Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
Showing 1 of 104 conversations about:
HeftyMann
39
Mar 6, 2018
bookmark_border
The thing that I find stupid is even if I needed a motherboard I wouldn't buy any of the combos I have seen recently. Why no X370(or B350) boards? AMD all the way man, screw Intel!
Mar 6, 2018
A community member
Mar 7, 2018
bookmark_border
HeftyMannRyzen is awful now that 8th gen intel is out. An intel i3 is more budget friendly than Ryzen for gaming.
Mar 7, 2018
Moosefeather
1
Mar 7, 2018
bookmark_border
For gaming the i3 would have a slight edge yes, but there's no denying the perf/dollar regarding the r5 1600.
Mar 7, 2018
HeftyMann
39
Mar 7, 2018
bookmark_border
hahahahahahahahaaaaaaaa....right!
The hole thing that AMD has going that Intel doesn't is the fact that they are trying to actually come up with new products and do something innovative than re-release the same CPU three dam times with just slightly higher clocks (pretty much negligible gains) just to line their pockets. The way Intel acted with all of their shady practices last year after Ryzen was released has pushed me from ever wanting one of their CPU's again.
AMD wins when it comes to overall usability and performance of the CPU because the extra cores really really help with more workstation related tasks plus any multi-tasking that may take place. Most people use their computers for more than just gaming Brah!
Mar 7, 2018
Moosefeather
1
Mar 7, 2018
bookmark_border
HeftyMannI don't think that's fair, Intel has been making gradual but still visible improvements especially regarding the latest 8th gen cpus while AMD seems to have been making great strides but a large component of that is the fact that ryzen was the first architecture AMD had released in 7 years.
Mar 7, 2018
HeftyMann
39
Mar 7, 2018
bookmark_border
MoosefeatherYes but Intel has been giving us 4 cores on the high end consumer chips for so long and AMD comes along and is like here is an 8-core CPU for less than this comparable Intel CPU. Plus Threadripper came along with 16-core CPU. Then Intel comes back like "Ahh no we have something too, ummm yeah it will be a 6-core or something for consumer and a 18-core on enthusiast. Yes that is it." And they botched the shit out of that launch because they really didn't have anything ready because they have just been milking what they have been pushing out.
If it wasn't for AMD, we would still be seeing 4-core high end consumer chips and super expensive enthusiast chips <16-core. So yeah screw Intel. There is no reason they couldn't have come about these recent innovations sooner. They just pulled them out of their ass because AMD came along and gave them some competition.
Mar 7, 2018
Moosefeather
1
Mar 7, 2018
bookmark_border
HeftyMannThat's how the market works, if you're at the top, you wait until you get competition then you release something competitive. As for AMD, they had to work 7 years to make something competitive.
Mar 7, 2018
A community member
Mar 7, 2018
bookmark_border
MoosefeatherThat’s why I mentioned gaming, and lots of people would be just fine with an i3, and perf/dollar goes to intel for 8th gen low end for gaming and single core exclusively.
Mar 7, 2018
A community member
Mar 7, 2018
bookmark_border
HeftyMannBrowsing the internet doesn’t benefit from 6 cores.
Mar 7, 2018
A community member
Mar 7, 2018
bookmark_border
HeftyMannThe 8700 is an irrelevant upgrade unless you’re on an older chip than the 6th gen. Intel did speed up a bit, but they were already planning on major upgrades for 8th gen well before Ryzen.
Mar 7, 2018
HeftyMann
39
Mar 7, 2018
bookmark_border
Lol browsing the internet could actually benefit from multiple cores. I completely froze up my CPU at work that was a 6-core Xeon just by having over 30 tabs open in Internet Explorer while using Solidworks and Outlook....
Either way I am talking aout streaming, video/audio/visuals editing, rendering, 3D CAD,, are all things that I do with my PC besides gaming. So yeah 4 cores don't cut it which is why I have a Ryzen 8-core and it is plenty to get the work done.
Mar 7, 2018
HeftyMann
39
Mar 7, 2018
bookmark_border
I wasn't talking about the 8700 when I said that Intel just pulled it out if their asses. I was referring to that 18-core collosal that they pulled out of their asses after Threadripper was released. Cause that is what happened and why the launch was so botched.
Mar 7, 2018
A community member
Mar 7, 2018
bookmark_border
HeftyMann90% of people don’t do that, and I know that memory would benefit more for more tabs. Clearly, you’re an AMD fanboy.
Mar 7, 2018
A community member
Mar 7, 2018
bookmark_border
HeftyMannIf you want the absolute best, Intel still holds the title.
Mar 7, 2018
Bobert
46
Mar 8, 2018
bookmark_border
HeftyMannWhole. Also try removing the word "that" to see if you don't need it.
" omething innovative than re-release the same CPU three dam times with just slightly higher clocks " What about AMD's previous CPU's and video cards?
Mar 8, 2018
Sassequatch
0
Mar 9, 2018
bookmark_border
HeftyMannInternet Explorer though...need I say more?
But I do agree with you on AMD v. Intel. I can't justify buying a 6-core processor for $460 (just checked prices on Newegg. I'm sure there are other sites that have it for way less and that people will undoubtedly contradict me because internet) when I can buy an 8-core processor for $100 cheaper by going with a R7 1800x. And the prices fall from there as well. But hey, to each their own. Intel fans can't accept the fact that there's another comparable alternative to their CPUs that's ACTUALLY affordable. Heck, I stream, game and have up to 5 tabs open in Google Chrome all at the same time with multiple background processes on my Ryzen 5 1500x and I never suffer a loss of performance anywhere. Proof is in the pudding. Or however that saying goes.
Mar 9, 2018
A community member
Mar 11, 2018
bookmark_border
SassequatchWhat you're not understanding is that Intel is still best. We dominate FPS numbers because for a little more, you get better single core performance.
Mar 11, 2018
Sassequatch
0
Mar 11, 2018
bookmark_border
"A little more" meaning what? $100 - $150 dollars more? That's a lot more. Like I said, I personally cannot justify paying for similar performance. Single core or multi-core. AMD has made themselves a viable option for people who aren't made of money and can't afford nor will pay the premium price for a CPU that works just as well. "FPS numbers" is just a different way of saying "We can piss farther". As long as I'm getting a stable 60-70+ FPS in a demanding game like The Division for example with my graphic settings set to high, I'm good because anymore than 60 FPS the human brain really can't register that.
Mar 11, 2018
A community member
Mar 11, 2018
bookmark_border
SassequatchYou should use a shitty FX processor then because CPU‘s don’t matter for gaming.
Mar 11, 2018
View Full Discussion