AMD 8350 vs Intel 3570k for rendering and gaming

[clonic96]

I just got a MSI 670 GPU, but I'm still stuck at my old AMD Athlon II 630 4x 2,8 GHz.. I'm a 3D animator and a gamer.. I'm using Cinema 4D for my animations and i want to play battlefield and planetside, but my CPU bottlenecks Planetside to 20 fps.. Whitch CPU would be best for my needs? The i5 3570k or the FX 8350?
Tek Syndicate just uploaded a video to youtube where he showed that the FX plays many games better, but not all..
Also the FX is about 10 - 15 dollars cheaper that the i5..
And whitch one will scale better when OC'ed?

ACER OEM mobo
8 GB ram
MSI 670
AMD Athlon II 630

 

[noob2222]

battlefield 3 will be limited to the gpu with either processor. Cinema 4d would favor the 8350.

Can't find much on planetside 2, cpu or gpu side.

As for overclocking, 8350 is more than capable of hitting 5.0-5.2 ghz with a good cooler, where the 3570 can hit 4.7 and heats up quick after that.

 

[rene13cross]

According to the following video review, the 8350 actually beats the i5-3570k in most tests and as already stated OCs very well, even on air cooling:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE

I would also imagine that video rendering programs would favor more cores, which the 8350 offers.

 

[sarinaide]

Either is a good option, it is hard to recommend either above the other, the FX and i5 offer very good price/performance at the respective price bracket adn will do the job intended very well.

 

[clonic96]

what if we add in the 3770k? it's $175 more than the 8350.. would you still choose the 8350?

 

[darth pravus]

The i7 will destroy them all in rendering by a large margin.

The i5 and i7 will be quicker then the 8350 in gaming.

The 8350 is better if you cant afford the i7 and your preference is rendering.

If your preference is gaming then the i5 for sure. It all depends on the systems primary use

 

[sarinaide]

The i7 is in a completely different price bracket yet the 8350 does beat out even the i7 in a few tests run. The i7 represents the worst value for money here as in gaming the FX8350 and i5 3570K are relatively close in gaming performance but the i7 costs considerably more.

 

[clonic96]

so the 8350.. got it

 

[darth pravus]

If it's a workstation first and gaming second then the 8350 for sure.

 

[clonic96]

it's half/half

 

[Wisecracker]

An FX8320 would work just dandy, too, and will save yah another $20 toward other goody-ness.

 

[FinneousPJ]

FX8320 +overclock.

 

[darth pravus]

If your going to overclock the fx make sure the have a good cooler and beefy PSU

 

[sarinaide]

We tested a FX8320 and FX 8350 like we did with the FX 8120 and FX 8150 and the outcome was the same, even at the same clocks the lower part doesn't deliver the exact same numbers as the flagship part, mostly because clocks speed is not the limitation. I have seen places selling the two for $10 apart which to me I'd rather just buy the flagship piece and be done with it.

 

[clonic96]

i will be running with the stock cooler in some months and i have a 650 psu..

so all of you tells me that the 8350 is the best choose.. then why do many other people tell me ''ooh, the i5 is better in every aspect'' ?

 

[darth pravus]

The i5 is a literally THE best gaming CPU but if you want rendering the 8350 is in between the i5 and the i7.

This makes it's probably the best for dual purpose.

 

[c_h1132]

for gaming the i5 is way definately better, but if you want an all around cpu then amd 8350 is the better choice. cant go wrong with either one though.

 

[Wisecracker]

From Anandtech Vishera Review

CineBench is the Cinema 4D benchmark.

If you want to spend $200 on your CPU, that is the likely retail price for the new 95w FX8300 Piledriver.

Otherwise, even at stock the FX8320 will be just dandy.

 

[noob2222]

i will be running with the stock cooler in some months and i have a 650 psu..

so all of you tells me that the 8350 is the best choose.. then why do many other people tell me ''ooh, the i5 is better in every aspect'' ?

The I5 is better at games, people are stuck on that, they don't look at rendering, they look at starcraft II. They don't look at games where the 8350 is faster, those are "fake"

you can't benchmark at high resolution because you lose the advantage of having pci-e 3.0. you can't bench the game at high resolutions because it makes AMD look better, even though thats where most people play the game, maxed out. People don't buy a gaming system and play on ultra low. Intel owns ultra-low benchmarks, right where it doesn't count.

Sure the I5 wins by 2-5% fps, and is overexaggerated as being completely blown away when you use settings that you will not use IRL. Its barely detectable and can only be seen in the benchmark, not in RL side by side play.

would you seriously be able to see the difference between 223 fps and 215, a difference of 4%? Especially if you have a 60 hz monitor, anything over 60 fps is a moot point.

Cinema 4d can't be faked tho, there is no settings to change that will change the outcome. Its I7 > 8350 > I5.

 

[darth pravus]

It's more shogun 2 and CPU bound games that are appearing the i5 will stretch its legs and outlast

 

[griptwister]

If you live by Microcenter you can pick up an i7 3770K for only $30 more than Bulldozer.

 

[FinneousPJ]

Nobody's suggesting Bulldozer.

 

[sarinaide]

Please do not try convince a Intel or nvidia user that AMD is actually pretty respectable, just tell them that their CPU is 500% faster and the GPU is 1000% faster, makes your life a lot easier.

 

[darth pravus]

Please do not try convince a Intel or nvidia user that AMD is actually pretty respectable, just tell them that their CPU is 500% faster and the GPU is 1000% faster, makes your life a lot easier.

No-one is saying AMD have bad stuff. The 8350 is the best fro the OP obviously so he should close the thread.

Amd did really well with the surprise drivers this year and the large amount of "gaming evolved" games. They need to get more TV adverts out there or something to get that they have good tech across. The only disappointment is their overall power usage

 

[sarinaide]

It is so far trite that AMD is behind in generations but they are good enough to still in many instances offer up fantastic gaming options.

No hardcore gamer or enthusiast really cares about moderately worse power numbers.