dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
3697
share rss forum feed


McBrain
BRB Face Melting

join:2010-05-06
Kalimdor
kudos:2
reply to Krisnatharok

Re: AMD vs I-core

Sorry for putting out bad gouge.

I was speaking based on my experience, and I'm 100% convinced that the $200 I spent on those two parts went a hell of a long way. Granted, I bought a Phenom II BE and not a Bulldozer chip, and I knew from the word go that I was sacrificing performance for price. I feel like the $90 I spent on my cpu definitely wasn't a bad decision and I still feel like I came out on top in the price/performance ratio...Granted, I'm more than likely wrong, and surely I'll have a change of heart when I buy my first Intel chip. But I'm new to this whole community, and you've gotta learn somehow...right?
--
McBrain#1430

Name's Ash...Housewares.


Krisnatharok
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit
kudos:12
Talking about Phenom II and Bulldozer/Piledriver architecture is an apples and oranges comparison when looking at the relative value vs. Intel.


Krisnatharok
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit
kudos:12
reply to Ignorant
said by Ignorant :

Actually, I didn't buy components, I bought a system through cyberpower pc. The 8 core AMD FX-8120 system and the 4 core i5-3570k system, with all other components being the same were ~$750 and ~$850 respectively. I was trying to keep the price under ~$800 (and would have preferred $700), and the AMD 8 core was offered as a free upgrade over the AMD FX-6100 6 core, which was only $30 more than the AMD FX-4100 4 core.

I tend to have a lot of programs open when playing WoW - usually at least mumble, a web browser, email application, sometimes other stuff as well. Playing on my current off-the-shelf laptop, I'm often in mid single digit framerates. I'm hoping do all this, plus FRAPS and have improved framerates. My assumption was that it would assign a core to each app. Was this incorrect?

Thanks for info.

I would return/cancel it and get the 3570K system instead--much better value for only $100 more. If you absolutely cannot afford the extra $100, get an i3 system instead, it will still be faster than the "8 core" FX-8120 system. I put "8 core" in quotes because the AMDs are not true octo-core chips--it is really four cores further subdivided and slightly built up, but the two sub-cores in each module share resources.

You can read here on Bulldozer: Analyzing Bulldozer: Why AMDs chip is so disappointing.
--
If we lose this freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment, those who had the most to lose, did the least to prevent its happening.


Dissembled

join:2008-01-23
Indianapolis, IN
reply to tuladrin
Kris, dude, come on. The guy is playing WoW and said he wanted to keep it under $800.


Krisnatharok
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit
kudos:12
Edit: Found WoW benchmarks. Keep in mind this is with a GTX 680 2GB video card, so whatever he got for $700 will be drastically lower.

The FX-8150 performs worse on normal settings (77 FPS) than the i5-2550K (that's one generation old for Intel, mind you) does under AA (88.5 FPS).

But he's not getting an 8150, he's getting an 8120, which will be even slower. Tom's Hardware test system was using a GTX 680 2GB, and I guarantee you he got nothing close to that for $750, so he will probably be dipping under 60 FPS.

In raid settings, he might be going under 30 FPS.

This is why the current AMD CPUs are horrible for gaming.
--
If we lose this freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment, those who had the most to lose, did the least to prevent its happening.

JoelC707
Premium
join:2002-07-09
Lanett, AL
kudos:5
While I agree with everything you're saying (hell, I even said basically the same thing back on page 1), he mentions he gets single digit FPS now. If he can bump that up to 30+ then I'd call that a decent increase. Can he get better for the money? Without a doubt but that's still going to be a very good increase over his current system, especially if he is set on keeping an AMD system.


Krisnatharok
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit
kudos:12
I find it hard to justify throwing $700 away on a new rig to be disappointed with similar FPS, when only a little bit more money (or different components) could be exactly what he needs.

Remember the Tom's benchmarks are inflated by two things--the faster CPU (they tested an 8150 and he's getting an 8120) and their ungodly fast GTX 680 2GB.

OP hasn't told us what graphics card he is getting.
--
If we lose this freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment, those who had the most to lose, did the least to prevent its happening.

JoelC707
Premium
join:2002-07-09
Lanett, AL
kudos:5
reply to Ignorant
said by Ignorant :

(snip)My assumption was that it would assign a core to each app. Was this incorrect?

Yes and no. You can usually set the affinity of each process to a specific core but there is no need to do this under most circumstances. Setting the affinity means you can tell it you want this process to only execute on core #3 for example. You are also free to set it to core #1 and #2 if you wanted it to have more than one core.

Windows includes a built in scheduler that basically intelligently (or in some cases, not so intelligently) shuffles processes around to each core. If you have an app that is single threaded (meaning it can only execute on one core), and it uses up "100%" of it's CPU, you won't usually see one core at 100% and the others at zero (unless you've told it to do that). In a dual core setup, you would see ~50% load on each core (~25% for a quad core and so on). That's the task scheduler shuffling that process between cores.

In all honesty, this isn't something you will ever really need to know about or worry about.

JoelC707
Premium
join:2002-07-09
Lanett, AL
kudos:5
reply to Krisnatharok
For sure, and you're right the GPU choice (if any) will play a big role in what FPS he will ultimately see. FWIW, if he is capable of building his own, he could likely get an i5 system with a midrange GPU for the same possibly less. I say this assuming the $100 price increase for the i5 system he compared to didn't have a GPU change (or even have an add-in GPU at all).


Krisnatharok
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit
kudos:12
reply to JoelC707
I think he was under the assumption that 8 cores = 200% the power of 4 cores.

You're right, there are so many unknowns here, but we did try to steer him in the right direction.
--
If we lose this freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment, those who had the most to lose, did the least to prevent its happening.


Ignorant

@comcastbusiness.net
Sorry, my replies get delayed b/c I'm anon. I'm not so ignorant to think 8 cores is necessarily twice as good a 4 cores, but I'm ignorant enough to think that each AMD core is at least half as good as one intel core of the comparable level.

FWIW, Cyberpower says that the AMD FX-4100 with all the other components I picked would get 82 FPS on MS2 (high). I assumed that the framerates would be similar on WoW, and that the 8 core AMD would outperform the 4 core AMD.


Ignorant

@comcastbusiness.net
reply to Krisnatharok
To get down to the same price point, I would need to go i3-3220 on a Gigabyte GA-B75M-D3H board. The video card is Radeon 7770 1G. I beefed up the power supply to 700W and also have a low end sound card. What say you?

Thanks.


Krisnatharok
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit
kudos:12
reply to Ignorant
said by Ignorant :

FWIW, Cyberpower says that the AMD FX-4100 with all the other components I picked would get 82 FPS on MS2 (high). I assumed that the framerates would be similar on WoW, and that the 8 core AMD would outperform the 4 core AMD.

I think you mean MW2, and not MS2. MW2 is a joke in terms of demanding hardware--it runs on a six-year-old Xbox 360. WoW, on the other hand, can be a ball-crusher (as shown in the above benchmarks).

Don't trust the benchmarks the seller is putting out there. They exist to sell PCs. Turn to a place like Tom's Hardware, Anandtech, Benchmark Reviews, or Hardware Compare to learn how your chosen components will perform.
--
If we lose this freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment, those who had the most to lose, did the least to prevent its happening.


Krisnatharok
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit
kudos:12
reply to Ignorant
said by Ignorant :

To get down to the same price point, I would need to go i3-3220 on a Gigabyte GA-B75M-D3H board. The video card is Radeon 7770 1G. I beefed up the power supply to 700W and also have a low end sound card. What say you?

Thanks.

Your build would survive just fine on a 450w power supply--the 700w is wasted space and will perform inefficiently since your average load will probably be sitting at 80w.

You should not need a sound card with any motherboard from the past 4 years. Unless you are using a high-quality 5.1 surround speaker system (and subsequent high-quality sound card), there will be no audible difference.

The i3-3220 will perform better in games than the FX-8120.

Again, these are questions you should have asked first before ordering. Live and learn--you can certainly improve this build by adding a second 7770 (for about $100) and overclocking the CPU (assuming it comes with adequate cooling--if not, the Hyper 212+ cooler is $15).
--
If we lose this freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment, those who had the most to lose, did the least to prevent its happening.

JoelC707
Premium
join:2002-07-09
Lanett, AL
kudos:5
reply to Ignorant
said by Ignorant :

(snip)and that the 8 core AMD would outperform the 4 core AMD.

Not always. Depends on the workload honestly. If something can only take advantage of 4 cores then an 8 core CPU only gains you headroom to be able to do something else while that 4-core app is running. Further, if you have to step back to a slower CPU to get those 8 cores over a 4 core, you could actually hurt performance of the app. If the app can use more than 4 cores, then a slower 8 core CPU may outperform the same app on a 4 core CPU (faster or not) but it's one of those things that squarely falls in the "it depends" category.

This also doesn't take into account the difference in the AMD 8 core CPU and a true 8 core CPU. An AMD 8 core CPU is more like a quad core with hyperthreading. I haven't read all the details on it but it's more than just a quad core that appears as 8 cores, but it's also not a true 8 core CPU either. All I said in the previous paragraph largely depends on actual CPU cores. In some specific cases, a fake core or hyperthreading core can help improve performance or it can hinder it. Another one of those "it depends" things.

As for the i3 system you mention, does the AMD system have the same 7770 GPU in it? If so, I'd say it is a better deal but could be a wash. If absolutely nothing else, the motherboard on the i3 setup would let you at a later date upgrade to an i5 or possibly better CPU if you feel you need it and THAT you would notice.


McBrain
BRB Face Melting

join:2010-05-06
Kalimdor
kudos:2
reply to Krisnatharok
Let's see, I've already got the following parts (some are on the list), so I'll more than likely be salvaging them. (or at least replace them later on):

Coolermaster Hyper 212
Rosewill Thor Black Edition case
MSI R7870 HAWK GHz Edition video card
Samsung 830 series 128GB SATA III SSD
2x4GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600
Samsung DVD-RW
OCZ ModXStream 700W modular 80 plus certified PSU
Windows 7 64 Bit Home Edition

I will more than likely buying 2 more 4GB sticks of the same ram and potentially a more powerful PSU if it is needed(80 plus gold isn't a requirement since I'll be in the barracks for the next 2 years and the gov't's dime will be paying the power bill...if I get hot from the excess heat I can take off my pants )

From the list I would need:

i5-3570k - ~$200
ASUS Sabertooth Mobo - $225
New HDDs - $300
Blu-Ray Drive - $60
Monitor - $400
RAM/PSU - $40-$200

So, we're looking at $1000-$1400 assuming I buy the quality parts you've got listed and salvage what I can from my current rig that'll be roughly 8-10 months old.

I'm not sure what my budget is right now (I'm looking at a late spring time-frame for this upgrade), but I'm going to estimate that it'll be somewhere in the $1000 range.

If I cut out the new PSU, Blu-Ray Drive, and 1 HDD I'll be right at a grand.

I've got a few months yet to figure it out. Surely some of these things will drop in price a bit between now and then.

It is encouraging that I've got a few of the quality parts you listed.
--
McBrain#1430

Name's Ash...Housewares.


Ignorant

@ultzindustries.com
reply to Krisnatharok
I was shooting for an affordable system that meets at least the "recommended" system for Pandaria. I didn't think about asking on here until I saw the thread (unfortunately, after I ordered) while coming on to haunt the WoW forum.

Here's what I ordered:

MZXT Tempest 210 mid tower case (least expensive choice)
AMD FX-8210 3.1G AM3+ processor
Gigabyte GA-970A-D3 AMD 970 Chipset motherboard
Astek 510 LC 120 MM radiator & fan
8G (4GBx2) DDR3/1866Mhz dual channel memory
AMD Radeon 7770 1GB video card
700W power supply (2nd least expensive choice - default was 350 W, which the site warned as being low)
1TB SATA-III hard drive
LG 12x Bluray Drive & DVDRW (upgraded so I can play Bluray disks)

You're saying I should switch to the i3 system at about the same price point if I can, and I don't need the sound card unless I'm going surround sound (I'm not - headset). Any other suggestions?


Krisnatharok
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit
kudos:12
reply to McBrain
Your current PSU is more than adequate to power your new rig, so I would hold onto it. You could get away with cheaper ram if you don't want it OC'd (the max non-OC freq for ram is 1600). With XMP, there's no reason not to OC the ram.

I like how you have many of the parts I'd pick myself. Great minds and all that.
--
If we lose this freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment, those who had the most to lose, did the least to prevent its happening.


Ignorant

@ultzindustries.com
reply to Krisnatharok
said by Krisnatharok:

I think you mean MW2, and not MS2. MW2 is a joke in terms of demanding hardware--it runs on a six-year-old Xbox 360. WoW, on the other hand, can be a ball-crusher (as shown in the above benchmarks).

Don't trust the benchmarks the seller is putting out there. They exist to sell PCs. Turn to a place like Tom's Hardware, Anandtech, Benchmark Reviews, or Hardware Compare to learn how your chosen components will perform.

I did mean MW2 (S was a typo), and I assumed similar framerates for WoW (never played MW); but that said, I also was taking it with a grain of salt, and relying on it more for relative comparison than for actual performance. I also assumed that the vid card would be more important than the CPU for gameplay and framerates.

Truth be told, I'd be ecstatic if I can get 30fps in a 25 man raid. As things stand, I'm often playing blind at 3fps or worse in 25s. I a deadman on the wind boss because the framerates are too slow for me to dodge the tornados.


Ignorant

@ultzindustries.com
reply to JoelC707
said by JoelC707:

Not always. Depends on the workload honestly. If something can only take advantage of 4 cores then an 8 core CPU only gains you headroom to be able to do something else while that 4-core app is running. Further, if you have to step back to a slower CPU to get those 8 cores over a 4 core, you could actually hurt performance of the app. If the app can use more than 4 cores, then a slower 8 core CPU may outperform the same app on a 4 core CPU (faster or not) but it's one of those things that squarely falls in the "it depends" category.

This also doesn't take into account the difference in the AMD 8 core CPU and a true 8 core CPU. An AMD 8 core CPU is more like a quad core with hyperthreading. I haven't read all the details on it but it's more than just a quad core that appears as 8 cores, but it's also not a true 8 core CPU either. All I said in the previous paragraph largely depends on actual CPU cores. In some specific cases, a fake core or hyperthreading core can help improve performance or it can hinder it. Another one of those "it depends" things.

As for the i3 system you mention, does the AMD system have the same 7770 GPU in it? If so, I'd say it is a better deal but could be a wash. If absolutely nothing else, the motherboard on the i3 setup would let you at a later date upgrade to an i5 or possibly better CPU if you feel you need it and THAT you would notice.

Just to clarify: I mentioned that generally have a bunch of other apps open when I'm playing WoW. Do the additional cores help with that?

Also, do you mean you the i3 system with the same GPU is better or a wash, but the i3 is more easily upgradeable later?

Thanks again. Hopefully, I can change my order, if not, at least I'm less ignorant.


Ignorant

@ultzindustries.com
reply to Krisnatharok
said by Krisnatharok:

you can certainly improve this build by adding a second 7770

Forgive my ignorance - how does a second 7770 help?


Krisnatharok
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit
kudos:12
said by Ignorant :

said by Krisnatharok:

you can certainly improve this build by adding a second 7770

Forgive my ignorance - how does a second 7770 help?

It will run in Crossfire--while it is not the full benefit of a second Radeon 7770, you will get 60-95% of the rendering capability of the second GPU.
--
If we lose this freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment, those who had the most to lose, did the least to prevent its happening.