7 replies to this topic

[BrosBeforeGardenTools]

First off, I hope I don't offend anyone with this thread. Or the fact I talk about hardware a lot.

I like AMD processors because with the right tender loving care, they become blazing fast at general use under Windows. To the point that a few benchmarks don't tell the whole story. Whereas Intel is fast right out of the box, AMD processors will only do what you put into them. You have to nurture them with the right RAM, etc., and they will absolutely fly. My Phenom II quad-core in the basement is buttery smooth when overclocked by 25% and the RAM is tweaked sufficiently. I bet it rivals a Core i3 with no tweaks, and I bought it at a similar price to the Core i3 now, many years ago. AMD processors need RAM and clock speed (whether manufactorer set or through overclocking) to help them out.

The thing is though, AMD processors are sometimes a little faster than select benchmarks on the web will have you believe, while Intel is honestly about the same.

Now I'm not saying AMD processors are perfect. They can get hot, mostly the laptop chips. There are no high-end models. And some runs of them need bug patches due to errata.

Now let's talk about why I like ATI. NVIDIA's image quality causes images to look a little more washed out. ATI's picture is less washed out. Even though it's close, I seem to notice a difference.

Now the ATI cards have downsides as well. They can run hot and often don't overclock quite as well as NVIDIA's.

Now I can make a case as to why NVIDIA and Intel are also good, but most people already realize that they are good, without giving AMD/ATI a real chance.

Now you might be wondering why I don't care much for the CPU in the XBox One/PS4, despite it being AMD. It's just clocked too low for an AMD processor, when paired with such powerful graphics.

[grahamf]

ATI is gone. AMD bought them out, so they're just called AMD now.

[BrosBeforeGardenTools]

ATI is gone. AMD bought them out, so they're just called AMD now.

I know. I never know whether to say AMD or ATI though. I'm not sure which confuses people the least.

[3Dude]

I loved ati,and even though it may not look like it right now, I like amd... Its just they have been in a really rough spot since the bulldozer architecture didnt pan out as well as they thought, requiring extensive fixes over time.

They need a new solid SIMPLE, STRAIGHTFORWARD architecture thats immediately performance compatable with current os's to ground themselves again. CPU's should be truly general purpose, only excelling under specific scenarios is no good.

I like amd, i just cant really recommend them right here and now. Im just waiting. (amd cpu's)

[SPG]

i have an amd rig and an intel rig, both with amd gpus
I prefer my intel rig because the cpu just works a lot better with everything that I do (render, 3d modeling etc)

but both have an amd gpu because its far cheaper and performs better then nivida for the price (well, until the 970 came out)

i'll stick with my i7 4771 and my crossfire 280x lol 

[Raiden]

Doesn't matter to me anymore. Way back when on Tech TV in the early 00's I loved the ATI vs Nvidia wars and was pro ATI.

I remember the ATI Radeon 9800 being such a big deal and I felt sad mine was only a 9700 Pro.

 

Now I use a 2012 Asus G75VW Laptop with a Nvidia 660m so a bit dated now and 16GB of ram with a i7 4core which hyper threads to 8 and built in the software can set it to over clock from 2.3GHZ to 3.1. I don't do heavy gaming. I do some like PSO2 or Steam but I just wanted a Laptop to last me a good while as I don't know when I will be able to afford another. I also video edit.

[Waller]

Price is the only thing that computes in my brain, really, so AMD is instantly my favored choice for this sort of stuff since they have some nice budget processors.

[Tom]

The only thing that I don't like about AMD GPUs is the fact that they're huge power hogs and their reference cards sound like leaf blowers under load.