Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 124
  1. #61
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    1,682

    Re: what you like dislike about intel amd

    FingerOfGoad, Brandito, have you guys ever thought of meditating?

    It really helps with cooling yourself down so you don't react out of instinct and say something that offends more than just the person who you intended it to.

    Back onto topic... what was the original topic? oh, yes...

    "what do you dislike about amd intel" and not "what do you dislike about FingerOfGoad Brandito"

  2. #62
    Joined
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Joliet, Illinois
    Age
    34
    Posts
    15,846

    Re: what you like dislike about intel amd

    i'm still trying to figure out what folksy words are...
    Corsair 800D / Corsair TX750 PSU
    ASUS Sabertooth P67 / Win7 Pro
    Intel i7 2600k @ 4.4ghz (44 x 100) + Corsair H100
    Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600 x 16GB
    2 x XFX R9 280x + 3 x Asus VS24AH-P 24" IPS 1920x1200
    Samsung 840 Evo 250GB OS + 2 x 1TB WD Caviar Black




    The member formerly known as SuBX3r0 HEAT

  3. #63
    Joined
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    5,358

    Re: what you like dislike about intel amd

    Quote Originally Posted by FingerOfGoad View Post

    ever think that it could be because the min fps is better on one system then the other? most benches dont acctualy show the true min fps, and the crysis bench tool has been shown to be flawed/bugged so it dosnt really count.
    Why again doesn't Crysis count? I bet only reason for it not counting is that it does not support your position. What does count then? If a 'smooth' system is something that actually exists, it sure as heck can be measured and described and not just 'felt'.

    Maybe this one counts (Core2Duo vs FX-62):
    http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/articl...hlbnRodXNpYXN0

    Here's what the picture looks like quite often:
    http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/image....lfNF81X2wuZ2lm

    Now which one looks 'smoother' to you?


    I especially like this quote from the article:
    The gameplay experience was “smoother” on the Intel Core 2 Duo X6800 and the framerates did not drop down as low, but the game was still playable on the AMD Athlon 64 FX-62.

  4. #64
    Joined
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    138

    Re: what you like dislike about intel amd

    Quote Originally Posted by Pehu View Post
    Why again doesn't Crysis count? I bet only reason for it not counting is that it does not support your position. What does count then? If a 'smooth' system is something that actually exists, it sure as heck can be measured and described and not just 'felt'.

    Maybe this one counts (Core2Duo vs FX-62):
    http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/articl...hlbnRodXNpYXN0

    Here's what the picture looks like quite often:
    http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/image....lfNF81X2wuZ2lm

    Now which one looks 'smoother' to you?


    I especially like this quote from the article:
    because its a horribley coded peice of shit????? yeah thats right, its a horrbily coded peice of shit that dosnt scale for shit, look at the perf delta between say 1280 and 1920 on a high end system, dosnt scale worth a damn.

    and dont bring hardocp/hardforums links out on me i dont have any respect for them, they are VERY nvidia bias, they banned me and a stack of other people for simply reporting 8800gt problems/issues because they insisted it was all lies and that the 8800gt was perfect, after email with the admin it turnes out he dosnt allow "bad mouthing" of nvidia because he and some of his staff are nvidia betatesters/insiders and they dont want to loose access to all that taisty new hardware nobody else can get.

    as to smooth, its hard to masure how something like this feels, but when a large number of people can testify that somethings smother/snappyer, then i tend to take that as a sign its true, look at server 2003/ xp x64 vs 32bit xp, unless you have used them both, you cant understand where people who use them are coming from when they say "it feels smooother" or "its just snappyer" or "its just faster"

    the fact that you think crysis is a valid performance bench between ANY systems is to me laughable, its CRAP, the company that made even stoped supporting it, they blame piracy, •••••••• they have said that sales EXCEDED their expectations in a few interviews, they didnt want to keep supporting it because ITS A CODING NIGHTMARE, and really crysis is just a TECH DEMO for CRYENGINE 2, nothing more, the end of the games a joke, serious sam had a better plot......

  5. #65
    Joined
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Joliet, Illinois
    Age
    34
    Posts
    15,846

    Re: what you like dislike about intel amd

    maybe you should read hardocp's recent 4850 and 4870 reviews, they were tickled to death with the cards. there wasn't much bad they could say about them.

    hard ocp and pcper i tend to hold in the highest regards as far as reviews go.
    Corsair 800D / Corsair TX750 PSU
    ASUS Sabertooth P67 / Win7 Pro
    Intel i7 2600k @ 4.4ghz (44 x 100) + Corsair H100
    Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600 x 16GB
    2 x XFX R9 280x + 3 x Asus VS24AH-P 24" IPS 1920x1200
    Samsung 840 Evo 250GB OS + 2 x 1TB WD Caviar Black




    The member formerly known as SuBX3r0 HEAT

  6. #66
    Joined
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    138

    Re: what you like dislike about intel amd

    pcper, anand, techpowerup are my top3 review sites for videocards, i know wizard over at tpu, even talk to him on messenger a bit, hes a good guy, tho his forums staff are about 50% brainless pratts the other 50% are good/great tho...makes the forums a chore since one mod will take ur most as funny(the way you ment it) and another will be offended and bann you for it..........

    hardocp will im sure review the nvidia cards with new drivers soon then say that the nvidia is the better buy, and yes they rarely have given amd good reviews, like their assassins creede review in 10.1 mode, they gave the 3870/x2 cards some respect, but still, if you have delt with them on a level where i have, you wouldnt respect kyle as much as you do, he is an undoughted and undennieing nvidia fanboi and insider, as such his whole view is scewed, and he gets voilently mad if you report problems with new nvidia hardware in his forums.

  7. #67
    Joined
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    5,358

    Re: what you like dislike about intel amd

    Quote Originally Posted by FingerOfGoad View Post
    because its a horribley coded peice of shit????? yeah thats right, its a horrbily coded peice of shit that dosnt scale for shit, look at the perf delta between say 1280 and 1920 on a high end system, dosnt scale worth a damn.
    Horribly coded piece of **** that runs smoother on an Intel system.

    and dont bring hardocp/hardforums links out on me i dont have any respect for them, they are VERY nvidia bias, they banned me and a stack of other people for simply reporting 8800gt problems/issues because they insisted it was all lies and that the 8800gt was perfect, after email with the admin it turnes out he dosnt allow "bad mouthing" of nvidia because he and some of his staff are nvidia betatesters/insiders and they dont want to loose access to all that taisty new hardware nobody else can get.
    Attack the source, not the issue? That's not too smooth.


    as to smooth, its hard to masure how something like this feels, but when a large number of people can testify that somethings smother/snappyer, then i tend to take that as a sign its true, look at server 2003/ xp x64 vs 32bit xp, unless you have used them both, you cant understand where people who use them are coming from when they say "it feels smooother" or "its just snappyer" or "its just faster"
    If the difference is real, it can be measured.

    the fact that you think crysis is a valid performance bench between ANY systems is to me laughable, its CRAP, the company that made even stoped supporting it, they blame piracy, •••••••• they have said that sales EXCEDED their expectations in a few interviews, they didnt want to keep supporting it because ITS A CODING NIGHTMARE, and really crysis is just a TECH DEMO for CRYENGINE 2, nothing more, the end of the games a joke, serious sam had a better plot......
    Again, none of that babble really does anything, but really again goes around the issue that Crysis (like many other games) just run smoother using an Intel system.

  8. #68
    Joined
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    5,358

    Re: what you like dislike about intel amd

    Quote Originally Posted by FingerOfGoad View Post

    hardocp will im sure review the nvidia cards with new drivers soon then say that the nvidia is the better buy, and yes they rarely have given amd good reviews, like their assassins creede review in 10.1 mode, they gave the 3870/x2 cards some respect, but still, if you have delt with them on a level where i have, you wouldnt respect kyle as much as you do, he is an undoughted and undennieing nvidia fanboi and insider, as such his whole view is scewed, and he gets voilently mad if you report problems with new nvidia hardware in his forums.
    I actually agree probably to a large degree with your view about 'kyle', but that does not mean that the results represented before are in any way manipulated or false.

  9. #69
    Joined
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,463

    Re: what you like dislike about intel amd

    I've noticed varying degrees of smoothness and responsiveness with different CPUs and memory configurations.

    My Opteron 170 @ 2.8GHz felt smoother than my E2140 @ 3.2, until I finished tweaking my memory on the latter. There was a very perceptable, but only barely measurable, difference in performance going from ~70ns memory latency to ~50ns on the E2140.

    On the other hand, my E8400 never felt any less responsive than my Opteron, even totaly untweaked. The 6M L2 seems to have done an extremely good job at masking memory latency. If anything it was smoother than the Opteron.

    Quote Originally Posted by Brandito View Post
    it's just illogical to me that one system will give the higher frame rates while the other is 'smoother' just doesn't sit well with me.
    I've seen plenty of situations where a game running at higher FPS was more jerky/choppy than another set up that gave lower overall FPS.

    Things like this can be tested/proven, if you have a way to poll the frame rate fast enough. Most often frame rates are averaged each second when they are measured but look at the fps every 10-100ms and there may be a great deal of variation. When the time between frames is not consistent, you can feel the jerkiness, even if the fps is high.

    That said, I generally agree that the claimed differences between the responsiveness of both platforms is irratic and overstated. The only time I've been able to percieve such differences are in situations like my above example, when one setup or the other had a massive latency advantage over the other (my tweaked opteron had 36ns memory latency, the untweaked 1M C2D had 70ish). When the latency gap was closed, the responsiveness of the two became indistinguishable under light load (under heavy loads the C2Ds were faster hands down).

  10. #70
    Joined
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Age
    34
    Posts
    475

    Re: what you like dislike about intel amd

    Quote Originally Posted by oralpain View Post
    That said, I generally agree that the claimed differences between the responsiveness of both platforms is irratic and overstated. The only time I've been able to percieve such differences are in situations like my above example, when one setup or the other had a massive latency advantage over the other (my tweaked opteron had 36ns memory latency, the untweaked 1M C2D had 70ish). When the latency gap was closed, the responsiveness of the two became indistinguishable under light load (under heavy loads the C2Ds were faster hands down).
    I'd say this the best response to this question so far in this thread. And that is something i can believe about the memory latency being the issue at hand.

  11. #71
    Joined
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Joliet, Illinois
    Age
    34
    Posts
    15,846

    Re: what you like dislike about intel amd

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain O Hair View Post
    I'd say this the best response to this question so far in this thread. And that is something i can believe about the memory latency being the issue at hand.
    yeah, sounds plausible
    Corsair 800D / Corsair TX750 PSU
    ASUS Sabertooth P67 / Win7 Pro
    Intel i7 2600k @ 4.4ghz (44 x 100) + Corsair H100
    Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600 x 16GB
    2 x XFX R9 280x + 3 x Asus VS24AH-P 24" IPS 1920x1200
    Samsung 840 Evo 250GB OS + 2 x 1TB WD Caviar Black




    The member formerly known as SuBX3r0 HEAT

  12. #72
    Joined
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,520

    Re: what you like dislike about intel amd

    Quote Originally Posted by Pehu View Post
    Horribly coded piece of **** that runs smoother on an Intel system.



    Attack the source, not the issue? That's not too smooth.



    If the difference is real, it can be measured.



    Again, none of that babble really does anything, but really again goes around the issue that Crysis (like many other games) just run smoother using an Intel system.
    He's not babbling, what he says is true, although i do prefer nvidia gpu's over ati's gpu's myself.

    How could someone named finger of goad be wrong? It takes a genius to come up with a name like that.

    Anyway, dude, amd cpu's are in general smoother than intel systems. what purpose do you the think the on purpose memory controller serves? Intel doesn't need it b/c they know people will buy their cpu's out of benchmark scores alone and b/c they pay 50% of the market not to sell intel cpus.

    If their athlon64 was superior to intel's offerings at the time (which it was even people who go by bms only can't argue), then why would amd have had only 20% of the market?

    It's because amd wasn't so impressed with their name like intel was "intel inside" and b/c dell, one of the largest oems, and fry's a huge retailer didn't sell amd products at intel's requests.

    Benchmarks don't determine

    And brandito, no offense intended to you whatsoever, but try to tell me how many amd systems you've had. B/C i think you're just ignoring the fact that amd is smoother b/c intel wins in benchmarks.

    Like I've said, this isn't something pshychological. Many here agree with me, along with the fact that I've had 3 amd systems, and more intel systems, and every amd system i had was VERY smooth, and every intel system i've ever had was very choppy. i'm sorry , but that's just the truth. you're just in denial, which is ok b/c many people are in denial about this. however, those who think about half the possibilities are purely correct.

    Think of it this way. If intel goes at 1000 fps (not possible but you get the idea, or so i hope) as their max, but dips down to a slide show for 2 seconds of the benchmark, and amd cpu's go at a constant 60 (i.e. no dips), then who's choppier? Intel. Who's smoother? AMD. Smoothness and frame rate aren't the samething. video game benchmarks don't measure latency, just like people buy ram with more bandwidth blindly, and ignore the timings, instead of a looking considering both at an optimum value.

    of course that's an exaggerated situation for many obvious reasons, but it is true 100%.

  13. #73
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    2,745

    Re: what you like dislike about intel amd

    Quote Originally Posted by vote ron paul View Post
    along with the fact that I've had 3 amd systems
    That says it all right there, case dismissed, one must have owned at least 5 amd rigs to claim a fact... I'll let you in on a little secret, most regulars here have owned quite a few more AMD rigs than 3, hell I have enough spare A64 parts laying around to build three AMD rigs at this very moment, really.

    Just out of curiosity what build components where used in these numerous Intel rigs you are revolving your opinion around.

    If you've been around here long enough you would know this was pretty much an all AMD forum and most regular members here where all very pro AMD even before A64 and have owned and built numerous AMD rigs.

    As for fps, minimum means just what it implies, minimum, the lowest value. If the game dipped down to 2fps that is the minimum, if it was caused by latency its still the minimum.
    i7 Beast: Asus P6T Deluxe, Intel i7 920 21x191 (4000) HT on 1.3875v, Swiftech GTZ/D5/BIX2
    6GB (3x2GB) G.Skill pi Black DDR3 1600, ECS 9600GT
    CM STACKER 810, PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750


    i7 Game: Asus P6T, Intel i7 920 20x180 (3600) HT on 1.275v, TRU-120
    6GB (3x2GB) G.Skill DDR3 1333 7-7-7-18, MSI GTX260 OCv2, Dell 3007WFP LCD
    CM STACKER 830, PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750


    AMD: Biostar 790GX A2+, PII X4 940BE 17x200, Freezer 64 Pro
    4GB (4x1GB) Ballistix Tracer DDR2 800, Powercolor 4850
    Corsair VX450

  14. #74
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    third stone from the Sun
    Posts
    1,794

    Re: what you like dislike about intel amd

    You cannot say that a processor is the only factor that makes a system run smooth. I use AMD because they are the underdog, they are cheaper, the systems are cheaper to build. Good company, what more can you say.

  15. #75
    Joined
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,520

    Re: what you like dislike about intel amd

    Quote Originally Posted by highoctane View Post
    That says it all right there, case dismissed, one must have owned at least 5 amd rigs to claim a fact... I'll let you in on a little secret, most regulars here have owned quite a few more AMD rigs than 3, hell I have enough spare A64 parts laying around to build three AMD rigs at this very moment, really.

    Just out of curiosity what build components where used in these numerous Intel rigs you are revolving your opinion around.

    If you've been around here long enough you would know this was pretty much an all AMD forum and most regular members here where all very pro AMD even before A64 and have owned and built numerous AMD rigs.

    As for fps, minimum means just what it implies, minimum, the lowest value. If the game dipped down to 2fps that is the minimum, if it was caused by latency its still the minimum.
    Dude, the intel systems count also. one was ~$5300, and another one was $3576. 2nd, if it wasn't all 3(i.e. only 1 or 2) then you'd have a point.

    2nd, can you answer me why amd would continue to have an integrated mem controller if it didn't give them an advantage? i don't think cost has anything to do with it.

    2nd, the athlon xp was several generations ago. I had 2 athlon xp systems.
    They were smoother than every single intel system that i've had in my household.

    Never mind, i forgot that the pc i'm using now is an amd system. So it's ALL 4 amd systems that have been in my household. not just 3 of 4 but all 4. And it's much smoother than any intel system i've used for the long term, which is a lot.

    I've used both intel and nvidia chipsets with the intel cpu systems, and nvidia, via, and ati/amd chipsets for the amd cpu systems.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •