AMD FX-4170 vs Intel Sandy Bridge i5

Status
Not open for further replies.

rEdsKu11z

Distinguished
Aug 16, 2010
11
0
18,510
0
Hello i was wondering what cpu would be better for gaming the AMD FX-4170 or the Intel Sandy Bridge i5? i noticed that the i5 is more used in gaming rigs but the FX-4170 seems to have better performance then the i5 (4.2 ghz to 3.6 ghz).

Sorry if this is an easy question but i do not know processors as much as i thought.

Thank you, for you time to read this

Steve
 
Even at 4.5ghz, the FX41XX gets embarrassed in gaming by a stock dual core 3.1ghz i3-2100. GHZ has nothing to do with performance anymore, it's all about architecture.

If you want to build a budget gaming machine, forget the FX41XX and go with a i3-2120. Mobo's start at just $59 and are upgradable to Ivy Bridge.
 

Rockdpm

Splendid
Yea.....Intel Core I5 is better. Infact i was just reading and these Revisions, arent really revisions. Because the performance wasnt really increased and its on the same B2 stepping, not B3
 

Tab54o

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2012
261
0
18,790
1
I have an i5 2500k and I wouldn't trade it for anything. It's hands down the best bang for your buck, maybe even a tad more bang than necessary.
 

re-play-

Distinguished
Mar 17, 2007
140
0
18,680
0


buy what your money can and give u more for less money... AMD FX 4170 for sure will be a good CPU, really dont pay attention to the intel market propaganda that its around Tomshardware its a shame, AMD did a revision of FX4170 if u see the hatchery chart is place #1 for just 135dollars at newegg
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819106009&Tpk=fx-4170
 

cmi86

Distinguished
Sep 29, 2010
2,145
0
20,160
123
Like I have said in a few other post's my FX runs just fine. I have it a 4.5Ghz nice and cool, I play BF3 on ultra on a 55" lcd while listening to my own music, downloading and uploading multiple files, multiple programs and browser windows open and still everything runs without a hitch. Single program performance goes to the intel, the FX CPU's will embarrasingly out multi task any evenly priced intel offering, thats why i can do all this while the guy with the i5 can only play BF3 on ultra :)
 

Don't try to start a war here. You can do those tasks on the i5 easily.
 

cmi86

Distinguished
Sep 29, 2010
2,145
0
20,160
123
Not trying to start a war just speaking the truth. It is a proven fact that mhz for mhz the i line from intel are faster than BD, it is also a PROVEN FACT that BD multi tasks better (evenly priced offerings) due to the way it's cache is layed out. Man you intel guys are like mac fan's, speak a little truth and everyone stats running around screaming like a pissed off toddler.
 

cbrunnem

Distinguished
Dec 19, 2010
3,326
0
20,960
70


i will guarantee that you can not play bf3 on ultra because at the best your sig say you have a 6850 so unless your are playing at 720p or less your are lying.
 

cmi86

Distinguished
Sep 29, 2010
2,145
0
20,160
123
Yeah maybe the i3 (that costs more) has a small edge in games and only games (at stock clocks). Got news for ya guys there is alot more to the world of computers than just gaming. The FACTS of the matter are the i3 only has 2 cores, no L3 cache and supports a max of 1333 DDR3 ( this applies to the G-860 aswell ) So when it comes down to things like video editing, rendering, audio production, folding and just multitasking in general ANY of the FX line or Phenom (minus some dual core phenoms) line will royally choke slam the i3 or G-860 Due to the fact the have 2 more cores, L3 cache (alot of it) and support memory speeds of 1866Mhz (not OC'd) Oh yeah not to mention my "shitty" FX has yet to have ANY issue playing ANY game that I have thrown at it at more than playable frame rates so *** off with your off intel fanboy bullshit because my FX works just fine ( at everything, not just gaming). In response to cbrunnem my apoligies, I missed adding 2X and I also made a typo they are in fact 6950's that i purchased in a promotional CFX bundle from a local retailer so gigabyte required that both be sent back for RMA process.
 

cbrunnem

Distinguished
Dec 19, 2010
3,326
0
20,960
70


fyi the i3 2100/2120 is a dual core plus hyperthreading which is the same concept as your FX processor. also in no area does your cpu beat the i3 outright. ive seen multiple benchmarks that have them even at best. skyrim will favor the intel as it is much better clock for clock.

your cpu will hold you back IF you have CF 6950s and theres no denying that. if you do then you need to read up
 

aganarok

Honorable
Mar 2, 2012
21
0
10,510
0
+1 then the i3 2100 smashes all phenoms aswell as the FX lineup....
125 dollar cpu vs 100 dollar cpu.... make much of a difference now??

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-fx-pentium-apu-benchmark,3120-3.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-fx-pentium-apu-benchmark,3120-4.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-fx-pentium-apu-benchmark,3120-5.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-fx-pentium-apu-benchmark,3120-6.html

Need i say more....
Isnt it ironic how all three games you linked are on the Havok physics engine, which only scales with two cores and IS OWNED BY INTEL. Hmmmmmm I wonder why the Intel dual cores are doing well there....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads


TRENDING THREADS