[theverge] AMD won the next-gen console war, and PC gamers could reap the reward

[Final8ty]

http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/21/44...-game-consoles

[Rollo]

That does it! I am selling my gaming pcs and replacing them with boxes containing AMD APUs, before people see this article and realize they are now obsolete!

Or not.

What I am wondering is why people seem to think that the parts of games that CPUs run are now magically going to be better suited to multithreading. How many years have we had 4 core cpus from AMD and intel, and how many games still don't take advantage of that?

http://www.extremetech.com/computing...-still-stuck/2

Even in a rare game like Crysis 3 that gets high core utilization across all 8 physical threads the FX8350 provides, the 4GHz 8350 loses badly to the 3.3GHz 6 core 3960, and barely edges the 3.4GHz 4 core 3770.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1362591/g...pu-cpu-scaling

I'll believe this "new era" of "ZOMG! AMD CPUs are destroying everything at PC gaming because they have low end Jaguars in consoles!" when I see it. And then I'll buy AMD cpus.

Till then, I'll remember the 8 million other "It's all over for company X!" threads I've read in the 28 years I've been a computer gamer and wait for yet another "revolution" in the industry.

[K404]

I'm gonna take the cynical approach:

With the "next-gen" consoles using x86, yes, it's easier to port to PC, but that could be interpreted by dev studios as "we can put even less effort in than before....and still get cross-platform sales."

Plus- the GPUs in the up-and-coming consoles are not exactly high end. It will make the ported games available to more people, which IS a good thing..... BUT if there are no demanding games, there is nothing to push hardware forward, other than e-peen and IMO, that's not a healthy motivator.

[hurleybird]

Interesting that ignite engine can't be ported to PC due to lack of HUMA.

[El Mano]

Interesting that ignite engine can't be ported to PC due to lack of HUMA.

Lol, that means they can't copy-paste the code. Of course it could be done for PC, they just don't want to.

BUT if there are no demanding games, there is nothing to push hardware forward, other than e-peen and IMO, that's not a healthy motivator.

Games are designed to be ran on as many computers as possible. Don't expect this to change, no matter how many cores, RAM and whatnot bring the new and future console generations.

[AzureSky]

http://www.extremetech.com/computing...-still-stuck/2

Even in a rare game like Crysis 3 that gets high core utilization across all 8 physical threads the FX8350 provides, the 4GHz 8350 loses badly to the 3.3GHz 6 core 3960, and barely edges the 3.4GHz 4 core 3770.

ok lets do a little math

fx 8350 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...819113284]$180
intel 3960x $1070
intel 3770k $310

now, please explain to me, stock for stock how the cheaper chip even comes close to the intel chip in anything, let alone being faster ever?

please, you constantly post how AMD are(every AMD thread that pops up) yet, you never do respond when people show how close they are in most games and tests.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1362591/g...pu-cpu-scaling

I'll believe this "new era" of "ZOMG! AMD CPUs are destroying everything at PC gaming because they have low end Jaguars in consoles!" when I see it. And then I'll buy AMD cpus.

Till then, I'll remember the 8 million other "It's all over for company X!" threads I've read in the 28 years I've been a computer gamer and wait for yet another "revolution" in the industry.

havent seen anybody say its over for anybody, i mean other then you constantly posting doom and gloom about amd sucking in every thread that even mentions AMD.....

as to how much AMD sucks and cant game....

because the only games on the market are skyrim and f1.....ooook......sorry but not all games are as poorly optimized and coded as skyrim an f1....

lets try some other games shal we.







and then we have the summery stuff

in short your assertion that amd cards cant drive multi gpu setups is bull flat out, they can, just not on games running antiquated poorly threaded engines.

skyrim's engine is based on gamebryo, f1 well, I dont know a single person who actually plays that game....and i havent bothered to look into it but, i have read that its engine is far from modern...

now we head over to http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Crysis...hmark-1056578/



not multi gpu, but, shows that the 8350 even at stock isnt worthless for games using modern engines.

ahh heres a good one
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6934/c...gpu-at-1440p/5


so, your saying a 3.49fps delta between a 3770k and 8350 means amd cant drive multi gpu?

how about SLI

humm so 0.32 fps means an 8350 cant drive multi gpu.....huh....thought that was within margin of error...

on to dirt 3


here the delta is 15.72fps, but in this case, the fps are well above 120fps, so.....how is the 8350 not able to drive multi gpu again?


an fps delta of 2.66fps.....wow amd cant drive dual 580's at 1440p can it....


in civ v the fps on amd never drop below 66.63 AFIK thats still quite playable.


a whopping 0.45fps delta between intels top chip that retails for 570usd vs an 8350 that retails for 200usd.....yeah amd cant game, and they cant multi gpu game at all..


huh....0.3fps....must be a new definition of "cant drive multi gpu"...



so, if Civ V is your game of choice and you want more then 66.6fps, go intel, if not.....the diffrance over all is pretty minimal if you test at what many of us are starting to consider the new hardcore gamer resolution(i run many games at 2560x1600 via downsampling, on my old monitors it was 2560x1440)

but yeah your right, amd just cant game at all, and cant push multi gpu setups at all can they....

so the of all the games on the market only f1 2012, skyrim and civ v matter, those are the most popular games and the only ones anybody plays?

interesting...since i know nobody who plays f1, i only know a few people who play CivV(and the amd users still say they get smooth fps...so whats it matter?), and skyrim, sorry but even most people who have reviewed the games perf on intel admit it should run better then it does, the fact they didnt optimize it for more cores because they where lazy and where more worried about console porting then anything else.....yeah its poorly optimized, the same has been said in more then 1 review of f1 where they didnt even use amd chips....





wont get into why i dont even look at vrzone anymore and havent for many years......long story short i have no respect for their staff anymore.




um, most people have 60hz monitors, so anything over 60fps isnt going to matter....so yes, even in civ5 pretty much any game system you builds gonna be "good enough", if all you play is f1, skyrim, civ5 and just have to have over 60fps, then yes you need to get yourself intel/nvidia, other then that.....sorry but most people dont spend this kinda money on videocards or processors.....most popular cpu's are under 200bucks in my exp, the most popular videocards are around the same price each(for true gamer buyers that is)



how about they guy who already has

1. an AMD system with 1 7870/7950/7970 and just wants a boost in gfx perf?

2. has an AMD am3+ system and want a newer cpu and videocard?

Oh wait they should spend more, and replace everything so they can go intel/nvidia......

sorry but I see alot of the above and I cant justify them replacing their board(even if its not high end) just so they can get an dead end intel platform...

I personally have see at most 5 people buy dual 7900 cards, I have seen far more buy a 7870 then later grab a 2nd OR a 7770 and grab a 2nd, or a 650/660 series and grab a 2nd....this makes more sense, and it gives a nice perf boost be it amd or intel platforms......despite your bull assertion that amd cant drive multi gpu configs(soundly prove false above..)




so 60+fps in non shooter games is crippling them? must be a new definition of crippling im no familiar with....



some do , and if thats the only games they play and they need over 66fps, its probably a good idea to go with intel.




again, cripples, if you look at the charts I posted, and reviews I have seen, I have yet to see a case where AMD wasnt able to produce 60+fps in a modern game.....and since very few gamers have 120hz or higher monitors, it really dosnt matter if the system dosnt produce 160-200-300-500-1000 fps, since only 60 can be displayed by the vast majority of computer monitors.



thanks for proving my point

lets start with the fact nobody cares about 1280x800, so lets focus on 1920x1080


a delta of 3 fps(intel is 3 whopping fps faster!!!) in Batman Arkham City....amazing, guess 70 is unplayable and 73 is smooth as silk..... mind you thats between the $200 8350 and the $320 3770k....


lets move on to Borderlands 2
a delta of 9.2fps between the $200 8350 and the $320 3770k....
so 60.3fps is totally unplayable and crippled and 69.5fps is smooth as silk...interesting.



but lets move on to crysis2
with a delta of 0.9fps between the $200 8350 and the $320 3770k....
so 61.3 is unplable and crippling, but 62.2 is smooth as silk....ok......


how about dirt showdown....
with a delta of 3.2fps between the $200 8350 and the $320 3770k...
so,58.8 is unplayable and crippling but 62 is smooth as silk...


next is Far Cry 2
with a delta of 19.6 fps between the $200 8350 and the $320 3770k....
it may seem amd?s being destroied, but, to put this in perspective thats
113.9fps for the 8350 and 133.5 fps for the 3770k, is 19.6fps worth 120usd?



on to Metro 2033
with a delta of 1.4fps between the $200 8350 and the $320 3770k....
so, 28.8fps is unplayable but 29.4 is smooth as silk?

it amazes me what you Intel/nVidia fanboi's will call crippling and unplayable.....





a delta of 9.2fps between the $200 8350 and the $320 3770k....
so 60.3fps is totally unplayable and crippled and 69.5fps is smooth as silk...interesting.

amazes me what you fanboi's will call total failure and unplable and crippling.....it really does...your own numbers show a whole 9.2fps slower where both are over 60fps....and thats "fail"



funny, last I checked, ivybridge runs hotter then my FX line stock cooler for stock cooler, hell, i could run at 4.4 on my stock cooler and get better temps then a 3770k at stock on its stock cooler.....perhaps if your lovely intel hadnt cheaped out and used shoddy TIM under the IHS temps would be better.....



yes im sure, you cant wait to troll those threads like you do every other AMD thread you can find....

what you fail to understand is, this simply isnt a chip for noobs, just like your 990x isnt a chip for noobs, its a niche market product for people who have to much money and to little brains, it will sell if it goes retail, just as the X series chips sell, and just as the EE chips and first gen FX chips sold(athlon64 fx chips that is)

these arent there to "rippoff noobs" they are there because theres a niche market that will buy them.....same as the X series from intel, Just like the Titan was/is a niche market product made for people with to much money and to little brains to see that if they had waited they could have got over 90% of the perf at just over half the price or as anand says Link

guess titan was nvidia ripping off stupid noobs with a $1000 videocard that isnt as fast as their 690(thats cheaper) or even as fast as 2 of their 660ti's.....

http://www.techspot.com/review/644-n...tan/page4.html

wow man, you should be PISSED at nVidia for ripping you off, they could have sold you 2*660ti's or a dual 660 card and given you better perf for alot less money.

its amazing how you defend the titan and even 990x, despite the fact you got ripped off and could have bought a far cheaper product and gotten the same performance!!!!

so, AMD totally suck and cant even hope to compete with Intel/nVidia.....

and lets be honest tRollo, even if AMD do pull ahead in games at some point, your not gonna own AMD, specially if they dont bench the best in 100% of games and synthetics, because, if it dosnt give you top fps in f1, skyrim and civ V, it will mean you have a limp epeen.

[Buckeye]

There seems to be a rash of reported posts today, mainly by two users. This needs to stop unless something is way out of line.

If it keeps up some people are going to get banned from news section.

[Ace123]

I second that.

[Tomasis]

+1

we need constructive posts..

not some nonsense by 1000$- of- every- part- buyers who like to ride on high horses.

[Buckeye]

That was not the point of my post, Rollo brings his arguments to these posts and I sometimes actually agree with him

The point was Stop reporting every single post he makes, then he reports others. If its something that is warrant to reporting, fine and that goes for any post form anyone. But lets try and stop quoting line by line what some one says and then braking down each word. Then reporting the post.

[Tomasis]

Lol it is funny human behaviour. Thanks for the insight

[MaddMuppet]

Everyone knows that Rollo is Rollo. Some people just need to chill out a bit. Everyone, right or wrong is entitled to an opinion.

[Greg83]

And when i see these why buy one or the other i can't help but think. had they actually bought these games shown in reviews. t
hey'd not be thinking what plays every game i can download for free best, they'd be thinking what do i need to play these $150 dollars for 4 games i bought best.

[Final8ty]

*sigh*

hadn't browsed XS in a while; come in here & *bam* there's a poster I had a run-in with years ago.. an utter troll.. never admitted when he was wrong (& he often was) - heck, never saw a single constructive post from him(?)

He contradict himself to much, i had a run in with him a few times and he was having go at me for not supporting AMD enough because i have not upgraded to the latest GPU and CPU like as if only that matters when he does not know my purchase history(over 30 AMD CPUs)(16 motherboards, killed a few), he then tells me to buy 2 7950 for CF which he now says is crap, i post that my sig does not show all and that he sees through a link that i have a AMD Piledriver FX-8 Eight Core 8350 Black Edition at 4.8Ghz, so he posts that i should of bought an Intel CPU, yes that will plug right into my Asus Crosshair V Formula Z AMD 990FX, and Asus Crosshair V Formula AMD 990FX.

I have 3 x MSI HD 7950 OC BE @ 1100/1465 (due to one of my 5970 is on the way out) that only cost me 207 pounds each, i can peak them at 99% even with Vsync , i need more bring on the 8990 or whatever so i can have 2 for Quadfire and i was given the impression that the new cards need more grunt to push them.

I buy AMD because they are cheap (CPU/GPU) and get the job done get my 60fps and the CPUs don't have features disable besides the Multi on the really cheap stuff, but still i will keep my eye out for Intel just in case but there is always something that puts me off.

I'm not getting into any drawn out BS with him any more, I'm enjoying my rigs and that's all that matters.

[ajaidev]

The shift to x86 is good and fine but the core count is what is more interesting. When the first Xbox 360 was released 7-8 years back i had a long talk with Mr. V who later joined the LRB team he said that the Xbox 360 CPU is limited not because of the architecture followed but because of the core count "He assumed the Cell CPU was much better given the SPEs". He followed a very easy path for any game according to him it was all about separation - processing - integration - output, separate parts of a scenario were suppose to be made by the programmer and then processed by different cores if some thing is very heavy use a unified SPE/PPE then integration of scenario and output. [Sorry if i forgot some thing]

This off-course never happened given the stupid Cell processor but their is no reason why this cant work on the AMD Fusion part or for that matter on the Intel LRB. Talking about HUMA AMD has done a very good job and LRB has something similar in the works which will be disclosed later if not disclosed already. One thing is for sure AMD should focus on fusion parts because their FX range is ridiculed by Intel engg but the fusion parts such as 5800K really did take their sleep, just imagine a 6 core part with a 7770 equivalent iGPU.

[Zloyd]

Personally looking forward to console ports(well not looking forward but its gonna be much better.) this generation of consoles are basically PC's .... wouldnt be surprised to see Win OS being run on them eventually (By people hacking them) 4k monitors coming should make 1600/1440p much more accessible .... cant complain.


Ignore Rollo Jesus told him AMD is run by the damned. (sorry its a cheap shot couldnt resist :P)

Lighten up Rollo !!

[MaddMuppet]

The shift to x86 is good and fine but the core count is what is more interesting. When the first Xbox 360 was released 7-8 years back i had a long talk with Mr. V who later joined the LRB team he said that the Xbox 360 CPU is limited not because of the architecture followed but because of the core count "He assumed the Cell CPU was much better given the SPEs". He followed a very easy path for any game according to him it was all about separation - processing - integration - output, separate parts of a scenario were suppose to be made by the programmer and then processed by different cores if some thing is very heavy use a unified SPE/PPE then integration of scenario and output. [Sorry if i forgot some thing]

This off-course never happened given the stupid Cell processor but their is no reason why this cant work on the AMD Fusion part or for that matter on the Intel LRB. Talking about HUMA AMD has done a very good job and LRB has something similar in the works which will be disclosed later if not disclosed already. One thing is for sure AMD should focus on fusion parts because their FX range is ridiculed by Intel engg but the fusion parts such as 5800K really did take their sleep, just imagine a 6 core part with a 7770 equivalent iGPU.

That is certainly something we need to happen more in gaming. All this processing power only using one or two cores in the majority. If these new consoles help to change that, then bring them on. It can't happen soon enough.

[Rollo]

Everyone knows that Rollo is Rollo. Some people just need to chill out a bit. Everyone, right or wrong is entitled to an opinion.

People have been posting that games optimized for more physical cores on the upcoming consoles will have an advantage on AMD parts, so I thought a thread about how upcoming games might have an advantage on AMD parts was a good place to post an article about why it's hard to get gains multi threading games, and show an example of how AMD parts aren't competing clock for clock even at games that are using all 8 of the 8350s cores heavily.

As far as the HUMA goes, I think the author is nuts if he thinks unified memory access will give AMD APUs an advantage at anything except perhaps other APUs. Unified memory access is not going to change the fact that the CPU/GPU of APUs are feeble compared to dedicated parts and will be for quite some time.

If people disagree with what I've said in this thread, how about posting why and links to articles that prove me wrong rather than yelling about how I hate AMD?

I reported ONE post here, and that is AzureSky reposting that huge post from the other thread about why AMD multi-GPU is "good enough" that one could ignore the failings for the savings they get with 8350s. I disagree with this too, because a. basically there's only one AMD chip showing close to intel levels of performance at multi GPU (8350) b. people spending the extra for multi GPU usually aren't in "savings" mode, and they can buy intel parts that don't have the disadvantages for similar money. However; that is a discussion for another thread, not here.

[Aberration]

So moral of all those benchmarks is to buy an i5-2500K? Seems to be the winner @ $200

[Tomasis]

why have you buy 2 generations old cpu?

why you have to sell perfectly fine FX system for Haswell when you have to buy new motherboard, ev. cooler, PSU for F**** 10 fps when it is still playable as AzureSky proved in charts?

It is plainly stupid and Elitistic argument also it wastes nature resources .

Honestly anyone who still has 920, phenom, core2 duo should stick with it and use better GPU if they have a little of brain to think rationally.

Again it is pretty much Elitistic way to disregard new consoles with LOTS of bandwith when its main purpose is to PLAY. Im surprised how good looking it was in games on ancient hardwares as x360, ps3. Imagine how games will look at those new consoles and it is easy to port games to PC with more textures, tesselation by game studios. Games we gonna see, are going to be larger in variation of genres.

[Aberration]

Why have to buy 2 year old CPU? I don't have to. But IF I were looking to buy and save $, AMD would not be my choice.

As far as stupid, elitist and a waste of resources... well buying AMD would be just that.

I am not in the console market, so I could really care less Except that the money goes to AMD, maybe some day they can compete again.

[Greg83]

if more cores didn't improve gaming performance greatly, you'd obviously have disabled 3 cores and shown us how great it was still.
compilers, ease of coding. optimized for 1 fpu + 1 interger. for ease of coding across platforms currently existing.
left 4 interger cores not used in amd side

now with intel going 8 cores next year, and amd doing 1 fpu for 1 interger in their next gen 8 cores. its all gonna be able to show where and why things were so far apart. 10-15% hahah.

but with steam wanting games linux compatible, opengl is having to come back, same with unix of ps4. that is where i see more improvenments then anything coming back
prob even opencl use for cross OS unix/nix/windows cpu coding.

and if a light bulb 100w or two makes you elitest . then all those ppl working in places with 10 light bulbs just to regulated what we can and cannot have. as a career. they must be demented.

[Tomasis]

Abberation , it was not the reply to you without a general comment.

if I was in market for buy a new system, I would look at Kaveri, Richland

It will be laughable when other buy "weak apu" read Ps4 while other put 5k $ to play SAME games.

People spend money what they want. Often more money than his own brain cells

Also not everybody afford that insane amount for 4x monitors, Quad Fire, 999999x cores etc.

Rollo tells everybody to buy same as his hardware as in Finalfantasy8 case. Then also say only he can say opinion about 1000$ priced crap Amd cpu because he can afford that and other are not entitled to their opinions. Thus ironic remark "elitistic".

hey im not serious

[Rollo]

Rollo tells everybody to buy same as his hardware as in Finalfantasy8 case. Then also say only he can say opinion about 1000$ priced crap Amd cpu because he can afford that and other are not entitled to their opinions. Thus ironic remark "elitistic".

hey im not serious

I don't recall telling anybody to buy anything that costs $1000.. Obviously that stuff isn't bang for buck and if I wasn't in the position either my wife or I can pay the mortgage and bills, I wouldn't buy it either. I'm not elitist, but I'm not "most people" either.

I also agree with you that for people with AMD motherboards, FX8350s make a lot of sense. But I'd also say if I were buying a new motherboard it would have to be intel currently because even though the differences are smaller with Vishera, intel is still the leading edge tech and they're inexplicably selling a lot of really nice chips now for $200-$300..

I ranted about the 9590 because it will give $300 chip performance for $920, according to rumor. If intel or NVIDIA try the same, I'll flame them as hard. (or harder, as they don't need the money)

[AzureSky]

So has anybody else noticed that tRollo hasnt responded to the charts/graphs and discredited them in any of the threads they have been posted in?

instead he made one post citing f1 2012, skyrim and civ v as proof amd cant game....

the point tRollo and a few others cant seem to get is, alot of people dont buy multi gpu upfront, they buy one, then when they feel the urge for moar powar they go buy a 2nd, as the above shows, amd can deal with that just fine.

as to the "AMD parts aren't competing clock for clock even at games that are using all 8 of the 8350s cores heavily." who cares?

honestly, you keep grasping at straws like "AMD parts aren't competing clock for clock even at games that are using all 8 of the 8350s cores heavily." well, in games using modern engines like frostbyte/cryengine latest builds, amd are competing stock for stock, and guess what, the vast majority of people, even people who buy high end parts, DONT OVERCLOCK.

we do, but then, I find the fun of clocking AMD more of a challange then just adding a few volts and changing a multi.....(i can do it that way but, i use a hybrid oc mult+buss)

im sorry it upsets some people that everybody wont tell them how great their $1000 cpu+$1000gpu is, I really am, if your ego/epeen is that fragile you really may be better off on a site like TPU where you likely can get into a big circle jerk with other elitists.

by the way some elitists in this thread talk, we all NEED a videocard that costs 1k, a cpu that costs 1k, likely ram that costs at least 1/2 that, exct, or we just cant possibly game or have fun gaming....i mean all that matters is that you get the best bench scores ever, if you dont, you cant have fun gaming....or doing anything else.

and we are stupid to be happy with our systems that arent using a cpu that costs 1k, gpu that costs 1k , exct.....

guess most of us are really REALLY stupid then since, i dont see alot of people posting from either camp running cpu/gpu that cost a grand each.....