Gaming: AMD or Intel?

[rhadoo]

hi guys

I wanna buy a gaming pc and I wonder witch cpu is better in this days.
AMD FX 8xxx series vs. intel i5 Ivy bridge 3470 or 3570 series?

thanx in advance

 

[khubani]

In my estimation, I've found that AMD has extremely fast, but often unreliable processors. I can't say this with experience but many of my colleagues have ended up buying Intel processors due to the idea that Intel makes quality processors, although a little expensive, it is worth every buck. The i5-3570k today seems to be the flavor of the month and is typically used in gaming machines.

 

[Rammy]

If you are making a machine solely for gaming, Intel is usually going to be the way to go. If you have a preference towards AMD or already have a decent AM3+ motherboard, then there's nothing wrong with the Vishera line really. Anything heavily threaded will likely skew results towards AMD too.

 

[iceclock]

it depends on ur budget.

 

[Kiowa789]

it depends on ur budget.

Why do you use improper grammar everywhere you go.....

If its a gaming build, Intel, hands down, all of you.
i5 3570k kicks just about any AMD up and down the street, However, AMD is better than intel is some things, (Some programs, photo editors, etc.)
Otherwise, Intel is the way to go.

 

[iceclock]

not really, ur obviously an intel fanboy, the new amd cpus are quite efficient in gaming and apps, overclocked 6300s 6cores and 8core amds will equalize and can beat at times intel depending on the apps.

 

[Rammy]

it depends on ur budget.

Not hugely, the AMD 83xx series are pretty competitively priced against the i5 3xxx. Really depends on where you are buying, and ofc what you want it to do, but I'm not sure that the budget makes a huge significance. The 3570K is a bit above, but the i5 range and FX8xxx overlap significantly.

 

[iceclock]

meh for budget builds i recommand amd over intel, depending on usage,

the 8cores are still cheaper and can compete with the 3570k.

so i think its a bang for bucks cpu series tbh.

 

[Rammy]

meh for budget builds i recommand amd over intel, depending on usage,

the 8cores are still cheaper and can compete with the 3570k.

so i think its a bang for bucks cpu series tbh.

I think it's too dependant on usage. You can make a definite argument for value if you can actually use the extra threads and are confident in fiddling with overclocks, but I think that even on a techy forum like this plenty of people are happy to get something out of the box that just...works. I think the i3 can be a hard sell sometimes, because it's priced against the FX6300 in places and however good it is, it's still a glorified dual-core. In the mid-high bracket the FX8xxx and i5s compete, I don't think value really comes into it, usage will always dictate the right choice for the job. If you are comparing the FX8xxx to i7s for encoding or whatever, then it becomes great value.

 

[iceclock]

i meant 120$ 4300 or 125$ on sale 6300 is a better deal than an i3 dualcore. imo.

 

[drinvis]

Definitely i5 3570/3470 over fx8350 for gaming.

 

[iceclock]

those are quite more expensive, and when overclocked the 6300 can bring the punch to these i5s.

please dont just say better without backing it up. doesnt add anything just saying its better.

 

[drinvis]

those are quite more expensive, and when overclocked the 6300 can bring the punch to these i5s.

please dont just say better without backing it up. doesnt add anything just saying its better.

Sure.Actually there is nothing much to see here.Bring out some CPU intensive games like civ5,Just cause 2 ,skyrim
and some others,fx8350 would just fall behind even at 1920*1080.
If gaming is the most important thing that one would do then definitely i5 3570 over fx8350.
If it was encrypting,running multiple VMs or video encoding with gaming then fx8350 over i5 3570 would do.

 

[Kiowa789]

meh for budget builds i recommand amd over intel, depending on usage,

the 8cores are still cheaper and can compete with the 3570k.

so i think its a bang for bucks cpu series tbh.

Alright, I was just curious on why you use improper grammar everywhere you go, no reason to get hostile.
Again, not an Intel fan boy, he just said gaming build, not if it was going to be used in a build or not, so asking for budget is pointless.
Again, 8350 does beat intel in a few things, (Including games) but the number of things is minimal, and the 3570k is top in most of them.

 

[iceclock]

im saying price wise. 6300. 4300 chumps on i3 2cores and 4core locked cpus. when we compare the 2570k to the 8350 theres a smaller gap in price, so in that case id recommand a 3570k over the amd. but only than i would.

also im not hostile. just saying my opinion and have language disability.

 

[rds1220]

If your main purpose is gaming than without a doubt go with the I5. As for those saying the AMD is better especially if you are on a budget is a load of crap. In the end it all comes out pretty close. As I have said many times on here I recently did two gaming builds for two customers. Other than the motherboard and processor everything else was exactly the same. The same optical drive, RAM, HDD, PSU fans case literally everything was the same. In the end the I5 build came out to a little less than 100 dollars more than the AMD build. For around 80 dollars I'll take the faster and better performing I5.

 

[drinvis]

im saying price wise. 6300. 4300 chumps on i3 2cores and 4core locked cpus. when we compare the 2570k to the 8350 theres a smaller gap in price, so in that case id recommand a 3570k over the amd. but only than i would.

also im not hostile. just saying my opinion and have language disability.

fx6300 is a better processor than i3 3220.Fx4300 and i3 3220 are good,but for heavily threaded scenarios fx4300 is ahead of i3 3220,else i3 3220 does well in other thing.Also i3 3220 is crippled for instrcution sets than other higher intel processors.
As far as gaming is concerned i3 3220 would do better than fx4300 in some situtations and they would perform similarly in other,same goes for fx6300.Yeah,one can say fx4300 is overclockable.
Now as far as locked i5 3xxx processors are concerned they are better than fx6300 or fx4300 as far as gaming is concerned.Overclocking these CPUs won't reach give that good results in games.FX processors are less responsive to frequency.I definitely don't buy that fx6300,fx4300 with help of over-clocking would perform better than i5 3570 or similar in games.There is a recent article in tomshardware which compare fx8350+7970x2 and i7 3770k+7970x2.Fx8350 at 4GHz to 4.4GHz doesn't give anything that substantial.

 

[iceclock]

where talking budget chips, 4300 and 6300 tromp and equalize the i5s up to the unlocked 3570k, when u get the 8core amd vs i5, id recommand the i5 as its got higher performance when overclocked than the 8core and a smaller premium to add.

 

[drinvis]

I am not talking here about performance/dollar.As far as gaming performance is concerned i5 3xxx chips are a good step ahead of fx6300,fx4300 even if we take overclocking into consideration.

 

[sarinaide]

HHH says "Just play the Game" either processor at the price ranges will give you comparative performance, while Intel will be stronger in the x86 based titles, the margins are pretty even in GPU bound equations. Ultimately it comes down to game choices yet both AMD and Intel will game just fine, the bigger issue is down to what GPU choice to make.

Tut tut tut same people again, its becoming laughable.

 

[Kiowa789]

HHH says "Just play the Game" either processor at the price ranges will give you comparative performance, while Intel will be stronger in the x86 based titles, the margins are pretty even in GPU bound equations. Ultimately it comes down to game choices yet both AMD and Intel will game just fine, the bigger issue is down to what GPU choice to make.

Tut tut tut same people again, its becoming laughable.

Yeah, a 20 FPS Difference, Processor choice IS important.
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu-charts-2012/-20-Crysis-II,3175.html

 

[linkgx1]

If your main purpose is gaming than without a doubt go with the I5. As for those saying the AMD is better especially if you are on a budget is a load of crap. In the end it all comes out pretty close. As I have said many times on here I recently did two gaming builds for two customers. Other than the motherboard and processor everything else was exactly the same. The same optical drive, RAM, HDD, PSU fans case literally everything was the same. In the end the I5 build came out to a little less than 100 dollars more than the AMD build. For around 80 dollars I'll take the faster and better performing I5.

Yeah for some reason the price difference isn't incredibly huge and I'm not sure why.

 

[rds1220]

Because the CPU is only one part of the overall build. Once again by the time you get done adding everything else into the build it doesn't come out to be much more, which is why I said that the whole "Go AMD if you are on a budget is a load of crap."

 

[Rammy]

Yeah, a 20 FPS Difference, Processor choice IS important.
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu-charts-2012/-20-Crysis-II,3175.html

That's a pretty irrelevant benchmark though, you realise that right? I get why you run a game at low settings and a low resolution so that it stops being GPU bound, but all you really learn is that at those settings basically any CPU from the last 5 years can run Crysis 2 at playable framerates (even the Athlon X2 240 at the bottom is pretty passable).

I don't necessarily disagree with your general viewpoint, but to the main part there's not a lot in it anymore.

That's probably a much more relevant kind of comparison. Pretty much any 2nd/3rd gen i3/i5/i7 is going to be quicker in stuff that's using 2 cores until you factor in overclocking, but the margins are fairly insignificant overall.

I'm not sure there is a genuinely bad CPU on sale from Intel or AMD.

 

[linkgx1]

Because the CPU is only one part of the overall build. Once again by the time you get done adding everything else into the build it doesn't come out to be much more, which is why I said that the whole "Go AMD if you are on a budget is a load of crap."

The biggest problem is always the GPUs that take the biggest take of the budget. And AMD's pricing structure isnt' that great. It's just a $50 range or so of an Nvidia card and the NV card is usually better.

To me, a Radeon 7870 @ $199 or less would really put the heat on Nvidia. It's the same with their processors. To me, they need to be lost cost, high performance for the price. $99 FX 8350 would be great.