AMD or Intel?

[Codex]

Most games are gpu depended, with lower resolutions (see below) you see big differences though. (flight)sims are really happy with a fast cpu, but you almost dont see reviews on that. So you would probaly see bigger differences with flight sims then for the examples below.

Bingo ... a good test is to run a DCG campaign with the object density set to Heavy, then you'll see why a powerful CPU is better.

[WTE_Galway]

Assuming you decide INTEL the other issue to be considered is whether you want to invest money in a deprecated/outdated chipset.

The current Sandy Bridge 1155 chipsets replace the older 1156 i3/i5/i7 motherboard. It comes in two breeds:

a) The Sandy bridge P67 which allows overclocking of K series processors but needs a separate graphics card.
b) The Sandy Bridge H67 which does not overclock (even with a K) but enables on-board built in Intel graphics.

These two chipsets supersede the 1156 chipsets currently used by CPU's like the i5-750. The 1156 chipset will start to disappear.

Note that both the new Sandy Bridge 1155 chipset and the older 1156 chipsets used dual channel ram (not triple) and have a limited number of PCIe lanes - meaning that three or more graphic cards in SLI at once may bottleneck. ( Note most review sites are saying triple channel ram does not give a noticeable performance improvement in real life and the 1155/1156 chipsets appear fine with single or dual graphic cards. )




What does this mean ?

a) The 1156 is superseded and should only be a consideration if you can get a bargain basement price.

b) The 1366 chipset will also eventually be superseded with a Sandy Bridge version - but not till much later this year later this year. If you currently want triple channel ram, or three or more graphics cards, then you are stuck with the older 1366 chipset for a while longer.

[Oldschool61]

As I said
ALL these cpu's have similar gaming performance;
Phenom X6 series cost $180-240
i5 750 $280
i5 2500S $230
i5 2400S $200
i7 875,870,860 $290
phenom II X4 955 $140
phenom II X4 965 $160

Why would you want to spend $100 more for a cpu when you gain nothing??
You could almost build a whole system around an phenom II X4 955 for just the price of an i7 875!! AND have almost identical gaming performance.

Whats the refresh rate on your monitor 60hz?? Then you cant display over 60 fps anyway. Playable frame rates are anything over 30. Do you need 200 fps or can you live with 60 (which is all you'll get with normal monitor).

[WTE_Galway]

Originally Posted by Oldschool61

As I said
ALL these cpu's have similar gaming performance;
Phenom X6 series cost $180-240
i5 750 $280
i5 2500S $230
i5 2400S $200
i7 875,870,860 $290
phenom II X4 955 $140
phenom II X4 965 $160

Why would you want to spend $100 more for a cpu when you gain nothing??
You could almost build a whole system around an phenom II X4 955 for just the price of an i7 875!! AND have almost identical gaming performance.

Whats the refresh rate on your monitor 60hz?? Then you cant display over 60 fps anyway. Playable frame rates are anything over 30. Do you need 200 fps or can you live with 60 (which is all you'll get with normal monitor).

1) I deliberately avoided the AMD versus Intel debate in the last post but if you MUST bring it up the Phenom X6 is based on a soon to be superseded chipset/socket and CPU with limited future upgrade possibilities. If you must do AMD then wait for Bulldozer which is due out shortly.

2) Most readers on this forum are thinking in terms of flight sims where the variation between processors is much greater than other games (which are generally GPU locked so processor makes minimal difference). Game review sites tend to mainly use first person shooter games for testing and in those games CPU does not matter. Even when they do test flightsims they rarely do the CPU intensive stuff like massed bombers that the typical simmer will regularly do.

3) Most people looking at SB processors are thinking of the K series which will overclock up around 5.0 Ghz with air cooling and way past that (6.0 Ghz and more) with a water block. Even running NO2 you would be pushing to overclock a current AMD to match SB 2500k/2600K overclocked performance.

4) Whilst wasting money is silly --- a difference of $100 is minimal compared to the cost of most other hobbies. In reality $100 buys me less than an hour of real time flying, a small fraction of the annual cost of owning a motorcycle and a similar small fraction of the coast of joining the local golf club.

[Codex]

Originally Posted by Oldschool61

As I said
ALL these cpu's have similar gaming performance;
Phenom X6 series cost $180-240
i5 750 $280
i5 2500S $230
i5 2400S $200
i7 875,870,860 $290
phenom II X4 955 $140
phenom II X4 965 $160

Why would you want to spend $100 more for a cpu when you gain nothing??
You could almost build a whole system around an phenom II X4 955 for just the price of an i7 875!! AND have almost identical gaming performance.

Whats the refresh rate on your monitor 60hz?? Then you cant display over 60 fps anyway. Playable frame rates are anything over 30. Do you need 200 fps or can you live with 60 (which is all you'll get with normal monitor).

I can see your point on gaming on 60fps, but if you do other things such as 3D work, Video editing or even programming / data base operations, Intel still has the upper hand $ for $. Comparing the AMD X6 1100T with i7 2600 (locked), they're roughly the same price ($AUS $295 and $319), the Intel is way ahead in all benchmarks and better at power consumption.

Having said that, I'm really hoping AMD will give Intel a run for their money with Bulldozer.

[Oldschool61]

Originally Posted by WTE_Galway

1) I deliberately avoided the AMD versus Intel debate in the last post but if you MUST bring it up the Phenom X6 is based on a soon to be superseded chipset/socket and CPU with limited future upgrade possibilities. If you must do AMD then wait for Bulldozer which is due out shortly.

2) Most readers on this forum are thinking in terms of flight sims where the variation between processors is much greater than other games (which are generally GPU locked so processor makes minimal difference). Game review sites tend to mainly use first person shooter games for testing and in those games CPU does not matter. Even when they do test flightsims they rarely do the CPU intensive stuff like massed bombers that the typical simmer will regularly do.

3) Most people looking at SB processors are thinking of the K series which will overclock up around 5.0 Ghz with air cooling and way past that (6.0 Ghz and more) with a water block. Even running NO2 you would be pushing to overclock a current AMD to match SB 2500k/2600K overclocked performance.

4) Whilst wasting money is silly --- a difference of $100 is minimal compared to the cost of most other hobbies. In reality $100 buys me less than an hour of real time flying, a small fraction of the annual cost of owning a motorcycle and a similar small fraction of the coast of joining the local golf club.

Your only partially correct. These cpu comparisons are based on average all around scores on multiple games and cpu intensive benchmarks so your claim of intel being so superior arent valid in this instance.

What is your monitior refresh rate?? 60hz?? Your max fps is never going to realistically break 60 fps so saying you need a cpu to get you 200fps over 150 fps is kind of pointless.

It's all about the minimum fps. With a better pc the minimum fps are better.

[Oldschool61]

Originally Posted by Codex

I can see your point on gaming on 60fps, but if you do other things such as 3D work, Video editing or even programming / data base operations, Intel still has the upper hand $ for $. Comparing the AMD X6 1100T with i7 2600 (locked), they're roughly the same price ($AUS $295 and $319), the Intel is way ahead in all benchmarks and better at power consumption.

Having said that, I'm really hoping AMD will give Intel a run for their money with Bulldozer.

I dont know were your getting your cpu's but the amd 1100T is only 240 on newegg while the i7 2600K is 330. For that much difference I can get a mobo, 100T and ram for the price of the i7. And it would play CoD just fine. And I save $100

[F19_lacrits]

Originally Posted by Oldschool61

.. And it would play CoD just fine.

That say absolutely nothing how it will perform in IL2:CLoDO.. You are just guessing like the rest of us which CPU will be best.

[Oldschool61]

Originally Posted by F19_lacrits

That say absolutely nothing how it will perform in IL2:CLoDO.. You are just guessing like the rest of us which CPU will be best.

im not saying what is best im saying what will work. Once you get your minimum fps above 30-40 fps everything else is wasted in a sence. I know there are intel cpus better but they are totally unneccesary. These cpus will almost certainly give more then adequate gameplay for a fraction of the price.