Jump to content

Amd To Intel Expectations


94 replies to this topic

#1 The Potatoe Whisperer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 1,740 posts

Posted 22 November 2014 - 01:58 PM

So a few weeks ago my motherboard got cooked. I suspect by my own doing. Maybe not. My liquid cooled FX 8320 @ 4.6GHz gave my Asus motherboard a run for it's money. Whatever the reason, the board is now 2 weeks in the RMA process with no repair in sight. Oh well! I'm not waiting! I just purchased an i7 4790k with an Asrock Extreme 6 motherboard and I'm curious how it will perform in MWO.
Is anyone currently using this chip? How do you like it? My 8320 use to drop fps like crazy orstutter in heavy combat. Do Intel chips have that problem in this game?

Old rig:
Fx8320 @ 4.6Ghz
Asus M5A99FX Pro
Corsair H100i cooler
2 x Gigabyte GTX770 4GB sli
CORSAIR CX750M PSU


New rig:
I7 4790k
Asrock Extreme 6
corsair H100i
yada yada yada...

Edited by DjPush, 22 November 2014 - 01:59 PM.


#2 Aznpersuasion89

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 614 posts
  • Locationca

Posted 22 November 2014 - 02:01 PM

This game isn't very consistent it seems between similar hardware. I'm running a fx 8320 at 4.2 never dropped frames because of the processor. It was the video card that couldn't keep up. Now with my 970 am at a solid 60 frames at max everything with the processor at around mid load on all cores

#3 The Potatoe Whisperer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 1,740 posts

Posted 22 November 2014 - 02:14 PM

Hmm... i loved my 8320. There were just these little "things" that made me want to give intel a shot. The biggeet one was the hesitation in core activation. If a core maxed out it would take a fraction of a second for it to switch an inactive core/cores on. Games would just lag while it was doing this. At that point and it would drive me crazy. I have a feeling it was an indication of a failing motherboard because it was getting progressively worse. Im gonna make a back up rig with the FX chip and see how this intel does.

Edited by DjPush, 22 November 2014 - 02:17 PM.


#4 Iqfish

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,481 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationGermany, PHL Headquarters

Posted 22 November 2014 - 03:16 PM

View PostDjPush, on 22 November 2014 - 02:14 PM, said:


Hmm... i loved my 8320. There were just these little "things" that made me want to give intel a shot. The biggeet one was the hesitation in core activation. If a core maxed out it would take a fraction of a second for it to switch an inactive core/cores on. Games would just lag while it was doing this. At that point and it would drive me crazy. I have a feeling it was an indication of a failing motherboard because it was getting progressively worse. Im gonna make a back up rig with the FX chip and see how this intel does.



Yea and there are the big things such as Power consumption, Heat output and raw perfomance differences.

I am using an extreme 4 paired with an overclocked (4,4) 4770k, so a similar configuration. Paired with a GTX 780.
While MWO is just being MWO (crashes, lags, stuttering when smoke appears, inconsistencies in FPS, bugs) other games run beautifully.
But I don't see much difference compared to my old i5 2500k. Buying an i7 only makes sense if you run any program that takes profit out of the 4 HT cores and even when Im normally using this PC in Premiere or Photoshop, it mostly just runs with 4 of the cores activated.


So if you are just gaming, i'd advise you to cancel the order, get a 4th gen i5 instead and save 120$.

Edited by Iqfish, 22 November 2014 - 03:16 PM.


#5 The Potatoe Whisperer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 1,740 posts

Posted 22 November 2014 - 03:26 PM

I will also be running 3D design programs like Solidworks and Photoshop, Some video editing, probably Sony Vega, Ableton Suite 8, Matlab and I like streaming my games as well. Im happy with the decision I made.

#6 Iqfish

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,481 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationGermany, PHL Headquarters

Posted 22 November 2014 - 03:44 PM

View PostDjPush, on 22 November 2014 - 03:26 PM, said:

I will also be running 3D design programs like Solidworks and Photoshop, Some video editing, probably Sony Vega, Ableton Suite 8, Matlab and I like streaming my games as well. Im happy with the decision I made.


Yup, makes perfect sense then.

#7 AZA311

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 79 posts

Posted 22 November 2014 - 08:35 PM

But if you get the i5 4690k, you would need a decent AIO cooler which is over 100$ anyways to overclock to i7 levels (4,4) which is what most will do for gaming right? So that cancels out any savings making the 4790k the most logical choice doesn't it?

On a side, is there any scenario where you would recommend a base clock 4690k now, in waiting for an eventual upgrade to Broadwell for a slight performance hit until Broadwell comes out whenever that is? That's the only way I could justify an i5 over an i7 right now I think....

In all scenarios above, let's say the GTX 970 is fixed

#8 Iqfish

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,481 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationGermany, PHL Headquarters

Posted 23 November 2014 - 02:50 AM

View PostAZA311, on 22 November 2014 - 08:35 PM, said:

But if you get the i5 4690k, you would need a decent AIO cooler which is over 100$ anyways to overclock to i7 levels (4,4) which is what most will do for gaming right? So that cancels out any savings making the 4790k the most logical choice doesn't it?

On a side, is there any scenario where you would recommend a base clock 4690k now, in waiting for an eventual upgrade to Broadwell for a slight performance hit until Broadwell comes out whenever that is? That's the only way I could justify an i5 over an i7 right now I think....

In all scenarios above, let's say the GTX 970 is fixed


That is not true.

Actually, decent air coolers from bequiet or thermalright outperform aio watercoolers, are more silent and cost about 1/3 of the price.

And the difference you see in FPS between 3,5 ghz and 4 ghz clock speed is not noticeable, in fact the GPU is the bottleneck 90% of the time with a powerful intel setup. Please dont buy the PC parts propaganda and compare clock speed and cores, because these are not the only thing that matters.
Ive been running a Thermalright macho HR02 in 3 pcs now, with an Overclocked i5 2500K to 4,8 ghz at ~75C max.
My current 4770K runs at 4,4 ghz with 65C-70C.

Air cooling is perfectly fine :)

#9 Kuritaclan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,838 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 23 November 2014 - 02:59 AM

View PostDjPush, on 22 November 2014 - 01:58 PM, said:

So a few weeks ago my motherboard got cooked. I suspect by my own doing. Maybe not. My liquid cooled FX 8320 @ 4.6GHz gave my Asus motherboard a run for it's money. Whatever the reason, the board is now 2 weeks in the RMA process with no repair in sight. Oh well! I'm not waiting! I just purchased an i7 4790k with an Asrock Extreme 6 motherboard and I'm curious how it will perform in MWO.
Is anyone currently using this chip? How do you like it? My 8320 use to drop fps like crazy orstutter in heavy combat. Do Intel chips have that problem in this game?

I Use the Asrock Extreme6 Board + i7 4770k (what is an i7 4790k beside of the better thermal interface between die and IHS and a little bit upgraded VRM on the chip itself) Got mi i7 4770k for a good price, otherwise i would have run an i7 4790k. The Haswell Refresh is a bit better.

Since you use Photo/Video Editing the the virtual Cores via HT will help. So to speakt the i7 is a good shot. I don't think sticking with an i5 4690k oc to 4,5GHz+ will be a good advice for a while to upgrade on a big Broadwell. Get the i7 4790k right away and the difference to the lead chip Broadwell/Skylake will be maybee 10%. This is nothing to get a midrange CPU now and w8 for the top-cpu later.

You will see Motherboard+CPU wise a good upgrade to an FX-CPU. 4 Years in development and a stronger calculating power per core is very good for MWO.

A hint: If you upgrade decide between the Asrock Extreme6 oder the Gigabyte Gaming 5. Those two boards are price-value-champions.

View PostAZA311, on 22 November 2014 - 08:35 PM, said:

But if you get the i5 4690k, you would need a decent AIO cooler which is over 100$ anyways to overclock to i7 levels (4,4) which is what most will do for gaming right?

AiO-.cooler sucks. Get a full H2O or a premium Air-cooler. Since surface on an average AiO is pretty much the same like on a good air coller (Noctua NH-D15, be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 3 (BK019), Prolimatech Genesis +2/3 additional coolers) the cooling results are nearly equal or better with an air cooler. The only AiO (which is modular) is a H220 Swiftech i would suggest, if the wish is an AiO. The backdraw of AiOs are their loud coolers, you need to change those, to get equal noise. In the End get a good air-cooler or a full H2O. Btw with a good cooler+good board with a good vrm an i5/i7 is pretty good ocable. 4,5Ghz are in 99% achiveable. Up to quality of the cpu 4,8Ghz are doable. - IF you buy the i7 4790k you may don't even need to oc. The 4,4GHz single core performance is good at itself, so overclocking it to maybee 4,8Ghz won't bring you that much of a better performance.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 23 November 2014 - 03:20 AM.


#10 P5YCO

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 81 posts

Posted 23 November 2014 - 03:04 AM

Ok i went from a single core Athlon 64 to a quad core HT i7 2600k. Light and day, tech generations apart in one sense, but I just feel the intel chip in much more stable. The reviews at the time didn't really rate the AMD FX chips as a competitor and seeing I wanted to use all 8 threads for Blender the i7 seemed like the logical choice over the cheaper AMD part. Actually there wasn't that much difference at the time as the AMD motherboards were more expensive so it kind of balanced out compared to the cost of the rest of the rig. I had a similar experience with graphics cards too changing from AMD to Nvidia feels more stable and reliable.

#11 Iqfish

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,481 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationGermany, PHL Headquarters

Posted 23 November 2014 - 06:28 AM

View PostP5YCO, on 23 November 2014 - 03:04 AM, said:

Ok i went from a single core Athlon 64 to a quad core HT i7 2600k. Light and day, tech generations apart in one sense, but I just feel the intel chip in much more stable. The reviews at the time didn't really rate the AMD FX chips as a competitor and seeing I wanted to use all 8 threads for Blender the i7 seemed like the logical choice over the cheaper AMD part. Actually there wasn't that much difference at the time as the AMD motherboards were more expensive so it kind of balanced out compared to the cost of the rest of the rig. I had a similar experience with graphics cards too changing from AMD to Nvidia feels more stable and reliable.


Think of it like comparing a cheap japanese car to an expensive german one.

AMD was never trying to build top notch hardware like Intel or Nvidia does. They just trade off excellence in stability, heat output, performance and feature richness for price. That's why AMDs hardware is normally better at the raw performance/price ratio.

Edited by Iqfish, 23 November 2014 - 06:28 AM.


#12 The Potatoe Whisperer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 1,740 posts

Posted 23 November 2014 - 01:02 PM

Well.. I Ordered the I7 4790k and the Asrock Z97 Extreme 6. They will be here Tueaday! Pretty excited to have the rig up and running again. Kinda bent that the life expectancy of my Asus mobo was not longer. Death after 6 months of use is a deal breaker for me. So I am giving ASrock a go. The Intel will be my main set up and if the ASrock mobo should die. I at least have the 8320 and the refurbished motherboard in the basement to fall back on.

#13 The Potatoe Whisperer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 1,740 posts

Posted 23 November 2014 - 01:13 PM

Also AIO coolers do not suck. The fans Corair supplies with the H100i are not the quietest. I repaced mine with some Rosewill Hyperboreas. Having done that my PC is just as silent with a H100i cooler as it was with a Cooler Master 212. The difference? A giant ugly azz heat sink hanging off my motherboard. The H100i also kept a 8320 @ 4.6Ghz under 50C while gaming heavily while I couldn't break 4.4Ghz with a 212.

#14 MechWarrior4172571

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 251 posts

Posted 01 December 2014 - 11:03 AM

View PostDjPush, on 23 November 2014 - 01:13 PM, said:

Also AIO coolers do not suck. The fans Corair supplies with the H100i are not the quietest. I repaced mine with some Rosewill Hyperboreas. Having done that my PC is just as silent with a H100i cooler as it was with a Cooler Master 212. The difference? A giant ugly azz heat sink hanging off my motherboard. The H100i also kept a 8320 @ 4.6Ghz under 50C while gaming heavily while I couldn't break 4.4Ghz with a 212.

::whoop:: ::whoop:: Here comes new tech.. http://www.newegg.co...N82E16835856025 Made of triple fan AIO coolness.

#15 Bill Lumbar

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • 1,902 posts

Posted 01 December 2014 - 11:23 AM

View PostIqfish, on 23 November 2014 - 02:50 AM, said:

That is not true.

Actually, decent air coolers from bequiet or thermalright outperform aio watercoolers, are more silent and cost about 1/3 of the price.

And the difference you see in FPS between 3,5 ghz and 4 ghz clock speed is not noticeable, in fact the GPU is the bottleneck 90% of the time with a powerful intel setup. Please dont buy the PC parts propaganda and compare clock speed and cores, because these are not the only thing that matters.
Ive been running a Thermalright macho HR02 in 3 pcs now, with an Overclocked i5 2500K to 4,8 ghz at ~75C max.
My current 4770K runs at 4,4 ghz with 65C-70C.

Air cooling is perfectly fine :)

I am sorry to have to point out to you.... 75C is not a ideal temp for very many CPU's to run...... a I5 2500K being one of them. While i could be wrong, I believe Intel states max temps before throttling is around 95C, I would never want to see many of the CPU's I have owned go above 70C. While some out of the box store bought water coolers are overpriced for what cooling they offer vs. some higher end air coolers, and in some case's the better quality air coolers do out perform them for less money... I made the choice 4 years ago to invest into, and build a custom loop. 4 years ago I had around $300 dollars into this loop, and I have been able to transfer it over with out putting any more money into it, new water blocks etc. etc. when I have upgraded to new systems, Intel or AMD. Right now I am running a FX-8350 at 5ghz.... and I do not see temps over 30C even with hard gaming and benchmarking. Right now she is on Idle and at 18C. Water cooling is an investment for sure, and can be an expensive one at that, but if done right, it blows away any air cooler you can purchase. Just a thought..... As a computer repair tech, heat is one of the biggest things that damage PC components.... anything you can do to lessen heat, will help your parts last longer, and gain more performance from them.

Edited by Bill Lumbar, 01 December 2014 - 11:26 AM.


#16 Odins Fist

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 3,098 posts
  • LocationThe North

Posted 01 December 2014 - 12:01 PM

There shouldn't be any sort of discussion on Water versus Air cooling.

If you have the proper Water cooling, you will outperform Air cooling in terms of Temp and Noise on any CPU,
AMD or Intel.

Posted Image

Phenom II x6 1100-thuban 3.3ghz Clocked to 4.2 GHZ on water.

This next Pic is after I added a GTX 680 Sig 2 with waterblock to the loop.


Posted Image

Edited by Odins Fist, 01 December 2014 - 12:11 PM.


#17 Inveramsay

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 611 posts
  • LocationStar's End

Posted 01 December 2014 - 12:25 PM

Obviously a proper custom water loop will far outperform anything else.

As for the AMD vs intel, my suspicion would be that the Intel chip will do better in MWO. Reason for this is that the individual cores on the AMD chips are weak (together they do reasonably but not alone) and that MWO is not threaded at all. This is one of the main reasons for poor performance I assume why nvidia waited so long before they put a SLI profile out there. SLI simply isn't needed unless you run very high resolutions with very highly clocked intel chips so the GPU becomes the bottleneck instead.

#18 Odins Fist

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 3,098 posts
  • LocationThe North

Posted 01 December 2014 - 12:27 PM

View PostInveramsay, on 01 December 2014 - 12:25 PM, said:

Obviously a proper custom water loop will far outperform anything else.

As for the AMD vs intel, my suspicion would be that the Intel chip will do better in MWO.


You sir are CORRECT..!!

#19 The Potatoe Whisperer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 1,740 posts

Posted 02 December 2014 - 08:44 AM

My new Intel is kicking the pants off my old AMD...

#20 MechWarrior4172571

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 251 posts

Posted 02 December 2014 - 03:47 PM

View PostOdins Fist, on 01 December 2014 - 12:01 PM, said:

There shouldn't be any sort of discussion on Water versus Air cooling.

If you have the proper Water cooling, you will outperform Air cooling in terms of Temp and Noise on any CPU,
AMD or Intel.

Posted Image

Phenom II x6 1100-thuban 3.3ghz Clocked to 4.2 GHZ on water.

This next Pic is after I added a GTX 680 Sig 2 with waterblock to the loop.


Posted Image
It would be nice if you would post in the future, if you get to it, pics for such occasions with not only minimal scan but with maximum maxed out (in past tense) due to some heavy workout, like benchmark or furmark burnin--this would be reflected in the "max" settings having recorded that... just a thought. It would make it a lot more interesting to look at.

View PostInveramsay, on 01 December 2014 - 12:25 PM, said:



...As for the AMD vs intel, my suspicion would be that the Intel chip will do better in MWO. Reason for this is that the individual cores on the AMD chips are weak (together they do reasonably but not alone) and that MWO is not threaded at all....

Exactly. I have just discovered that MWO runs my 6 core Phenom II 1090T Thuban processor at 1 core maxed out--hogging that one core to death, and SOOOO, it shows that it would want higher and higher frequency from that core in order to process faster (at gameplay). doh Sure, I do realize that intel is fast at single thread and beats AMD and that Phenoms don't have hyperthreading, but,... this is ridiculous. My GTX 970 is running mwo at 50% utilization and only 1 cpu core (out of 6) is fully utilized (the other ones are at 10% utilization or less.)





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users