SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
04-23-13, 11:43 PM | #16 |
Grey Wolf
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 768
Downloads: 101
Uploads: 2
|
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/25...rmance-account This page can help Intel fanbois. Just saying. http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/272094-28-hate-guys We also have to take into account the price range, and the fact the Phenom II is three years old now. And AMD has newer processors to take on Intel's new ones. http://media.bestofmicro.com/W/M/369...leneck2013.png Look at these figures, the difference is marginal. This is what most people want to see, in Battlefield 3 http://media.bestofmicro.com/W/U/369...leneck2013.png
Last edited by V13dweller; 04-24-13 at 12:00 AM. |
04-24-13, 01:57 AM | #17 |
Navy Seal
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Land of windmills, tulips, wooden shoes and cheese. Lots of cheese.
Posts: 8,467
Downloads: 53
Uploads: 10
|
... Fanboi? You don't think I might kinda know what I'm on about? Citing cherry-picked sources here isn't going to help you convince anyone.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/288?vs=146 I'll stand by my previous statement of it depending on the game. A lot of times it won't really matter; once you hit a comfortable framerate it doesn't really matter if it's 60 or 120. But to say Phenom II can get even close to Sandy or Ivy Bridge, strictly CPU performance wise, is outright nonsense.
__________________
Contritium praecedit superbia. |
04-24-13, 03:31 AM | #18 |
Grey Wolf
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 768
Downloads: 101
Uploads: 2
|
There is no point going on, we all know this will go nowhere. (Just like politics)
There is enough Biased information wherever you go. Unless Toms Hardware is not a reputable source, then I don't know then. More Information, of the I7 Vs the Phenom II. http://media.bestofmicro.com/W/I/369...leneck2013.png This picture shows the difference is marginal. http://media.bestofmicro.com/W/L/369...leneck2013.png This image shows my point once again. Here are some more of the I7 against AMD's latest FX 8350. http://media.bestofmicro.com/L/F/367...md-oc-1920.png Here is intel's I7 http://media.bestofmicro.com/L/I/367...intel-1920.png Here are the 3D benchmark tests. http://media.bestofmicro.com/W/I/369...leneck2013.png These differences only make a very small impact on your gaming experience. And the cost differences of these is much larger then the gap in their gaming performance. The cost gap is usually 200-250 Dollars in most Australian Retailers. I am not trying to change your opinion, because that is not what we are here for, but these figures are to show that these Processors are very, very close when it comes to performance and if you want to pay that extra $200, so be it. Last edited by V13dweller; 04-24-13 at 03:50 AM. |
04-24-13, 03:52 AM | #19 | ||
Navy Seal
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Land of windmills, tulips, wooden shoes and cheese. Lots of cheese.
Posts: 8,467
Downloads: 53
Uploads: 10
|
Quote:
This is what you were saying: Quote:
You're right, this isn't going anywhere. I feel that it is through no fault of mine though.
__________________
Contritium praecedit superbia. |
||
04-24-13, 05:27 AM | #20 |
Grey Wolf
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 768
Downloads: 101
Uploads: 2
|
From all reviews I have read, Multi threaded applications (Like Sh5) run better on the AMD Phenom II x6, because they utilise all six cores.
This one from CPU-World.com shows that the Un-overclocked Phenom II runs Slightly better. http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/372...5_i5-2400.html My AMD Phenom II X6 runs at 4 Ghz like a breeze, no problems, the doesn't even need to spin up for more demanding games, like Sh5, Crysis 3. The Phenom II (Tested by me) can run Crysis 3 at 90-150 FPS solid and they core's ave not even got over 50%. Last edited by V13dweller; 04-24-13 at 05:39 AM. |
04-24-13, 08:11 AM | #21 |
Navy Seal
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Land of windmills, tulips, wooden shoes and cheese. Lots of cheese.
Posts: 8,467
Downloads: 53
Uploads: 10
|
... You've really lost the plot now, mate. Games are notoriously hard (or excessively expensive) to multi-thread. Single-core performance is still preferable over core count, let alone back in 2010.
Since you seem to appreciate Tom's; http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/...ard-core-gamer Note the thread title. See how he points out he's not a "hard-core" gamer in a thread about multi-threading? That's because he knows games don't thread well and he wants to point out it is not a concern for that system. Topics like that where this is not specified always get the same response I gave you: single-core performance is more relevant to gaming.
__________________
Contritium praecedit superbia. |
04-24-13, 08:32 AM | #22 |
Grey Wolf
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 768
Downloads: 101
Uploads: 2
|
I just use my Nvidia card to enable multi threading for any of my games, and Bam, Core load is balanced perfectly, took my SH5 core load from core 1 from about 40% and balanced it across all my cores perfectly.
And as the previous images I have linked you before, they only show a slight difference in gaming performance. All my games seem to support Multicore, because all the load is balanced across all my cores, and this allows me to achieve very high frame rates on all my games. I run Sh5 at Max Video setting and with 45 mods and my cores have the load balanced perfectly, I am able to use Time compression over 2000. I have never had lag in any game I play. The most my processor has ever got to is 45% on all cores, no core runs higher then others. My GPU is the only thing that limits how effective my CPU is. My Gpu can be working 50% and more while my CPU is just plodding along at at 20% average. And I would not be here debating this if I had "Lost the Plot" My Friend. This thread is about purchasing advice, not about maliciously defending your preferred Processor manufacturer. Last edited by V13dweller; 04-24-13 at 08:59 AM. |
04-25-13, 07:26 AM | #23 |
Navy Seal
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Land of windmills, tulips, wooden shoes and cheese. Lots of cheese.
Posts: 8,467
Downloads: 53
Uploads: 10
|
Let's get something straight: I'm not defending Intel. At no point did I say Intel is better than AMD, while you stated "Like everything Intel makes, they charge way too much for it.". So who exactly is "maliciously defending" their "preferred Processor manufacturer" here?
I have given you a straight up, all-round comparison between a i5 2500K and a AMD Phenom II X6 1090T. The AMD has a 2 core advantage there, and the i5 comes out with a clear lead. You flat out ignored it. I gave you facts about game engines. You ignored them. I don't much care what your experiences are with AMD; we covered that with acknowledging that a better CPU doesn't necessarily translate to better gaming, except where the game is CPU-bound. The fact is your statements contradict reality, and that's why I'm debating this: I can't stand misinformation, and I know from experience there's an awful lot of it floating around.
__________________
Contritium praecedit superbia. |
04-25-13, 09:12 AM | #24 |
Grey Wolf
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 768
Downloads: 101
Uploads: 2
|
I'd like you to go over that again, I took all of this into account, I did not "Ignore it" I read over this multiple times.
I have given you all my comparisons. I have told you how my Machine works, I have taken all this into account, would you like me to show you a picture that shows my performance in these games that I have previously discussed? Want me to find a spare i5 and put this to the test against my current processor? I have done these tests myself, I know what I am talking about. And you showed the 1090T. I use the 1100T and as I said, I run games like Crysis 3 on max video settings with a solid average of 130 FPS, do you use an i5? because I'd like to see you get an i5 to that. My friend's i7-2760QM in his Gaming laptop runs a game Red Orchestra 2 at an average or 50-60 FPS. And as the previous source showed, the i7 desktop processor's performance is only SLIGHTLY better then the AMD. From what I gather, your not even looking at my sources, or your not taking any of these facts into the next posts you create. I do not have time to go over this every day to give you these facts that I have already supplied but have not been taken into account. I strongly recommend you re-read (If you have not done so already) these sources my friend. I do believe that that your attitude towards me, and this subject is nonsensical, but mostly to me. Last edited by V13dweller; 04-25-13 at 09:40 AM. |
04-25-13, 11:10 AM | #25 |
Torpedoman
|
Look at my sig, then copycat it! LOL I love my PC! My setup falls around your price range, but I already had a monitor(I just use my 42" LCD TV). Although I will be upgrading to a dual Video card setup, the single 610 with 1 Gig works great, I can run Call of Duty MW3 and BF3 with full graphics and options .
Check Microcenter for prices. They've got some killer deals. Good luck!
__________________
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] Current Realism settings: 84% My Vessel: Asus M-pro Z-77 Intel I5 3.4Ghz Nvidia Gforce 610 1 Gig ram/Overclocked 8 Gig ram. |
04-25-13, 11:21 AM | #26 | ||||
Rear Admiral
|
Quote:
if you're such a tester and you know what you talk aobut it shouldn't be so hard. Quote:
even the FX8350 clocked at 4.6GHZ maxed out at 1080p resolution squeezes perhaps an average of 20 and without the games filters (AA/AF) 32fps in crysis 3, and let's throw in some Far Cry 3 for a bonus and crossfire GPU results. Quote:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ng,3451-8.html 130FPS Average? maxed out? Cores not breaking a sweat? ehm...I don't think so unless you can bring forth what I asked above. Quote:
HunterICX
__________________
Last edited by HunterICX; 04-25-13 at 11:39 AM. |
||||
04-25-13, 12:54 PM | #27 |
A-ganger
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 74
Downloads: 437
Uploads: 0
|
I'm building a setup right now:
AMD A10 5800k (which I intend to overclock) has brilliant built in graphics ASUS F2A55-M LE 2x 8GB RAM at 1.6 GHz (may go higher on the speed) Cooler master 440 case SATA 500GB HDD (may add another 500GB HDD or a SSD) HD TV for a screen |
04-25-13, 01:01 PM | #28 |
Grey Wolf
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 768
Downloads: 101
Uploads: 2
|
As my previous data shows, I was comparing the Phenom II to the processor of 2010's standard, the 37xx not the 39xx, not the latest top of the line equipment.
And your showing equipment of post 2010 standards, and this is voiding the validity of what some of my data shows, now just settle down and look at the data I show you, and see it as it is, not just how you want to see it. And I know the odds's are stacked against me so I will just discontinue this debate while I am still ahead, please get the expected silliness and expected insults and/or rude remarks out of the way. Since all of my data has been shot down without any of it taken into consideration. Also, if you have difficulty viewing and seeing information from links. Not too much difference. Not much difference at all. I will also have a screenshot taken at a later date of the FPS counter showing you the results you don't want to see. Relating to my friends i7, It was a comparison from is LAPTOP processor to other i5's. And the i7 does outperform the i5 under most circumstances even though it is a laptop core. I'm sorry I have a different opinion to the rest of the community even if it is supported by facts. If having a different view is not allowed here, I will associate myself somewhere else. Last edited by V13dweller; 04-26-13 at 12:32 AM. |
04-25-13, 01:18 PM | #29 |
Lucky Jack
|
Spike, here's my advice.
Don't ask for advice. |
04-26-13, 07:07 AM | #30 |
Predator of the sea
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: England
Posts: 139
Downloads: 6
Uploads: 0
|
Its a good job Toms Hardware is around or else some people would not know what there opium is because they wont listen to anyone who is actually using the program or hardware. its all down to what Tom says the guy must be making a killing on kickbacks.
|
|
|