3 ms·
> Still beats AMD's high-end FX-8350 processor in all cases, amusingly enough. A brand-new AMD FX-8350 costs around $160, while a Intel Xeon e5 2670 is sold fo
by bubuga 10y ago
> Still beats AMD's high-end FX-8350 processor in all cases, amusingly enough.
A brand-new AMD FX-8350 costs around $160, while a Intel Xeon e5 2670 is sold for $1560 (newegg prices)
The Xeon isn't 10x the processor that the AMD FX is. Not by a long shot.
- paulmd 10y agoYes, while workstation chips are insanely expensive (from a consumer perspective) they do often underperform enthusiast chips like the Core i5 series. The point here is that the FX-8350 does not. An older workstation-class chip outperforms it pretty handily. And once we move into consumer-class chips, its Ivy Bridge class equivalents totally outclass it, as do even its Sandy Bridge class predecessors. The Bulldozer architecture is absurdly bad for gaming usage, and should never be recommended, full stop. Single-threaded performance pushes frames, not multi-core performance. The AMD equivalent is likely several times as much as the FX processor as well. Not quite as much as the Intel, certainly, but not $160.