Intel i3-3220 Processor $100, i5-3570K $200 +shipping

Quote from Dillweed : Maybe you're too young to actually remember these things?

Born in the 90s, but “remembering things” isn’t terribly relevant when information is just a click away.

Quote from Dillweed : IBM makes everything from semiconductors to calculators to mainframes to software --and they used to even make typewriters.

… and the closest thing they make to what you’ve been describing is server hardware.

Quote from Dillweed : And your point is?

That RISC isn’t taking new market share, it’s staying strong in the same market segments it has always stayed strong in.

Quote from Dillweed : The last RISC desktop arch only got pulled because Motorola is a horrible fab. BTW Nvidia is about to launch a 45w ARM version of Tegra. It's not going to fail.

When and if that happens and succeeds, your argument will be lent some credence.

Quote from Dillweed : Samsung's 11.6 inch chromebook. Lenovo's Ideapad 11, and Asus's Vivobook. There's three.

I’m still unaware of any popular laptop or desktop that uses RISC…? Are you suggesting that Windows RT devices and Chromebooks have had any measure of mainstream success, outside of a tiny niche market?

Quote from Dillweed : Something is VERY wrong when a Mac is more open than Windows...

Just… what?? I think you’re confusing common stereotypes about iOS with the history of two completely different operating systems (Windows and OS X). Explain to me how NT is more “open” than XNU, please?

Quote from Dillweed : No product in existence still uses PPC. The IBM PowerX Cell8i is an in order Power 6 command unit for a series of SPEs that use another instruction set entirely. The Wii is using a ULV variant of Power 5, and the Xbox 360 is using a Power 6 variant with multiple logic units per core similar to Hyperthreading.

Xbox 360 uses a Power Architecture core, just like the PS3. It’s not marketed as a “PowerPC,” but uses the same architecture. The 360 devkits were essentially G5s. The Wii chip is not only Power Architecture, but also literally a PowerPC chip – it’s an ISA 1.10, from the G3 family (7xx). To say that “no product in existence still uses PPC” is absurd.

Quote from Dillweed : PPC was dead in the water after it was dropped by Apple and then later it was dropped by Motorola.

Yet there are a ton more products with PPC cores sold daily than Chromebooks or Windows RT devices..

Quote from Dillweed : But really, you're just trying to find something to argue about, but you don't really know enough to argue effectively.

Thanks for the constructive critique of my rhetoric, that’s quite necessary.

Quote from Dillweed : You, and most of the "enthusiasts" set in an outmoded world where individual component performance is more important that total system performance. In 2013 --that shit doesn't matter. The game is wide open for the first time since 1981 when IBM set the de facto PC standard. What people want is total system performance --that's why AMD bought ATi --that's Why Nvidia makes ARM chips --that's why MS is pissing their pants --that's why Intel is making phone chips. There is REAL competition now....

It’s naïve to think that at any point in recent history the average consumer cared more about individual components than total system performance. Yet here we are, discussing the performance of a processor – which means that in the context of this thread, individual component performance is really all that matters…

Quote from Dillweed : BTW Stars is bested by Trinity. Grab an A10 5800K instead of an i3 or a Phenom II. You'll be pleasantly surprised at how much umpf that sucker has...

I linked a bunch of real world tests and benchmarks that show that the Phenom II is a superior processor at the $100 price point than Trinity. You haven’t responded to that other than trying to lecture on how your odd, personal naming schemes for computers are based on your version of history, and generally going completely off topic.
Do you have a link or any evidence that supports your point other than hearsay and your personal opinions? If so, please provide it.

Quote from Dillweed : BTW Stars is bested by Trinity. Grab an A10 5800K instead of an i3 or a Phenom II. You'll be pleasantly surprised at how much umpf that sucker has...

It all depends on what you are doing. Almost all benchmarks I see from multiple sites around the web shows an i3 beating the A10 5800K in most games (when paired with a discrete videocard)

See benches here [anandtech.com]

Now, if we are talking i3 for video and A10 for video, the A10 destroys the i3.

These new APUs about to be announced should turn the tables for gaming.

In heavily threaded applications, the A10 wins. Again, all depends on what you are using the chip for.

Also, I see the the i3 will beat (or tie) almost any Phenom II quad cores in most games.

See benches here. [anandtech.com]

There is a bias towards Intel in most benches. I've seen end users do their own benchmarks and the AMD chips "mysteriously" perform much better than what is listed on review sites, or destroy Intel in games that review sites do not test. I can only base my decisions with the information I have on hand.

Quote from xveganrox : Born in the 90s, but “remembering things” isn’t terribly relevant when information is just a click away. … and the closest thing they make to what you’ve been describing is server hardware. That RISC isn’t taking new market share, it’s staying strong in the same market segments it has always stayed strong in. When and if that happens and succeeds, your argument will be lent some credence. I’m still unaware of any popular laptop or desktop that uses RISC…? Are you suggesting that Windows RT devices and Chromebooks have had any measure of mainstream success, outside of a tiny niche market? Just… what?? I think you’re confusing common stereotypes about iOS with the history of two completely different operating systems (Windows and OS X). Explain to me how NT is more “open” than XNU, please? Xbox 360 uses a Power Architecture core, just like the PS3. It’s not marketed as a “PowerPC,” but uses the same architecture. The 360 devkits were essentially G5s. The Wii chip is not only Power Architecture, but also literally a PowerPC chip – it’s an ISA 1.10, from the G3 family (7xx). To say that “no product in existence still uses PPC” is absurd. Yet there are a ton more products with PPC cores sold daily than Chromebooks or Windows RT devices.. Thanks for the constructive critique of my rhetoric, that’s quite necessary. It’s naïve to think that at any point in recent history the average consumer cared more about individual components than total system performance. Yet here we are, discussing the performance of a processor – which means that in the context of this thread, individual component performance is really all that matters… I linked a bunch of real world tests and benchmarks that show that the Phenom II is a superior processor at the $100 price point than Trinity. You haven’t responded to that other than trying to lecture on how your odd, personal naming schemes for computers are based on your version of history, and generally going completely off topic. Do you have a link or any evidence that supports your point other than hearsay and your personal opinions? If so, please provide it.

Kid, why are you having such a hard time finding basic info like the difference between Power and PPC? Or that IBM PC is a standard we're still using?

If you can't find what I'm talking about, maybe it's time to learn to research. Google sucks as a way to find information, and if your school librarian was that bad at teaching you how to "look it up", I'm sorry for you.

BTW I'm blocking you. The worst type of ignoramus is the kind so ignorant they don't even know enough to know what they don't know. You are that type.

Quote from AustinPowersISU : It all depends on what you are doing. Almost all benchmarks I see from multiple sites around the web shows an i3 beating the A10 5800K in most games (when paired with a discrete videocard) See benches here [anandtech.com] Now, if we are talking i3 for video and A10 for video, the A10 destroys the i3. These new APUs about to be announced should turn the tables for gaming. In heavily threaded applications, the A10 wins. Again, all depends on what you are using the chip for. Also, I see the the i3 will beat (or tie) almost any Phenom II quad cores in most games. See benches here. [anandtech.com] There is a bias towards Intel in most benches. I've seen end users do their own benchmarks and the AMD chips "mysteriously" perform much better than what is listed on review sites, or destroy Intel in games that review sites do not test. I can only base my decisions with the information I have on hand.

I was 100% unimpressed by Trinity until I actually used an A10 for about a week as my main machine. Now, using an i3 would be downright frustrating.

The kicker is that ALL AMD hardware needs CAPs and is RAM timing dependent. If you do those two things right with the most recent CAPs and 9-9-9-24 1866 memory, you'll be amazed at just how fast that SOB is.

I didn't think there was any way in Hell I'd ever love these things, but an APU w/ dual graphics costs about $300 to build if you do it right, and it's farking amazing.

As for reviews --they're paid for by advertisers. AMD has laid off their entire marketing department twice in 18 months, whereas Intel is paying Will.I.Am out the ass --dude, AMD is just too broke to outspend Intel's review purchasing power. In my 6th grade science class over two decades ago, we had to compare products for the science fair. I'd have flunked for a review like Tom's or even Trubritar does. Science? Meh....

Quote from Dillweed : I was 100% unimpressed by Trinity until I actually used an A10 for about a week as my main machine. Now, using an i3 would be downright frustrating. The kicker is that ALL AMD hardware needs CAPs and is RAM timing dependent. If you do those two things right with the most recent CAPs and 9-9-9-24 1866 memory, you'll be amazed at just how fast that SOB is. I didn't think there was any way in Hell I'd ever love these things, but an APU w/ dual graphics costs about $300 to build if you do it right, and it's farking amazing. As for reviews --they're paid for by advertisers. AMD has laid off their entire marketing department twice in 18 months, whereas Intel is paying Will.I.Am out the ass --dude, AMD is just too broke to outspend Intel's review purchasing power. In my 6th grade science class over two decades ago, we had to compare products for the science fair. I'd have flunked for a review like Tom's or even Trubritar does. Science? Meh....

just curious whats your setup? contemplating between i3 or i5, but your post intrigues me.

Quote from Dillweed : Kid, why are you having such a hard time finding basic info like the difference between Power and PPC? Or that IBM PC is a standard we're still using? If you can't find what I'm talking about, maybe it's time to learn to research. Google sucks as a way to find information, and if your school librarian was that bad at teaching you how to "look it up", I'm sorry for you. BTW I'm blocking you. The worst type of ignoramus is the kind so ignorant they don't even know enough to know what they don't know. You are that type.

So you don't have any benchmarks that counter the ones I provided, so you're blocking me and calling me ignorant? Lovely.

"Google sucks as a way to find information." Right. I'm sure EBSCOHost and Jstor are terribly unreliable too. My entire life is a lie - thanks for the revelation!

Quote from intimidatorx31 : just curious whats your setup? contemplating between i3 or i5, but your post intrigues me.

Which one LOL? I'm an engineer for a law firm --I've got a few dozen used for various tasks.

The one I'm talking about in that post is 5800k with a 6670 configured in dual graphics:

APU: 5800K w/ passive cooler
GPU: XfX 6670 w/ passive cooler
RAM: Corsair 1866 CSL 9-9-9-24 16GB
SSD: Samsung Series 3 256GB
HDDs: RAID10 500GB Hitachi single platter 500GB (obviously 4)
ODDs: 2x LG BDRWs
MoBo: ASRock FM2 mITX
NIC: Intel ExtremeN+BT4.0
Case: Lian Li mITX micro tower
PSU: Silverstone Passive 500w
Monitor: HansG 1920*1200 27"

This box isn't the cheap way to build FM2. It's the extreme high end of FM2. No 1155 chip even in the same situations can keep up. That said, I've built others with:

5800k
6670
ASrock MoBo
8GB 1866 9-9-9-24 RAM
500GB single platter HDD
No ODD or just a DVDRAM
Cheap case w/PSU

That'll set you back $300-400, and it'll easily roast any Intel build in the same price range. That's AMD's consumer niche --higher performance in low power, inexpensive platforms. Their server lineup is TOTALLY different, and that's what AM3+ is based on. APUs have no direct competitor, and Intel keeps pushing their CPU performance lead to keep the argument from moving to total system performance where they just can't compete. It's like Apple saying exchange support didn't matter when the iPhone didn't have it, but then saying it did when they got it but android lacked it. The industry term for that is "puffing". Thing is, most people are buying it --something that doesn't happen with many other fields.

Quote from Dillweed : I was 100% unimpressed by Trinity until I actually used an A10 for about a week as my main machine. Now, using an i3 would be downright frustrating. The kicker is that ALL AMD hardware needs CAPs and is RAM timing dependent. If you do those two things right with the most recent CAPs and 9-9-9-24 1866 memory, you'll be amazed at just how fast that SOB is. I didn't think there was any way in Hell I'd ever love these things, but an APU w/ dual graphics costs about $300 to build if you do it right, and it's farking amazing. As for reviews --they're paid for by advertisers. AMD has laid off their entire marketing department twice in 18 months, whereas Intel is paying Will.I.Am out the ass --dude, AMD is just too broke to outspend Intel's review purchasing power. In my 6th grade science class over two decades ago, we had to compare products for the science fair. I'd have flunked for a review like Tom's or even Trubritar does. Science? Meh....

I don't doubt your claims, in fact I've seen the results in benchmarks comparing memory timings, but I have a few points I'd like to make.

9-9-9-24 1866 memory is more expensive than slower memory. If Intel is not as reliant on the memory timings as AMD, and the chips are the same price (and in this case, Intel's is significantly lower at $99), that is an advantage to Intel.

For 8 gigs of that better-timing RAM, your talking about $80. For some slower RAM, you can easily get some for around $50.

That's nearly a $30 difference right there. In my case, I have 8GB of 1600 RAM sitting around. So it would be an additional $80 for me.

The cheapest 5800k online (that I can find) is about $125 vs $99. When factoring in shipping the i3 is about $20 cheaper.

So now we are at $50 savings with the i3.

If you check out reviews on the A10 on newegg, you'll notice a bunch of people complaining about a loud stock fan, The Intel fan is generally accepted to be a quiet fan. I like my rigs to be quiet. In order to get a good quiet fan, it'll cost around $20.

So now we have a difference of $70.

Next lets look at the cost of a wireless USB dongle for my build, as I cannot find any mini itx FM2 boards with integrated wireless. That'll be around another $20.

So now we have a difference of $90

Then lets look at the other things I get with my gigabyte mini itx board. Dual Nics, Bluetooth, Dual HDMI output. I'll say these extra features are worth about $10 to me. I won't really use them, but having them available for me in the future is worth some money.

So, adding all that up, it's $100 more expensive to go with the A10. With that $100 I could have purchased an i5 3570k over my i3 and destroyed the A10 in every area (when paired with a 7850 videocard).

It just doesn't make much sense for my situation to go FM2.

Guys just let it rest already, the fact is - Intel and AMD are competitors and price their CPUs accordingly. Therefore, it allows OPTIONS and better CUSTOMIZATION for the builder - ie. you can choose what you want to put in your tower for YOUR purpose. There is no one ruler for EVERY purpose.

let. it. rest.

...and move on!

Kinda sad that I posted this deal and forgot it expired last night, was just about to pick up another i3 3220

Quote from AustinPowersISU : I don't doubt your claims, in fact I've seen the results in benchmarks comparing memory timings, but I have a few points I'd like to make. 9-9-9-24 1866 memory is more expensive than slower memory. If Intel is not as reliant on the memory timings as AMD, and the chips are the same price (and in this case, Intel's is significantly lower at $99), that is an advantage to Intel. For 8 gigs of that better-timing RAM, your talking about $80. For some slower RAM, you can easily get some for around $50. That's nearly a $30 difference right there. In my case, I have 8GB of 1600 RAM sitting around. So it would be an additional $80 for me. The cheapest 5800k online (that I can find) is about $125 vs $99. When factoring in shipping the i3 is about $20 cheaper. So now we are at $50 savings with the i3. If you check out reviews on the A10 on newegg, you'll notice a bunch of people complaining about a loud stock fan, The Intel fan is generally accepted to be a quiet fan. I like my rigs to be quiet. In order to get a good quiet fan, it'll cost around $20. So now we have a difference of $70. Next lets look at the cost of a wireless USB dongle for my build, as I cannot find any mini itx FM2 boards with integrated wireless. That'll be around another $20. So now we have a difference of $90 Then lets look at the other things I get with my gigabyte mini itx board. Dual Nics, Bluetooth, Dual HDMI output. I'll say these extra features are worth about $10 to me. I won't really use them, but having them available for me in the future is worth some money. So, adding all that up, it's $100 more expensive to go with the A10. With that $100 I could have purchased an i5 3570k over my i3 and destroyed the A10 in every area (when paired with a 7850 videocard). It just doesn't make much sense for my situation to go FM2.

If you're in a niche where CPU-only performance is what matters. Then CPU-only performance is king.

My earliest point that led down this rabbit trail is still that you'd probably be happier with Sandy for CPU-only stuff. Ivy is a horrible, horrible mistake on Intel's part. Intel botched the Sandy SATA controllers, but the CPUs were stellar. They botched the CPUs themselves with Ivy.