It's a sad day for AMD when...

[ultimatebob]

Tom's Hardware Guide recommends Intel's $130 Core i3 processor over AMD's top offerings:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html

I know that the Bulldozer chips aren't exactly screamers at gaming, but doesn't this seem just a bit harsh?

 

[Magic Carpet]

Biased. Period.

 

[anikhtos]

Tom's Hardware Guide recommends Intel's $130 Core i3 processor over AMD's top offerings:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html

I know that the Bulldozer chips aren't exactly screamers at gaming, but doesn't this seem just a bit harsh?

well it was going to happen sooner or later
when amd in every generation looses ground isntead of winning or at least remain at the same diferense
then it was a matter of time when intel was goign to push amd out from the lower segment

trully the only good recomendation for amd cpus are well threaded programs but since games struggle to see 4 cores that leaves so few to look for that

if only amd could do a die shrink to phennom and add 2 more cores
then it will make a true 8 core cpu with better ipc than buldozer

 

[philipma1957]

One of the problems I find with bang for buck reviews is what do I use for the buck.

well he is basing this on bang per the buck he uses 109.99 as the price for an amd fx 4100.

Now if he used the 99.99 dollar price with a mobo at micro center. it would be on top of the list based on bang per buck. if he used the 139.99 fx 6100 with free mobo at micro center that would be second on the list.

I do agree that at the standard prices of 109.99 for a fx 4100 cpu alone vs an intel i3 the intel is better. but My second build is using an amd fx 4100 with a passive sapphire hd 6670 for silent htpc. It is a good htpc. It cost a lot less then the intel that I built.

if you want a low cost microAtx the fx4100 deal at micro center has a lot of value.

 

[bononos]

Tom's Hardware Guide recommends Intel's $130 Core i3 processor over AMD's top offerings:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html

I know that the Bulldozer chips aren't exactly screamers at gaming, but doesn't this seem just a bit harsh?

No, the i3 is better/cheaper at gaming at msrp/newegg prices. Check out AT benches for the i3 vs the 8150 in gaming benchmarks.

 

[AtenRa]

No, the i3 is better/cheaper at gaming at msrp/newegg prices. Check out AT benches for the i3 vs the 8150 in gaming benchmarks.

Are you sure ?? check the link in my sig bellow

 

[Maximilian]

Tom's Hardware Guide recommends Intel's $130 Core i3 processor over AMD's top offerings:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html

I know that the Bulldozer chips aren't exactly screamers at gaming, but doesn't this seem just a bit harsh?

Tis... they dont have much choice though with bulldozer being fail for games and thuban out of production the i3 is all that's left for budget gamers.

 

[Yuriman]

Are you sure ?? check the link in my sig bellow

Without a top-end video card the speed difference is negligible because the processor isn't the bottleneck in most cases. One would be perfectly content with the FX.

However, the i3 really is a faster chip if you're comparing stock to stock, even if it isn't what's holding you back.

 

[AtenRa]

Tis... they dont have much choice though with bulldozer being fail for games and thuban out of production the i3 is all that's left for budget gamers.

I bet an FX4100 OCed at 4.2GHz with an HD7950 will be faster than your Core i7 2600 paired with HD5850 in the majority of today's DX-11 games

But yes, FX is a fail for gaming

 

[Maximilian]

I bet an FX4100 OCed at 4.2GHz with an HD7950 will be faster than your Core i7 2600 paired with HD5850 in the majority of today's DX-11 games

But yes, FX is a fail for gaming

Ye true lol.

 

[Magic Carpet]

Doubling L1$ should make AMD more competitive this fall. Watch out for comeback

 

[guskline]

The chart is a gaming cpu hierarchy chart. The tests don't lie. I have loved my AMD rigs for a long time but my best gamers are SandyBridge 2500ks. As Sgt. Joe Friday on Dragnet would say ... "just the facts maam, just the facts".

Hopefully, the AMD PileDriver engineers are addressing this.

 

[guskline]

I bet an FX4100 OCed at 4.2GHz with an HD7950 will be faster than your Core i7 2600 paired with HD5850 in the majority of today's DX-11 games

But yes, FX is a fail for gaming

Pair a HD7950 with an AMD 8150FX and with an Intel I7 2600k ( heck even a 2500k) and let the best CPU win.

 

[bononos]

Are you sure ?? check the link in my sig bellow

There's also an article at THW about benching games on the i3 and 4100:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-4100-core-i3-2100-gaming-benchmark,3136.html

Your review used an overclocked 4100@4.08Ghz

 

[nyker96]

I think if you only game, i3 is better but if you do some video encoding, threaded app then x4s x6s will do better. also i3s are not OCable, so for overclockers that's another advantage for team AMD.

this is all for sub 200 though, anything above 200, K-series are the champ, no contest.

 

[eternalone]

Forget the i3 even the Pentium G630 pwns all of AMD's line up. The G630 beat the FX-4100, -6100, and -8120 at stock clocks. Im running on a Pentium G850 that Pwns my old phenom X4. Those sandy bridge cores are sweet. At this point no reason to even buy AMD even at the lowest end. The only way I would by an AMD set up would be like what Micro center is doing with the 4100 and that is $99 dollars and a free 970 motherboard now that would be the only situation where it would be worth it.

 

[exar333]

Biased. Period.

No. TH was recommending GAMING CPUs. AMD is completely out of the game for gaming right now. Not unplayable (for sure) but when a low-power dual from Intel beats every dual, tri, quad, and hexa AMD has, its a no-brainer.

 

[pelov]

Doubling L1$ should make AMD more competitive this fall. Watch out for comeback

I'm not that hopeful. The small L1$ was only one problem because it meant relying on a very slow L2, which is the bigger problem. I'm not that hopeful after seeing these numbers. Yes, it's SuperPi and x87 but it also shows no improvement from FX4100 at roughly the same clocks :/ IPC has apparently taken a back seat and it's going to be Netburst or bust.

 

[Magic Carpet]

No. TH was recommending GAMING CPUs. AMD is completely out of the game for gaming right now. Not unplayable (for sure) but when a low-power dual from Intel beats every dual, tri, quad, and hexa AMD has, its a no-brainer.

In highly threaded games... several AMD offerings should do a hell better than Intel's i3.

 

[LoneNinja]

No. TH was recommending GAMING CPUs. AMD is completely out of the game for gaming right now. Not unplayable (for sure) but when a low-power dual from Intel beats every dual, tri, quad, and hexa AMD has, its a no-brainer.

If anyone here follows the best gaming CPU for the money articles TH puts out monthly, they would know that AMD use to have almost all the recommendations before the dual core Sandy Bridge was released.

Now almost everything AMD has will loose to a stock Pentium Dual core in the majority of todays games, it's rather sad to see the lack of multithreading in games and how weak AMDs individual cores are.

 

[Leyawiin]

The i3 2XXX processors need to be moved down a notch

 

[intangir]

Doubling L1$ should make AMD more competitive this fall. Watch out for comeback

Ha. Somehow I don't think that'll fix all of Bulldozer's problems. Generally, the main problem with Bulldozer is that it's produced by the resources available to AMD.

Anyway, just posting to say that it's the L1 data TLB that's being doubled in Piledriver, not the data cache. The Translate Lookaside Buffer is the cache of virtual to physical memory address mappings.

 

[nanaki333]

well if the rumors are true, and AMD secured the spot for the PS4 CPU/GPU... they've got guaranteed income.

at least the AMD A series APUs still have relevance. i just built an HTPC and a SFF PC for some friends with the A6 3 core and they love them. the one even plays l4d2 with pretty high detail on his TV.

the problem with the bulldozer CPUs is they're not true quad, 6, 8, etc chips. they preform more like a hyperthreaded intel CPU. AMD always said 2 APU per actual core, but they shot themselves in the foot by advertising it as a true 8 core. now it makes them look worthless compared to any intel quad core, and in some cases, dual core offerings.

 

[grimpr]

well if the rumors are true, and AMD secured the spot for the PS4 CPU/GPU... they've got guaranteed income.

at least the AMD A series APUs still have relevance. i just built an HTPC and a SFF PC for some friends with the A6 3 core and they love them. the one even plays l4d2 with pretty high detail on his TV.

the problem with the bulldozer CPUs is they're not true quad, 6, 8, etc chips. they preform more like a hyperthreaded intel CPU. AMD always said 2 APU per actual core, but they shot themselves in the foot by advertising it as a true 8 core. now it makes them look worthless compared to any intel quad core, and in some cases, dual core offerings.

And not only that, most importantly they broadened and secured their Fusion APU software ecosystem, more developers, more software, increased installed base etc.

 

[Remobz]

I remember back in the days I was a HUGE AMD fanboy.

Not anymore