FX 8350 or An Intel 3570K?

[hotshot2797]

I just cannot decide btween the FX 8350 with ASROCK extreme9 and the Intel 3570K with ASROCK z77 extreme4.Gaming only purpose.

 

[Uther39]

Get the 8350 AMD and invest the extra $30 in a better GPU or memory or SSD etc etc.

 

[hotshot2797]

Get the 8350 AMD and invest the extra $30 in a better GPU or memory or SSD etc etc.

Should I buy an SSD or get the 7970? P.S. I'll upgrade to a better GPU later on in about one and a half yrs

 

[darth pravus]

Crysis 3 is not really a CPU intensive game.

An i5 and an SSd and the best GPU you can afford.

Upgrade this GPU when you can and you won't be held back by the AMD proc.

 

[iceclock]

7970 will net u better gaming performance ssd will only access information faster wont actually give u any fps boost.

also if your just gaming the 3570k is beast.

if u want to do photoshop. 3d rendering and video encoding 8350 wins.

considering 8350 is decent but still lags behind a stock intel 3570k. and when the 3570k at 4.5+ gigahertz its a no brainer.

u need to overclock ur amd 8350 a good bit to equalize a stock 3570k.

so if gaming again. 3570k

 

[hotshot2797]

FINAL BUILD:

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: AMD FX-8350 4.0GHz 8-Core Processor ($194.15 @ Amazon)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($32.98 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: ASRock 990FX Extreme4 ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($139.99 @ Amazon)
Memory: Corsair Vengeance 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($59.48 @ Amazon)
Storage: Hitachi 500GB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($59.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: OCZ Agility 3 60GB 2.5" Solid State Disk ($64.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 3GB Video Card ($344.98 @ SuperBiiz)
Case: Cooler Master HAF 912 ATX Mid Tower Case ($56.21 @ TigerDirect)
Power Supply: Corsair Builder 500W 80 PLUS Bronze Certified ATX12V Power Supply ($49.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: LG GH24NS72 DVD/CD Writer ($18.98 @ Outlet PC)
Total: $1021.74
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2013-02-20 11:01 EST-0500)


What do you guys say? I went with the 8350 as many said it was as good as the 3570K but the FX are much better at rendering so win-win for me as I am thinking of some video rendering too later on.

 

[jaguarskx]

Overall, the i5-3570k is better for games than the FX-8350 because in nearly all games the i5-3570k beats the FX-8350 from all the various gaming benchmark views on the web. However, actual performance that you will see will be limited by your overall hardware; mainly the graphics card and monitor.

Assuming you buy a powerful graphics card like the nVidia GTX 680 there are many games where you can get above 60 FPS, but the actual FPS that is displayed on the monitor will be limited by its refresh rate. A 60Hz monitor can only display at most 60 FPS and a 120Hz monitor can only display at most 120 FPS. All 3D monitors are 120Hz, but using it in 3D mode will limit you to 60 FPS.

The link below benchmarks several CPU with a nVidia GT 680; all of which are running at stock speed:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/fx-8350-8320-6300-4300_6.html

In Batman, both the i5-3570k and FX-8350 basically perform the same at 1920x1080. The i5 is 3 FPS faster; 73 vs 70. However, if you are only using a 60Hz monitor, then you are going to get the same performance because the monitor can only display 60 FPS.

Far Cry 2 is a game where both CPUs can get above 100 FPS at 1920x1080 resolution. Both CPUs will perform exactly the same on a 60Hz monitor. On a 120Hz monitors both are pretty close in performance. Even though the i5 + GTX 680 combo can provide up to 131 FPS, the monitor limits it to only 120 FPS. The FX + GTX 680 combo gives you 114 FPS. Unless you can visually tell the difference between 120 FPS and 114 FPS, both CPUs will seem to perform exactly the same.

The FX is slightly cheaper and socket AM3+ is expected to last until at least Steamroller. But it does consume a lot of power more than an i5 at full load as seen in the link below (note that is 100% load on the CPU, when not playing games). Depending on how much you pay for electricity the difference of 92w may or may not make much of a difference.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/fx-8350-8320-6300-4300_8.html#sect0

I generally pay double the national average rate for electricity in the US so I basically avoid AMD CPUs. Even though Intel CPU sockets do not last for more than 2 generations, I generally do not upgrade very often so I do not mind switching sockets when I upgrade.

 

[iceclock]

theres nothing to do with u. amd consummes more power and performs less.

im done here.

 

[Uther39]

theres nothing to do with u. amd consummes more power and performs less.

im done here.

Consumes more power is true, for less performance is not strictly true, as its application dependant, as it performs better in some and less in others, as far as gaming is concerned it also is game dependant, and even where it performs less in certain games its not going to be at all noticeable in the real world.

 

[iceclock]

yes its less power gaming wise.

intel has the uper hand since a while in gaming.

for other apps different story.

 

[hotshot2797]

Just tell me, by how much percent is the 3570K better than 8350 at gaming(REAL WORLD BASIS). Also I Feel the 990FX is very loaded compared to the Z77 chipset

 

[FinneousPJ]

Depends on the game. I'd say up to 50%. But the FX can still run any game.

 

[Uther39]

Depends on the game. I'd say up to 50%. But the FX can still run any game.

50% !!?

That is a damn right outrageous claim to make and truly unfounded, your actualy in certain games only looking at 5 to 15 % at the very most, and dont forget, more and more new games are coming out with multi threaded ability like Crisis 3 so will actually favor the FX8350.

Again i have both, but either one will make you very happy.

 

[FinneousPJ]

Not outrageous. Circumstantial and non-relevant yes. Here's a 44% advantage to the 3570K

Not that it matters at 70+ FPS but the OP did ask.

source http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/FX-8350_Piledriver_Review/6.html

 

[Uther39]

Not outrageous. Circumstantial and non-relevant yes. Here's a 44% advantage to the 3570K

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/FX-8350_Piledriver_Review/images/f1_2010.gif

Not that it matters at 70+ FPS but the OP did ask.

source http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/FX-8350_Piledriver_Review/6.html

So you managed to find one 3 year old game, thats is badly coded so takes advantage of the i5 better single threaded performance !

 

[FinneousPJ]

I guess you don't understand what "up to" means.

 

[darth pravus]

Basically uther is arguing that the difference is small but as soon you put it into a situation where you are CPU limited the i5 shows that it is much more powerful.

The benches that show them close generally are GPU bound and very light on the CPU.