0
10

[–] jhaluska 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

I dislike comparing products that aren't even close to the same price point. This is just trying to have a halo product that makes it look like you have the best tech cause your product is at the top of the chart. Intel has a history of doing this when they're behind.

0
5

[–] Mechanicalmechanic 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

I am an AMD fanboy, have been for almost 2 decades. I recently was reading a comparitive article for one of the new desktop Ryzen vs the Intel combined with an AMD card and an ATI card. The author matched and mismatched the card then posted frame rates of all 4 combinations. Pretty much in all of them the Intel came out on top, sometimes by a few frames per second, other times by 10 - 15 frames. These were frame rates in the 90s and low 100s mind you, like comparing supercars, they are both fast. I was disappointed, but I am loyal to AMD.

Then I looked up the prices of the processors he tested. The AMD was $209 and the Intel was $339. That is not apples to apples! The price difference pays for an SSD!

My opinion still stands. If you want the absolute highest, biggest dick in the shower performance, go Intel. If you want the most economical bang for your buck, go AMD. I would gladly sacrifice 10% frame rate for a 30% difference in price. Especially to get an SSD for the price difference, or halfway to a decent video card. $120 goes a long way when building a gaming system.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
1

[–] jhaluska 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I would gladly sacrifice 10% frame rate for a 30% difference in price.

I've also been building computers for almost 20 years. When you see it all depreciate to $0 over time as faster stuff comes out, you become more economical about your decisions. I usually just buy best bang for the buck on video card and CPU. AMD has served me well in that area..

0
3

[–] firex726 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Yea... Might as well compare an F1 car to a Prius on speed and decare the F1 the better value.

0
5

[–] AmaleksHairyAss 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago  (edited ago)

And by "destroys" they mean "outperforms by 15% in some benchmarks" (I know it says 30% in the article but 3155/3667=.86)

0
2

[–] valk2 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

If you buy either then be prepared for linux or windows 10 only rigs. Nothing wrong with linux but Nvidia driver support for open source drivers being developed outside of Nvidia was just cancelled. I wouldn't buy a CPU from this latest generation, the AMD Ryzen or the Intel i9's.

I am sure they are great chips, but I don't want a hardware manufacturer determining what software I can use on my machine.

0
0

[–] TimberWolfAlpha 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Bullcrap. I'm running Win7 on Ryzen just fine.

0
0

[–] Mechanicalmechanic 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Can you elaborate? Within the Linux communities I had read that AMD products were widely supported, especially the new Ryzen processors. I have a Radeon RX470 and an older AMD it works very well under Linux, I get better gaming performance under Linux rather than Win 7. It's a pretty consistent 5 FPS gain when I am lucky to be getting 30 FPS on my old rig.

Also what do you mean Windows 10 only or Linux only. What would you be trying to run?

0
1

[–] valk2 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

0
1

[–] MadWorld 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Now that we have pretty awesome CPUs from AMD, Intel can fuck off with its classic tactic.

0
0

[–] smtalha2 [S] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

In Other word,Intel is still the king of the Jungle.

0
0

[–] MadWorld 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

https://voat.co/user/smtalha2

In Other word,Intel is still the king of the Jungle.

A delusional "king" who is constantly losing its army. I have built 5 additional Ryzen based systems for my friends, so far so good!