AMD & ATi have been offering some good hardware offerings, with a nice pricetag. But perhaps, the offerings could be a bit too much (Price-to-performance ratio). I just had some questions with the people who spend more time reading the reviews, and having a non-biased opinion about the two vendors.
[b]no bullshit how I should go nvidia and/or intel. [/b]
First of all, the CPU
I have been eyeing the Phenom II x6 1090T. yes, I can/do utilize 6 cores. So it's not an excessive buy.
The alternatives? I have been thinking about those as well, while Thuban seems like a nice core, with a decent price-to-performance ratio, is it worth it? Or should I stick with an Deneb core? IE: x4 955BE?
Second is the GPU. I was thinking about the 5970. The price tag is hefty.. and most of it is just to have the 5970. The proclaimed "most powerful single graphics card on the market". Yet, I want to see what you guys think about this. Is there is a cheaper or same price alternative for a CF 58X0 or a 5770, with an equal or greater performance?
On my stance on Intel and Nvidia
Intel, I'm sick of the fucking socket games. Or paying obscene amounts of money for a 'dead end' processor, with limited mobility for upgrading.
Nvidia, great cards.. but overpriced in my opinion. I'm also going with an AMD platform with an AMD chipset. So I cannot use SLI for that, and I'm unsure if the AMD solution would inhibit the GPU by any chance.
Any thoughts or solutions? I have a price range of $1600, and I do plan to have the build completed by end of August 2010.
Thank you :)
Don't go with 5970 (except on Eyefinity setup or an 30" monitor with 2560x1600 screen resolution), take either 5870 or 5850. These two cards alone can do the same performance as 5970.
[editline]06:37PM[/editline]
And seriously, if you are not a multi-tasker, with a lot of multi-threaded softwares, switch for X4 955/965 instead. The new AMD processors "Bulldozer" (6/8 cores) are coming soon.
[QUOTE=ADT;23304848]Don't go with 5970 (except on Eyefinity setup or an 30" monitor with 2560x1600 screen resolution), take either 5870 or 5850. These two cards alone can do the same performance as 5970.
[editline]06:37PM[/editline]
And seriously, if you are not a multi-tasker, with a lot of multi-threaded softwares, switch for X4 955/965 instead. The new AMD processors "Bulldozer" (6/8 cores) are coming soon.[/QUOTE]
Thank you for the response.
I will be using my current monitor setup, which is 2 22" (21" viewable) CRT monitors, both with a resolution of 2048x1536 with a total resolution of 4096x3072 @ 70Hz. However, one monitor is normally off due to the intense power consumption, unless I need the extra screen space.
Would a 5870 be a good solution, with the flexability to add the extra 2048x1536 resolution, without costing much on my graphics (This is normally in regards to hammer, 3ds, photoshop)
I've been waiting for Bulldozer for the last 3 years, and anxious that Thuban just came out. And I won't have to update my entire board to upgrade to Bulldozer. Oh AMD, thanks for the lack of socket games.
I do use some multithreaded applications. Maybe it's best to go with the 955/965.
What would be the best fit, the 955BE or the 965BE (Is there a Black Edition for the BE?)
\/ READ THE DAMN THREAD
Please, for the love of god, do not get a 5970 unless your doing eyefinity.
BE means Black Edition, so these two processors have a good overclocking capability. 965 has just 0,2 Ghz over the 955.
And you should go buy an LCD monitor, because the quality is far superior compared to CRT. Samsung, Asus, LG are good branchs, and for your money, you should buy the Samsung P2370H (23" with 1920x1080 resolution) for about 200$.
And yes, the 5870 will be worth it with this monitor.
[editline]07:02PM[/editline]
By the way, you only need an 600-650W PSU. Antec (TruePower New), Corsair (HX) and Seasonic (X-Series) are the way to go.
BE stands for Black Edition...
Stick with a 5870 if you're not gonna be using eyefinity. If you plan on using eyefinity, go for the 5970.
Whats your overall budget?
[editline]05:05PM[/editline]
Ninja'd...
Also for PSU, look at BFG, and Silverstone
[QUOTE=ADT;23305383]BE means Black Edition, so these two processors have a good overclocking capability. 965 has just 0,2 Ghz over the 955.
And you should go buy an LCD monitor, because the quality is far superior compared to CRT. Samsung, Asus, LG are good branchs, and for your money, you should buy the Samsung P2370H (23" with 1920x1080 resolution) for about 200$.
And yes, the 5870 will be worth it with this monitor.
[editline]07:02PM[/editline]
By the way, you only need an 650W PSU. Antec (TruePower New), Corsair (HX) and Seasonic (X-Series) are the way to go.[/QUOTE]
Ha, well I know what BE is.. just being pestered here at work. Didnt put a clear thought into closing that post. But thanks for saying that, atleast I know you guys are willing to educate and correct mistakes :)
And no, please do not, tell me to touch LCD. My CRTs still produce a finer image than LCDs. So no I won't do that. Thanks for the suggestions though, but I get LCDs dirt cheap.
But on the price range, is a 955BE a better price-to-performance than a 965BE? 200MHz doesn't seem anything special, especially if its over $20.
[editline]12:10PM[/editline]
I nailed the PSU already. ADT already said what I was going to get. :)
[QUOTE=Richard Simmons;23305560]Ha, well I know what BE is.. just being pestered here at work. Didnt put a clear thought into closing that post. But thanks for saying that, atleast I know you guys are willing to educate and correct mistakes :)
And no, please do not, tell me to touch LCD. My CRTs still produce a finer image than LCDs. So no I won't do that. Thanks for the suggestions though, but I get LCDs dirt cheap.
But on the price range, is a 955BE a better price-to-performance than a 965BE? 200MHz doesn't seem anything special, especially if its over $20.
[editline]12:10PM[/editline]
I nailed the PSU already. ADT already said what I was going to get. :)[/QUOTE]
LCDs are superior to CRT in a way that they get better contrast and dynamic ratios. However, CRTs are more capable of having a higher resolution and display frequency.
I can see you not wanting to switch. I have two 21" CRTs as monitors at the moment. My LCD had a dying capacitor for a year and finally kicked the bucket last week.
Mine still displays a nice image, but my LCD looked better. Yet I have a higher resolution on this one (1600x1200) than my old LCD which was 1400x1050. I can also force one of my CRTs into 2048x1536.
[QUOTE=ghostofme;23306033]LCDs are superior to CRT in a way that they get better contrast and dynamic ratios. However, CRTs are more capable of having a higher resolution and display frequency.
I can see you not wanting to switch. I have two 21" CRTs as monitors at the moment. My LCD had a dying capacitor for a year and finally kicked the bucket last week.
Mine still displays a nice image, but my LCD looked better. Yet I have a higher resolution on this one (1600x1200) than my old LCD which was 1400x1050. I can also force one of my CRTs into 2048x1536.[/QUOTE]
I have the Trinitron G500 and 520. I think my contrast ratio is still superior over the LCDs I use . However, it's a trinitron. By the amount of times these things failed, I have became a pro at repairing these bastards. Even had to do the contrast fix (first thing to repair on these badasses). the through point soldering makes it much easier to do repairs too. I do remember once my desk collapsed onto my legs because of the monitors (had 3 CRTs on it at one point). Boy did it hurt, nothing broke though. Monitors laughed on the inside, I'm sure.
Go for an i7 920 with a gtx 480
[QUOTE=derlicious;23315110]Go for an i7 920 with a gtx 480[/QUOTE]
oh okay. Thanks.
If you can utilise the 6 cores on a 1090t go with that, it would be well worth the money. Also a 5850 and if you had enough money get a 5870 instead.
[editline]04:31PM[/editline]
Woo! 1000th Post :woop:
[QUOTE=derlicious;23315110]Go for an i7 920 with a gtx 480[/QUOTE]
Hurrrrrr
Have you reading OP?
[editline]11:03AM[/editline]
So yeah 1090t + 5870 is kinda okay, even though I'm not agree with this processor.
I suggest you get the 5870 like the rest here.
The 1090t seems kind of overpriced to me. It has only 400MHz higher clock and unlocked multiplier compared to 1055t, but the price is 50% higher. You decide if it's worth it.
[QUOTE=pebkac;23326512]The 1090t seems kind of overpriced to me. It has only 400MHz higher clock and [b]unlocked multiplier[/b] compared to 1055t, but the price is 50% higher. You decide if [b]it's worth it[/b].[/QUOTE]
He doesn't NEED to go AMD. I say go intel because you have the money. Intel are better when you get higher up the price range. Either go i5 750 or if you want something with some oomph go for an i7 920
Huur
Shut up.
[editline]04:38PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Richard Simmons;23304769][b]no bullshit how I should go nvidia and/or intel. [/b][/QUOTE]
[editline]04:38PM[/editline]
Good if you can read this.
[QUOTE=derlicious;23329290]He doesn't NEED to go AMD. I say go intel because you have the money. Intel are better when you get higher up the price range. Either go i5 750 or if you want something with some oomph go for an i7 920[/QUOTE]
Yeah, because I want to spend $200 on a dead end processor. Thanks. Yeah, no wasn't planning on upgrading without upgrading the motherboard too. because upgrading both the CPU and Motherboard is more practical. Thanks, no, really good thinking. way to read my fucking original post.
Firstly if someone gives you some sensible advice, don't flame them. Especially if you don't know what you're talking about. Also why is the i7 more dead end than the 1090? It's likely that AMD will never release another AM3 processor. For the amount of money your talking about it's far better to get an intel CPU because after a certain point they become better value for money. No AMD processor can match a 5970 so you'd just be wasting money
[QUOTE=FINLEY;23333768]Firstly if someone gives you some sensible advice, don't flame them. [b]Especially if you don't know what you're talking about[/b]. Also why is the i7 more dead end than the 1090? [b]It's likely that AMD will never release another AM3 processor.[/b] For the amount of money your talking about it's far better to get an intel CPU because after a certain point they become better value for money.No AMD processor can match a 5970 so you'd just be wasting money[/QUOTE]
Fixed for emphasis, the bulldozer (12 core) was announced as being AM3. AMD has kept their socket the same much more then intel, so an AMD board may not become obsolete as fast (or an immediate dead-end)
[QUOTE=FINLEY;23333768]Firstly if someone gives you some sensible advice, don't flame them. Especially if you don't know what you're talking about. Also why is the i7 more dead end than the 1090? It's likely that AMD will never release another AM3 processor. For the amount of money your talking about it's far better to get an intel CPU because after a certain point they become better value for money. No AMD processor can match a 5970 so you'd just be wasting money[/QUOTE]
They'll be AM3+ CPUs most likely if they're not just AM3. And AM2+ worked in AM2 Motherboards if I remember correctly.
This is speculation.
Also AM2+ and AM3 cpus both used x86-64 architecture where as bulldozer is something completely different
[QUOTE=FINLEY;23352283]Also AM2+ and AM3 cpus both used x86-64 architecture where as bulldozer is something completely different[/QUOTE]
=>
[QUOTE=FINLEY;23337738]This is speculation.[/QUOTE]
Who cares if you upgrade on a "dead-end" socket? No one knows for sure which sockets are being continued on, or how long they will be continued.
You'll probably be scrapping your current rig and build a new one in three years anyways.
[editline]04:19PM[/editline]
All you would have to do also is upgrade your motherboard, CPU, and possibly GPU. You can reuse case, optical drive, HDD, and powersupply.
[QUOTE=ADT;23353356]=>[/QUOTE]
What I said is true, what socket the new CPU will use is speculation
[QUOTE=FINLEY;23352283]Also AM2+ and AM3 cpus both used x86-64 architecture where as bulldozer is something completely different[/QUOTE]
You seriously think they would ditch x86 for a desktop processor and make it incompatible with all OSs out there? As far as i've read into it, the difference in architecture will be different core design
[QUOTE=Wikipedia]Bulldozer is the next-generation micro-architecture and processor design developed from the ground up by AMD. Bulldozer will be the first major redesign of AMD’s processor architecture since 2003, when the firm launched it's Athlon 64/Opteron (K8) processors. Bulldozer will feature two 128-bit FMA-capable FPUs which can be combined into one 256-bit FPU. This design is accompanied with two integer cores each with 4 pipelines (the fetch/decode stage is shared). Bulldozer will also introduce shared L2 cache in the new architecture. AMD calls this design a "Bulldozer module". A 16-core processor design would feature eight of these modules,[5] but the operating system will see each module as two physical cores.[/QUOTE]
Two cores of each "module" will share an FPU and L2 cache. I've read that later when they integrate the GPU into CPU, they'll use stream processors instead of the FPU. But before the Bulldozers with integrated GPUs come out, they'll release Phenom II with integrated GPU.
[QUOTE=Richard Simmons;23304769][B]no bullshit how I should go nvidia and/or intel. [/B][/QUOTE]
Funny how nobody gives a damn when someone says this, yet if someone says;
[QUOTE=Richard Simmons;23304769][B]no bullshit how I should go ATI and/or AMD. [/B][/QUOTE]
a fucking shitstorm erupts.
With biased posts like these it's no wonder why the H&S went to shit tbh.
[QUOTE=pebkac;23360131]You seriously think they would ditch x86 for a desktop processor and make it incompatible with all OSs out there? As far as i've read into it, the difference in architecture will be different core design
Two cores of each "module" will share an FPU and L2 cache. I've read that later when they integrate the GPU into CPU, they'll use stream processors instead of the FPU. But before the Bulldozers with integrated GPUs come out, they'll release Phenom II with integrated GPU.[/QUOTE]
Just because it's a 128 bit CPU doesn't mean it'll be incompatible with 64 bit OSs
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
