Is that really all? That's almost no FPS-difference between my AMD and Intel?

[Guest]

Ok, I am deciding how to upgrade my rig. Since I have an FX-8350 and love playing Arma 3 and DayZ - I had this silly idea that an upgrade to Intels i5 4670k would make a world of difference. Now I stumple on this:

http://www.techspot.com/review/712-arma-3-benchmarks/page5.html

Is that really all the difference between my FX and the biggest and nastiest Intel? 5 FPS? For real? Thanks

 

[Seladon-1370374]

Yes, that's really all that you'll see, in that game. In some other games the gap might be a bit bigger, but honestly, those two are pretty decently close for gaming. Not really worth buying a new CPU+motherboard, spending about $400 for that. You might as well just get a new GPU honestly.

 

[Guest]

Yes, that's really all that you'll see, in that game. In some other games the gap might be a bit bigger, but honestly, those two are pretty decently close for gaming. Not really worth buying a new CPU+motherboard, spending about $400 for that. You might as well just get a new GPU honestly.

It's crazy, I really thought the secret behind more frames was Intel. Now I need to look for a decent motherboard and a better GPU.

 

[Supernova1138]

You have to keep in mind that when they do CPU benchmarks they use the fastest graphics card available to ensure that the CPU is the deciding factor in performance, and they aren't just hitting a GPU bottleneck in every game. If you only have a low end or midrange graphics card, most of the time you won't see much of a difference between comparable Intel and AMD chips in terms of gaming performance. If you were playing a game that massively favours Intel over AMD like Skyrim or Starcraft 2, you might see a bigger difference. For Arma 3, that's not really the case as it requires a lot of GPU horsepower too, and you won't see a big difference unless you have a really high end graphics card or an SLI/Crossfire array.

 

[CTurbo]

The real secret is to get the best video card possible, put it on a solid motherboard, and power it by a reliable and efficient psu. The cpu is probably the 4th most important piece in a gaming build, and so many people WASTE money on overclocking when that extra money would have gotten them a better video card.

 

[VenBaja]

OP, those are single player benchmarks. Singleplayer doesn't tax the CPU nearly as much as multiplayer. Any large scale multiplayer game will see more benefit from a better CPU.

You can tell they're singleplayer benchmarks because an i3 is only 8fps away from a 4770k. Log onto the multiplayer component though, and watch that i3 go from 43fps to 23fps.

 

[Guest]

Jesus, nothing is ever easy! I just want to play my Arma 3. Sigh.

OP, those are single player benchmarks. Singleplayer doesn't tax the CPU nearly as much as multiplayer. Any large scale multiplayer game will see more benefit from a better CPU.

You can tell they're singleplayer benchmarks because an i3 is only 8fps away from a 4770k. Log onto the multiplayer component though, and watch that i3 go from 43fps to 23fps.

 

[con635]

OP, those are single player benchmarks. Singleplayer doesn't tax the CPU nearly as much as multiplayer. Any large scale multiplayer game will see more benefit from a better CPU.

You can tell they're singleplayer benchmarks because an i3 is only 8fps away from a 4770k. Log onto the multiplayer component though, and watch that i3 go from 43fps to 23fps.

On dayz/mod? The mp fps is limited by the server your on, on mp dayz mod an i5 = athlon x4 in my experience, both get 28-35 fps in towns and 60-70 fps outside towns. The other day I checked afterburner and no matter what video settings used gpu usage was 40-50%, cpu 60-70% across 4 cores.