|
|
|
The New AMD Building Thread
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
29. November 2009 @ 00:00 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by shaffaaf:
thats the thing, there is no need to upgradwe, realistically for most gamers aswell. but yet we do, its a diseaase :D
LOL! Indeed. I have the disease I think. I have this certain feeling that I have to have the best or at least close to it :D The idea that one has state of the art devices feels really good...
Sure is a tease though when you can't afford it.
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 29. November 2009 @ 00:01
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
29. November 2009 @ 00:06 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by shaffaaf:
thats the thing, there is no need to upgradwe, realistically for most gamers as well. but yet we do, it's a disease :D
Shaff,
True, but one that requires lots of money! :)
Happy Holidays,
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
 |
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
29. November 2009 @ 04:06 |
Link to this message
|
While I will agree that i5 is a fantastic CPU and a good value, I don't think they will sell too well for a while. I must agree with Russ that the economy is getting hit hard in the US. Jobs are disappearing, wages are shrinking, and companies are going out of business. And it's not just isolated cases in certain areas. It's happening EVERYWHERE. Combine that with the increasing cost of living and you'll understand that every penny counts. The Athlon II X4 represents a powerful spot in the market right now because it's fast and cheap. Whether or not i5 is a good deal makes no difference to whether or not it's affordable.
I must also agree with Russ on CPU speed Sam. You constantly make the point that a faster CPU is needed. You stress it so badly. But i5 really doesn't represent our next step forward in overall speed. No matter how fast it is, it's still just a beefed up Core 2 Quad. If Core 2 Quad and Phenom II are too slow, then why do they still sell? I have never found a situation where my CPU was a limiting factor in my enjoyment of a game or program. Russ hit it on the head with this:
Quote:
Speeds have reached to point where you have to ask yourself, "How fast is fast"? It's not like the old days where upgrading to a new platform reduced encoding time by half. Half back then was 1.5 hours from 3 hours. Today, I process most DVDRB/CCE jobs in less than half an hour, with my personal best being 17:26 total time for "Alice, Sweet Alice"! Even if i5 was twice as fast, you are not talking about a huge amount of time difference here. You're also talking about gamers here. What do we have here on AD for high end gamers? 4 or 5 people?
Though, Russ, your reasoning applies to gaming as well and more than you might think. As easily as I could go get one right now, I have felt absolutely no squeeze to upgrade to an i5. My Phenom II is blazingly fast and near overkill for most of my games.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388 |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
29. November 2009 @ 08:10 |
Link to this message
|
Omega: It's pretty simple really. Compared to say the X4 600 series, the i5 platform is around 40% more expensive, but typically 40% faster, if not more.
I don't often consider upgrade potential for new systems as quite frankly, as chipsets change and so on, even if the socket still exists, you're usually still after a new board for the CPU, and in the case of now upgrading from Core 2s to Core i5s/i7s or from original AM2 AMDs to the current AM3 crop, possibly RAM as well.
Russ: The same goes for any CPU that costs less money than another. People set different budget limits, the i7 platforms were out of reach of a large number of them. The AMD 600 series is not, but neither is the Core i5. Of course, in several examples, people will only be able to afford an X4 600 system and not the i5. However, those hit by the financial downturn may have cut their budget from what would have before bought an i7 to now what buys them an i5. A nose under $400 for CPU/board/RAM really isn't that much to ask for a performance PC system. Knowing just how powerful the Core i5 platform is will be enough to persuade a lot of people to nudge their budgets slightly higher. I know, because I've already seen it happen a couple of times.
Shaff: Depends what you already own. There are a few people out there with midrange or older dual cores or original Phenom quad cores who want to upgrade due to some of the CPU-demanding new games that come out.
I wouldn't call PC upgrades a disease, but a habit/obsession, sure. I justify it by the fact that I'm still probably spending less than a chain-smoker or binge-drinker, and have more than either lung cancer or a few thousand boozy photos on facebook to show for it.
Jeff: Appreciably I don't have the first-hand experience of the economic situation in the US, but it would have to be pretty dire to render sales of a $390 platform CPU system mediocre. I think it should really be considered from a more relative perspective. ALL CPUs will be selling badly by comparison to a healthy economy. As to how much of an exponential effect that has on PC components as they go up in price, I wouldn't like to speculate, I'm no economist, but quite frankly, I don't see it coming under the grouping of 'extreme purchases' until you reach at least more like $600. My X2, A8N and 2GB of DDR1 set me back £450 back in 2006, that wasn't exactly extreme - I could have spent £100 more on an A8N-SLI Premium and another £150 on getting 4GB of RAM instead of 2. That would have been extreme back then.
I'm going to have to ask you how much you paid for your CPU, RAM and board. I'm willing to bet it was at least $350 or so. I forsee that (I can't believe I'm having to go into this much detail just to make it stop it seeming like economic downturn means people only buy AMD CPUs) there is a price tipping point where people think about a potential PC build, and even after cutting their budget due to the economy, consider anything above this tipping point as unnecessary. As far as I'm concerned the i5 750 is the perfect CPU to sit as close to that tipping point without crossing it. It's the cheapest CPU in its class, and offers the same performance per dollar as low-end chips, which is rare in the high-performance sector.
Then consider prebuilt PCs, they outnumber custom-built PCs by goodness knows how many times. A CPU/board/RAM platform for less than $400 means you can slap in the standard cheap PSU and case, basic HDD and graphics card for your essential 'performance workstation', it would probably work out at a $600-$700 PC in many cases. We would never buy one, but sadly, they sell like hotcakes compared to the sort of stuff we build.
Yeah, the sales of i5 aren't going to be great, but no CPU is going to have sales anything beyond 'not great' in this sort of era. I don't see any reason for the i5 to do badly by comparison.
As far as the whole 'CPUs are fast enough' argument goes, putting together an X4 940 with a 790GX board that isn't cheap and tacky runs almost $350. $40 for the gap between an X4 and an i5?
Core 2s are even worse, a Q9400 system with an EP43-DS3L and 4GB of RAM runs you $370, and an EP43-DS3L versus a P55-UD3L isn't an exact comparison.
Quote:
No matter how fast it is, it's still just a beefed up Core 2 Quad.
Close performance or not, you know that's not true.
Obviously, as far as games are concerned, I have much more stringent standards, as I prefer to run games without any CPU-related spikes, which become less prevalent the higher my Q9550 is clocked, but since I can't push it that far with both PCIe slots full, I'm really down to relying on a faster CPU to get smooth performance in games. There are quite a few titles out there which won't keep a fluid 60 without an i5, and an overclocked one at that. Average frame rates don't say enough.
See this for example:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/20...ld-cpu-review/7
A 25fps minimum even with the Q9650 overclocked. 22 with it stock. The i5 750 runs 27 even stock, and a full 32 when overclocked. That's a noticeable difference, even in Crysis. Were it 40 to 50 I would have less to say about it. And no saying Crysis is an isolated example either, it isn't.
I guess what it really comes down to is that people don't seem to care about getting as much, or more extra performance for extra cost these days. A couple of years ago, just to get 20% extra performance for 20% extra cost would be something to scream about. Now it's even better than the ratio, nobody seems to care - and wait for it "CPUs are fast enough already" - fine proponents for technological advance we are....
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
29. November 2009 @ 08:25 |
Link to this message
|
|
but if th eUS is hit so badly, and peopel are so financially stretched, why woudl they bother to upgrade at all. wouldnt they rather be trying to pay for mortages/bills instead. anyone who will be upgradig though, probably have disposable income.
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|. |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
29. November 2009 @ 08:34 |
Link to this message
|
|
Think about the country as a whole. A large number of them aren't even going to care about the fact they've got an old P4 or Athlon XP that does the job. A significant number won't even have PCs. You will only be looking at the more affluent part of the population who will want to upgrade their PC to anything but the budget basic $250 off-the-shelf unit anyway. That already skews the perspective of what's affordable and what isn't.
|
Member
2 product reviews
|
29. November 2009 @ 14:56 |
Link to this message
|
Hi everyone,
i have been looking for a Cpu upgrade from Athalon X2 5000+ would a AMD Athlon II X4 620 be a worth while upgrade for gaming and doing Transcoding. Ans what proformce boost will i be looking at.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
29. November 2009 @ 15:15 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by navskin:
Hi everyone,
i have been looking for a Cpu upgrade from Athalon X2 5000+ would a AMD Athlon II X4 620 be a worth while upgrade for gaming and doing Transcoding. Ans what proformce boost will i be looking at.
navskin,
First it has to be an AM2+ motherboard, that's capable of running a 95w CPU. I have the 630, and I feel it's worth the extra $12. As far as the performance goes, it's more than twice as fast as the 7750 it replaced, which is considerably faster than your x2 5000+. I have mine overclocked 700MHz at 3.510GHz, and I'm real pleased with the results!
Happy Holidays,
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
29. November 2009 @ 15:32 |
Link to this message
|
From what I can see, the M2N-SLI Deluxe will only take original Phenom CPUs, which means you will have to buy a new board to use an Athlon II with it.
|
Member
2 product reviews
|
29. November 2009 @ 15:57 |
Link to this message
|
that was ny next question that i was going to ask, bu thanks for clearing that up for me sam. As it gose i think that i am in the market for a new motherbord can you please recermend one that will go nicely with this cpu. I can buy new ram if needed. thanks for the help.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
29. November 2009 @ 17:33 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
I guess what it really comes down to is that people don't seem to care about getting as much, or more extra performance for extra cost these days. A couple of years ago, just to get 20% extra performance for 20% extra cost would be something to scream about. Now it's even better than the ratio, nobody seems to care - and wait for it "CPUs are fast enough already" - fine proponents for technological advance we are....
Sam,
Now you are getting the general idea. It's not that people don't seem to care about getting as much, or more performance these days. They just don't have the extra money it takes at the moment! BTW, the price difference is 32%, not 20%! My cost for MB, Ram and CPU was $125 less than what you quoted for an i5 750 platform. Even with the 630 it's still $113 less, a 29% difference.
I never said that people would only buy AMD, but two low cost Quads, with no real competition from Intel, makes the incentive pretty good to buy one. It's not that CPUs are fast enough already, but rather how fast is fast! Other than for games, which I'll concede are far better with the i5 750, what does it do so much better as to induce people to spend $100 extra, or more for it if they are not into games? Time differences running Apps is not going to show any earth shattering difference. percentage wise it will, but the gap that percentage difference covers is slight in terms of actual time spent, because the difference today is measured in minutes, not hours like it was in the P4/Athlon days. I do a lot of video conversions and video encoding, so my question would be how much faster will my encode be with an i5 compared to what I have. The difference, if any, would be slight, in terms of real time consumed to do the job. Hypothetically, do you really think I would be fussed if someone could do their encode 2 or 3 minutes faster than I can. To me that time difference would be meaningless because it's not worth spending the extra 29% to 32% just for a couple of minutes difference.
I do understand that with games, it's a completely different thing. The performance has to be there in terms of FPS, eye candy, etc. If it's not there, the game may well be unplayable. There, a slower CPU playing a game is right in your face, and you can see the difference, visually. Apps don't become un-playable, and don't hurt anything because they might run slightly slower!
Your last line just goes to prove that even at AD, many cannot afford the latest and greatest, Your remark, "fine proponents for technological advance we are".... is really meaningless, as we are governed by the same economy as everyone else. Given the number of builds this past year, the economy has impacted almost all of us! It's great that you can afford a high end gamer, but you are also a single guy. You have no real responsibilities like most of us married folks here on AD have. We have to worry about our family first, then the bills, Mortgage payments, Car Insurance, utilities and so on. A family man today, has to consider these things first, because they are far more important than any computer! Very few of us were able to build what we really wanted to build this past year. I know I deliberately overbuilt mine because I wanted to take advantage of the upgrade paths available to me in the future, So I spent the money on the best motherboard I could afford, and AMD hasn't disappointed me, by offering a couple of low price quads that have made upgrading to one a no brainer, and cheap! I have no doubt that when the economy gets better, I will eventually get an MA-790XT-UD4P motherboard, which is the DDR3 version of the motherboard I have now. It wasn't available when I did my build, or I may have considered one then. I still have plenty of upgrade options with what I have now, so I don't feel that I'm being left behind. I'm sure we will see more low cost quads from AMD, and I should be able to run any of them I choose to buy, so I should be in pretty good shape for the next year at least!
Best Regards,
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 29. November 2009 @ 17:36
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
29. November 2009 @ 18:09 |
Link to this message
|
|
No, it really is that some people don't care. You still seem to think nobody can afford anything over $300 for the CPU/Motherboard/RAM combo. I'm flat out telling you, that just isn't true. Of course, fewer people can afford such systems, but fewer people can afford to upgrade their systems at all, it just doesn't make that much difference. Where i5s are losing sales, so are low-end AMDs.
Also, I was comparing an X4 940 to the i5, not the 630, as that's a hell of a lot more than 20% performance difference, it's closer to 50.
You can't use me as an example of what people can/can't afford - I place PC hardware about as high as it can be on the priorities list. Most other people have PC hardware much further down on their list of priorities. That goes for all CPUs, not just AMDs.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
29. November 2009 @ 19:50 |
Link to this message
|
|
hell a fast C2Q can keep up with games aswell (albeit possibly not at 2560x1600).
i5 is just a good future proof upgrade (if there is such a thing) for dual core users who are looking to upgrade a mother baord aswell. infact, yes, if anyone is upgrading their mobo, then i5 seems most reasonable, if not, then pop in the best what yuo mobo can do. :) but the thing is, about the whole, i5 needs a new mobo agrument is that, alot of people upgrade their mobo witht he same CPU alot of the time. from P965 to P35 > P45, or from the SB700 > SB750 > sb800 etc etc etc.
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
29. November 2009 @ 20:13 |
Link to this message
|
Resolution has almost no effect on the CPU's requirement at all. It's more that if you game at 2560x1600 you WILL have the settings turned up, and high settings = high CPU demand, not to mention there's more CPU overhead when you use more than one graphics card.
People just don't seem to get that the CPU makes that much of a difference to games though, just because of the average frame rates. Look at the minimums...
As for the needing a new motherboard argument, it never makes any sense as people very rarely can get away without a new board when they need to upgrade. That goes for all systems.
|
|
rick5446
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
29. November 2009 @ 21:28 |
Link to this message
|
|
As Computers mature to the need and speeds required by today's technology . I honestly feel more people will upgrade ,but not the way U Guys do hear. They will stick to the common consumer levels [E-Machines, Compaq, etc].The average Family is content if it does what it's intended to do, and a price they feel is adequate.They do not have the knowledge nor the time to build. The way advancement is going you almost have to upgrade .
Especially if your a Movie BUFF like me [but I build]. Most families use TV's as babysitters, If they can get something more convenient then going to Blockbusters, also letting the kids do it and sit their and wait on the Movie to D/L they R Damn sure gonna do-it
Let's face it Electronic Science is making tremendous Advancements
YOU REALLY DON'T HAVE A CHOICE, you have to upgrade. But at that consumer level machine and price tag . Ive seen Some really nice Computers [Dual & Quad] between 3 & 500 bucks. Just what the average Joe or Josephine can afford, and willing to settle for
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
29. November 2009 @ 22:27 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
No, it really is that some people don't care. You still seem to think nobody can afford anything over $300 for the CPU/Motherboard/RAM combo. I'm flat out telling you, that just isn't true. Of course, fewer people can afford such systems, but fewer people can afford to upgrade their systems at all, it just doesn't make that much difference. Where i5s are losing sales, so are low-end AMDs.
Also, I was comparing an X4 940 to the i5, not the 630, as that's a hell of a lot more than 20% performance difference, it's closer to 50.
You can't use me as an example of what people can/can't afford - I place PC hardware about as high as it can be on the priorities list. Most other people have PC hardware much further down on their list of priorities. That goes for all CPUs, not just AMDs.
Sam,
Just stop with the BS, and quit trying to put words in my mouth all the time. I never said that no one could afford an i5 platform. I said that most people in the US can't. You claimed a price of $390 for the MB, Ram and CPU, and I countered with $265 for the AMD. You were the one who came up with the 20% price difference, not me, so where did this 20% performance thing suddenly come from? And if you think that the difference between the 940 and the 630, is that much, you haven't been paying attention. There is very little difference in what the 630 can do compared to the 940. The 630 even beats the 940 at certain things in testing. Functionally, it's about 95% of the 940!
As far as that other BS goes, People here where I live, and that includes LA, do not have the extra $100 to $125, nor the desire to spend it if they did! Yes fewer people can afford to upgrade as well as build new, but the ones that can will be doing CPU upgrades, whether from AMD or Intel! If you have a socket 775, or an AM2+, your cheapest track to better performance is to stick an appropriately faster CPU in it! Perhaps even some more memory!
You keep saying, "To say people can't afford i5s is utter crap, AMD systems don't cost a penny less". I've shown two AMD Quad platforms, the 620 and the 630 that cost far less! $125 and $113 less respectively! Now you want to use the 940 for comparison because it costs more? Even then the Phenom II 940 in the same setup is still $75 cheaper than the i5 750! $75 may not mean very much to you, but $75 here is two tanks of gas or more!
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103471
Since I've got a CPU that is about 95% of the 940's performance, why would I want to spend the additional $38 when I don't have to? I'm already thrilled with it's performance, and the lack of L3 cache, doesn't seem to hurt the performance much at all, so I have no idea where you are coming up with this 50% bit! For all intents and purposes, the 630 is just below the 940 in overall performance! That makes the Athlon II x4 630 the Quad core Champ for most Bang for the Buck! Consider, I have a Quad that overclocks well, and scales better than the Ph-II 940. I'm getting better performance with the 630 at 3.510GHz, than Oman7 was getting at 3.93GHz with his Ph-II 940. This in spite of being a total newbie when it comes to overclocking a locked multiplier AMD CPU. I've never done one before, and know nothing about doing it, yet it still performs very well! The way it scales, and if I can get it stable at 3.7-3.8GHz, it should register about 60,000+ MIPS in Sandra.
I look for a flock of 620s and 630s to be sold over the Christmas Holidays! All of the Pre-Builts like Dell, Compaq, HP, Gateway and eMachines will all have low cost quads from AMD for the Christmas rush! They've even hedged their bets a bit by offering Dual and Triple core AMDs at even lower prices. They have some Intels as well, but the big push is on AMD and low cost Quads or Triples! It should be a very Happy New Year at AMD!
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
29. November 2009 @ 22:31 |
Link to this message
|
|
The way things are going, in my opinion, everyone should be required to take at least one semester of basic computing in high school. I think it should be required learning. For in the not so distant future, there will be a computer around every corner, in every office, in every home, in every job, etc etc. For the people who find it intimidating, perhaps they simply need it laid out in a more fun filled approach (better teachers). I didn't always like science. But my freshman and sophomore science teachers had this way of grabbing my attention. Its like they knew how my mind works ;) Now im filled with all sorts of useless information LOL! Kidding ;)
I suppose most parents could be teaching their kids how to build. For believe it or not, it is NOT that difficult. People are simply intimidated by complex pieces of equipment. And the best time to learn is when we're really young believe it or not.
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 29. November 2009 @ 22:37
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
29. November 2009 @ 22:42 |
Link to this message
|
PS russ from what i am hearing MSI has a new BIOS on their mobos, which im sure other manufacturers will use aswell that unlocks thats L3 cache ;)
your sentece there is perfect though:
"If you have a socket 775, or an AM2+, your cheapest track to better performance is to stick an appropriately faster CPU in it!"
its what i have been saying all along! :D
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
29. November 2009 @ 22:48 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by shaffaaf:
PS russ from what i am hearing MSI has a new BIOS on their mobos, which im sure other manufacturers will use aswell that unlocks thats L3 cache ;)
your sentece there is perfect though:
"If you have a socket 775, or an AM2+, your cheapest track to better performance is to stick an appropriately faster CPU in it!"
its what i have been saying all along! :D
Shaff,
The L3 only applies to the very few Deneb examples out there. The Propus core has no on chip L3 cache at all! Just empty space! Given that PH-IIs with a failed L3 cache would probably become 630s, the numbers won't be high enough to try and get lucky and get a Deneb! besides, the Propus architecture is better!
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 29. November 2009 @ 23:24
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
29. November 2009 @ 23:21 |
Link to this message
|
Shaff,
I forgot to mention that the 630 was designed to be a 940 without the L3 cache. I suspect based on seeing what mine can do, that the Propus will become the Phenom IIs core of the future. It also would explain why there is still empty space on the die. Add appropriate L3 Cache, and you have the better scaling architecture and reduced instruction set of the 630 in an all new Phenom II! So far the Propus has been bullet proof, so I'm assuming that AMD got it right! I know it's handled everything I've thrown at it and come up smiling! If someone has an AM2+ motherboard that can handle 95w, buy one! You won't regret it. Even my games have improved! Hey! AMD did give us something to talk about, right? LOL!!
Happy Holidays,
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
30. November 2009 @ 09:07 |
Link to this message
|
Rick: The average joe comment is one of the things I'm trying to highlight. They won't be buying an i5, but I doubt they'll be buying Athlon II X4s either, they're more likely going to be going for the Athlon dual cores, low-end Pentium dual cores, or heck, quite possibly semprons and celerons... Perish the thought, but it's true.
Russ: Putting words in your mouth..... right. What is actually happening here, is what you're saying, you interpret in a different way to how we do. It's incredibly difficult to keep track of a conversation because every time I try and highlight something I disagree with, or something I think is wrong, 3 extra paragraphs of unnnecessary text appear in the middle, repeating what you said in your last half a dozen posts. Keep it clear and simple and maybe you'd be misunderstood a lot less.
Percentages appeared. They were to compare the X4 940 since Jeff was actually in this discussion too, though you may not have noticed to the i5 750. Choosing an X4 940, the cheapest Gigabyte 790GX board and 4GB of the cheapest Corsair DDR2 PC8500 comes to $356 before rebates. I originally compared with a 770 board, but I think considering what the i5 boards can all be used for, using a 790 is fairer. Using an i5 750, the cheapest full-ATX board and the cheapest 4GB of Corsair PC12800 comes to $420 (since the removal of the US3L board from newegg). $420 from $356 is 18%, so actually slightly less than 20. The performance gains on this switch are in the majority of cases substantially more than 20%.
If you keep up with the PC industry as a whole you'll know that getting more % extra performance for a given % extra cost is something to welcome, and not something that comes by very often.
Quote:
As far as that other BS goes, People here where I live, and that includes LA, do not have the extra $100 to $125, nor the desire to spend it if they did!
Sure don't think they're going to appreciate you putting words in their mouths any more than you like me "putting" them in yours. Also, I quite frankly don't believe that. That you can categorically state that an entire city would never spend any more than $265 on a CPU/board/RAM is utterly absurd.
I like the use of the quote there. Do you consider the X4 620 and 630 equivalent to an i5? If you do, it's clear why this discussion isn't going anywhere. Let's find an equivalent AMD CPU to the Core i5. Well, there isn't one, but we take the closest AMD have got, which is the X4 965BE. Now put that in an appropriately comparable system, I'm pretty sure it won't cost any less than a Core i5 system does.
There's no point arguing that something slower costs less, to a substantial proportion of PC users, you could take that down to the Athlon II X2 250 level, that'd still be more than enough.
Also, please don't use the tank of gas argument. $75 isn't one tank for more than half the cars on the road in the UK. Whining about how much fuel costs in the US is just laughable, the country practically burns the stuff for giggles. </Politics>
You claim your X4 630 is 95% of a 940. I'd like to see some benchmarks showing that to be the case please. There aren't really any competent benchmarks comparing the 630 and 940, the 955 is about as close as you can get, so including how the 630 and 620 compare for clock speed differences estimates have to be drawn.
Anandtech
Photoshop CS4: i5 100% 955 81.1% 630 69.1% 620 65.8%
DiVX/Xmpeg Transcode: i5 100% 955 90.2% 630 74.8% 620 71.5%
x264HD Transcode Pass1:i5 100% 955 101.5% 630 88.2% 620 82.9%
x264HD Transcode Pass2:i5 100% 955 91% 630 78.6% 620 73.3%
WME9 x64 AP Transcode: i5 100% 955 100% 630 88.2% 620 81.1%
3DSMax9 SPECapC CPU: i5 100% 955 84.3% 630 71.6% 620 66.4%
Cinebench R10 Single: i5 100% 955 86.7% 630 71.8% 620 67.1%
Cinebench R10 Multi: i5 100% 955 93.6% 630 75.8% 620 71.9%
POV-Ray 3.73b23 SMP: i5 100% 955 93.8% 630 82.2% 620 76.4%
Blender 2.48a CRender: i5 100% 955 83.4% 630 71.1% 620 69.6%
Excel2007SP1-M.C.S.: i5 100% 955 80.7% 630 56.0% 620 53.6%
SonyVegasPro8 BRD-C: i5 100% 955 85.3% 630 76.4% 620 73.4%
Sorenson Squeeze FLV: i5 100% 955 89.5% 630 77.2% 620 72.9%
PAR2 Archive Recovery: i5 100% 955 83.7% 630 69.6% 620 67.3%
WinRAR Archive Create: i5 100% 955 86.0% 630 71.8% 620 65.0%
As per the discussion, games results omitted.
Total Score:
i5 750: 1500 [141.75%] CPU Cost: 200 Architecture Cost: 420 [138.16%]
X4 955BE: 1330.8 [125.76%] CPU Cost: 166 Architecture Cost: 371 [122.04%]
X4 630: 1122.4 [106.07%] CPU Cost: 113 Architecture Cost: 318 [104.61%]
X4 620: 1058.2 [100.00%] CPU Cost: 99 Architecture Cost: 304 [100.00%]
Right, having turned a discussion that had almost nothing to do with performance into a benchmark, time to move on.
Quote:
I look for a flock of 620s and 630s to be sold over the Christmas Holidays!
But if people are too poor to buy new PCs, surely there won't be a flock sold?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 30. November 2009 @ 09:12
|
Senior Member
|
30. November 2009 @ 11:06 |
Link to this message
|
I follow this discussion because I am currently looking to help a friend build something to replace his AMD939 system he's giving away for Xmas.
He's (we are) not even one of those in the USA thats worrying about if an I5 build is $50-100 more than an AMD X4.
What do you guys think about futureproofing? AMD has used the AM2,AM2+, AM3 architecture for roughly 5 years since we built his 939, will they sustain it another 5?
Wasnt it discussed the I5 is just a quick stop between the 775 and whatever is next?
For all the banter over which is the superior value ATM the sustainability aspect I believe may have been overlooked.
Any opinions on this? (Like I need to ask LOL)
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
30. November 2009 @ 11:19 |
Link to this message
|
The AM2 platform replaced Socket 939 in summer 2006, similar to the time the Core 2 Duo systems came out. Socket 775 had been established prior to the Core 2's released, launching with the release of the Prescott Pentium 4 chips in early 2004. Thus, the fact that you can still buy Intel CPUs on Socket 775 even now means the socket has lasted almost six years, and although is in the early phases of being withdrawn, is not going away just yet. Considering how much AMD have achieved migrating AM2 to AM3 I don't see that socket disappearing any time soon either.
However, I don't really consider the socket type much of a 'generation' of technology. You certainly can't put any of the current AM2+/AM3 crop in one of the original AM2 X2 boards, nor can you put even the earlier Core 2 Quads, let alone the current ones, into a board designed for the P4s. Realistically, the socket types are actually moving 'production lines' if you will for CPUs, new chipsets supporting new CPUs come and go with the same socket. The real question you have to ask about AMD's current AM3 longevity in that sense is actually - how long will the 790X, GX and FX chipsets last, in terms of supporting new CPUs? The original 780G is already looking a bit dated, in much the same way as the P31/P35/X38 chipsets are for Intel - yet, both of them support all the CPUs that are available on that socket type today, so far. - for Intel, it's very unlikely there'll be any new CPUs on 775, so the P30 series is safe, but for AMD? There's no LGA1156/1366 replacement for AM3, the socket carries all their current chips.
Quote:
Wasnt it discussed the I5 is just a quick stop between the 775 and whatever is next?
No, but you're on the right lines. The i7 top-end was the stop-gap between the Core 2 systems and the Next generation platform, which manifests itself as i7, i5, and i3. The i5 750 and i7 860/870 are the first of the new generation which will spawn a large number of other chips. Consider the ones we have now on LGA1156 the midrange. The i3 low-end will be appearing in the next few months, and around the same time, the original i7s (920/940/950/965/975) on LGA1366 will be ousted for the new 32nm chips which will include 6-core CPUs.
|
Senior Member
|
30. November 2009 @ 11:49 |
Link to this message
|
Interesting points. I'm sure I will lurk for awhile (as usual) and when its time to order, I will rear my head much like Nessie in the Loch and ask the community for competing parts/price list between AMD and i5.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
30. November 2009 @ 12:07 |
Link to this message
|
Well to be honest, if you can afford an i5, it's pretty simple, you buy the i5. There isn't anything from AMD that can compete with the i5 yet. However, if you're considering it from purely a value perspective and you only run single-pass x264 video encodes, then a Phenom II might work out better value. Other than that, at this end of the market, it's i5 or nothing, at the moment.
|
|
