Have a 3090 currently but am severely bottlenecked. Looking to get the best possible PC that I can build through microcenter in Kansas City. Looking for high end so like 13900k and ddr5 ram. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Fish:
I'm certainly not an AMD hater by any means. They have come a long way in the CPU/GPU market over the last 10 years. And I certainly appreciate the market competition. But I have to admit is does annoy me when AMD fanboys try to say they're just as good at half the price. They're not. That's why they're priced significantly less while still having double the VRAM.
Is AMD acceptable for CPU/GPU gaming purposes? Absolutely, it's a perfect solution for cheap PC gaming. Is it just as good as Intel/NVidia at half the price? :-) no. Once you experience what ray tracing is capable of, it's hard to accept anything lesser. Certainly for me anyway. And it is absolutely the future of gaming tech. The next technological step in gaming graphics technology is going to be path tracing. Guess who's already positioned to lead that race? And that's not even touching on DLSS. Which is straight black magic fuckery by NVidia. 30-50% performance increase with no visual decrease in quality. It's really quite amazing what they're doing.
I'm not going to argue GPU because I agree.
As for CPU - I'd argue that AMD is better. I've been extremely impressed with Ryzen. And Intel has had some mishaps over last couple of years with their CPU's. [Reply]
I'm not going to argue that raytracing isn't the future or that Nvidia doesn't do it better, because that would be a blatant lie.
To me it just comes down to would I rather spend damn near double the money to get a Nvidia card right now, or save a few hundred bucks and get something that is more than capable of getting close enough in performance to the point where I generally wont be able to tell outside of niche situations like a reflection in a glass window. For a complete degenerate nerd like that Anthony guy who eats, sleeps, and breaths computers and studies the sway pattern of tree shadows, you can tell, but for the average person just casually walking through 95% of a game... questionable.
Don't get me wrong, raytracing is clearly the future of graphical design just because of how much easier it is to build a game because designers dont have to creating lighting for every single piece of architecture they put in, but for me it's not worth the extra money, yet... and it probably wont be before the time I'm ready to replace my next GPU upgrade.
The value argument is very valid. I also think it greatly depends on the game. The difference in CyberPunk 2077 was immediate and like night and day. I also remember that being the case in Metro Exodus. [Reply]
Fish 03-09-2023, 12:33 AM
This message has been deleted by Fish.
Reason: dup
Fish 03-09-2023, 12:33 AM
This message has been deleted by Fish.
Reason: dup
Originally Posted by BleedingRed:
I'm not going to argue GPU because I agree.
As for CPU - I'd argue that AMD is better. I've been extremely impressed with Ryzen. And Intel has had some mishaps over last couple of years with their CPU's.
Regarding CPU.. You're wrong again. For gaming at least, Intel still dominates. Even the $289 Intel core i5-12600K beats the $550 Ryzen 9 5900X. Go ahead and check out Tom's Hardware's latest breakdown. Tom's Hardware is considered the most impartial source. Compare the blue to the red, should be easy for you:
Originally Posted by :
Despite AMD's recent refresh, Intel is winning the CPU war overall right now. Of course, an AMD processor could still be the better choice depending on your needs, like if you prize the lowest power consumption or forward compatibility with your motherboard for a few more chip generations. But for now, if you want the best in gaming or application performance, overclocking, or software support, Team Blue deserves your hard-earned dollars.
To be fair to AMD, the 5900x isn't anywhere near $550 any more. You can buy that for like $330 now. It's also not the best CPU for gaming that AMD offers from last gen. The 5800x3D beats it in gaming performance at around $310 or whatever it's going for these days.
Those are the 2 CPUs I'm currently debating on. I use my computer for mostly gaming and just typical everyday computing so the 5800x3D is probably the better buy for me, but I also like the idea of having a well rounded CPU like the 5900x that isn't THAT much worse for gaming and has 4 more cores for $20 more.
EDIT: Update with the release of the new gen 3D CPUs. Still not included is their 7900x3D and 7800x3D which have yet to be released but will be soon and they will slot somewhere between the 7950x3D and the 5800x3D, obviously.
It's kind of hard to say you dont hate AMD when the first mention of those 3 letters you come out and respond with "AMD dipshit has entered the chat." Then you put up a bunch of graphs and articles that just gloss over AMD's best CPU offerings for gaming, or simply exclude them entirely, when you are specifically talking about gaming performance. You claim you aren't an AMD hater, but you certainly come off as one. Kind of weird. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Otter:
I might jack up the PSU and RAM but certainly going to get you by. Not a bad price either.
I'm going to save my peanuts for next year. Probably upgrade this board to a z790 chipset and DDR5 at 32 GB then take this board, ram, my old video card and get another processor for my boys. But for this year, they get my old rig as is. [Reply]
