add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube

Comments (Continued)

  • 60 months ago
  • 0 points

Overclocking the 6300 moderately erases most or all of that gap, and can be done quite easily, because AMD didn't slap its low-end customers with pointless locks and feature removals.

This also makes the AMD build more expensive, time consuming, prone to failure (albeit how small), and consume more power. AM3+ also has no upgrade path.

In any case, overclocking either CPU would be mostly pointless for the vast majority of games, since we are talking about framerate differences above 60fps.

Wrong in many many instances

http://pclab.pl/art57503-3.html

  • 60 months ago
  • 1 point

This also makes the AMD build more expensive, time consuming, prone to failure (albeit how small), and consume more power. .

Not more expensive than an 1150 build that has a proper upgrade path. The other stuff is of little concern to people whose primary interest is simply getting performance/price. In other words, if you actually know what you're doing around a computer, rather than being a typical Intel buyer, who just likes to drop in his hardware and doesn't understand a thing about how to use it properly or why precisely it is so good/bad at the things he uses it for.

AM3+ also has no upgrade path.

Wrong. You can go all the way from dual core up to eight core, and make similar steps up in clock speed and IPC. It definitely has an upgrade path.

Wrong in many many instances

Many != Most

  • 60 months ago
  • 1 point

Not more expensive than an 1150 build that has a proper upgrade path.

You can buy the cheapest H81 board and put an i7 in it. Try the same thing with a 760G chipset motherboard and a 9590.

The other stuff is of little concern to people whose primary interest is simply getting performance/price.

Except AMD still isn't better from a price/performance perspective, so yeah...

In other words, if you actually know what you're doing around a computer, rather than being a typical Intel buyer, who just likes to drop in his hardware and doesn't understand a thing about how to use it properly or why precisely it is so good/bad at the things he uses it for.

What an incredibly ignorant statement. Your baseless ad hominem attacks do nothing for your argument except make you look like a fool. P.S. your bias is showing, how embarrassing!

Wrong. You can go all the way from dual core up to eight core, and make similar steps up in clock speed and IPC. It definitely has an upgrade path.

There is no IPC upgrade on AM3+ unless you buy a first gen FX CPU which is a terrible idea. Going from a hexcore to an octocore is going to have minimal performance impact in most games (Many != Most). Sure AM3+ technically has an upgrade path but its a really terrible one. If you're going to pull the FM2+ card that's still terrible because if you're buying a dualcore FM2+ CPU you're doing it wrong since a Celeron or Pentium will perform significantly better for the price, otherwise you're getting an A8/A10 or Athlon X4 which are the best the platform offers and are quadcores so 1150 socket still has the better upgrade path.

Many != Most

Are we including the entire backlog of all PC games ever? Then I guess a Pentium 4 meets this definition because I'm sure it'll kick some *** in DOSBox. For modern games, the benchmark I linked proved you wrong.

As for your price/performance argument

i3 build

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/KMNWf7

FX 6300 OC build

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/pDTXvK

Even removing the CPU cooler the i3 build is still cheaper.

  • 60 months ago
  • 1 point

You can buy the cheapest H81 board and put an i7 in it. Try the same thing with a 760G chipset motherboard and a 9590.

Enjoy it while you can, bucko. No guarantee Intel will allow the overclocking bit for future sockets, and no guarantee they will even allow it forever on 1150. Otherwise you'd be dropping a hugely expensive proc into a pile of crap.

Except AMD still isn't better from a price/performance perspective, so yeah...

Psh. I'm gonna save why this is such a laughable statement for below, where we take a look at your build comparisons.

What an incredibly ignorant statement. Your baseless ad hominem attacks do nothing for your argument except make you look like a fool. P.S. your bias is showing, how embarrassing!

It ain't ad hominem if it's true, and in my experience, it is. It even makes perfect sense if you think about it: AMD isn't as popular or well-known; therefore chances are that if someone is using it, it's because they pay somewhat more attention to their computer than the average joe who rolls out and buys the first Dell Dimension he sees at Walmart.

By the way, I'm currently happily using an Intel CPU in this PC. You still think I'm biased?

There is no IPC upgrade on AM3+ unless you buy a first gen FX CPU which is a terrible idea. Going from a hexcore to an octocore is going to have minimal performance impact in most games (Many != Most). Sure AM3+ technically has an upgrade path but its a really terrible one. If you're going to pull the FM2+ card that's still terrible because if you're buying a dualcore FM2+ CPU you're doing it wrong since a Celeron or Pentium will perform significantly better for the price, otherwise you're getting an A8/A10 or Athlon X4 which are the best the platform offers and are quadcores so 1150 socket still has the better upgrade path.

So much funny stuff you write... Yes, there is no IPC/ghz advantage if you start smart on AM3+. That being said, there's plenty room for IPC upgrades in the form of overclocking and multithreading. Saying "it's a terrible upgrade path" a hundred times does not make it true; it's perfect for many people. I'm not super-interested in talking about FM2+ because we are talking about AM3+ right here, but for the sake of argument I will point out that the A6-7400K and/or A8-8600 will beat the pants off Intel's HD chip on their Celerons and Pentiums in gaming, and that's what entry-level really looks like. But you're right - stopping at quad-cores isn't a good thing. Why do you suppose that, oh great i3 propounder?

Are we including the entire backlog of all PC games ever? Then I guess a Pentium 4 meets this definition because I'm sure it'll kick some *** in DOSBox. For modern games, the benchmark I linked proved you wrong.

No, actually I was thinking of all those new games hitting shelves now and in the future that are extremely multithreaded. Kinda funny how old FX looks a lot more modern these days... and your benchmark didn't look like it proved a whole heck of a lot to me: http://pclab.pl/art57503-20.html. What's true in Poland isn't necessarily true everywhere, either, esp. when it comes to price.

As for your price/performance argument

Nah bro. Let's do a more realistic comparison, shall we?

Intel: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/KMNWf7 (hope you don't need to refresh the BIOS, lol)

AMD: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/Z7KpmG

For one dollar more you get a better CPU, better cooler (don't have to spend on that again since it will also step up to your next CPU purchase), and a mobo rated to 125W, which should let your 95W 6300 overclock just fine.

And it IS the better type of CPU to have:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/57615-amd-vishera-fx-6300-fx-4300-review-18.html Summary: more feature-rich and still highly competitive

http://www.futuremark.com/hardware/cpu/AMD+FX-6300/review Summary: significantly more IPC potential than all other processors in its price class, yielding much better performance for gamers over time as game tech catches up with processor tech.

http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/56/amd-fx-8350-powering-gtx-780-sli-vs-gtx-980-sli-at-4k/index.html Summary: once you get to the top of the line, your i7 doesn't do much for you anyway.

P.S. - it will also still lack ECC support, unlike FX - not important at all, but still kinda funny.

  • 60 months ago
  • 0 points

No guarantee Intel will allow the overclocking bit for future sockets, and no guarantee they will even allow it forever on 1150. Otherwise you'd be dropping a hugely expensive proc into a pile of crap.

I never said anything about overclocking because you don't need to overclock to get decent performance like an AMD alternative. Go with a cheaper locked i7 or Xeon if you're smart.

It ain't ad hominem if it's true, and in my experience, it is.

Anecdotal experience much? I could say the same thing about the "typical AMD user" but I'm not an ignorant buffoon so I refrain from making such sweeping statements.

AMD isn't as popular or well-known; therefore chances are that if someone is using it, it's because they pay somewhat more attention to their computer than the average joe who rolls out and buys the first Dell Dimension he sees at Walmart.

AMD is plenty popular and many prebuilts contain AMD hardware. So your argument is flimsy at best if not completely baseless.

that being said, there's plenty room for IPC upgrades in the form of overclocking and multithreading.

Overclocking makes hardware faster? Thats not an argument for an upgrade path though...

benchmark didn't look like it proved a whole heck of a lot to me: http://pclab.pl/art57503-20.html.

So because the 6300 after being overclocked to 4.7GHZ on a high end motherboard and high end CPU cooler beats a stock i3 4130 (not 4150, which is .1ghz faster easily taking it into the lead by a slim margin) by 0.1% that means its better. Ignoring cost, ignoring the effort, ignoring power consumption, and everything else. Yeah no. You're grasping at straws here.

Intel: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/KMNWf7 (hope you don't need to refresh the BIOS, lol)

The DS3H has supported Haswell Refresh out of box since release as it came out around the same time. So yeah, snarky ignorant comment no. 2 (at least) from you.

AMD: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/Z7KpmG

This build sucks for several reasons, starting with the fact it's still more expensive so your entire argument has pretty much dissipated. The board you picked doesn't even have USB 3.0, SATA III, or 4 RAM slots so it has worse features for the price too. It also lacks VRM heatsinks which are incredibly important for overclocking more so on high power draw CPUs such as the FX line. The fact you are using a tower cooler is going to cause even more issues since the stock top down cooler provides added airflow to cool the board's VRM. See here: http://www.overclock.net/t/1239645/asus-m5a78l-m-lx-plus-fx-4100-throttling-even-at-stock-clocks#post_16909225 You basically suggested a hardware combination that is broken. So good luck overclocking at all let alone getting to 4.7GHZ which is required to barely lose to a stock i3 4150. You also have close to no upgrade path, you MIGHT be able to get a 8320 or one of the new 95w TDP octocores to run at stock speeds without throttling, but again fat chance getting any kind of OC out of it (seeing as the 8320/8320E have a lower boost speed vs the 6300 your IPC argument is also void).

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/57615-amd-vishera-fx-6300-fx-4300-review-18.html

Compared to IVY BRIDGE. Your arguments might have made sense two or three years ago, but not today.

http://www.futuremark.com/hardware/cpu/AMD+FX-6300/review

Synthetic benchmarks are next to worthless for this discussion. I'm not sure where you're getting this summary about it having the best IPC in its price class which is ridiculously false. Haswell architecture is close to twice as fast in IPC, a Pentimu G3258 knocks the socks off of any AMD cpu in IPC.

http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/56/amd-fx-8350-powering-gtx-780-sli-vs-gtx-980-sli-at-4k/index

They picked a bunch of decidedly not CPU intensive titles to test CPU bottlenecking... There's a whole host of issues regarding their methodology that I'm not going to bother getting into. This benchmark also has nothing to do with our discussion regarding the i3 and 6300.

  • 60 months ago
  • 1 point

I don't have time for this. There are easy rebuttals to all of what you said above, but I don't think I can possibly convince someone who is willfully not thinking things through just because they got caught making a stupid comment and don't want to have to admit it. At least I think I've shown why you are wrong enough to make a compelling case to anyone else who might read this with an unbiased point of view.

inb4 "no u," "i win" and all that other silly crap. I freely give it to you.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Ya so what It more expensive by like 10 bucks. You have to consider the load that you will be putting on the machine. Because i know in some thing like video editing that 6300 will absolutely wipe the floor with that i3.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Ya so what It more expensive by like 10 bucks.

Pricing has changed since these builds were posted. When you consider the fact the FX 6300 performs worse for gaming and the cooler/mobo combination he recommended is essentially broken, the argument of AMD being the budget choice loses much of its standing. Not to mention I could drop the motherboard down to a cheaper H81 chipset that would still have better features than the 760G chipset motherboard he suggested, cost basically the same if not less, with lower power consumption (cheaper to run over time), and an actual upgrade path.

video editing

Hardly relevant in a discussion about gaming performance, but you are correct. Highly multithreaded workloads common in mathematical work, video editing, and similar tasks are some of the few instances where I would feel somewhat comfortable recommending a build with an AMD CPU currently. Intel still has the benefit of newer/better chipset features and lower power consumption, among other pros.

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube