FX 8320 or Intel Core I5 4440 (Gaming Build)

[C0m_pute]

Hello there guys I am building a new gaming rig and I need some help on what to pick I made some research and ended up picking those parts

AMD FX-8320 3.5GHz Processor with Cooler Master Hyper TX3 54.8 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler.

ASRock 970 Pro3 R2.0 ATX AM3+ Motherboard

G.Skill Ripjaws X Series 8GB DDR3-1600 Memory

Sapphire Radeon R9 280X 3GB Tri-X Video Card

Corsair CX 600W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply
So what do you guys think about this build for 2015 ? is it considered reliable and kinda future proof ? notice that I may use the rig for 3D Rendering and Video Editing so the question is..is the CPU good should I pick Intel processors over AMD ? also how would a Zotac GTX 960 do against the above Sapphire Radeon card ?

 

[Phil923]

If you can get a good overclock with the TX3, then the 8320 will be better for rendering and video editing and will play games well. Also, unless your case has compatibility issues with larger CPU coolers, I would suggest something like the 212 Evo or the Cryorig H7, much better cooling for about $10-15 more.

The GTX 960 is not better than the 280x, it's actually about 10-15% slower than the 280x, the only advantage is that it consumes less power.

For your power supply, the CX series from corsair is their low end, not very good in terms of quality. I would suggest the EVGA B2 or the XFX P1 650W, both are top quality at an excellent price point.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

Power Supply: EVGA 750W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($59.99 @ NCIX US)
Total: $59.99
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-04-29 14:00 EDT-0400

or

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

Power Supply: XFX 650W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply ($58.99 @ NCIX US)
Total: $58.99
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-04-29 14:01 EDT-0400

made by SuperFlower and SeaSonic respectively.

Bottom line is, for your needs the 8320 is better due to rendering utilizing more cores. The r9 280x is a great GPU, and you should pick up one of my suggested power supplies if possible.

Good Luck

 

[Neutr1n0]

IMO you should definately pick intel haswell over AMD FX. Haswell has by far superior IPC (single core performance) and efficiency. Especially for gaming IPC still rules over core count. Even an i3 will beat the FX8320 in most games

i5 4690K would be the best choise for gaming. I5 4660 if you're tight (but no overclocking on this one)... If you cant afford that you have 3 options: FX8320 vs i3 4160 vs G3258 (the latter you can overclock and later upgrade when you have the money). Buy a 9-series board if you go intel as these will be compatible with upcoming broadwell cpu's (another advantage for intel imo). Also i think you might want an 990 board if you decide to go for the FX anyway and want to overclock it (and those boards are quite costly).

check tom's buyer guide: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106.html

 

[Phil923]

Neutr1n0 makes a good point about the motherboards. The AM3+ is a dead socket, while the 9 series from intel has broadwell coming up which will allow for an upgrade in the near future. The i5 will come ahead by a few fps in most games and it isn't too behind the 8320 in video editing, though still faster. It really depends on if you plan to overclock the 8320.

 

[Outlander_04]

IMO you should definately pick intel haswell over AMD FX. Haswell has by far superior IPC (single core performance) and efficiency. Especially for gaming IPC still rules over core count. Even an i3 will beat the FX8320 in most games

i5 4690K would be the best choise for gaming. I5 4660 if you're tight (but no overclocking on this one)... If you cant afford that you have 3 options: FX8320 vs i3 4160 vs G3258 (the latter you can overclock and later upgrade when you have the money). Buy a 9-series board if you go intel as these will be compatible with upcoming broadwell cpu's (another advantage for intel imo). Also i think you might want an 990 board if you decide to go for the FX anyway and want to overclock it (and those boards are quite costly).

check tom's buyer guide: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106.html

If you were to check the Tomshardware review of the FX 8350 you would see the FX 8350 being equal or better than the intel i5's in games that can use all cores .
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8350-vishera-review,3328-13.html.
Even in the games engines that do not use all cores the FX is consistently making more than 60 fps . And since 60 fps is the maximum refresh rate of a 60 Hz monitor then it makes no difference to user experience that the intel can run greater FPS [ except that the intel is more likely to produce screen tearing ]
The 8320 will always OC to FX 8350 speeds and beyond so its a no brainer to save money on the cpu and spend it on graphics card where it will make a difference.

IPC and single core performance are NOT important in 2015 . If they were then XBOX and Play Station would not be using very low powered 8 core AMD cpus .

Suggestions that the intel socket will not date as quickly are not supported by recent history . No intel socket has lasted more than two generations before they change it and force people to buy new boards . Even many H series boards that have physically compatible sockets will not be able to run next generation broadwell cpu's.
AMD have usually started new cpu lines by making a model available that is completely backwards compatible so
Its entirely possible that in 12 months time AMD will be manufacturing a high performance ZEN processor that will slot right in to an AM3+ board

 

[Neutr1n0]

@Outlander_04: You must be kidding us right? That review is almost 3 years old. Haswell wasnt even out then. And now you are recommending Piledriver over haswell for a (quote TS) 'Gaming rig' because it beat a 5 year old sandy-bridge i5 in a full on GPU dependent game by half a frame??? Did you actually read the review? On the contrary, in the CPU intensive games the piledriver FX-8350 gets blown away by even the sandy-bridge i5. Better to check the cpu buyers guide i linked to as that one is up to date...

Then your statement about IPC not being important? Couldn't be further from the truth... Current PC games are not well multitreaded and even if they where IPC / single core performance will ALWAYS reign over number of cores (meaning fictional CPU with double IPC at same freq should ALWAYS be preferred over cpu with double amount of cores).

Lets also not forget about efficiency please. Not everyone lives in US where energy is super cheap. At the price I pay, savings can easily be upwards of 20€ a year on electricity bill alone.

 

[C0m_pute]

Ehm when I made a research about the FX8320 I read that it actually has 4 cores and not 8 4 cores and 4 threads but AMD says 8 for marketing reasons ?

 

[Neutr1n0]

Ehm when I made a research about the FX8320 I read that it actually has 4 cores and not 8 4 cores and 4 threads but AMD says 8 for marketing reasons ?

NoNo. It has 8 cores 8 threads.

Maybe you confuse it with what they call 'Modules' in Buldozer/Pildriver CPU. Each Buldozer/Pilediver module has 2 cores (sharing FPU). FX8320 and FX-8350 have 4 modules, so 8 cores.

 

[Bossyfins]

https://scalibq.wordpress.com/2012/02/14/the-myth-of-cmt-cluster-based-multithreading/\


Intel uses SMT while AMD uses CMT. Thats why its labeled as an 8 core

 

[Outlander_04]

@Outlander_04: You must be kidding us right? That review is almost 3 years old. Haswell wasnt even out then. And now you are recommending Piledriver over haswell for a (quote TS) 'Gaming rig' because it beat a 5 year old sandy-bridge i5 in a full on GPU dependent game by half a frame??? Did you actually read the review? On the contrary, in the CPU intensive games the piledriver FX-8350 gets blown away by even the sandy-bridge i5. Better to check the cpu buyers guide i linked to as that one is up to date...

Then your statement about IPC not being important? Couldn't be further from the truth... Current PC games are not well multitreaded and even if they where IPC / single core performance will ALWAYS reign over number of cores (meaning fictional CPU with double IPC at same freq should ALWAYS be preferred over cpu with double amount of cores).

Lets also not forget about efficiency please. Not everyone lives in US where energy is super cheap. At the price I pay, savings can easily be upwards of 20€ a year on electricity bill alone.

Intel gaming performance has not increased a great deal since the introduction of socket 1155 . The updated intels have improved a couple of percent at most since that test of the 8350 I published .
Yes I did read the review . I also saw that in 5+ year old game engines that dont multithread well even the FX was making more frames than a monitor could ever display .
The logical conclusion is that the only people who benefit from an intel are those who have 144Hz monitors or want an SLI/crossfire set up . Everyone else on a budget is better off AMD because their pc will do exactly the same thing for the user .
You mention power consumptiion . The idle differences are so low there is no real difference . Under gaming loads its not huge . Less than the cost of a dim light bulb .Important in a server farm , but in your house you had better be turning off every light every time you leave a room or your argument has no merit .
As for IPC . Sure its good to have . But it is NOT a critical metric for measuring how good a gaming cpu is . It measures efficiency. The amount of calculations per clock cycle in effect . What we are interested in is the total math ability of a core that can run a thread .
The intel cores might be loaded to 40% in game . The FX loaded to 70% . The game cant use all the resources of even the weaker core .
And one again . Sony and Microsoft both chose 8 core cpu's with Jaguar cores which are way lower power than FX . If you are correct about IPC being critical then playstation and xbox dont work and two enormous global hardware manufacturers have just been out thought by you

 

[Outlander_04]

Ehm when I made a research about the FX8320 I read that it actually has 4 cores and not 8 4 cores and 4 threads but AMD says 8 for marketing reasons ?

What intel call a core and what AMD call a core are different . The AMD is organized into four modules that each have two main math processor sections [ integer cores ] . The integer cores share other parts of the module .
It was always intended to be a kind of hardware version of intels hyperthreading .
It works exceptionally well in some tasks , but takes a hit when the software cant use more than one core because each integer core is only about 60% as powerful as an intel integer core

 

[C0m_pute]

Well since I am on tight budget I think I will go for the FX8320 but I will OC it..what type of FAN type CPU coolers do you guys suggest ?
Also can you guys suggest me a case ?

 

[Phil923]

I like the Cryorig H7, better cooling than the hyper 212 evo, smaller profile, and better mounting system.

 

[C0m_pute]

And what about the case ?

 

[Phil923]

Depends on your budget really,

If you aren't willing to spend over $40, the NZXT Source 210 comes to mind

If your budget is around $60, then the Corsair 200R comes to mind.

If $80, the Fractal Design Define R4 is my recommended choice.

If your budget is even higher, some cases that come to mind are the Define R5, NZXT H440, Phanteks Enthoo Pro, and the Corsair 450D for around $100.

 

[Outlander_04]

Antec 302 .
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5462/antec-three-hundred-two-stay-cool-budget-enthusiasts