not to be a serious botleneck for high end cards. 7970s work very well with them (yes, they are a bit outdated but once again work fine in the games I play).

So, if gaming at 1080P in HIGH quality graphics is high-end then ....yes. Some high-end users still use AMD CPUs hehe. The 8350, 8370 are pretty good because they are 95-125W while the 9 series go way to 220W and few motherboards were designed for that. The offset is that if you live far North your PC will double as a heater for your computer room.

(Can of worms opening here ...again)

 

[Essence_of_War]

quicksync is not an acceptable option

What about quicksync isn't acceptable?

 

[B-Riz]

B-Riz, totally agree with you. AMD is still my gaming platform of choice because its good value and affordable upgrades allow me to save $$ for my next video card.

AMD CPUs are fast enough as not to be a serious botleneck for high end cards. 7970s work very well with them (yes, they are a bit outdated but once again work fine in the games I play).

So, if gaming at 1080P in HIGH quality graphics is high-end then ....yes. Some high-end users still use AMD CPUs hehe. The 8350, 8370 are pretty good because they are 95-125W while the 9 series go way to 220W and few motherboards were designed for that. The offset is that if you live far North your PC will double as a heater for your computer room.

(Can of worms opening here ...again)

Very true.

If I had time, I would go get an 8320E / 8370E and run it for a month or two; but I am under time crunch (new baby on the way).

Back in the day, I wanted an Athlon X2 (skt 939) so bad, but they were still expensive, and the E6300 C2D was out.

I jumped on that, then got techno-lust for the i7 920 a few years later, but really wanted a Phenom II X6 too...

Lol, too many CPU's, too little time and money.

(I still think the 8320E / 8370E are awesome for gaming and all that sweet sweet VM work with 32GB o memory)

 

[2is]

quicksync is not an acceptable option

Keep telling yourself that. Next time just buy an i3. Check out the link B-Riz posted a few posts up. It does an excellent job of showcasing how an 8 core fx can't keep up with a dual core i3 in the majority of tasks. Add QS to that and you can notch up a few more victories for the i3 over fx8.

 

[frozentundra123456]

I really see quick sync and cpu encode comparison as apples to oranges. Yes, quick sync is faster, but it gives a different result, a different kind of encoded file, if you understand what I mean. Now you can say that intel has a feature that AMD does not, and one may choose to use that feature or not, depending on what they want out of the finished product. But quicksync and cpu encoding give a different product, so are not really comparable.

AMD fans on the other hand are pulling the "it is good enough but cheaper, a great value" card as usual, but the original topic of the thread was for "high end users". Once you get past the 300 dollar mark, which I would not consider a lot for the high end, 4790k and hex and octa core 2011 platforms pretty much destroy AMD in any metric, highly threaded or not.

 

[potzocalli]

No, "good enough but cheaper" and "high-end" is again relative. CPU's are like cars. Is a Mustang, Camaro, 370Z, Corvette high end? Probably yes to us normal fellow who drive a regular car to work everyday but a Ferrari or Lamborghini owner would ROFL at such pretensions.

It depends on what high end is for you. To comfortably play, navigate, run severals tasks at one without hiccups or nonstop video compression or lots of floating point calculations or the list is endless.

And yes, to answer the original question when I bought my 8350 and 7970 and my 970 motherboard and 16 GB ram some years ago it was high end. Hiogh end enough that I haven't had to upgrade in a few years except add an SSD and a Blu-ray burner.

Heck, even my sons PC with a Phenom 965 and a 7870 runs along nicely in all Steam games we have at 1080P and high end graphics.

Can I get a better system? Hell yes!! But unless you fellows send me some cash to help buy my i7 5th gen when its released I'd rather spend it by going out with the family and having a great time.

And peace to all.

 

[frozentundra123456]

No, "good enough but cheaper" and "high-end" is again relative. CPU's are like cars. Is a Mustang, Camaro, 370Z, Corvette high end? Probably yes to us normal fellow who drive a regular car to work everyday but a Ferrari or Lamborghini owner would ROFL at such pretensions.

It depends on what high end is for you. To comfortably play, navigate, run severals tasks at one without hiccups or nonstop video compression or lots of floating point calculations or the list is endless.

And yes, to answer the original question when I bought my 8350 and 7970 and my 970 motherboard and 16 GB ram some years ago it was high end. Hiogh end enough that I haven't had to upgrade in a few years except add an SSD and a Blu-ray burner.

Heck, even my sons PC with a Phenom 965 and a 7870 runs along nicely in all Steam games we have at 1080P and high end graphics.

Can I get a better system? Hell yes!! But unless you fellows send me some cash to help buy my i7 5th gen when its released I'd rather spend it by going out with the family and having a great time.

And peace to all.

Yes, it is relative to an extent, but an i7 or a hex core 5820k costs maybe 100 or 200 dollars more (FX on sale) at the most. Do you have a car payment, a house payment, a cell phone data plan, high speed internet, a 500.00 gpu or a 1000.00 computer, or buy a few AAA games every year, pay car and house insurance? Any of these expenses in a month or two is equal to the difference in price between the fastest mainstream intel cpu and an FX. So I dont see how anyone could reasonably argue in the context of this thread that a 4790k or 5820k is above the high end. What you are saying is that you are not willing to pay the price for the "high end" and would rather spend the money on other things, which is a perfectly legitimate strategy. But I dont think that strategy redefines the high end.

 

[2is]

Plenty of people who can buy an i7 without their families starving, and if money is that tight in your household, you shouldn't be spending any of it on steam games. This thread isn't about value as much as you AMD fans would like to make it about value. And even then, thanks to B-Riz we have that AT link showing how an inexpensive i3 is still outperforming an FX8 more often that not and does so while sipping power. So if you really want to push the value argument for AMD, you still lose. Then when?

The high end arugment doesn't work
The value argument doesn't work

You're left with the value with major stipulations argument, which looks something like this.

AMD FX8 is a better value for WinRAR

or

AND FX8 is a better value for encoding if you feel like arbitrarily limiting yourself to software encoding

 

[potzocalli]

The issue is really what high end means. If you mean the absolute best then I am definitely not there. If it means top % then I might just barely scratch the line hehe.

When does high end stop. If I have an i7 its high end or only 4th gen i7s count as high end? When a lot of fellows with celeron and AMD A4 laptops look at a good i3 or i5 or AMD A10 laptop (even without an SSD) they think your PC is great. If those guys game in their laptops (and beleive me I have seen them game DOTA and even Mechwarrior Online in them) and you let them use an i3 or A6 with a medium end video card they think they are in gaming heaven. Let them use your i5 or Phenom system with an SSD and a high end videocard and they will beleive your system is the best in the world.

And don't just argue back, send the $$$$. I want my i7 system and if I have some money left I'll take the family out for lunch and even let them know its thanks to you .

 

[potzocalli]

2is, the real issue is......do high end users use AMD instead of Intel.

In my case the answer is yes. It does not require majority of users or preference or price or performace or perfomance ratio.

Money's not tight, never said that. I just said that the money I saved could be put to better use.

Hehe you guys are making this Friday worthwhile. I was having a boring day at the office but reigniting the old AMD vs. Intel quarrel never fails.

Just to clear it up my current laptop is an i7 4800MQ, very nice, fast and I love it. Chose it and bought it myselfbefore anyone says otherwise. It probably runs circles around my home gaming system because the laptop has an 8GB GeForce 8800M but have never used it for gaming ....yet . I prefer to game in a nice big monitor and other cool gadgets.

 

[B-Riz]

Plenty of people who can buy an i7 without their families starving, and if money is that tight in your household, you shouldn't be spending any of it on steam games. This thread isn't about value as much as you AMD fans would like to make it about value. And even then, thanks to B-Riz we have that AT link showing how an inexpensive i3 is still outperforming an FX8 more often that not and does so while sipping power. So if you really want to push the value argument for AMD, you still lose. Then when?

The high end arugment doesn't work
The value argument doesn't work

You're left with the value with major stipulations argument, which looks something like this.

AMD FX8 is a better value for WinRAR

or

AND FX8 is a better value for encoding if you feel like arbitrarily limiting yourself to software encoding

While the i3 wins on paper, I would never buy the i3 over the FX8, not with a Micro Center an hour away.

I dropped the link to showcase how we all fixate on absolutes, the obsession with the i3 being "better" is strange.

Better because it is Intel?

The i3 is good for light duty office work, I hate using an i3 / dual core system; i5 or better, and the FX8 is AMD's long in the tooth i5 competitor.

Win 7 and up is vastly better to use on a true 4+ core system. HT is just a marketing bullet point anymore.

All this talk of changing spending to buy a "high end" setup is laughable. When you have kids, a family, a whole life outside of these forums, the signature becomes less and less important, especially with age.

10 years ago I cared a lot more about having an awesome computer; now I just want to use what I have for as long as possible, and avoid techno-lust (this is hard, lol).

 

[frozentundra123456]

Microcenter prices are not really relevant to general purchasers. In addition, the Microcenter deals on i3 are very poor compared to their deals on higher end intel and AMD cpus. In the normal market, FX8xxx and an i3 are pretty much the same price.

And my viewpoint is just the opposite. I would consider it a toss up for the i3 and FX8xxx for gaming, with the i3 having the edge in older games and very competitive in current games, while the FX *might* pull ahead in future more threaded games under DX12.

But for the normal user, who just does mainly social apps, browsing, even office work, I would never pick an FX8xxx over an i3. It uses more power, and is much slower in lightly or even moderately threaded workloads, which is what nearly all the casual user does.

Edit: not to mention with the FX, you have to either use awful motherboard graphics or add a discrete gpu.