It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
For a system with integrated graphics, what you really want is a die with Zen CPU cores together with that integrated GPU, and with HBM on package to relieve the memory bottleneck. That's not announced yet, but it's got to be coming eventually. And when it does, $100 discrete video cards become pointless.
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=9494387It costs 110$. And it sells VERY well. In my coutry its 50% cheaper than cheapest i5 and 130% cheaper than i5-k. Not to mention it has chaper boards also.http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=4904560&CatId=11857Both of these are "8350"i3 becoming obsolete due to 4 core requirements of new games. So pretty much only option is FX-63xxWhich is cheaper and performs better/same and can actually run games without hacking the game.Now count in whole new platform Intel pushes all the time, while you can use AMD CPUs on 5 years old boards.Again.http://wccftech.com/witcher-3-cpu-benchmarks-fx-63008350-i7-4790ki5-4690ki3-4130g3258-oc/future is here.What IS true is that software needed quite a while to catch up with hardware. But nonetheless its happening. And beside i7 (300+$ CPU) AMD has better deal for new games. And its NEW games that will drive sales.What do you think people will look, can they pay half the price for same-ish peformance in new games or will their old game run in 120 FPS instead of 140 FPS?In the end what would YOU choose?
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
Agreed 100% quiz. However he is wanting to argue things in a vacuum about strictly speaking price/perf in games. And he keeps linking the same 1 game in the same 1 wwcftech article as his claim that an AMD proc is 50% the cost for the same performance... and its frankly horsecrap. The point is also like you said, if you're going with SLI'd 980ti's, you can't throw an FX6300 behind it unless you like kneecapping yourself from the start.
Troll's gotta troll
Let's take away the labels and pick some round numbers for simplicity. Processor A costs $100 and processor B costs $200. Processor A offers 2/3 of the performance of processor B. Which is a better value in performance per dollar?You might say, A offers 2/3 of the performance of B at 1/2 of the price, so A is the better value. The problem is that you don't buy a processor all by itself. If you have to spend $300 on other parts for the computer, then a system with CPU A offers 2/3 of the performance of one with B, but at 4/5 of the price. Measured that way, B offers better performance per dollar.But neither of those are really the way people buy parts. It's more a case of, you've got a budget and you get the best you can fit into that budget. Today, it would be ridiculous to get an AMD CPU in a $1500 gaming rig, and it would also be ridiculous to get an Intel CPU in a $500 gaming rig. If you've got $500 for the entire computer, a $200 CPU just doesn't fit. And if you've got $1500, then I don't care if the AMD CPU is completely free; you don't want to unnecessarily give up a lot of CPU performance on that budget.
I really wish there was an ignore user function on this forum, so that their posts literally just wouldn't show up on your screen. This guy is absolutely off his rocker.
Edit: Holy crap, there is an ignore button, and it does exactly what I hoped it would do. Best day ever!
I really wish there was an ignore user function on this forum, so that their posts literally just wouldn't show up on your screen. This guy is absolutely off his rocker.Edit: Holy crap, there is an ignore button, and it does exactly what I hoped it would do. Best day ever!