AMD or Intel?

That's a couple of the issues I have with going AMD right now. I really do want to upgrade to Broadwell, however that would not be cost-effective if I went with AMD. The power draw is also just a little to much.

I would just use what I have, except that it's awful. I play Battlefield 3 on lowest settings 800x600 at 30 fps. Hey! I don't want to play Battlefield like a console does! :D
 
ok, i can see your problem.
So you already have a motherboard that supports the 9590. In that case i'll say go for it. You can properly get 2/3 of the 9590 price back if you sell both the CPU and motherboard as a packed when you want to upgrade again.
 
Oh sorry you misunderstood me. I didn't mean that I already have a FM3+ motherboard. I meant to say that I don't know if I want to go the AMD way because of the issues. My current PC is just some old Dell PC that I upgraded a ton.
 
The cost of running a FX 9590 at FULL load for 24hr if kWh cost is around 12cents would be 71 cents a day. At idle it would be around 19 cents a day. A 4790k full load would be 31 cents a day and idle would be around 12 cents a day.
 
The overuse of electricity is simply bad architecture design.
It also heats up much more than i think is reasonable.

And about the power bill.
ln Denmark El prices are much higher. It's about 30 cents KWh. So it's a concern for me atleast.
I also think we should all care just a little about our mother earth.

The El Prices here have gotten pretty high over the years. mostly do to our government want us to reduce pollution.
 
Sorry im not into the green eco stuff. I pay 10 cents kWh here. So 8 cents a day in power consumption does not make any difference at all to me. I dont know if architecture design is bad or not. I know i have a chevy blazer that runs at 210f and a grand am that runs at 180f.
 
Sorry im not into the green eco stuff.

That's ok. It's also more the big corporations that have to pull their heads out of their assess.
But we are not here to talk about that.

I'll argue that the architecture is in fact poorly designed. How else does it take almost 250W to clock 8 cores at 5ghz.
And even then it get's beaten by a 4 core I7. It's a poor power and core design.
This is also one of the reasons AMD price their CPU's as they do. Else they would be completely pushed away by Intel.
Not trying to raise a Intel fanboy flag. it's just fact.

Then again, you get a 8 core CPU for cheap money and it does deliver a better bang for the bug than what Intel offers.
That is why AMD is still in business on the CPU market.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom