Carrying ranked game
Posted 11 August 2012 - 02:00 PM
Everything going ok, getting ready to win final team fight and end match.
Vidya card overheats. >:I
Come back to this
Hooray for losing games you deserved a win in.
Posted 11 August 2012 - 02:05 PM
Posted 11 August 2012 - 02:09 PM
Posted 11 August 2012 - 02:17 PM
I'm saving up for a new rig anyway, want an 8 core so I can virtualize a server.
Posted 11 August 2012 - 05:22 PM
virtual 8 cores from an i7, or logical ones off of a xeon?
Posted 12 August 2012 - 12:18 PM
But, if you're going to dedicate a server to 4 cores and still use it for games etc. it's the obvious choice. ;p
Posted 12 August 2012 - 12:46 PM
Posted 12 August 2012 - 01:12 PM
Posted 12 August 2012 - 01:36 PM
Edit: This could all change with Piledriver though, if they manage to get it out before Haswell.
Posted 12 August 2012 - 02:00 PM
Posted 12 August 2012 - 02:12 PM
Although nearly every thing I've seen on heavy threaded applications there's > 5% difference. The exception to this being heavily threaded photoshop tools, in that instance Zambezi actually outperforms all the quad core sandy chips.
All that being said, you really can't go wrong with the high end chips from either company at this point in most instances. And if you do decide to go with the 8150, I suggest a very good cooling solution so you can OC it, as sql scales very well with clock rate.
Edit: If you wanted some real world numbers, in a situation that you'd be in, I have both an i5 and i7, and can section off 2 cores and 2 cores/4 threads on a VM, load them up with whatever SQL test you come up with, and run BF3, WoW, etc.
Posted 12 August 2012 - 04:56 PM
So we're looking at ~10% difference (from an arbitrary number)(I've also heard you can overclock the bulldozer to 4.2ghz with stock cooling, can't find a ref for it however). You gotta keep in mind win7 (and the majority of software you're going to run) is catered to quad core processors. 99% of the time, i7/i5 will outperform, but when we're looking at multiple VM instances bulldozer becomes a lot more attractive. Things like WoW will only run on one thread, and is a good case of the intel chipset being a clear cut winner.
Here's another good source that isn't arbitrary numbers http://www.phoronix....1204_virt&num=3 (graphs fairly irrelevant, check descriptions)
Posted 12 August 2012 - 07:47 PM
Now, in real word conditions, as the tests you linked show, things are a bit different. VM 4.1 runs horribly on an i7 chip. Hopefully this is something that gets fixed in the future though. The benchmark I referenced was using VM on a SB Xeon and Interlagos Opteron, where the 6 core Xeon scored a 63ms response time over a 170ms time on the Opteron: http://www.anandtech.com/print/5058
Considering the only real difference between core and xeon is the xeons are binned higher, I assumed that VM would work equally well on each. For down, in the desktop chips, the bulldozer performs better it seems. I'd keep an eye out for a VM update before you buy one though, to see if they improve performance on the i7, because if they do, for mysql purposes, the intel chip would smoke the amd one.
Also, WoW hasn't run on a single core for a very long time, and the new 64 bit client not only fills all 4 cores of my i5, but loads them quite well, as well as the BF3 multiplayer, which is why I suggested the two.
Posted 12 August 2012 - 08:24 PM
Posted 13 August 2012 - 03:43 PM
i7/i5 is going to be miles ahead in the majority of things, but once we start talking multiple VMs bulldozer will handle it much more smoothly.
Posted 13 August 2012 - 03:48 PM
Posted 13 August 2012 - 03:55 PM