View Single Post
  #7  
Old 12-29-2012, 08:10 PM
TonyD TonyD is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Jozi, SA
Posts: 263
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kendo65 View Post
OK, deep breath...

First up, I don't want this to degenerate into an Intel V AMD dust-up, but ...
Neither do I, and that wasn’t the OP’s question. My recommendations are based on his enquiry; suggesting that he would require a processor that costs 2 to 3 times the price of his choice to achieve acceptable gaming performance is not true. Processors are generally not that important when it comes to gaming, as long as it’s fast enough performance will be gpu-bound.

If you have another look at the gaming benchmarks in the links I provided, you’ll see an almost imperceptible difference in frame rates between all cpu’s, to the naked eye anyway. Some site’s methodology for testing a cpu’s game performance is fine in theory, but nobody actually plays games at 800 x 600 (or whatever). And so what if cpu A can run a game at 135fps and cpu B can only manage 95 when the average monitor can only display at 60Hz? All my games run in high detail at 1080p limited to 60fps using VSYNC.

I don’t want to get into debating benchmarking procedures since many sites (and people) have their own opinions, my reference is purely to gaming. I have the advantage of having 4 pc’s in my house, 2 Intel and 2 AMD, and can therefore run any comparative tests I like. With my current settings my FX machine is a little quicker than my son’s Core i5 2500k at default – BD needs a 400 to 500MHz clock advantage to do this. A mate has a 2600k with the same graphics card as me, and while benchmark scores are higher on his, game benchmarks and actual game performance are almost identical. A bit of reading on overclockers.com will reveal that the two architectures perform very closely at around 4.50GHz – BD needs higher-than-standard clocks to properly utilise the architecture, Intel’s SB and IB don’t.

I am AMD biased, same as I prefer Audi to BMW cars, or my BMW motorcycle to riceys, but that’s personal preference. If you search some of my posts here you’ll find that I try not to be biased when offering this sort of advice – I have recommended Intel systems to a number of people based on their preferences. The advice offered was based on the OP’s specification, and I didn’t think suggesting that he change to Intel to achieve what he wanted was correct. You would (generally) always achieve higher performance by spending more money, whether it would be noticeable or worth it is up to the purchaser.

And instead of relying on second-hand info found on the always-right internet, how about acquiring one yourself and finding out first-hand – you may be surprised
__________________
I'd rather be flying ...

Gigabyte 990FXA-UD5 | AMD FX-8350 | MSI HD7970 TFOC-BE | 8GB Corsair DDR-III 1866 | Win8.1 Pro 64-bit
Reply With Quote