Another review,a bit shocking :D . It's hands on review of 8350 in gaming AND streaming while gaming(versus 3570K,3770K and 3820). Surprising results for Piledriver ;).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...=eu8Sekdb-IE#!
Printable View
Another review,a bit shocking :D . It's hands on review of 8350 in gaming AND streaming while gaming(versus 3570K,3770K and 3820). Surprising results for Piledriver ;).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...=eu8Sekdb-IE#!
That review looks very poorly conducted though ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Why? Because it was not done by "pro" websites like AT or TR? What are your objections exactly?
The funny thing is that FX8350 excels with non-top of the range card like 7870 which should (if theory behind "bottlenecking GPUs" is correct) perform the same on all 4 tested CPUs. We see that's not the case since in numerous games and in situation with game streaming(more CPU and GPU taxing) 8350 is much better than 3570K and even more expensive parts. The guy who did the benchmarks performed the tests numerous times to rule out some sort of freak anomaly. Notice how 3820 and 3770K perform similarly with that card although they are 2 different platforms(but have similar CPU specs: one has slightly more IPC while the other has more cache -cancelled out effectively).
This "review" is complete non-sense. Results between Intel processors are illogical and I don't talk about FX gaming ones.
Review only used a 7870, kind pushing the gpu at resolutions at 1080P/1440P.
Interesting review I like the game streaming tests never seen that before.
Love the game song at the end ;)
I'm not gonna argue either way both r good processors different strokes for different folks I guess
The fact that people r still reviewing and comparing these 2 processors shows that their is something there to be talked about
I dont think its complete nonsense. It shows:Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
1. Games dont use more than four cores.
2. If you stream, u get more performance from more cores.
3. Intel is better option if you game and not stream.
4. FX is in many cases better if your tasks are capable of utilizing many cores, intel if your tasks dont utilize many cores.
I dont think there is really anything new in here, its just showing the obvious.
Very interesting review.
Would love to see some similar tests done with prof. apps.
Particularly on the video and image processing/editing end of things.
What's interesting is where people(like myself) didn't actually know about this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanical Man
Which is a big deal when you think about it as this potentially means getting a higher performance from a cheaper build by going AMD.
For gaming that is... ;)
Not really, my 5850 does just fine on 1080PQuote:
Originally Posted by demonkevy666
Not really, my 5850 does just fine on 1080PQuote:
Originally Posted by demonkevy666
click: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...ONgFEUo8#t=77s
This guy doesn't even know what dual channel is. You can't honestly expect him to conduct a balanced review. I came across this particular youtube channel before, subscribed for a bit, but soon realized that his presentation is more style than substance. For one thing, no comparison graphs?
Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
There is review from PCtuning, all modern CPUs in games with game resolution:
http://pctuning.tyden.cz/hardware/gr...omu-po-core-i7
Very interesting review. This time we have GTX670,a second fastest single GPU card on the market (after 680/7970GE) and results are pretty close yet again. 3770K is just 7% on average faster than 8350 in minimum fps department(across 15 games) and ~equal to 8350 in avg fps metric. Looks like 670GTX is still not fast enough to bring out any significant weaknesses of BD/PD based cores in gaming. Heck even old X6 @ stock is not that bad(although in few titles it produces lower results than the FX or intel parts). Sure there are few games that are just running better on i5/i7 hardware than on any AMD chip so who plays those games exclusively has one clear choice to make.Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
I'm still using a 2Gbs 5870 too. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by stangracin3
not at far cry 3 very highQuote:
Originally Posted by stangracin3
I still can't believe what I seeQuote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
for example
Far Cry 3 look and tell me what is there wrong.I fell off my chair
760 vs i5 3550 or i7 3770K. i5 760 is the fastest:rofl:
Arma II is a big mistake, anyone played this game from pct.
ACIII level Boston good place to test CPU not GPU.
I seached "Extreme system Superkames FX 8350" afew munites before, anh the google lead me to this topic , page 7. :D
Some of you still confuse about my results before?
I don't know what happened to maxforce's 3dsmax +Vray results, but I tested so many time before and I'm so sure that at the same speed the FX83xx faster than any I7 quadcores CPU Ivy/Sandy Bridge. And the review of behardware also have the similar result.
3dsmax 2012/2013 with Vray 2 is not much different.
My review as the same system:
AMD FX8320 vs Xeon E3-1230V2 (similar to a I7 3770 , 100mhz slower , E3-1230V2 @all core fulload ~ 3.5ghz ~ AMD FX8320 with my mainboard )Quote:
AMD:
CPU :AMD FX 8320
Mainboard:Gigabyte GA-990XA-UD3
Intel:
CPU :Xeon E3 1230V2
Mainboard:MSI Z77A-G45
Other hardware :
Ram Gskill Jipsjaw-X 1333 cas7
HDD Western Digital Black 1TB Sata3
VGA MSI R6950 Twin Frozr III PE/OC unlocked 2GB
PSU Seasonic X650
Cooler Prolimatech Megahalems Rev.B + 2 fan Cooler Master
Moniter Dell 2209WA (1680*1050)
OS Win7 64bit Ultimate SP1
VGA Driver 8.982.0.0 (Catalyst 12.8)
http://vozforums.com/showthread.php?...357&highlight=
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUPERKAMES
Some more result with I7 3770K@ 4.5ghz , the same file, sameOS/3dsmax version/renderer :
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8200/8...a3d4dd0a_b.jpg
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8205/8...147120ac_b.jpg
I7 3930K:
http://nu3.upanh.com/b5.s34.d4/1ecad...683.3dsmax.jpg
@maxforce: Can you show me the Vray setting? Or how many passes did you set in the Light cache menu?
Yesterday I released my second Vishera-Review (in german): click!
It's nothing special but I thought it's worth to share. :)
I tried boards with old agesa-code, I compared power draw with air- and watercooling, tested performance with different memory-clocks and -timings, tested performance with higher referenceclock, did a comparison between even and uneven multiplier and tweaked turbo core for better performance.
Crysis 3 (beta) and FX AMD looks very good in practice. Now is core i3 Ivy Bridge totally destroyed....
http://pctuning.tyden.cz/multimedia/...naroku?start=6
http://pctuning.tyden.cz/ilustrace3/...cpu_medium.png
I love seeing charts like these
Ermm, I3 is only a dual core with HT. Vishera is a full grown 8 core CPU. We'd better stop comparing to Intel and just enjoy Vishera. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
look at FX-4300 :)...And still, this is not classic quadcore only 2CU with 4c.
zeus, nice to see you back :)
fx4300 looks good :p