Brain overload too many Intell cpu's Last look before I buy the AMD 8350 help

[g335]

Hello

Intel has way too many cpu's out that are close to each other.

Taking one last look at Intel before I buy the AMD 8350

With all of the i5's and i7's available, is it worth it to buy non K models?

I plan to do gaming, video editing, 3D design and rendering.

I am choosing the 8350 because of the 8 cores and the price.

Should I look at Intel or should I go ahead and get the AMD 8350 as planned and use more money to buy a very good gpu?

 

[cemerian]

only the k ones from intel are worth getting, other than that the fx 8350 is a good cpu but it just needs to be overclocked, in terms of gaming you will see a lot biger benefit from a kick ass gpu than cpu

 

[cemerian]

it is not poor at gaming your whole assumption is bias the fx 8350 is more than good enough for gaming and once overcloked its almost the same level as the 3770k and, and that headroom assumption is incorect the fx chips can easyly reach 4,7 -5 ghz when oc i know my 8120 is running @4,73 ghz on air cooling

 

[madcap42]

i like the amd 8350 piledriver save some money and buy the saved money can be put towards a better graphic card

 

[cemerian]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbMYV8Djt7k
http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-fx-8350-vs-intel-core-i7-3770k--4.8ghz--multi-gpu-gaming-performance/17494.html
http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-fx-8350-vs-intel-core-i7-3770k-4-8ghz-multi-gpu-gaming-performance/17494.html/2

fx8350 is very poor at gaming compared to intel cpus. Also amd chips have like half the memory bandwidth and have poor single core performance hence why intel systems destroy amd at multitasking performance unless you are using all 8 cores of the amd cpu intel will feel usually a lot faster. i7 3770k or 4770k etc will beat the fx8350 at rending 9 times out of 10 and has more headroom to oc. Also the fx8350 takes so much electricity that you will save like £20-£30 a year if you lets say use your cpu on the limit for like 5 hours a day for a year with an intel cpu.

Also amd cpus have a lot of frame latencies and fps dips compared to intel. Intel being great at multitasking can be seen on below link:
http://techreport.com/review/23246/inside-the-second-gaming-performance-with-today-cpus/7

No latencies while playing a game and transcoding video.

it is not poor at gaming your whole assumption is bias the fx 8350 is more than good enough for gaming and once overcloked its almost the same level as the 3770k and, and that headroom assumption is incorect the fx chips can easyly reach 4,7 -5 ghz when oc i know my 8120 is running @4,73 ghz on air cooling

The reason why intel games better is due to better memory bandwidth and ipc of single thread performance being double amd. AMD fx8350 was just designed for video encoding and that is about it.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8350-core-i7-3770k-gaming-bottleneck,3407-5.html

Did you know the i3 3220 beats the fx8350 on average game performance on tomshardware and behardware:
http://www.behardware.com/articles/880-17/amd-fx-8350-review-is-amd-back.html

i like the amd 8350 piledriver save some money and buy the saved money can be put towards a better graphic card

It will cost more for the op after a year or two to get an fx8350 as the intel cpu takes on average 100w less then the amd cpu at full load with similar multithreaded performance.

that was before microsoft released 3 or 4 paches for fx so that they would actuly run better on windows 7 this year, and the fx cpus are ment to be oveclocked and after that they are on par with the core i5 and WTF is behardware

 

[8350rocks]

Hello

Intel has way too many cpu's out that are close to each other.

Taking one last look at Intel before I buy the AMD 8350

With all of the i5's and i7's available, is it worth it to buy non K models?

I plan to do gaming, video editing, 3D design and rendering.

I am choosing the 8350 because of the 8 cores and the price.

Should I look at Intel or should I go ahead and get the AMD 8350 as planned and use more money to buy a very good gpu?

The 8350 is fine for gaming...you won't be disappointed...put the money saved toward a great GPU.

 

[Justin Pinotti]

Just so you know, the 8350 and the 8320 are virtually the exact same CPU, you're just paying more for a higher stock clock speed. So if you ever do plan on overclocking, just get the 8320 and use the extra cash for an aftermarket cooler.

Don't listen to the Intel fanboys either, AMD is cheaper but let's look at the facts. The Xbone and PS4 both use AMD 8-core CPUs. Simply put, future games will be better optimized for AMD octocore cpus.

Now let's not ignore the fact that AMDs vishera CPUs are great on their own. Look at any review and people will tell you how hard it is to get all 8-cores to reach 100% load during real world applications. I've seen people who will play BF3 1080p @ ultra settings while rendering a 1080p video, downloading a file and converting a video(just youtube 8350 multitasking) and not go above 60% core usage.

Keep in mind that CPUs are not too important for gaming. As long as you have a half decent quad core then a GPU is the real factor.

 

[CooLWoLF]

Just so you know, the 8350 and the 8320 are virtually the exact same CPU, you're just paying more for a higher stock clock speed. So if you ever do plan on overclocking, just get the 8320 and use the extra cash for an aftermarket cooler.

Don't listen to the Intel fanboys either, AMD is cheaper but let's look at the facts. The Xbone and PS4 both use AMD 8-core CPUs. Simply put, future games will be better optimized for AMD octocore cpus.

Now let's not ignore the fact that AMDs vishera CPUs are great on their own. Look at any review and people will tell you how hard it is to get all 8-cores to reach 100% load during real world applications. I've seen people who will play BF3 1080p @ ultra settings while rendering a 1080p video, downloading a file and converting a video(just youtube 8350 multitasking) and not go above 60% core usage.

Keep in mind that CPUs are not too important for gaming. As long as you have a half decent quad core then a GPU is the real factor.

Truth. TRUTH spoken here.

 

[IAmSnowy]

Just go with a 3570K or a 4670K (hell, even a 2500k will preform amazingly)....Save up some cash and get the better product..You will not see your rendering benefit skyrocketing with the 8350..AMD has been just upright the worst choice you can possible make for the last like 4 years (after the Phenom II x4 9xx)..IF you have time, wait till amd releases a new architecture since they're ditching the AMx platform, maybe that'll revive AMD...Now though, go with a i5 4670k.It's basically a 4770k just without hyper-threading.

 

[g335]

Just go with a 3570K or a 4670K (hell, even a 2500k will preform amazingly)....Save up some cash and get the better product..You will not see your rendering benefit skyrocketing with the 8350..AMD has been just upright the worst choice you can possible make for the last like 4 years (after the Phenom II x4 9xx)..IF you have time, wait till amd releases a new architecture since they're ditching the AMx platform, maybe that'll revive AMD...Now though, go with a i5 4670k.It's basically a 4770k just without hyper-threading.

I am going from a Q6600 oc'ed to 2.9 GHZ(3) So I am sure that even the AMD 8350 would be a big improvement for me.
Also I am choosing it for the price. If I had the extra money I would go for the i7 4770K.
Thanks for the suggestion.

 

[g335]

I am going from a Q6600 oc'ed to 2.9 GHZ(3) So I am sure that even the AMD 8350 would be a big improvement for me.
Also I am choosing it for the price. If I had the extra money I would go for the i7 4770K.
Thanks for the suggestion.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Processors-Benchmarklist.2436.0.html
As you can see the single threaded performance a q6600 is about equal to the fx8350, the fx8350 with its 8 cores though has 2x the multithreaded performance so in terms of single threaded applications you won't notice any improvement. You will notice more differnece with an i5, gaming wise most bencharks show the fx8350 lose to an i3 and on par with core 2 quads from before. An i5 is a beast for gaming

Thanks for the chart.

I do not see the 8350 on there. Are you sure that the 8350 is same performance? I am sure that must be better.
I am going to do video editing, 3D design and rendering, otherwise I would get a i5.

 

[MajinCry]

Take whatever Hafijur says with a grain of salt. He's a renowned troll; a quick search through his post history will reveal such a conclusion.

@OP The 8350 performs around the same as the 2500k when four threads are being used. The 8350 lags behind a tad in single threaded games/applications. Up the number of required threads to five or higher, the 8350 will leave it behind in the dust.

In gaming, the 8350 is about as effective as a quad core, due to the shared FPUs. Outside of gaming, it will perform as a true octo-core processor.

What do you plan on doing, by the way? If it's just gaming and you've got a low/mid-end GPU (E.g, 6670/6850(6850 performs around as well as a 7770), you won't see any major difference between ANY CPU that you upgrade to. A GPU upgrade to a high-end part (E.g, 7950) WOULD get you that performance gain which you are looking for.

 

[Guest]

Some pointers:

-The 8320 and the 8350 are the same save for the 8350 MAY overclock higher. Save yourself some $ and ge thte 8320.
- Look at the i5 4XXX non K series. They are around the price of the 8350 and they may not overclock but they more than make up for it with the superior IPC and energy efficency.

 

[g335]

Take whatever Hafijur says with a grain of salt. He's a renowned troll; a quick search through his post history will reveal such a conclusion.

@OP The 8350 performs around the same as the 2500k when four threads are being used. The 8350 lags behind a tad in single threaded games/applications. Up the number of required threads to five or higher, the 8350 will leave it behind in the dust.

In gaming, the 8350 is about as effective as a quad core, due to the shared FPUs. Outside of gaming, it will perform as a true octo-core processor.

What do you plan on doing, by the way? If it's just gaming and you've got a low/mid-end GPU (E.g, 6670/6850(6850 performs around as well as a 7770), you won't see any major difference between ANY CPU that you upgrade to. A GPU upgrade to a high-end part (E.g, 7950) WOULD get you that performance gain which you are looking for.

I will do gaming, video editing, 3D design, 3D animation rendering. I do not have any gpu right now. This is a new system build.

 

[Narcissistic_Martyr]

OP,

If you do 3D design and rendering and video editing professionally I'd highly encourage you to look into an i7 3930k at a minimum (assuming your program uses CPU rendering) because time is money and time spent rendering instead of designing is worth more than $500 extra start up cost for the PC.

Now if this is primary a recreational machine and you're on a budget I'd either go for the fx8350 or the i7 3770k/4770k depending on your budget. Also, if you don't care about overclocking I'd highly recommend the xenon e3 1330v2/v3 as it's an i7 3770 less the iGPU and with ECC RAM support which can be helpful if you deal with large CAD files with very tight tolerances for your clients.

i like the amd 8350 piledriver save some money and buy the saved money can be put towards a better graphic card

It will cost more for the op after a year or two to get an fx8350 as the intel cpu takes on average 100w less then the amd cpu at full load with similar multithreaded performance.

This argument bugs the heck out me. You realize that the average electricity cost is $0.08 per kWh so that's 8 cents for every ten hours of operation. To make up the $50 price difference between an i5 3570k and an fx8350 would require 6250 hours or 260 days at of operation at full power. Of course the idle load is roughly 5-10W different so in that case you're talking 2600 days at idle to make up the startup costs.

So, unless someone is running full tilt 24/7 the energy cost difference should not be the deciding factor. (Yes I'm ignoring added cooling costs but it still doesn't change the thrust of my argument)

 

[CooLWoLF]

OP,

If you do 3D design and rendering and video editing professionally I'd highly encourage you to look into an i7 3930k at a minimum (assuming your program uses CPU rendering) because time is money and time spent rendering instead of designing is worth more than $500 extra start up cost for the PC.

Now if this is primary a recreational machine and you're on a budget I'd either go for the fx8350 or the i7 3770k/4770k depending on your budget. Also, if you don't care about overclocking I'd highly recommend the xenon e3 1330v2/v3 as it's an i7 3770 less the iGPU and with ECC RAM support which can be helpful if you deal with large CAD files with very tight tolerances for your clients.

i like the amd 8350 piledriver save some money and buy the saved money can be put towards a better graphic card

It will cost more for the op after a year or two to get an fx8350 as the intel cpu takes on average 100w less then the amd cpu at full load with similar multithreaded performance.

This argument bugs the heck out me. You realize that the average electricity cost is $0.08 per kWh so that's 8 cents for every ten hours of operation. To make up the $50 price difference between an i5 3570k and an fx8350 would require 6250 hours or 260 days at of operation at full power. Of course the idle load is roughly 5-10W different so in that case you're talking 2600 days at idle to make up the startup costs.

So, unless someone is running full tilt 24/7 the energy cost difference should not be the deciding factor. (Yes I'm ignoring added cooling costs but it still doesn't change the thrust of my argument)

THANK YOU for doing the math while pointing out the RIDICULOUS "electricity cost" argument that certain people continue to use when discouraging people against buying an 8350. That one bugs the heck out of me too!

You sir, deserve a medal!

 

[griptwister]

I wouldn't touch a i5 right now... considering that gaming is heading towards multiple threads/cores. I just don't see a i5 lasting that long when there are more resources needed. Go with a i7 4770K or FX 8320 and OC it. IMO, the 8320 is the best bang for buck future proof CPU you can buy. It will most likely last longer than a i5. And again, if you want the better performance, just go z77 and 3770K.

 

[cemerian]

Take whatever Hafijur says with a grain of salt. He's a renowned troll; a quick search through his post history will reveal such a conclusion.

@OP The 8350 performs around the same as the 2500k when four threads are being used. The 8350 lags behind a tad in single threaded games/applications. Up the number of required threads to five or higher, the 8350 will leave it behind in the dust.

In gaming, the 8350 is about as effective as a quad core, due to the shared FPUs. Outside of gaming, it will perform as a true octo-core processor.

lmao I thought I would quote this just to show who the troll is. 2500k vs fx8350 both with 4 cores the 2500k will beat it by 80%. Even your post contradicts what you said. If the 2500k is so much better at single threaded performance then how in your mind do you work out with 4 threads it will perform the same.

The i5 2500k wins I believe on 21 benchmarks compared to the fx8350 out of 36 benchmarks here:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/288?vs=697

Leave it in the dust the i5 2500k with 4 cores at 100% would beat the fx8350 with 7 cores at 100%. It will only win slightly with all 8 cores at 100% over an i5 2500k.

lol even my fx8120 @4,73 beats i7 2600k in every benchmark

 

[cemerian]

I wouldn't touch a i5 right now... considering that gaming is heading towards multiple threads/cores. I just don't see a i5 lasting that long when there are more resources needed. Go with a i7 4770K or FX 8320 and OC it. IMO, the 8320 is the best bang for buck future proof CPU you can buy. It will most likely last longer than a i5. And again, if you want the better performance, just go z77 and 3770K.

lol, in 4 years time I expect an i5 4670k or 3570k even at stock to even outperform the fx9590 in most games by a big margin. In fact currently I am testiing games on my laptop and considering my cpu (i5 3320m at 3.1ghz upgrade) is similar to an i3 3220 in performance I don't even see what the fuss is about to get an i5 quad in desktop for games yet. People don't get the fact intels 4 cores have 2x better ipc like superpi or multithreaded benchmarks show, compare the fx8320 to an i5 4670k and the 4670k will win most benchmarks.

8 cores thing is a load of rubbish. These next gen console cpus get demolished in cpu performance by an i3 3220. A good i5 quad is more then enough for probably next 4 years without breaking a sweat.

lol you are one real ugly troll wtf those console cpu are only available for consoles and only game devs will be able to benchmark them, 2x ipc over amd is a load of bs aswell

 

[cemerian]

i would recomend closing the post its infected by trolls

 

[simon12]

I bet this helped the brain overload. I advise if you want to overclock there are no bad choices between the 8350, and K series i5s if not the cheapest i5s like 3330 are a good option.

 

[Cazalan]

I see Hafijur still throwing around useless 14 year old SuperPI benchmarks. Good stuff! Perhaps we should continue running 3DMark99 as well. 😉

 

[MajinCry]

@OP The 8350 is your best bet. Only i7 I can think of that might outperform the 8350 in heavily threaded programs would be those 6 core/12 thread ones. But that would be a colossal investment for rather paltry gains. The performance gain of hyperthreading is somewhere in the realm of 1.1x per core.

Never mind the insanely high price tag.

 

[Justin Pinotti]

These next gen console cpus get demolished in cpu performance by an i3 3220

oh yea, i forgot that the xbone and ps4 were released and being benchmarked already... this intel fanboy is getting on my nerves... all of his posts are filled with holes and at the bottom of those holes is a nice pile of bias.

AMD has nice CPUs and APUs. Don't let any intel fanboy tell you otherwise. In any real world application(gaming at 1080p, rendering videos, watching fullscreen 1080p youtube videos etc) any newer quad core will do you find, AMD or intel. If you want to future proof just get an AMD 6-8 core or any of the newer intel quad cores if you have the money. Intel will DEFINITELY cost you more and IMO will be a lot less future proof but you will get better preformance in most applications. I love my fx-6300 but i have seen too many intel builds to give AMD a straight up preformance medal but they deserve the price/preformance medal for sure.

 

[MajinCry]

Guys. Don't bother with Hafijur. He's a complete troll. I'm amazed he's still even on this site, considering how much misinformation he types, never mind how people actually believe him.