Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
TechGauge Admits AMD Not A Good Buy
#1
http://techgage.com/article/amds-fx-8320...-a-budget/
Quote:The trouble is, at present, throwing threads at games shows diminishing returns in general. As I said earlier, it all depends on the games you plan to play and how well they leverage more than 2-4 cores.

I hate to be a negative voice in regards to AMD, as I’ve been a fan for over a decade. Since I built my first PC back on 2001, I’ve built 2 for myself that have been Intel-based. In fact, I’ve been running a Phenom II X4 based system for the last 4 or 5 years and before that it was an Athlon 2 dual-core. That said, I can’t justify going with a new AMD build based on the AM3+ platform if you’re currently running an Athlon X4 or Phenom II X4-based system. I can see buying a new board to move up to USB 3.0 and SATA 6Gbps, but if you’re running an AM3-based chip, I’d recommend just sticking with it. Instead, spend the money you’d put towards an octo-core CPU towards a GPU upgrade since that’s going to net you the biggest bang-for-your-buck return.

If, on the other hand, you’re coming from an AM2-based system or a dual-core AM3 and you’ve got limited funds, you’ve got two choices: go with either an AM3+ 6+ core CPU (at the time of this writing you can find the FX-8320E for $120-$149 USD), and get the cheapest 970 or 990FX-based board you can get your hands on; or go with an H97 based board and an Intel Core i3.
...
As much as I hate to write this, as an enthusiast, I can’t really recommend AMD’s CPUs right now. Not if you’re starting from square one. Like I said earlier, if you’ve got a compatible chip (AM3) and want to move to USB 3.0 and SATA 6Gbps, by all means, the boards are great. The chipset is mature and I’ve even seen where one of the board manufacturers is coming out with a board with USB 3.1. If you’re sporting an AM2+ or earlier system, just take the plunge into an Intel setup. They’re really not all that much more money if you’re frugal with your choices, and they don’t represent a dead-end in the future if you go with a 9X series chipset.

That said, I’m really at a loss for words. I’m a little sad, very disappointed, and unhappy in feeling like I’ve failed one of my heroes. So, I’m going to retire and lick my wounds.
Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply
#2
Who in the world would?

One thing i find very strange (or maybe not),
go to a random tech forum and more than half of the posters have AMD cpus in the sigs. It must mean one thing.......................
Every single person who buys a modern AMD CPU post in tech forums.................
Reply
#3
(04-08-2015, 08:33 AM)ocre Wrote: Who in the world would?

One thing i find very strange (or maybe not),
go to a random tech forum and more than half of the posters have AMD cpus in the sigs.  It must mean one thing.......................
Every single person who buys a modern AMD CPU post in tech forums.................

I don't think any of them "bought" an AMD CPU, at least not with money.

There hasn't been any reason to buy an AMD CPU for a lot of years now. People in enthusiast forums read the reviews and know this better than anyone.
Reply
#4
Here's the FX-8320E's Unigine Heaven score on 4 cores after being OCed to 4.6 GHz:
[Image: 8320eheav-500x394.jpg]
The guy did a run of Unigine Heaven with the i5-4690K at stock, here's the result:
[Image: original.jpg?w=600&h]
Valve hater, Nintendo hater, Microsoft defender, AMD hater, Google Fiber hater, 4K lover, net neutrality lover.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)