Why is an Intel Quad better than an AMD Octo?

After discovering http://www.anandtech.com I have come to the conclusion that AMD is not the greatest choice in terms of performance CPUs. I'm just wondering what AMD's FX-8350 is better at doing than for example a 3770K.

dude, this has been discussed over and over, and whether or not you make your conclusions after reading anandtech stuff is up to you, you believe the advertisements you want to believe...

bottom line: Intel: every iteration of intel CPU's = new socket, new platform, in the future the VRM will be integrated in the chip, the Intel IGP sucks but is very compatible with linux open source drivers, the performance per clock is higher than AMD because of better process optimisation and GCC trickery, the power consumption is lower because of smaller lithography, it's more expensive; AMD: made in germany, larger lithography uses more power but less quantum side-effects, less software optimised for now, cheaper, enthusiast friendly (very overclockable), very consistent in platform (AM3/AM3+), still able to beat intel in a few things with raw power without GCC trickery.

The performance goes back and forth. Anandtech and Toms put the Intel WAY in the lead. From personal experience, the speed of the 8 core is about the same as the Intel quad cores in most games (sometimes better, sometimes worse). Also, it is better for streaming games.

Would it be better for recording games? Im planning to do build with i7 3770k with 7950 or 8350 with 7970. Another question: shoud I wait for haswell? Is it worth it? Btw, I love the Tek :)

To be honest if you can afford it the 7950 would probably be the best... but even then that 8350 is still pretty tempting given that it has the best bang for the buck on the market right now...


daaaaammmnn... looks good for 8350

drop the stick, and back away from the horse carcass

Take a Asrock 990FX extreme 9 or Asus  Rog  board. take the FX8350 and  the money you saving, buy a sapphire 7950/7970 Vapor X  just my oppinion ☺