1329 replies to this topic

[Vulpesveritas]

BlackJackRaider, on 16 June 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

I had never heard of PowerColor gpu's before this post. Thanks for taking the time to keep working on this. I might have to build my own rig, my old gaming laptop with the GTS 9700m isn't going to cut it. I will probably have some more questions as this process moves on.

Hey, that's what we're here for. Or rather, that's what we find fun to do. lol

[Warcorer]

This is my take on both Nvidia and AMD as far as GPUs go, I have used multiple GPUs from both companies. AMD/ATI Cards generally have less issues with the drivers and with problems in general, but they have slightly less power than Nvidia GPUs. Nvidia Cards generally have slightly more computing power and there drivers are stable for the most part but still have more issues than AMD GPUs. Also using the beta drivers from Nvidia is definitely not recommended if your having issues as the beta drivers usually break more than fix issues.

[Vulpesveritas]

Alright, time for a new guide.
Here I will be covering my general recommendations for power supplies. For more detail on what to look at, please take a look at my general hardware guide.

This is mainly a quick reference guide to power supplies at given price points, and in this guide I will not be taking into account any sale prices, and as such please keep that in mind.
Furthermore, all pricing and availability is based upon what is in the USA and Canada, if you are outside the USA I cannot guarantee similarity of prices or availability of units.

>This guide will be added onto over time (as I have more time) and about every three months after PSUs up to $400+ are listed. I will be following $25 up to $200, and $50 increments after that. Feel free to assist with the PSU guide.<

General Rules of PSUs;
1. The 12v rail(s) should constitute a maximum output amperage of at least 85% of the rated wattage, preferably at least 90%.
2. It is preferable to have at lest 25-30 amps on each rail minimum, or as high as you can get on a single rail PSU.
3. Modular Power supplies, while easier to work with, generally are more expensive than non-modular PSUs.
4. Try to get at least an 80+ Bronze PSU.*

*What is 80+?
80+ Certification means that the power supply has been tested to meet a certain power efficiency at various loads. 80+ basic is the lowest of the certification, going up through bronze, silver, gold, platinum, and finally titanium. (The last of which is currently not a certification in 115v power socket countries [like the USA], and only for 230v areas. [Like much of Europe.])
The actual power efficiency chart is here;




Wattage recommendations and purposing;
350w- Low end PC with integrated GPU
450w- Low end gaming rig or office PC with dedicated GPU
550w- Normal gaming rig
650w- High end graphics card or low-mid end dual GPU with OC CPU
750w- Multi-card setup
850w- Multi-card setup, some overclocking
950w- tri-card setup (3 card) with overclocking
1kw-1.5kw - tri-graphics card / enthusiast overclocking PSU or basic 4X GPU setup
1.5kw+ - 4X GPU and / or heavy OC.


Guide basics;

80+:
Brand:
OEM: (Original Equipment Manufacturer for the internal assembly.)
Rated Wattage:
12v Rail Amperage:
PCI-e connectors:
Modular:
Warranty:

Onward with the power supplies at price points; (note all are newegg)

$50;
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817151077
80+: Bronze
Brand: Seasonic
OEM: Seasonic
Rated Wattage: 350
12v Rail Amperage: Multi 17a/17a (204w/204w - max total 324w)
PCI-e connectors: none
Modular: no
Warranty: 3yrs

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817139026

80+: Basic
Brand: Corsair
OEM: CWT
Rated Wattage: 420
12v Rail Amperage: Single 28a (336w)
PCI-e connectors: Single; 6+2
Modular: no
Warranty: 3 yrs

$75;

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817703034

80+: Bronze
Brand: PC Power and Cooling
OEM: Seasonic
Rated Wattage: 400
12v Rail Amperage: Single 30Amps (360w)
PCI-e connectors: 1 (6+2)
Modular: Yes
Warranty: 5yrs

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817207018

80+: Bronze
Brand: XFX
OEM: Seasonic
Rated Wattage: 450
12v Rail Amperage: Singe 36amps (432w)
PCI-e connectors: 1 (6+2)
Modular: no
Warranty: 5yrs

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817207013

80+: Bronze
Brand: XFX
OEM: Seasonic
Rated Wattage: 550
12v Rail Amperage: Single 44a (528w)
PCI-e connectors: 2 (1x 6+2, 1x 6)
Modular: no
Warranty: 5yrs

$100


http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817371054

80+: Platinum
Brand: Antec
OEM: FSP
Rated Wattage: 450w
12v Rail Amperage: Multi 30a, 30a ( 360w, 360w)
PCI-e connectors: 2 (6+2)
Modular: no
Warranty: 3yrs

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817182068
80+: Gold
Brand: Rosewill
OEM: Superflower
Rated Wattage: 550w
12v Rail Amperage: Single 45.5a (546w)
PCI-e connectors: 2 (2x 6+2)
Modular: No
Warranty: 5yrs

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817703036

80+: Bronze
Brand: PC Power and Cooling
OEM: Seasonic
Rated Wattage: 600w
12v Rail Amperage: Single 46a (552w)
PCI-e connectors: 2 (2x 6+2)
Modular: Yes
Warranty: 5yrs

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817207014

80+: Bronze
Brand: XFX
OEM: Seasonic
Rated Wattage: 650w
12v Rail Amperage: Single 53a (635w)
PCI-e connectors: 4 (2x6, 2x6+2)
Modular: No
Warranty: 5yrs

$125:

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817121094

80+: Platinum
Brand: Kingwin
OEM: Superflower
Rated Wattage: 550w
12v Rail Amperage: Single 45.5a (546w)
PCI-e connectors: 4 (6+2)
Modular: No
Warranty: 3 yrs


http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817116014

80+: Bronze
Brand: NZXT
OEM: Seasonic
Rated Wattage: 650 watts

12v Rail Amperage: Single 53a (635w)
PCI-e connectors: 4 (2x6, 2x6+2)
Modular: Yes
Warranty: 5yrs

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817207015

80+: Bronze
Brand: XFX
OEM: Seasonic
Rated Wattage: 750w
12v Rail Amperage: Single 62a (744w)
PCI-e connectors: 4 (2x6, 2x6+2)
Modular: no
Warranty: 5yrs

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817207011

80+: Bronze
Brand: XFX
OEM: Seasonic
Rated Wattage: 850w
12v Rail Amperage: Single 70a (840w)
PCI-e connectors: 4 (2x6, 2x6+2)
Modular: no
Warranty: 5yrs

$150


http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817207016
80+: Silver
Brand: XFX
OEM: Seasonic
Rated Wattage: 750
12v Rail Amperage: Single 62a (744w)
PCI-e connectors: 4 (6+2)
Modular: Semi
Warranty: 5yrs


http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817151108

80+: Bronze
Brand: Seasonic
OEM: Seasonic
Rated Wattage: 850w
12v Rail Amperage: Single 70a (840w)
PCI-e connectors: 4 (6+2)
Modular: Yes
Warranty: 5 years


http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817121090

80+: Bronze
Brand: Kingwin
OEM: Superflower
Rated Wattage: 1000w
12v Rail Amperage: Single 81.5a (978w)
PCI-e connectors: 4 (2 6+2, 2 6 pin)
Modular: Yes
Warranty: 3yrs

$175

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817151099 (fanless)

80+: Gold
Brand: Seasonic
OEM: Seasonic
Rated Wattage: 460w
12v Rail Amperage: Single 38a (456w)
PCI-e connectors: 2(6+2)
Modular: yes
Warranty: 5yrs

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817121083 (fanless)

80+: Platinum
Brand: Kingwin
OEM: Superflower
Rated Wattage: 500w
12v Rail Amperage: Single 41.5a (498w)
PCI-e connectors: 4 (2x6, 2x6+2)
Modular: yes
Warranty: 3yrs

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817121080
80+: Platinum
Brand: Kingwin
OEM: Superflower
Rated Wattage: 550w
12v Rail Amperage: Single 45.5a (546w)
PCI-e connectors: 4 (2x6, 2x6+2)
Modular: yes
Warranty: 3yrs

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817121092

80+: Platinum
Brand: Kingwin
OEM: Superflower
Rated Wattage: 650w
12v Rail Amperage: Single 54a (648w)
PCI-e connectors: 4 (2x6, 2x6+2)
Modular: yes
Warranty: 3yrs

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817256079

80+: Gold
Brand: Silverstone
OEM: Enhance
Rated Wattage: 750w
12v Rail Amperage: Single 62a (744w)
PCI-e connectors: 4 (2x6, 2x6+2)
Modular: yes
Warranty: 3yrs

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817207017

80+: Silver
Brand: XFX
OEM: Seasonic
Rated Wattage: 850w
12v Rail Amperage: Single 70a (840w)
PCI-e connectors: 4 (6+2)
Modular: Semi
Warranty: 5yrs

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817703028

80+: Silver
Brand: PC Power & Cooling
OEM: Seasonic
Rated Wattage: 950w
12v Rail Amperage: Single 83.4a (1000.8w)
PCI-e connectors: 6 (3x6, 3x6+2)
Modular: no
Warranty: 7yrs


$200

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817121088
80+: Platinum
Brand: Kingwin
OEM: Superflower
Rated Wattage: 750w
12v Rail Amperage: Single 62a (744w)
PCI-e connectors: 4 (6+2)
Modular: yes
Warranty: 3yrs

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817139015

80+: Gold
Brand: Corsair
OEM: Seasonic
Rated Wattage: 850w
12v Rail Amperage: Single 70a (840w)
PCI-e connectors: 4 (6+2)
Modular: yes
Warranty: 7yrs




And just a bit for my advice, for a gaming rig, approximate percentages of component cost which I recommend;
GPU: 35-50%
CPU: 10-20%
Power Supply: 10-15%
Case: 2-10%
Motherboard: 8-20%
Storage: 5-20%
RAM: 2-10%
Other parts: remaining 0-33%

CPU Guide here: http://mwomercs.com/...asic-cpu-guide/
GPU Guide here: http://mwomercs.com/...eral-gpu-guide/
Computer Case Guide Here: http://mwomercs.com/...endation-guide/
Motherboard Guide here: http://mwomercs.com/...herboard-guide/

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 21 June 2012 - 01:22 PM.

[Vulpesveritas]

Warcorer, on 16 June 2012 - 07:04 PM, said:

This is my take on both Nvidia and AMD as far as GPUs go, I have used multiple GPUs from both companies. AMD/ATI Cards generally have less issues with the drivers and with problems in general, but they have slightly less power than Nvidia GPUs. Nvidia Cards generally have slightly more computing power and there drivers are stable for the most part but still have more issues than AMD GPUs. Also using the beta drivers from Nvidia is definitely not recommended if your having issues as the beta drivers usually break more than fix issues.

Except AMD GPUs are faster at both gaming and compute at most price points at this time. lol

[Steelo]

I have to say this guy is a saint and deserves commendation.

[Vulpesveritas]

Eh, haven't noticed it in here.

Also, CPU guide coming up soon. (next week or so.) Let's see how many people rage at me for being an AMD "fanboy" if I try really, really, really hard to be unbiased.... mostly.

Did it anyhow. Hope I managed to make it unbiased as best I could.

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 16 June 2012 - 10:22 PM.

[Ishtar]

hmm didnt know this was pinned up.. lol..

almost flattering =)

Edited by Ishtar, 16 June 2012 - 09:52 PM.

[Ishtar]

Barbaric Soul, on 15 June 2012 - 06:39 AM, said:

Why did this get pinned? Ok, so there is twelve monitors. Are they hooked up to the same tower? If so, how? There aren't linked together to work as one monitor, so it's not like the system is running some awesome uber resolution. I just don't understand how this got pinned, yet Vulpesveritas' GPU guide hasn't been pinned(which is alot more useful in this forum than a simple picture of twelve monitors with absolutely no details of the setup)

There is 3 towers actually,

[Vulpesveritas]

This is meant to be a basic CPU guide, covering various price points, although largely focusing on gaming performance.
The main highlights to chosing a purchase will be listed with the information of each processor.

All pricing are from newegg.com, with retail listed boxes. OEM and sale prices are not included. Pricing and availability in other countries will depend, and may not follow this guide completely.
Updates will be made when new processors are released, and otherwise every three months for pricing.

Any input is always welcome.


Since a Russian review site did an official hiarchy chart, here it is for your viewing pleasure, although it doesn't have Vishera or Ivy Bridge;



(Please note, all processors here meet MW:O's minimum settings, though you will want at least a quad core processor if possible for best results when the game comes out.)

$75


Highlight - Use With Integrated Graphics Card, overclockable, low power usage at stock:
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819113282
AMD A6-5400k (Trinity)
FM2 Socket
65w TDP
Dual Core / 1 module



$100

Highlight - Low Power Consumption, Playing Older (or single threaded) Games
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819113282
Intel Pentium G2120 (Ivy Bridge)
LGA 1155 Socket
65w TDP
Dual Core

Versus:

Highlight - Integrated Graphics, Overclocking,
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819106002
AMD A6-3670k (Llano)
FM1 Socket
100w TDP
Quad Core


Versus:

Highlight - Overclocking, multitasking performance, quad threaded performance.
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819103727

Phenom II X4 965 (Deneb)
AM3 Socket
125w TDP
Quad Core



$125

Highlight - Low Power Consumption, Playing Single threaded games
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819115077
Intel Core i3-2120 (Sandy Bridge)
LGA 1155 Socket
65w TDP
Dual Core + HT

Versus:


Highlight - Integrated Graphics, Overclocking, Quad thereaded Performance
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819113281
AMD A8-5600k (Trinity)
FM1 Socket
100w TDP
Quad Core / 2 module


$150

Highlight - Low Power Consumption, single threaded performance
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819116773
Intel Core i3-3240 (Ivy Bridge)
LGA 1155 socket
55w TDP
Dual Core + HT


Versus:

Highlight - Integrated Graphics, Overclocking,
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819106002
AMD A10-5800k (trinity)
FM2 Socket
100w TDP
Quad Core / 2 module

Versus:

Highlight - Multitasking, Able to be Overclocked
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819113286
AMD FX-6300 (Vishera)
AM3+ Socket
95w TDP
6 Core / 3 module

Versus:

Highlight - Gaming Performance, Able to be Overclocked easily
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819113287
AMD FX-4300 (Vishera)
AM3+ Socket
95w TDP
Quad Core / 2 module

$175


Highlight - Multitasking, Number Crunching
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819103961
AMD FX-8120 (Zambezi)
AM3+ Socket
125w TDP
8 Core / 4 module


$200

Highlight - Stock Gaming Performance, Power Consumption
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819115234
Intel Core i5-3470 (Ivy Bridge)
LGA 1155 Socket
77w TDP
Quad Core

Versus:

Highlight - Multitasking, Able to be Overclocked, Number Crunching
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819113285
AMD FX-8320 (Vishera)
AM3+ Socket
125w TDP
8 Core / 4 module

$250

Highlight - Lower Power Consumption, Performance at Stock
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819116505
Intel Core i5-3570 (Ivy Bridge)
LGA 1155 Socket
77w TDP
Quad Core

Versus:

Highlight- Able to be Overclocked, Performance When Overclocked
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819115072
Intel Core i5-2500k (Sandy Bridge)
LGA 1155 Socket
95w TDP
Quad Core


Versus:

Highlight - Multitasking, Able to be Overclocked, Number Crunching
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819113284
AMD FX-8350 (Vishera)
AM3+ Socket
125w TDP
8 Core / 4 module


$350

Highlights - Performance at Stock, Power Consumption
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819116502
Intel Core i7-3770 (Ivy Bridge)
LGA 1155 Socket
77w TDP
Quad Core + HT

Versus:

Highlight - Able to be Overclocked, Performance when Overclocked
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819115095
Intel Core i7-2700k (Sandy Bridge)
LGA 1155 Socket
95w TDP
Quad Core + HT




Other things to consider when buying:

Longevity:
With applications becoming more and more multi-threaded, and quad-threaded applications currently being the norm, purchasing a higher threaded CPU will help your system remain valid for a longer period of time.

Upgrades:
When choosing a motherboard, keep in mind AMD tends to support it's motherboards longer than Intel, who is on a 2 year replacement cycle. (The primary exception being FM1, which is a dead socket)

Ethics:
I won't go too into depth on this, however it is my own personal reason that I do not buy Intel processors, other than AMD does have a price / performance advantage at this time. The full bit is below.

Spoiler

Just a quick bit from wikipedia;

Lawsuits

Intel has often been accused by competitors of using legal claims to thwart competition. Intel claims that it is defending its intellectual property. Intel has been plaintiff and defendant in numerous legal actions.

In September 2005, Intel filed a response to an AMD lawsuit,[158] disputing AMD's claims, and claiming that Intel's business practices are fair and lawful. In a rebuttal, Intel deconstructed AMD's offensive strategy and argued that AMD struggled largely as a result of its own bad business decisions, including underinvestment in essential manufacturing capacity and excessive reliance on contracting out chip foundries.[159] Legal analysts predicted the lawsuit would drag on for a number of years, since Intel's initial response indicated its unwillingness to settle with AMD.[160][161] In 2008 a court date was finally set,[162] but in 2009 Intel settled with a $1.25 billion payout to AMD (see below).[163]

In October 2006, a Transmeta lawsuit was filed against Intel for patent infringement on computer architecture and power efficiency technologies.[164] The lawsuit was settled in October 2007, with Intel agreeing to pay US$150 million initially and US$20 million per year for the next five years. Both companies agreed to drop lawsuits against each other, while Intel was granted a perpetual non-exclusive license to use current and future patented Transmeta technologies in its chips for 10 years.[165]

On November 4, 2009, New York's attorney general filed an antitrust lawsuit against Intel Corp, claiming the company used "illegal threats and collusion" to dominate the market for computer microprocessors.

On November 12, 2009, AMD agreed to drop the antitrust lawsuit against Intel in exchange for $1.25 billion.[163] A joint press release published by the two chip makers stated "While the relationship between the two companies has been difficult in the past, this agreement ends the legal disputes and enables the companies to focus all of our efforts on product innovation and development."[166][167]

[edit]Anti-competitive allegations

See also: AMD v. Intel

[edit]Japan

In 2005, the local Fair Trade Commission found that Intel violated the Japanese Antimonopoly Act. The commission ordered Intel to eliminate discounts that had discriminated against AMD. To avoid a trial, Intel agreed to comply with the order.[168][169][170][171]

[edit]European Union

In July 2007, the European Commission accused Intel of anti-competitive practices, mostly against AMD.[172] The allegations, going back to 2003, include giving preferential prices to computer makers buying most or all of their chips from Intel, paying computer makers to delay or cancel the launch of products using AMD chips, and providing chips at below standard cost to governments and educational institutions.[173] Intel responded that the allegations were unfounded and instead qualified its market behavior as consumer-friendly.[173] General counsel Bruce Sewell responded that the Commission had misunderstood some factual assumptions as to pricing and manufacturing costs.[174]

In February 2008, Intel stated that its office in Munich had been raided by European Union regulators. Intel reported that it was cooperating with investigators.[175] Intel faced a fine of up to 10% of its annual revenue, if found guilty of stifling competition.[176] AMD subsequently launched a website promoting these allegations.[177][178] In June 2008, the EU filed new charges against Intel.[179] In May 2009, the EU found that Intel had engaged in anti-competitive practices and subsequently fined Intel €1.06 billion (US$1.44 billion), a record amount. Intel was found to have paid companies, including Acer, Dell, HP, Lenovo and NEC,[180] to exclusively use Intel chips in their products, and therefore harmed other companies including AMD.[180][181][182] The European Commission said that Intel had deliberately acted to keep competitors out of the computer chip market and in doing so had made a "serious and sustained violation of the EU's antitrust rules".[180] In addition to the fine, Intel was ordered by the Commission to immediately cease all illegal practices.[180] Intel has stated that they will appeal against the Commission's verdict.[180]

[edit]South Korea

In September 2007, South Korean regulators accused Intel of breaking antitrust law. The investigation began in February 2006, when officials raided Intel's South Korean offices. The company risked a penalty of up to 3% of its annual sales, if found guilty.[183] In June 2008, the Fair Trade Commission ordered Intel to pay a fine of US$25.5 million for taking advantage of its dominant position to offer incentives to major Korean PC manufacturers on the condition of not buying products from AMD.[184]

[edit]United States

New York started an investigation of Intel in January 2008 on whether the company violated antitrust laws in pricing and sales of its microprocessors.[185] In June 2008, the Federal Trade Commission also began an antitrust investigation of the case.[186] In December 2009 the FTC announced it would initiate an administrative proceeding against Intel in September 2010.[187][188][189][190]

In November 2009, following a two year investigation, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo sued Intel, accusing them of bribery and coercion, claiming that Intel bribed computer makers to buy more of their chips than those of their rivals, and threatened to withdraw these payments if the computer makers were perceived as working too closely with its competitors. Intel has denied these claims.[191]

On July 22, 2010, Dell agreed to a settlement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to pay $100M in penalties resulting from charges that Dell did not accurately disclose accounting information to investors. In particular, the SEC charged that from 2002 to 2006, Dell had an agreement with Intel to receive rebates in exchange for not using chips manufactured by AMD. These substantial rebates were not disclosed to investors, but were used to help meet investor expectations regarding the company's financial performance; the SEC said that in the first quarter of 2007 they amounted to 70% of Dell's operating income. Dell eventually did adopt AMD as a secondary supplier in 2006, and Intel subsequently stopped their rebates, causing Dell's financial performance to fall.[192][193][194]



Environmental record

In 2003, there were 1.4 tons of carbon tetrachloride measured from one of Intel's many acid scrubbers. However, Intel reported no release of carbon tetrachloride for all of 2003.[147] Intel's facility in Rio Rancho, New Mexico overlooks a nearby village, and the hilly contours of its location create a setting for chemical gases heavier than air to move along arroyos and irrigation ditches in that village. Release of chemicals in such an environment reportedly caused adverse effects in both animals and humans. Deceased dogs in the area were found to have high levels of toluene, hexane, ethylbenzene, and xylene isomers in lungs.[148] More than 1,580 pounds (720 kg) of VOC were released in June and July 2006, the company stated.[149] Intel’s environmental performance is published annually in their corporate responsibility report.[150]

[edit]Religious controversy

Orthodox Jews have protested against Intel operating in Israel on Saturday, Shabbat. Intel ringed its office with barbed wire before the protest, but there was no violence.[151] As of December 2009, the situation has been stable for Intel Israel while some employees reported working overtime on Shabbat.

[edit]Age discrimination

Intel has faced complaints of age discrimination in firing and layoffs. Intel was sued by nine former employees, over allegations that they were laid off because they were over the age of 40.[152]

A group called FACE Intel (Former and Current Employees of Intel) claims that Intel weeds out older employees. FACE Intel claims that more than 90 percent of people who have been terminated by Intel are over the age of 40. Upside magazine requested data from Intel breaking out its hiring and terminations by age, but the company declined to provide any.[153] Intel has denied that age plays any role in Intel's employment practices.[154] FACE Intel was founded by Ken Hamidi, who was terminated by Intel in 1995 at the age of 47.[153] Hamidi was blocked in a 1999 court decision from using Intel's email system to distribute criticism of the company to employees.[155]

-http://en.wikipedia....onmental_record

http://www.corralesc...d=2013&Itemid=2

There's even a book on the chemical dumping; http://www.faceintel...oilingfrogs.htm

something that might be of concern to you as well;
http://www.tomshardw...ange,11749.html
blackmailing the Russian government.

Also, Intel admitted to blackmailing OEMs like HP, dell, Toshiba, etc. not to use AMD processors for years, most heavily during the Athalon 64 vs Pentium 4 era where AMD had a rather large performance advantage;
http://www.bit-tech....ays-1-25-bill/1

Also, let's not forget in independent investigations the EU, South Korea, and Japan also found Intel guilty...
http://www.techencla...tel-anti-66863/
http://www.pcworld.c...ssor_sales.html
http://www.pcworld.c...violations.html

and a history of anti-trust cases against Intel, dating back to 1991.
http://www.pcworld.c...trust_woes.html


So... blackmail, paying billions of dollars in anti-competitive actions for OEMs to not make AMD chips available in consumer market PCs, endangering the lives of US citizens through dumping of toxic chemicals (and lying about it in official records.), not to mention that they got a lawsuit from Nvidia a few years back for using chipsets without licence... if that matters to you at all. http://www.engadget....pset-licensing/
and another bit.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2887

And just a bit for my advice, for a gaming rig, approximate percentages of component cost which I recommend;
GPU: 35-50%
CPU: 10-20%
Power Supply: 10-15%
Case: 2-10%
Motherboard: 8-20%
Storage: 5-20%
RAM: 2-10%
Other parts: remaining 0-33%

GPU Guide Here; http://mwomercs.com/...eral-gpu-guide/
PSU Guide Here; http://mwomercs.com/...r-supply-guide/
Case Guide Here: http://mwomercs.com/...endation-guide/
Motherboard guide here: http://mwomercs.com/...herboard-guide/

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 01 January 2013 - 10:28 AM.

[Wonderful Greg]

Unfortunately, Intel vs AMD is not even worth comparing.
It pains me to say that(I liked AMD CPU's, and even worked at AMD), but at the moment NO AMD CPU is worth the money for gaming rig. Maybe with an exception of 3850/3870. A4, A6 are joke. FX came to early with promising architecture, but with almost no software support.
I'm talking desktops, laptops are completely different story.

[Vulpesveritas]

Wonderful Greg, on 16 June 2012 - 10:37 PM, said:

Unfortunately, Intel vs AMD is not even worth comparing.
It pains me to say that(I liked AMD CPU's, and even worked at AMD), but at the moment NO AMD CPU is worth the money for gaming rig. Maybe with an exception of 3850/3870. A4, A6 are joke. FX came to early with promising architecture, but with almost no software support.
I'm talking desktops, laptops are completely different story.

Apparently you are somewhat out of the loop, what with multitasking favoring more cores, and AMD CPUs not being -that- much slower clock for clock versus Intel. (20-40% slower clock for clock, core for core, depending on what architectures are being compared.)

Please note the Passmark Price / performance scores here;

This is of course for multitasking. And hence, multithreaded Gaming (i.e. all new and future games)

So unfortunately for your point of view, AMD actually is still a solid choice for a Gaming CPU, especially when Overclocking in the sub-$200 price point is taken into account.

And while there isn't much software support for the FX series, that doesn't matter quite so much for a CPU as it would with say, a GPU. Thank goodness. So it still runs things alright. Though I remember all the early issues with steam the FX line had.

Also, you worked at AMD?

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 18 June 2012 - 10:42 AM.

[CynicalCyanide]

It would be a good idea to specifically note in the lower end range you'd be struggling to run modern games at any decent reso / setting.

Also: I'm not sure Passmark is an accurate benchmark for gaming performance. But i guess i'll have to do some research and testing of my own before i can suggest a better way of comparing gaming performance.

PS: I would suggest cross linking your GPU guide to this thread, and this thread in your GPU guide.

[Vulpesveritas]

iron wolf, on 16 June 2012 - 10:58 PM, said:

It would be a good idea to specifically note in the lower end range you'd be struggling to run modern games at any decent reso / setting.

Also: I'm not sure Passmark is an accurate benchmark for gaming performance. But i guess i'll have to do some research and testing of my own before i can suggest a better way of comparing gaming performance.

PS: I would suggest cross linking your GPU guide to this thread, and this thread in your GPU guide.

I have both crosslinked with my hardware mythbusters, but I might.
I use passmark as it is a general computing power benchmark, able to use as many cores as you toss at it. And it isn't biased towards Intel or AMD, hence it is as best of a multitasking benchmark as I could think of.

And any of the above processors will run the majority of modern games without issue for the most part. I mean heck, look at BF3;

The A4 is the only one with any really noticeable performance drop.

[Wonderful Greg]

Vulpesveritas, on 16 June 2012 - 10:45 PM, said:

Apparently you are somewhat out of the loop, what with multitasking favoring more cores, and AMD CPUs not being -that- much slower clock for clock versus Intel. (20-40% slower clock for clock, core for core, depending on what architectures are being compared.)

Please note the Passmark Price / performance scores here;

This is of course for multitasking. And hence, multithreaded Gaming (i.e. all new and future games)

So unfortunately for your point of view, AMD actually is still a solid choice for a Gaming CPU, especially when Overclocking in the sub-$200 price point is taken into account.

Those test are mostly synthetics. Unfortunately, when it's come to actual gaming numbers are quite different.
Of all games that came out recently, only Battlefield 3 comes to mind for properly using multithreading.
And we have to clarify one more thing, I'm talking about current AMD product. A4, A6, A8 and FX(FM1 and AM3+ socket). 645/945 etc. are a very good money/performance wise, however they are all End of Life product(and have been for almost a year now). And have close to no supply. Only Chinese market is more or less properly supplied with with previous AM3 product.
Take AM3 product out of table you mentioned, and what's is left on AMD side?

[Vulpesveritas]

Wonderful Greg, on 16 June 2012 - 11:31 PM, said:

Those test are mostly synthetics. Unfortunately, when it's come to actual gaming numbers are quite different.
Of all games that came out recently, only Battlefield 3 comes to mind for properly using multithreading.
And we have to clarify one more thing, I'm talking about current AMD product. A4, A6, A8 and FX(FM1 and AM3+ socket). 645/945 etc. are a very good money/performance wise, however they are all End of Life product(and have been for almost a year now). And have close to no supply. Only Chinese market is more or less properly supplied with with previous AM3 product.
Take AM3 product out of table you mentioned, and what's is left on AMD side?

Thing is, AM3 works fine on AM3+, which is also receiving Piledriver later this year (which is when we'll see the Phenom II X4s disappear), and then we may be seeing Steamroller cores after that. There is plenty of supply on the X4 chips still in the USA and Canada. On the FX chips, they're not exactly "EOL" given they're currently still in mass production. 10xx series chipsets for AM3+ are coming out later this year with native USB 3.0, but not much more it seems. Given Trinity Piledriver is 5% faster clock-for-clock versus Llano without the likely architecture tweaks and the L3 Cache of Vishera, and the Octo-cores are coming at 4GHZ, this fall / winter AMD will be competing a bit better. For now, they are better if you overclock (and are looking under $200), multitask (and are looking under $300), and / or are looking for a CPU between $150-180.

[Turbo]

I have a question for you tech gurus. I currently have 2 EVGA Superclocked GTX 275's. looking to upgrade to DX 11 compatible GPU(s) and get the best possible bang for my buck upgrade, Im really not sure what to do as most stuff im reading says my 275s perform better than 570's. I dont have to stay with a SLI setup, however i really dont want to spend over $500. so what is my best route to go? single 580? 670? pair of 480s? Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

[Vulpesveritas]

Turbo, on 16 June 2012 - 11:41 PM, said:

I have a question for you tech gurus. I currently have 2 EVGA Superclocked GTX 275's. looking to upgrade to DX 11 compatible GPU(s) and get the best possible bang for my buck upgrade, Im really not sure what to do as most stuff im reading says my 275s perform better than 570's. I dont have to stay with a SLI setup, however i really dont want to spend over $500. so what is my best route to go? single 580? 670? pair of 480s? Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Your three best options:
Two Radeon HD 7850s in Xfire (fastest option [in xfire enabled titles], if your motherboard supports Xfire as well as SLI)
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814102986
One Radeon HD 7970, overclocked (fastest sub-$500 single card option) http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814131471
One Geforce GTX 670, overclocked (Decent value, lower power consumption, though will not be as good for non-gaming tasks as above cards) http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814127685

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 16 June 2012 - 11:46 PM.

[CynicalCyanide]

Vulpesveritas, on 16 June 2012 - 11:01 PM, said:

I have both crosslinked with my hardware mythbusters, but I might.
I use passmark as it is a general computing power benchmark, able to use as many cores as you toss at it. And it isn't biased towards Intel or AMD, hence it is as best of a multitasking benchmark as I could think of.

And any of the above processors will run the majority of modern games without issue for the most part. I mean heck, look at BF3;

The A4 is the only one with any really noticeable performance drop.

Considering your extensive qualifications that you mentioned earlier, i'm surprised you didnt pick up on the problem with that benchmark result. Right underneath it reads:

"This benchmark is clearly bottlenecked by our graphics card. As we know from Battlefield 3 Performance: 30+ Graphics Cards, Benchmarked, campaign mode demonstrates this behavior throughout. Once you start jumping into 32- and 64-player maps, the emphasis shifts. Unfortunately, it's incredibly difficult to quantify performance in a consistent way using the game's compelling multi-player component."

Here is a more CPU oriented benchmark:

"We already know that this RTS is more of a workout for CPUs than graphics cards. So, its benchmark results promise to be enlightening" The settings are actually lighter than those posted for BF3, which are so insanely high that its no wonder the graphics card is the limiting factor.

Edited by iron wolf, 16 June 2012 - 11:47 PM.

[Vulpesveritas]

iron wolf, on 16 June 2012 - 11:45 PM, said:

Considering your extensive qualifications that you mentioned earlier, i'm surprised you didnt pick up on the problem with that benchmark result. Right underneath it reads:

"This benchmark is clearly bottlenecked by our graphics card. As we know from Battlefield 3 Performance: 30+ Graphics Cards, Benchmarked, campaign mode demonstrates this behavior throughout. Once you start jumping into 32- and 64-player maps, the emphasis shifts. Unfortunately, it's incredibly difficult to quantify performance in a consistent way using the game's compelling multi-player component."

Here is a more CPU oriented benchmark:

"We already know that this RTS is more of a workout for CPUs than graphics cards. So, its benchmark results promise to be enlightening" The settings are actually lighter than those posted for BF3, which are so insanely high that its no wonder the graphics card is the limiting factor.

My main probles with starcraft are;
Poorly threaded- No real difference between an A4 dual core and an Athalon II quad core at the same speeds?
Running Havok- Generally known to favor Intel CPUs. Unfortunately.


For a more directly comparable to MWO title;
http://www.guru3d.co...ce-benchmarks/6
Not much difference between a Phenom II X4 and an i7.
Though we see here how well quad-threaded CryENGINE 3 is. Here is DX9;

http://www.techspot....ance/page8.html

Even Tom's Hardware, known for being Intel-biased in the past, shows very little difference;

http://www.tomshardw...rk,3090-10.html

The majority of current and future game titles are becoming more and more heavily threaded. Though it does largely depend on the game engine at the current time still.

[CynicalCyanide]

Vulpesveritas, on 16 June 2012 - 11:55 PM, said:

http://www.tomshardw...rk,3090-10.html

>"Minimal variation between platforms in this graphics-bound title is expected"