• Log In
  • Register

Blog Post "AMD A10-7870K Godavari Release And Build Livestream"


  • Be respectful to others
  • No spam
  • No NSFW content
  • No piracy or key resellers
  • No link shorteners
  • Offensive content will be removed

Comments (Continued)

Eschaton 6 Builds 2 points 47 months ago

I did quote you correctly, and you are incorrect in your belief if "useless" means anything like what normal people think it means.

You were wrong, deal with it.

Edens_Remorse -3 points 47 months ago

I'm sure "normal" people with their "normal" $199 chromebooks are ok with just two threads. Are those "normal" people on here discussing a desktop APU with state of the art integrated graphics? In the context of this discussion what I said is 100% true. Perhaps it is time for you to calm down.

Would you like it if I used the word "pointless" instead of useless? If we're getting into semantics that is indeed a word better choice. In addition to the obvious benefits of having 4 core/4 threads such as enjoying a better browsing experience(do you use Chrome?) and actually being able to play recent titles, a $5 premium over the G3258 will net a budget pc builder this benefit as well - http://wccftech.com/project-cars-dev-dx12-improve-performance-3040/

I'd say that relegates two threads to the "useless" bin.

Eschaton 6 Builds 3 points 47 months ago

Are you trolling? First of all, and as an aside, I do believe many of those chromebooks are using quad core ARM exynos chips, or at least they were last time I checked.

I've already explained the reasons someone might find the G3258 compelling and not at all "pointless" or "useless." You can continue to blab, or you can make this conversation something other than you seeming ridiculous by actually trying to refute those points (protip: you can't).

As someone who uses Chrome on a 12 thread monstrosity primarily, as well as a bunch of dual core machines that I work with in my hobby, I can tell you there just isn't an appreciable difference unless you are running disgusting numbers of high-compute tabs. I've literally never seen someone do that. The bottleneck with Chrome is almost always your connection and/or your RAM, sometimes your storage medium. Very, very seldom your CPU. And in many cases where it is (such as HD video playback), the Intel CPU will actually wipe the floor with AMD since they have QuickSync.

I love AMD. I'm literally about to go home in an hour and help one of my customers put together an Athlon 860K build that I recommended over the G3258. But you have to be crazy to think that the G3258 is utterly pointless; it literally plays some games (Black Flag, Tomb Raider, Total War, etc) better than the Athlon when OC'd, due to the poor optimization those games have.

Edens_Remorse -4 points 47 months ago

You're funny. How did you like that DX12 link? The only troll here is the one suggesting a G3258 is anything but pointless. You just affirmed my comment that even something as simple as a chromebook can make use of >2 threads. At least you're not recommending it :)

point·less ˈpoin(t)ləs/ adjective adjective: pointless

  1. having little or no sense, use, or purpose.

synonyms: senseless, futile, hopeless, fruitless, useless, needless, in vain, unavailing, aimless, idle, worthless, valueless

jacobs4525 1 Build 3 points 47 months ago

Gonna have to stop you there. Eschaton is an active member in this community and has been for quite some time. It's one thing to disagree and debate (hell, that's what forums are for) but keep it friendly. You seem to be trying to go as close as you can to being rude without actually doing it, so let's try to keep it respectful and non-condescending. As for which CPU is better, it depends entirely on the application. An A10 or Athlon will (of course) demolish the Pentium in a quad threaded task, but in a single threaded one, the Pentium will beat the above listed chips. The sentiment of Eschaton's comment was not that this is a bad chip, hell, it's a great one for the money, just like the 7850K was. He was simply saying that it won't overclock too well, which has been the case with other chips on the same architecture, with most people falling short of 4.6GHz on Athlons and 7850Ks. It's also worth mentioning that overclocked don't scale performance equally across all CPUs. An extra 0.5GHz on an Intel chip right now is more of a boost than it would be on an AMD chip, because you have a higher IPC ratio with an Intel chip, so the amount of actually instructions that the CPU can process increases by more. Lastly, when he was saying he was going to "lol at this chip", he's expressing the sentiment that basically all of us have when AMD rebrands some old hardware, in that this is nothing exciting at all, and we don't care about it. So might get another 5% over the 7850K due to the higher clock. Big whoop. Most of us would rather see a new architecture with better performance at the same clock.

Edens_Remorse -3 points 47 months ago

Glad you're friends pal. Maybe someday you and I will be too. Until then I'll maintain my right to freely disagree. Team blue has enough idiots LOL'ing nonsensically, so I suppose I'll have to stop you right there and let you know that I reserve the right to correct cynical AMD'ers when necessary as well. I'd love to discuss the oc ability of this chip, but last time I checked we don't have any solid reviews(and I don't have a chip on hand just yet - though I will as soon as MSI gets me a bios update). Instead of pessimism I think I'll continue with optimism given the new stepping, improved cooling and dx12 right around the corner(I've got a hunch the 7870k will be better optimized for it, particularly regarding multiadapter use).