_Skittle wrote

ShutUpWill wrote

Zayev wrote

ShutUpWill wrote AMD is never reliable. Stick with the 970.

so much bias
AMD is fine, I ran AMD cards for 2 years and AMD CPU for 3 and not had an issue at all.

AMD CPUs are prone to overheating. They're more of a value brand if you're trying to save some money. That's why they usually have more memory for a lower price. If you want performance stick with the 970 but if you're trying to save a couple bucks then the AMD would do the trick. But keep in mind, most AMD cards don't have a sensor to sense if it's overheating. They'll keep running until they, basically, melt.

You have no clue what you're talking about, please leave.

he knows what hes talking about amd's stuff are lower priced cause they over heat faster and their cpus are dual quad and 6 cores amd does not have an 8core cpu cause they split the cores in 2 as for their gpu they just rename old gpus ie r9 280 to the 380 290 to 390 ro some bull like that anyways op stick with the 970

GFXMoon wrote

_Skittle wrote

ShutUpWill wrote

Zayev wrote

ShutUpWill wrote AMD is never reliable. Stick with the 970.

so much bias
AMD is fine, I ran AMD cards for 2 years and AMD CPU for 3 and not had an issue at all.

AMD CPUs are prone to overheating. They're more of a value brand if you're trying to save some money. That's why they usually have more memory for a lower price. If you want performance stick with the 970 but if you're trying to save a couple bucks then the AMD would do the trick. But keep in mind, most AMD cards don't have a sensor to sense if it's overheating. They'll keep running until they, basically, melt.

You have no clue what you're talking about, please leave.

he knows what hes talking about amd's stuff are lower priced cause they over heat faster and their cpus are dual quad and 6 cores amd does not have an 8core cpu cause they split the cores in 2 as for their gpu they just rename old gpus ie r9 280 to the 380 290 to 390 ro some bull like that anyways op stick with the 970

Why the 970? Again, the 390 performs better. Yes, the 970 is good and a bit more quiet and cooler, but the 390 is cheaper and better, so to say. Stop being bias because "AMD over heat faster".

GFXMoon wrote

_Skittle wrote

ShutUpWill wrote

Zayev wrote

ShutUpWill wrote AMD is never reliable. Stick with the 970.

so much bias
AMD is fine, I ran AMD cards for 2 years and AMD CPU for 3 and not had an issue at all.

AMD CPUs are prone to overheating. They're more of a value brand if you're trying to save some money. That's why they usually have more memory for a lower price. If you want performance stick with the 970 but if you're trying to save a couple bucks then the AMD would do the trick. But keep in mind, most AMD cards don't have a sensor to sense if it's overheating. They'll keep running until they, basically, melt.

You have no clue what you're talking about, please leave.

he knows what hes talking about amd's stuff are lower priced cause they over heat faster and their cpus are dual quad and 6 cores amd does not have an 8core cpu cause they split the cores in 2 as for their gpu they just rename old gpus ie r9 280 to the 380 290 to 390 ro some bull like that anyways op stick with the 970

You're just as aids as the first guy I was replying to... The 380 isn't just a renamed 280, it is a refreshed 285. If you had any idea at all what you're talking about then you would realise that every CPU and GPU has different generations.. 970 is newer generation 770, 980 is newer generation 780 etc. so don't come in here claiming that you or someone else know what you're talking about when neither of you clearly do.

ohh he knows what he is talking about then
oh ok
sorry
shame what he knows is a load of BS
running my AMD CPU for near 3 years and the warmest it has EVER got is 65C.. so overheat faster is a load of crap
as for re-branding, other companies do it to, heck even Intel did it with their Haswell REFRESH so yeah.. nice points bruh.

GFXMoon wrote amd's stuff are lower priced cause they over heat faster and their cpus are dual quad and 6 cores amd does not have an 8core cpu cause they split the cores in 2

Well, clearly you don't know how they work.

So. The FX 6xxx series have 3 bulldozer modules which each count as 2 cores. Each Bulldozer module has 2 integer cores but only a single floating point unit. So an AMD CPU with 4 cores only has 2 FPUs, where an Intel CPU with 4 cores would have 4 FPUs.

So technically, it's a tri-core CPU. The only true 6-core CPU AMD ever made was the Phenom X6 range. AMD FX8xxx series are quad core CPU but again with 8 logical cores. So it's a little like Intel's i7/Xeon range with the hyperthreading just with AMD it's 'hyperthreaded' constantly.

FYI: AMD CPU's run a lot cooler than Intel. Never forget the time my FX6300 hit 4 degrees C in the winter. That was a fun time.

Craig wrote

GFXMoon wrote amd's stuff are lower priced cause they over heat faster and their cpus are dual quad and 6 cores amd does not have an 8core cpu cause they split the cores in 2

Well, clearly you don't know how they work.

So. The FX 6xxx series have 3 bulldozer modules which each count as 2 cores. Each Bulldozer module has 2 integer cores but only a single floating point unit. So an AMD CPU with 4 cores only has 2 FPUs, where an Intel CPU with 4 cores would have 4 FPUs.

So technically, it's a tri-core CPU. The only true 6-core CPU AMD ever made was the Phenom X6 range. AMD FX8xxx series are quad core CPU but again with 8 logical cores. So it's a little like Intel's i7/Xeon range with the hyperthreading just with AMD it's 'hyperthreaded' constantly.

FYI: AMD CPU's run a lot cooler than Intel. Never forget the time my FX6300 hit 4 degrees C in the winter. That was a fun time.

ahh the single digit figures in the winter..
got mine hovering at 0 during last winter when it was properly freezing..