We all have our ways of getting an OS ;)

I tend to hook up freinds through work and have not paid more than 39 bucks for a copy of Windows in years. 

But yes, that needs to be tacked on if we want to be scientifically accurate. Maybe people can find used Vista and 7 copies off the itnernetz for cheap? 7 preferred...

Yes, Skyrim is a good example of something poorly optimized. I have a Phenom X4 955 + GTX 650ti, so it runs at max settings. But I have seen people with GPUs a little worser havingg to cut things. Sleeping Dogs achieves a much better graphical result withou using much more resources (it's actually a beautiful game close to max). With next gen hardware we will have better console games and better (and more optimized) PC games. Is a win-win situation.

But the AMD domination on consoles left me thinking. Could we see a situation where PC games (specifically console ports) will run better on AMD GPUs (or even CPUs)? That could be bad news for NVidia.

Cool post. Yeah, it makes sense.

I don't think it will come to that. AMD may get more game endorsments but Nvidia has some solid technologies they are working on. Adaptive VSYNC, GPU Bosst 2.0 all contribute to games running good on their hardware...

What kind of framerates are you getting in Skyrim at max with that hardware? I used to have a Phenom X4 965 and I remember running it at 4.2 Ghz and not seeing much CPU bottlenecks. It did have a memory controller bottleneck that would kick in on some games.

Games I played would see usage like this:

CPU - 60%

GPU - 40%

FPS - 40-60 (VSYNC on)

I remember being able to pinpoint that RAM and northbridge overclocks would give me proportional FPS increses so that must have been the bottleneck. 

This PC is 490$, has an 8 core CPU, and far surpasses the Xbone's GPU.
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1baYH

CPU: AMD FX-8320 3.5GHz 8-Core Processor ($144.99 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: MSI 760GM-P34(FX) Micro ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($49.99 @ Microcenter)
Memory: PNY Optima 4GB (1 x 4GB) DDR3-1333 Memory ($29.98 @ Outlet PC)
Storage: Toshiba 500GB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($54.98 @ Outlet PC)
Video Card: XFX Radeon HD 7850 1GB Video Card ($144.99 @ NCIX US)
Case: NZXT Source 210 (White) ATX Mid Tower Case ($24.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: Corsair Builder 430W 80 PLUS Bronze Certified ATX12V Power Supply ($24.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: LG GH24NS95 DVD/CD Writer ($15.98 @ Outlet PC)
Total: $490.89
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)

Just research in any place... it's knew that AMD CPUs are better for multitreading than singlethreading.

The same AnandTech that he used here.

"Heavily threaded workloads obviously do well on the FX series parts, here in our 7-zip test the FX-8150 is actually faster than Intel's fastest Sandy Bridge."

Not bad. I don't think it would surpass the X1 GPU in actual performance (only theoretical) due to 1 GB RAM and no low level access to hardware but if you add a 2 GB card in there like a GTX 760 you'd be alright. 

Thats because 2600k is a 4 core CPU. If you're able to utilize all 8 cores on an AMD cpu (big if), you will beat intels 4 core barely. 

But intels 6 core would beat AMD easily... Even haswell 4770k 4 core may beat FX 8350 when it comes to all core utilization. It beats the FX-8150...

AMD also has memory/read write bottlenecks compared to intel. 18 GB/s compared to close to 30 GB/s on Haswell.

Like I said, you supported Dis, he was saying that an Intel vairant 8 core would destroy the AMD version, and he's right just by looking at your data basing on logic. If you read his post again, you will know what I mean. As a matter of fact, I see plenty of hexa core xeons in action with 12 threads, those things are fucking monsters. O_Ob When Haswell-E comes out, it will be even more ridiculous, they will make 6-8 core Intels more common in desktops and running 12-16 threads! :D

ps: also, I'm comparing Ivy Bridge to Piledriver, your data is old by now.

Haswell-E man, Haswell-E, it's gonna be gud~ lol....