[merb]

price was always in AMD's favor. problem is more and more the energy consumption. also the i-series of intel was really really solid and good, at least until broadwell (didn't seen too much skylake yet). that especially lost amd a lot of ground in the server space. and a lot of "high end" gamer favored the Intel i7 series aswell, even when they weren't as cheap as amd.

[tormeh]

The i7 was a lot better for gaming than the 8350 was at the time. Hell, an i3 was better at the time. The 8350 was priced accordingly. There was no price advantage. What I'm saying is that AMD's design has aged a lot better.

[merb]

AMD was cheaper (always) not better. You can be cheaper and worse and people will still buy the worse since it's cheaper even if price / quality on intel would've been better.

[tormeh]

You obviously haven't actually checked the prices.

[CarVac]

How exactly?

I see the evidence of that happening with AMD GPUs versus Nvidia, but versus Intel processors?

Can you explain?

[AnthonyMouse]

When Bulldozer was released, most software only used one or two threads. Which meant that the 8-thread FX was slower than the 2-thread i3 because the extra threads did nothing and it had lower single-thread performance.

Now that newer software is using more threads, the old FX gets a big performance boost while the old i3 is only the same speed it ever was.

[milcron]

How did Intel lose ground with Broadwell?

[clevernickname]

IIRC it took much longer to deliver than expected, didn't improve much upon Haswell, sold in a limited set of SKUs, then was succeeded by Skylake a few months later.