I5 2500k with 7850 or i3 3220 with 7870

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Solution
Sunius
Higher resolutions? Higher settings? You realize that at those, the bottleneck shifts over to the GPU, so it's harder to see differences CPU makes? Your link clearly shows that i3 wins to FX-6300.

FX-6300-FX-4300-67.jpg


As for outside of gaming, it's irrelevant. The OP will not be using intensively photoshop or other program that's hard on CPU.
Sort by date Sort by votes
now THAT is a lot in the future, i mean core 2 duo's are STILL used in gaming,
and they are not below the minimum requirements.
and the 9000 series is probably 2 more years.
by then i3 would still not be a huge bottleneck.
look the thing is simple, if he gets an i3 he will have to upgrade to a better cpu later.
and if he gets an i5 he will have to get a better GPU later.
but a GPU upgrage will be more than 200$ and a cpu+mobo upgrade will be ~250$
it's not as good as u think.
if he gets an i3 the GPU will last longer
if he gets an i5 the CPU will last longer
what we choose is our desicion,
I ALWAYS put gpu before cpu in a gaming pc.
both options are great, now lets just leave it at him wat he wants.
if he really wants to OC the i5 2500k for it to last longer, it is his choice.
i would still go for an i3 with a 7870,
coz ur next upgrade will be a cpu. and 7870 will still last!
on a side note DDR4 might be out next year so it might be a good idea to upgrade the mobo+cpu first
and by the time he will have to upgrade the gpu GDDR6 will definately be out too
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Mild OC? They overclocked to 5 GHz man! That isn't mild OC. Hell, nobody is guaranteed to be able to overclock that high.

There's no reason going FX whatsoever. Look at Far Cry 3 benchmarks.

CPU-scaling.png


Even the last generation i3 beats FX-8320, which is stronger than FX-6300. Your comment about FPS difference is silly at the very least: so you would PAY MORE to GET LESS?

So yea, unless you want to waste your money, i3 is the way to go.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You realize your post shows the Fx-6300 at stock 3.5Ghz not 5.0Ghz and at medium settings right? He's gaming at 1920 x 1080 on high/ultra. Fx beats the I3 in higher resolutions/settings. Check the link I posted it shows both ultra and medium setting benchmarks so you can compare. And that's at stock speeds.

With an overclock the Fx destroys the I3. You get way more for $10 more. Plus the Fx destroys the I3 outside of gaming.

Also I'm not saying to OC to 5Ghz. I'm saying with the slightest OC the Fx6300 will beat it. (4ghz) look at the stock benchmark http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/57615-amd-vishera-fx-6300-fx-4300-review-12.html
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Higher resolutions? Higher settings? You realize that at those, the bottleneck shifts over to the GPU, so it's harder to see differences CPU makes? Your link clearly shows that i3 wins to FX-6300.

FX-6300-FX-4300-67.jpg


As for outside of gaming, it's irrelevant. The OP will not be using intensively photoshop or other program that's hard on CPU.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution


How is it irrelevant if that's what he's using? And yes the I3 wins in skyrim. It also beat it in dirt and is evenly matched in deus ex. With a slight overclock it would (at worst) match the I3 in gaming (more likely surpass it.)

http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image//skymtl/CPU/FX-6300-FX-4300/FX-6300-FX-4300-63.jpg
http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image//skymtl/CPU/FX-6300-FX-4300/FX-6300-FX-4300-65.jpg
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Other games aren't really relevant to this topic: Skyrim is the most CPU intensive game and that's the reason it's the best one to test. You shouldn't take overclocking into account, because the OP would need to buy a cooler as well - that's extra money. For that extra money, i5 would be much better choice. And thus, i3 is a better choice.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


How is the I5 even near the same price range? It's $100 more and don't forget the motherboard if he wants to OC. He can get a FX-6300 with an aftermarket heatsink and decent motherboard for the same price range as an I3 setup.

The Fx-6300 shadows the I5 in tasks and shadows the I3 in gaming. With an overclock he's getting way more for the money than the I3 plus the 7870. But I can see you're dead set on that extra 0-6 fps at STOCK levels to even look at anything else. If you could get the same (if not better) performance as the I3 in gaming plus close to the performance of an I5 in other tasks at the price range of an I3 build then whats the argument?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

The cooler makes it more expensive than a Core i3 build. Still should be cheaper than a Core i5 build though.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
That CPU is available as in-store pick up only.

I wonder about your math, really. If it was indeed the price of the CPU, it wouldn't be any more expensive than FX 6300. Then going with HD 7850 or HD 7870 wouldn't differ on either CPU.

Or, for $50 less than the i5, he can get an i3, which blows THE MORE EXPENSIVE FX 6300 out of the water. I think you're the fanboy here, you ignore facts and benchmarks just to make AMD look good.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Lol.. I have an I5 and I'm an AMD fanboy? I'm just stating facts how the I3 is less of a processor than the FX6300. The I3 barely beats the Fx6300 in gaming and gets destroyed outside of gaming at stock levels. And that's "blowing it out the water?"

Also would you like me to do the math for you?
I5 3470 - 185+200=385
I3-3220 - 120+250=370
FX-6300 - 130+250=380 *oh plus a $20 hyper212 plus heatsink so don't eat out this week and you have yourself $20*
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
"Gets destroyed outside of gaming". How is that relevant? That's totally useless feature for the OP. And i3 not barely beats FX 6300. The difference is big in Skyrim.

Your math is flawed. Graphics card doesn't need to be counted in. It will be decided after the CPU is decided. The $20 comment about eating out is retarded. And i3 today is $110.

i3-3220 option: $110
FX-6300 without cooler: $130
FX-6300 with a cooler: $155
i5-3470 option: $185

i3 is $20 cheaper than FX 6300 on stock. It's faster in games too, that's the only thing the OP is concerned about.

FX-6300 with a cooler is 40% more expensive than the i3 and it only then starts to compete with it. I think paying 40% extra for similar performance is waste of money. That sum of money can be invested in a graphics card. The OP clearly said that he can get HD 7870 with i3. That means he will have to get $40 cheaper card if he gets FX 6300 with a cooler. Definitely not a good choice.

If there is a need for a faster CPU - 20% more and there's i5. Definitely much better performance/price ratio.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Ok ill put aside everything outside of gaming and focus JUST on gaming. One thig though the GPU is part of the question. It doesn't matter the difference in prices between the CPUs because its the budget that matters.

A 7870 with I3 (or FX-6300)will get better fps than the I5 with a 7850. That's where speeds come in between the I3 and the Fx-6300. You can easily achieve better performance than the I3 with the FX-6300. Now the I3 will be less, $40 with a heatsink, but will give you more options and accessible Beyer performance. In skyrim the difference in performance is 5 fps. FX-6300 overclocked to 4.0Ghz will surpass that (at least match it)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Yes I can but I have to find it since I don't have it on my phone. Give me a few minutes.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

No not necessarily. Since he's wondering between and I5 with 7850 and an I3 with 7880 you have to realize the I5 with a good 7850 is $385 using your 3470. More with his preferred 2500k. Just because the I3 got cheaper doesn't mean he has less money to spend.

Also to the benchmarks. There's a benchmark with the Fx6300 overclocked, just have to find it on my damn phone. But just think the mere 3-7 advantage the I3 has, the Fx can beat with a small OC. And it overclocks really well. I'll have it after work for sure.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Do you realize that overclock in no way resembles what clock speed the OP can reach, do you not? I wouldn't advice NOBODY to run a CPU at 5 GHz, at least not on a $20 cooler. The review says that the overclocked CPU reached 76°C, and they used a $70 cooler. You'd be lucky to reach half that overclock. Not to mention it uses very much power.

At the very best case scenario, I would expect FX 6300 to match i3-3220. However, do you think it's wise to pay 40% more for a six cores and new architecture? That's just names, as they have no gains in real world scenarios.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom