Why?

O

Orddie

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 20, 2010
Messages
3,369
With respect...

from where i sit, Nvidia and Intel are crushing it. so my question is.. why have YOU chosen AMD over intel and Nvidia?
 
AMD-Uprising-2.jpg
 
Feel like this is bait and not sure if you're asking because you're curious or want to debate. I haven't chosen AMD yet as I'm still rocking my i7-2600, but am seriously wanting AMD to pull though with Zen for a number a reasons. First to shake up the market, the main reason why I still haven't upgraded is every generation from intel has been very small updates, leaving the only desire to upgrade is the newer motherboards. Second is cost, AMD is cheaper, self explanatory, made a budget computer for my father with AMD CPU and GPU and saved some money for it. Third is tied to the first and that is AMD is the only company in the way of two monopolies is the CPU and GPU market for us pc comsumers.

Idk maybe I'm wrong, but these are the things I think of when you asked.
 
im no trolling. im really looking for answers. i used to be an AMD guy myself (more video than proc). been on the intel side for years now. saw a few of you putting together AMD rigs.. i ask mysefl why.
 
One advantage is that the top end 8 core AM3 processors now come at a nice discount versus the i5 CPUs that they match up against in performance. These now can be had at i3 prices.

Although at this point its best to wait for Zen.
 
Last edited:
After building two computers last year with i5 cpus in them, I can honestly say that atleast in the games I play, there was not alot of difference between them and my FX 8350.
 
For me, I'm currently using AMD for their longevity (AM3 platform has lasted me a long time now, with only one mobo swap, that allowed me three CPU swaps), and I'm planning on upgrading mid-2017ish. Don't know if I'll go for Ryzen or not, I'll go for whatever offers the best price/longevity.

As for GPU, I've primarily used Radeon since the ATI days and having a freesync monitor now only further cements that choice. It'd be nice to see AMD release a high end competitor, but I'm currently happy with my R9 Fury.
 
I sold off my intel systems. I don't see any difference in real world scenarios, web browsing, gaming, etc. I paid $129 for a FX-8320E with 990fx motherboard from microcenter and i am extremely pleased with it. Got one for my brother in law, probably get another one for my son. Bang for the buck is my reason. Ill take an FX8320e over an intel G4400 all day.
 
I don't think your trolling, it's a legitimate question. For me, when I decided to build my own computer, I wanted to base my purchases as much as possible on whatever knowledge about the computer parts I was buying. When I finally built my system, i5-4690k, a 290x, etc. I learned several things about the market, mainly that Intel and Nvidia were and are crushing it, and AMD is the underdog.

I dunno, for some reason about my personality, I just like underdogs. Combine that with a philosophy that regards the consumer as having responsibilities and ability to influence the market (kinda broad meaning, i.e if AMD is losing, if you feel that AMD disappearance would negatively impact you in some way, you have the option to in some way support AMD, i.e buying their products, etc.) it basically meant that despite being shit at dx11, and shit drivers (at the time), I brought a 290x over a 970, something everyone I knew brought, and endorsed Nvidia as well. That and there was a sale.

Of course I do have my limits. I bought a Intel cpu cause amd cpus are just not that good, and platform was old as hell, but if Zen is good, even if just haswell level, if I feel like it, I'll switch, just cause I support AMD.
 
When my last GPU died at an awkward time (few months pre-pascal/polaris) my budget at the time allowed for a 390X or a 970, nothing higher. Picked the 8GB 390X and i've been pretty happy with it since.
 
Why not wait for the reviews. That's not even proper trolling.
 
Every time I chose AMD it was because it was the cheaper option, with enough performance.

I bought 2 Phenom X4 955 BE's for family members back in 2011, both overclocked well. One still runs @4Ghz all day long. They became long in the tooth in 2015 and I built 3 systems with Intel i5 cpu's. I bought AMD GPU,s to go with them because of the price/performance.

XFX R9 280X DD in March 2015 for $199, great card and will be handed down soon with lifetime warranty.

SAPPHIRE NITRO Radeon R9 390 in August 2015 for $345, excellent card and will be handed down also.

I am looking forward to what Vega has to offer because one system has a Benq xl2730 monitor.

Myself, I want to see what Ryzen can offer because my i5 really needs to be an i7. If i can get 8 core/16 thread instead of an i7 (and get the same single core performance==price) then I may be upgrading my PC soon.
 
Orddie said:
im no trolling. im really looking for answers. i used to be an AMD guy myself (more video than proc). been on the intel side for years now. saw a few of you putting together AMD rigs.. i ask mysefl why.
Click to expand...

Not all the time does nV or Intel produce the best stuff. AMD has its time too. For now CPU's looks to be all Intel, but Zen might change the pc market some on that. Video cards have been intermittently better from AMD, 3 out of the last 10 generations. AMD has had good products that compete or beat nV products.

Edit you can even say 4 gens I didn't add in the 290x cause that is when AMD started loosing marketshare so there were qualities in nV cards that AMD couldn't match.
 
Cheap builds where performance isn't a criteria, AMD computers are fine for everyday use. Who knows, maybe AMD may have a winner with Ryzen (still thinks it is a stupid name, should have just stuck with Zen).
 
drescherjm said:
One advantage is that the top end 8 core AM3 processors now come at a nice discount versus the i5 CPUs that they match up against in performance. These now can be had at i3 prices.

Although at this point its best to wait for Zen.
Click to expand...
"Match up against in performance" is one hell of a stretch. That statement implies that they do so in every situation, which they don't by a longshot. They match up in performance where it counts for budget builders, mainly low to mid level gaming rigs where pure CPU performance isn't a necessity.
 
There is no line in the sand that says AMD cannot do what Intel does. It can but just at a lesser degree of performance. And the higher the demand the greater the distance.
Forums have over discussed this for so many years now. The fact of the matter is its hard to sit at a computer and be able to tell if its AMD or Intel.


All of that is about to change with Ryzen so the Intel glam rockers can now get nervous because their whole world is about to be rocked. The bubble is about to implode on their lives and many will need counseling.
 
Short answer, Intel for CPU because AMD hasn't had something for my needs in a while, I'm expecting Ryzen to change that.

AMD/ATI before it for GPU because I fucking hate Nvidia as a company. Good products no doubt, Pascal is amazing, but fuck Nvidia.
 
Chimpee said:
Cheap builds where performance isn't a criteria, AMD computers are fine for everyday use.
Click to expand...
yup! 80% of people would not be able to tell the difference between similarly spec'd amd or intel based systems. surfing, banking, facebook, youtube and porn don't need much!
 
pendragon1 said:
yup! 80% of people would not be able to tell the difference between similarly spec'd amd or intel based systems. surfing, banking, facebook, youtube and porn don't need much!
Click to expand...

I can do all that well enough on a Ebay $5 E8500, so my perfectly logical conclusion is all the current CPUs are overpriced trash.
 
My last Intel was a P3, several CPUs prior and many after until this build were all AMD for various reasons. Mostly down to when I compared the price for performance gains AMD was king with super chips, Barton, 550 Black, Thuban and so on. Fantastic chips that offered great performance at cheap prices. I got my 550 Black fairly early in their launch for 89 dollars and on the stock air cooler was near 4ghz with little to no extra voltage and decent temps. My Thuban was amazing for many years. On the highest end I would say Intel had better performance all around but I never thought it was worth the cost in any way.

After Thuban I was never impressed with AMD, while not horrible the performance and price were just not worth it. I have an APU in my HTPC which is a turd, was fairly cheap but I cant afford to upgrade off of it for now. It can play videos and do some light things but multiple tasks and single thread performance were better when I had the 550 in it and on board graphics.

I held off updating for years partially due to cost and AMD just never brought something as awesome to the table to really invest in. The Haswell E's were great and my 5820 was only 300. It was expensive as was x99 but I am extremely please with this system. Cut render times for video's down by many hours. While the total TDP is higher than my Thuban it rarely needs all those watts and if it does, it gets the job done in a sixth or less of the time the old would so less heat and less power used.

I REALLY hope Ryzen brings AMD back to the table, not just to drive innovation but to bring choice back. AMD has decent chips out now, I've built some systems for folks with them but they just are not where they could be. If Ryzen lives up to the hype or close to it then they will have a great contender out there and roll some money back in. I'll happily put one in my HTPC.

For GPU's I went from Voodoo's to Nvidia with the Geforce 2 and up through many generations loving everyone until my 8800 GTX torched itself very quickly. I got a free 9800 out of it but buggy drivers and such were getting old. I had used ATI stuff in other builds but never really liked them (personal taste or the cards I had were not superb). I switched for Eyefinity and have really enjoyed my 5850 and 7970. The 7970 was surprisingly solid and good. After that though while some decent cards have come out it falls down again on the performance and price which is why I still have my 7970.

I'm hoping the 1080 Ti or 490 will have what I want as I plan to keep this system and that GPU for a good number of years.

I have no brand loyalty, I just want the best bang for my buck and this market NEEDS AMD to succeed or at least be a thorn in the side of the other players.
 
I built an AMD based rig recently because I got the chip for free. I can't really understand those that build AMD machines without getting some of the parts for free, unless they are on a severely restrictive budget. Maybe Ryzen and Vega will make them relevant again.
 
Orddie said:
With respect...from where i sit, Nvidia and Intel are crushing it. so my question is.. why have YOU chosen AMD over intel and Nvidia?
Click to expand...

Maybe it is better in the long run that you do not always look at what is going on performance wise rather then how a company operates. Intel has been a lost cause since it cheated with almost everything and Nvidia is more of the same where they optimized by crippling the competition.

If you lose that American winners take it all mentality and look at what the company is actually doing to achieve success then you might actually not be that bothered by buying AMD.

If in your current live people would use those same tactics at your expense would you feel great about it?
 
Orddie said:
With respect...

from where i sit, Nvidia and Intel are crushing it. so my question is.. why have YOU chosen AMD over intel and Nvidia?
Click to expand...
I use AMD graphics for the open driver support on linux. If zen ends up providing decent performance and a good memory capacity I'll probably get a dual dual socket system for a server. Intel has me on my laptop.
 
pendragon1 said:
yup! 80% of people would not be able to tell the difference between similarly spec'd amd or intel based systems. surfing, banking, facebook, youtube and porn don't need much!
Click to expand...
Actually over the years there have been a few blind tests where AMD garnered the choice from individuals, a near 40% to 30% for Intel. Truth be told the majority of users cant tell nor can the majority of the masses. Now business is a completely different story.
 
yeah business, medical, HPC(?), stuff like that that needs the absolute best performance, I get that!
 
I really don't care for the whole fanboyism stuff, I've used processors from all major companies since the mid-1990s (x86 or otherwise) and these days when I get new hardware, I simply buy what performs best for my use cases vs. price. What I need right now is 4-8 cores with the best single threaded performance for encoding/compiling tasks on older software. And right now only Intel provides that. I still have a glimmer of hope for Zen, although I have been mostly disappointed with the recent leaks/rumors with the exception of the supposed 5Ghz overclock.

I can give the same answer in terms of the Nvidia vs ATi/AMD fight - I get what works best for me and that is the reason I was going with Radeon in 2003-2004 and up until recently because they had best hashing performance for my DC tasks... I don't care about gaming that much. Currently I'm still on Tahiti Pro and I'm not really in need of a GPU upgrade though.
 
Money talks. If I get *most* of the performance for a lot less cash, then I'm in. I'm pretty sure most of us are just tired of throwing our wallets at the same manufacturer after a decade.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top