Eventually? Perhaps. Soon enough to affect my decision to not buy a Kaveri? Nah. By the time that software is ready, Kaveri will be obsolete.
Yes HSA needs more time but with so many big companies on the wagon it will liftoff eventually, they all are waiting final hardware and software specs.
I dont even want to ask you to post a picture with that setup in BF4 MP.
Also, i have both Intel and AMD CPUs and with the same GPU latest games are very close to even feel the difference. There are older games that Intel is faster but both AMD and Intel CPUs produce more than enough Frames that actually it doesnt matter if one is faster than the other.
Of course there are Games like Skyrim, Starcraft and some MMOs that Intel is simple the better choice, but generalizing that AMD CPUs are not for gaming is simple BS.
Like those Dual Core Celerons/Pentiums, with certain GPUs and older games are doing just fine, but modern games need at least 4 Threads or more this days and thats going to continue because all major Game Engines support more than 4 Threads.
Eventually? Perhaps. Soon enough to affect my decision to not buy a Kaveri? Nah. By the time that software is ready, Kaveri will be obsolete.
One thing remains constant about threads like this.
OP asks the question, then NEVER responds to the thread ever again....
Errm, I think you have that rather backwards... one of the main advantages of Mantle/DirectX 12 is that it improves scaling over multiple threads, and reduces the "driver thread" single core overhead.
The problem is that Kaveri is too big to support those kind of low prices. It was originally planned to support GDDR5M, which is why it has so many GPU cores- but when Elpida went bankrupt that plan fell through. That's why it has so many GPU cores that it can't feed. A smaller die designed around A8-7600 level performance would perhaps have been a better product.
Of course there are Games like Skyrim, Starcraft and some MMOs that Intel is simple the better choice, but generalizing that AMD CPUs are not for gaming is simple BS.
Skyrim and Starcraft are running ancient x87 instead of 'modern' SSE if memory serves me right. I think (could be wrong) AMD removed x87 on hardware. Hopefully, future games won't rely on engines that were designed for last century.
Correct about the AMD x87 support but no matter what, those games run faster with Intel.
I have had my AMD Quad Core processor since 2006 and have run my computer every day doing various tasks for large amounts of time without any problems. Intel is higher quality, but much more expensive.
I prefer AMD because of the cost and the fact it is nice, I have played various games with it perfectly fine and at high speeds.
Intel can handle more though so if you like premium performance just stick with that.
Skyrim and Starcraft are running ancient x87 instead of 'modern' SSE if memory serves me right. I think (could be wrong) AMD removed x87 on hardware. Hopefully, future games won't rely on engines that were designed for last century.
Skyrim got updated to use through SSE2 (or 3?) I think, and there is a mod for up to SSE4. Immense speed up. It came out around the same time as the Bethesda official high res texture packs. I remember I upgraded a Phenom II 940 to a 2500k just for Skyrim, then the patch made it so they would have been equivalent on my GPU at the time. Oh well, 2500k was a great purchase anyways.
And don't pay attention to the exaggerated benchmarks. For example, office productivity is twice as fast! We went from processing a document in .6 second to .3 seconds! $200 well spent!
Benchmark bias. You only buy Intel if you have a specific need (hackintosh, quicksync), or you have too much money. The average consumer wouldn't notice the difference between the 2 in everyday use. Because AMD is significantly cheaper than Intel, you can use the extra money towards something useful, such as an SSD. This actually makes a night & day difference.
A previous gen i5 and motherboard is about $400. Current gen is about $500. A current gen quad core APU and motherboard is <$200.
And don't pay attention to the exaggerated benchmarks. For example, office productivity is twice as fast! We went from processing a document in .6 second to .3 seconds! $200 well spent!