So, I frequently see FX apologists on here. If you're one of them, come out of the grass you snake and explain why you shill for the FX series over half a decade after it was released.
They always claim that the FX CPUs are ageing like wine. Is it true that the FX chips got better over time or is that just horseshit that FX buyers tell themselves to make themselves feel less bad that they chose Bulldozer/Piledriver over Sandy/Ivy?
Honestly, I think it's the latter. From late 2011 to early 2017, AMD was trying to sell us Core 2 Duos. Not exaggeration. FX at worst would match a Core 2 Duo from 2006 and at best would be slightly behind first gen Core series.
The FX series has to be the worst CPU lineup of all time. I used to think Pentium 4 held that position but I've recently changed my mind. At least Pentium 4s were somewhat competitive with Athlon 64s. The AMD FX series left Intel unchallenged for over half a decade and single-handedly made the CPU market a snoozefest for over half a decade.
It's astonishing that there are people out there who still to this day defend the FX series. Post purchase rationalisation is real.
you bought it for the same reason you bought boxed wine. sure there are better options but when you're on a tight budget you need to get the job done.
Hudson Phillips
this board shills a lot for ayymd trash, sorry you got meme'd on
Blake Russell
They are cheap. If you need a pretty low-spec PC buy a used FX 8XXX CPU for 60 $.
David Wood
>2055 >still creating fx threads
Jose Anderson
Pentiums and Core i3s gave the "8 core" FX chips a run for their money. And if you couldn't afford a Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge i5 back then, then building a PC shouldn't have been on your mind anyway.
Andrew Gray
Pentiums and Core i3s are also cheap and will outperform any FX chip. Price is not an argument.
Ryder Robinson
>tfw got memed into Ryzen I'm building a 9700K PC soon and AMD can eat my ass.
They were bad, but not as bad as pentium 4. They weren't even actually bad, it's just that intel released insanely fast CPUs in that time that lasted due today, and nobody knew at the time they did it by omitting security checks. Actually AMD improved speculative execution by a lot in future bulldozer iterations but they didn't even bother to release them on desktop past Vishera. The aging meme comes from more multithreaded applications available. Athlon 200GE is a better choice for a low budget PC if you buy new hardware. And FX weren't as cheap when they released.
Ian Morales
>getting memed >blaming chip
Isaiah Miller
It was my first ever PC. At least now I know to always avoid AMD like the plague.
Noah Scott
Lol, thread-let
Jaxon Carter
So you're entire comparison between AMD and Intel is by using one AMD computer and no Intel computers?.
hey, I'm not trying to argue here. Just trying to see exactly what's driving you. I don't care if you ever buy AMD again.
Justin Foster
Good price/performance for workloads that take advantage of multiple cores. More programs today use more cores more efficiently so FX is better now than it was years ago. Anything requiring good single core performance (read: almost everything) and you're fucked.
Levi Murphy
Faildozer aged like shit. It was garbage in 2011, it's still shit now. The gap between Sandy bridge and Bulldozer is even greater in 2018 AMD drones will NEVER admit it though. That would mean accepting AMD products don't age like fine whine and their entire world view would crumble.
I5 2500k are $40 on eBay And preform overall better. But then again, with $160 ryzen chips buying used is kinda dumb.
>Buying a CPU without hyperthreading. Enjoy your stutter fire in 1-2 years.
Carter Fisher
When in doubt, buy Intel.
Evan Martinez
100% pure fact spitter right here. You're going to trigger the AMDrones though.
Lucas Moore
i mean when i bought it it was 100$ compared to the i7-3770k new @ 250$, it performed pretty damn solid and had moar cores years later i still have the same desktop that i use as a botnet-free server since bulldozer doesn't have PSP or IME, so i think i got a lot out of it
Cooper Rogers
>Good price/performance for workloads that take advantage of multiple cores. FX doesn't even have that going for it. A Skylake Pentium will crush any 6 core FX in multithreaded workloads. Sad but true.
Thomas Long
Pentium 4 was worse than 3
Bentley Long
>FX-8350 cost less than it 3570k >has more overall processing power >All FX chips unlocked >FX8350 supports unbuffered ECC and is better than Xeon E3 for budget workstation >Soldered spreaders when Intel wouldn't
This, how many times must I talk my shit on one of these threads? FX was not the greatest but it's fine, and rather good if you have my needs.
That would be itanium, but the fx series are quite a mistake.
Benjamin Reed
Nah, Intel just nailed it with the Core architecture. Sandy Bridge is still the biggest jump they have had in years. AMD took years to bring that to themselves with Ryzen. FX weren't bad, Sandy was just too good and AMD couldn't compete. P4 was hot garbage. Really hot, hot, hot garbage.
Jeremiah Scott
>FX-8350 has more processing power than the Core i5-3570K OMEGALUL >all FX chips are unlocked It doesn't matter because even when overclocked they still perform like shit. >FX-8350 better than Xeon E3 for workstation OMEGALUL
Ryan Perry
are you using emotes on 4channel you braindead monkey
Julian Sullivan
Itanium was a failure but didn't harm the CPU scene the way FX did. P4 is way worse than Itanium.
If itanium was not the failure it was, we maybe wouldn't be as desperate with the moar cores thing.
Elijah Morales
How can I create emotes like this guy?.
Parker Nguyen
>FX weren't bad, Sandy was just too good and AMD couldn't compete. This is a common bullshit argument used all the time to downplay how atrocious FX was. In many ways FX was a step back from Phenom II.
Nathaniel Martinez
Under one core per module FX is an extremely high clocked phenom, if I set it to 4 core, 4 module mode, set the vcore to 1.4v, and 4.6GHz, you will get a CPU faster than an i5 3330 (436cb on cinebench), and the CPU will do 4.5GHz and get 725 cb on Cinebench with 8 cores 4 module mode with the same 1.4v vcore.
I always liked the idea of Bulldozer. Going massively multicore and bringing wide CPUs out of the datacenter and into a low budget poorfag PC sounds brilliant. But the chip always had pathetic per-core performance that completely erased the multicore benefits.
The main limitation of Bulldozer was the shared instruction decoder. The decoder was about as good as an Intel decoder but it had to feed two cores instead of one causing it to bottleneck the execution units.
In Steamroller they gave each core its own integer decoder to try and address this but it was too little too late. Too much of the front end was still shared and by this time Intel was shipping Haswell and Broadwell.
These improvements never made it into high-performance desktop chips. AMD knew they wouldn't sell enough chips in the high end desktop market to make it worthwhile. Steamroller was only used for mobile CPUs and Walmart PC APUs.
Another huge flaw of the Bulldozer architecture was primitive power management. Intel recognized the need for power efficiency early and dedicated much of their engineering in this direction. TDP determines which market segments you can compete in and the power per watt difference was so significant AMD could not sell chips even at bargain basement prices.
>bringing wide CPUs out of the datacenter and into a low budget poorfag PC sounds brilliant >tfw the target customer for such a CPU and on a budget The single core is a shame, and the FX 8 core is kinda out of place on a motherboard that has SLI/Crossfire on it, which will get bottlenecked anyway.
The performance of it is very similar to that of dual harpertown 3.2GHz quad cores when you get the threads rocking, and those X5482 Xeons each had a TDP of 150w.
>very similar to that of dual harpertown That pretty much sums it up. AMD's design goal was to beat Core 2, and they succeeded. But it was released the same year as Sandy Bridge, Intel's biggest step forward this century. Beating Core 2 was nowhere near good enough by 2011.
But FX doesn't consistently beat Core 2 though. Core 2 has better IPC believe it or not.
Samuel Russell
Core 2 is 5% better sadly, and when you load up the two cores in an FX module, the ipc of the cores becomes 20% worse, it just clocks extremely high with 1.35v and you have 8 of them.
Hunter Hall
It truely was the worst CPU anyone made apart from the p4 and the latest lake cpus
Adam Robinson
I don't even know if it's possible for FX to be the worst line of CPUs because it's cheap and bad, where as Intel is expensive as hell, and bad.
Juan Turner
>Pentiums and Core i3s gave the "8 core" FX chips a run for their money Only for running childrens' games. The 8350 beat out contemporary quad core i7s in many productivity tasks and so was a great cheaper option if you were in need of a CPU for those. Why would you buy an i5 and get objectively less for your money? Why can /v/tards only view things through the narrow lens of "MUH GAYMES"?
Absolutely, it was trash tier Phenom was the last time AMD was great upgraded from my fx 8350 to the i7 8700 and the difference is insane
Luke Johnson
As I said the latest lake CPUs are horrible especially the xeons hedt and workstation crap
Angel Sanchez
>If you're one of them, come out of the grass you snake and explain why you shill for the FX series over half a decade after it was released. Except I don't actively shill for it. People find it weird that I'm still using an FX-8150 in 2000+18, and they all asked me why, and I explained them.
>They always claim that the FX CPUs are ageing like wine. Is it true that the FX chips got better over time No, but people doing a very specific workload on a non-Windows OS with their computers had just found out that other chips turned out to be worse, and RMS was right all along.
All modern Intel CPUs are vulnerable to meltdown. Ryzen requires AMD PSP. Don't like jew backdoors on your CPU? Either use a Pentium 4 w/o HyperThreading, or buy AMD. Don't like PSP? You're stuck with either Phenom or FX. If you're not using Windows, and you like having a lot of processes running at the same time, guess which one's better.
Christian Roberts
Major cope
Eli Garcia
> you snake > you shill > implying anybody sane will answer to this Fuck off, dog.
Ethan Campbell
I cant say I know what the fuck youre talking about Maybe you should have stayed on Twitch as well?
John Cox
I love how when you show the 8350 getting 725cb on cinebench at 4.5GHz on a CPU that cost about $200, they just disregard it, that's i7-4770 multi core performance for cheap.
Nicholas Stewart
It's literally bought only by retards
So many people bought the fx8350 instead of the i5 2500k at the same $200 price point and they should feel bad
Ayden Hall
AMD CPUs are for retards and poorfags in general desu
Justin Sanders
you seem new, to be honest
Juan Lewis
>Phenom was the last time AMD was great Agree with everything except this. Ryzen has truly made AMD great again and Zen 2 will put Intel on suicide watch.
Leo Martin
I'll switch to AMD when they roll out AM5 boards, hopefully they'll keep getting better.
Owen Flores
bro the 8350 runs circles around the 2500k
Nicholas Gonzalez
by that point intel will be back on their feet though
Joshua Miller
Multi core doesn't matter to these fuckheads.
Jeremiah Johnson
Phenom was a huge pile of shit
Phenom II was better but only equal to Intel's offerings in the core 2 quad era
Phenom was a failure out the door because it gave us quad cores with worse IPC that could only do 2.5ghz, meanwhile Q6600 were hitting 3.4-3.6ghz all day
Leo Hill
AMD is going at 100 miles an hour now. They haven't been this competitive since the Athlon 64 days. Since you already have a Core i7-8700 there's literally no reason to switch. That CPU won't be obsolete any time soon.
Tyler Scott
Yeah, maybe at compiling gentoo and encoding anime
Worse at every other fucking thing
James Lopez
Another reason why Phenom is bad is because it has to share 2MB of L3 cache between all the cores. Phenom II fixed this and ended up being a good lineup, but it was just playing catchup to Intel's Core 2 lineup.
Gabriel Parker
FX series is AMD's pentium 4
Anyone that bought fx series is blind and retarded
Anyone that bought pentium 4 was blind and retarded
Brayden Myers
Shame Phenom II doesn't have SSE4.1, because it has realy good ipc and an X6 overclocked to 4.2 GHz (with a ton of voltage) performs like a bulldozer 4.4Ghz that uses less power.
>overclock 8350 to 4.6GHz on one core per module, get i7 930 equivalent quad core processor >overclock 8350 to 4.5GHz on 8 cores, get i7-4770 non k performance if the software can use them It's a cool chip.
Still using my FX-9590, never had any kind of issues. Then again I haven't done too much on it of any kind of intensity besides gaming.
Noah Bailey
They only run one legged races
Nicholas Bell
epic
Hudson Cruz
Fx isn't as bad as p4 The 9xxx series was worse tho
Lincoln Wilson
I like mine, but it was cheap and I knew what I was getting.
Juan Cox
you have to factor in the cost of the motherboard
AMD motherboards are usually much cheaper than Intel motherboards with the same features
Eli Rodriguez
I don't know what AMD was doing making CPUs with a 1.5375v VCORE, I guess its nice they cherry picked the good ones and set them aside, apparently the 8370 and FX-9000 chips are all the same bin. Maybe setting the vcore to 1.4 and seeing how high you can get it stable would be good, but only the later wave of 990FX boards with really good VRMs can handle a 9590 at stock vcore with a 23.5 multiplier.
Basically this, if you can use 8 threads, it's amazing for what it cost
990FXA-UD3 for $90 on amazon was fucking cash, love that board's revision 4 and R5
I got meme'd into Ryzen as well, but there's no fucking way I'd pay $350-$400 for an 8T processor. Intel doesn't deserve anyones money for this generation
Easton Ward
Then avoid Intel pozzed garbage altogether.
Henry Martinez
>FX series is AMD's pentium 4 Funny that non-HT Pentium 4 is also Intel's most capable secure chip. No meltdown, no IME. Funny that the FX is also AMD's last CPU that don't require AMD PSP. Here's the fun part: if you apply full spectre+meltdown patch on modern Intel CPUs, their performance would go down to near-P4 level.
Jaxon Collins
>Anyone that bought fx series is blind and retarded >Anyone that bought pentium 4 was blind and retarded Hello NSA.
Connor Peterson
PSP is nowhere near as bad as IME.
John Morales
Get a non ht atom and you are safe. Those things are basically 486s after all.
Nicholas Baker
>Pentium 4 was worse than 3 No shit, probably the reason why Core 2 Duos were essentially just modernized Pentium 3s
Carter Scott
>Kaveri Reflesh >REFLESH KEK, those asians..
Daniel Gutierrez
It's 'reflash'
Robert Barnes
>Core i7-8700 there's literally no reason to switch But isn't it true that intel didn't really fix any of those critial vulnerabilities, even in 9000 series?
Colton Myers
>Phenom II was better but only equal to Intel's offerings in the core 2 quad era Not even that, I'm pretty sure PhII had slightly worse IPC, it just camewith higher stock clocks most of the time.
Camden Clark
This
There's a reason why AMDrones keep harping about price/performance
People who buy Intel have real jobs and don't care about that, they just buy the absolute performance king
Landon Lopez
Aren't Meltdown and Spectre just memes? It was nearly equal. Competitive enough.
Parker Martin
I'm not hackerman or some IBM fag, for my gayming purposes my Intel is solid
Jayden Sanchez
Buying AMD because Intel are jews and you don't support their business practices≠person is poor
Jonathan Hall
>Still using my FX-9590, never had any kind of issues Except for needing your own, personal power plant.
Julian Bell
You can use Intel processors without paying them a dime, you know. I do the same with Nvidia
Caleb Edwards
It had slightly worse IPC stock, but was quite a bit more overclockable. One thing most people ignored with those CPUs was the cpu northbridge frequency which was the frequency of the memory controller and L3 cache, stock 2ghz and it went to 2.8-3.2ghz without any real temperature increase, and boosted performance by like 10% overall.
I had fun with one of those denebs in a gaming build for my gf at the time, phenom II x4 955 that was $120, overclocked it to 4.2ghz with NB freq 2.9ghz. Today that thing still works pretty well, about 8 years later.
Luke Hill
>Just trying to see exactly what's driving you Muh sheckels
Tyler Reed
>Aren't Meltdown and Spectre just memes? No, unfortunately That is one thing you should not be defending. Both are equally bad.
Hunter Perez
>kaby lake i5 gets beaten by bulldozer The STATE of intel LMAO
