2 ms·

> That probably only makes sense for people with low budget. Deciding whether you should spend 900€ or 100€ to get precisely the same performance is not a deci

> That probably only makes sense for people with low budget. Deciding whether you should spend 900€ or 100€ to get precisely the same performance is not a decision dictated by budget. Only a moron spends 9 times the cash to get the same performance. > If you really need performance, not only "in some benchmarks" then there is no alternative to Intel. The fact that AMD's 100€ offering gets you precisely the same performance as a 900€ cash-waster is the kind of stuff that makes or breaks the performance of your workstation. After all, for the same cash some idiots waste on a i7 processor, anyone can purchase an AMD FX processir with 6 or 8 CPU cores and then spend the remaining cash on high-end GPUs. Again, Intel fanboys usually take jabs at AMD but they seldom back them up with evidence.

elcct 10y ago
FX-8350, mentioned by you, costs $149.99 according to cpubenchmark, and for extra $35 you can get E5 1620 that blows AMD out of the water. You can also install up to 384 GB of memory, whereas AMD cannot go above 64 GB. You can also get more PCI-E lanes, and squeeze more bandwidth out of the GPUs. Not to mention you cannot upgrade your AMD system to anything more powerful, without replacing everything with Intel platform ;)
- geezerjay 10y ago
  > FX-8350, mentioned by you, costs $149.99 according to cpubenchmark It's on newegg for $139.99. Close. The AMD FX 8300 is also for sale at $115, and the AMD FX 8320 can be had for $119. > and for extra $35 you can get E5 1620 It sells for $308 at newegg. Nearly 3 times the price you pointed out. Intel's recommended price for the Intel Xeon e 1620 is $294.00. http://ark.intel.com/products/64621/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-1620-10M-Cache-3_60-GHz-0_0-GTs-Intel-QPI http://ark.intel.com/products/64621/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-... Get your facts straight. > and for extra $35 you can get E5 1620 Benchmarks state exactly the opposite of your claims. > You can also install up to 384 GB of memory, whereas AMD cannot go above 64 GB. You've tried to compare a server-oriented CPU with a desktop CPU. Even so, you failed to account for the fact that there are motherboards for the AMD FX CPU line that support up to 256 GB of RAM. Again, Intel fanboys usually take jabs at AMD but they seldom back them up with evidence.

elcct 10y ago

FX-8350, mentioned by you, costs $149.99 according to cpubenchmark, and for extra $35 you can get E5 1620 that blows AMD out of the water. You can also install up to 384 GB of memory, whereas AMD cannot go above 64 GB. You can also get more PCI-E lanes, and squeeze more bandwidth out of the GPUs. Not to mention you cannot upgrade your AMD system to anything more powerful, without replacing everything with Intel platform ;)

geezerjay 10y ago
> FX-8350, mentioned by you, costs $149.99 according to cpubenchmark It's on newegg for $139.99. Close. The AMD FX 8300 is also for sale at $115, and the AMD FX 8320 can be had for $119. > and for extra $35 you can get E5 1620 It sells for $308 at newegg. Nearly 3 times the price you pointed out. Intel's recommended price for the Intel Xeon e 1620 is $294.00. http://ark.intel.com/products/64621/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-1620-10M-Cache-3_60-GHz-0_0-GTs-Intel-QPI http://ark.intel.com/products/64621/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-... Get your facts straight. > and for extra $35 you can get E5 1620 Benchmarks state exactly the opposite of your claims. > You can also install up to 384 GB of memory, whereas AMD cannot go above 64 GB. You've tried to compare a server-oriented CPU with a desktop CPU. Even so, you failed to account for the fact that there are motherboards for the AMD FX CPU line that support up to 256 GB of RAM. Again, Intel fanboys usually take jabs at AMD but they seldom back them up with evidence.