Is there an AMD CPU comparable to the i5-2550k?

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
N

Nebulocity

Honorable
Apr 13, 2012
52
0
10,640
I plan to do a decent amount of gaming with some of the newer titles (right now it's Skyrim and Mass Effect 3 with a mix of CoD in there). Any tips would be greatly appreciated.

Just a note, but while I am trying to maintain the ability to upgrade to Ivy Bridge in 2013/2014, I know that it's impossible to plan things out that long. I chose the Z77 boards "just in case" I upgrade processors earlier (if I even do), if I stuck with Intel.

So far, my current board and CPU choices are listed at the end of the post. However, in the essence of cutting costs where I can (but still maintaining performance), I wanted to ask the opinion of the community regarding AMD CPUs that were comparable to the i5-2550k as far as reliability and processing power/overclock-ability was concerned.

Motherboard:
GIGABYTE GA-Z77X-UD3H LGA 1155 Intel Z77 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128544

OR
ASRock Z77 Extreme4 LGA 1155 Intel Z77 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157293&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-_-RSSDailyDeals-_-na-_-na&AID=10521304&PID=4176827&SID=1d8eqhthxambf

CPU:
Intel Core i5-2550K Sandy Bridge 3.4GHz (3.8GHz Turbo Boost) LGA 1155 95W Quad-Core Desktop Processor Without IGP BX80623i52550K
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115230
 
Solution
jaguarskx
In terms of raw power, there is no AMD CPU that can really compete against a Core i5 in benchmarks with the exception of some multi-threaded apps like media creation and encoding, and Civilization 5.

As shown in the gaming benchmarks of the following two reviews, AMD CPUs performs worse than Intel CPUs. Note that 1680 x 1050 resolution is used because the lower the resolution the less reliant the game will depend on the graphic card for it's performance. After all, they are comparing CPU performance not graphic card performance. Although, they should have used an even lower resolution.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-8120-6100-4100_6.html#sect0...
Sort by date Sort by votes


AMD priced the highest end chips to compete with Intel at the i5 level, the FX 8150/20 and X6 1090T/1100T are the direct comparable product from AMD's side. On per core grunt and IMC the Intel is a little stronger, but the FX and to a lesser extent the x6's are tremendous work horses.

With the power usage issue, nobody really cares, you may spend 20% of your yearly electricity usage on your PC, and Intel will hardly reduce that, also consider the amazing efficiency numbers of the Ivy bridge chips, yet how unstable and hot they are running at high clocks..
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
In terms of raw power, there is no AMD CPU that can really compete against a Core i5 in benchmarks with the exception of some multi-threaded apps like media creation and encoding, and Civilization 5.

As shown in the gaming benchmarks of the following two reviews, AMD CPUs performs worse than Intel CPUs. Note that 1680 x 1050 resolution is used because the lower the resolution the less reliant the game will depend on the graphic card for it's performance. After all, they are comparing CPU performance not graphic card performance. Although, they should have used an even lower resolution.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-8120-6100-4100_6.html#sect0

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review-amd-fx8150-tested/8


Unless you have a 120Hz LCD monitor all games that has greater than 60 FPS performance will basically max out at 60 FPS on a normal 60Hz LCD monitor. If you have an old CRT monitor, then you can really get more than 120 FPS if the graphic card is powerful enough.

I don't really think the i5-2550k is worth $20 more than the i5-2500k for just 100MHz. But I have to admit that I have done no research on it's overclocking potential. If it can OC better than the i5-2500k by a decent margin, then I suppose the i5-2550k would be the better choice.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
The real issue is what you can get for what you want to spend. Intel rules at the higher end, AMD rules at the lower end if you are willing to overclock.

I sell a lot of different systems, intel and AMD. Believe me when I say i'm no intel fanboy but AMD just isn't worth it at the very high end. For midrange and below gaming systems AMD is still very competitive in price performance.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote



1100t is discontinued right? I have one but it was a gift from a friend and it is unused as of now...just got it a week or so ago. I used to want one but could never find them, I'm pretty sure they are discontinued, just have to look or get a friend who has one to sell it. Good chips the 1100t and the 1090t, sad to see the phenom series go and be replaced with FX, still have faith that there will be a Phenom 3 or something else, here's hoping.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote



Hi :)

Yes discontinued now unfortunately....

I dont even bother to overclock mine...

Worth good money if you sell yours....

All the best Brett :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

Well actually the FX 4170 is better than all the Phenom II chips - http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The issue I have is the extreme amount of posting he does. Over and over in a thread claiming that AMD CPUs are just as good. Yes, for the most part they will work just fine. But there are plenty of games where they just won't work as well as Intel. It's one thing to have an opinion, but to make the claim so much people start to believe your falsehood is just wrong.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-4100-core-i3-2100-gaming-benchmark,3136-6.html

The differences are too large to ignore. Interestingly, the FX-4100’s minimum frame rate never exceeds 34 FPS, suggesting a particular bottleneck that didn't affect the Core i3, which manages to hit a 45 FPS minimum.
Click to expand...

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/world-of-warcraft-cataclysm-directx-11-performance,2793-10.html

Six core AMD CPU can hit a max of around 60FPS.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/world-of-warcraft-cataclysm-directx-11-performance,2793-9.html

Thats about what a single core CPU can do, while Intel dual and higher can do 100+. Where did those 40FPS go on the AMD CPU?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

The FX 4170 is the highest rated AMD gaming CPU PERIOD get off it and theres no harm in posting the truth so long as it's not filled with FALSE Dichotomy's like most of the TH Intel/Nvidia trolls. WHy do all the Intel trolls care about exalting Intel as empirical to the PC when many are just as happy with AMD under the hood sheesh. Also as I stated before and I will state again your post is full of false dichotomy's therefore rendering it as biased and in turn irrelevant.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Thanks for the replies, everyone. It's unfortunate that disputes happen in threads about brands...I'm sorry for not thinking about this before posting (perhaps I could have reworded the post).

I did some research into the 8120 and 8150 before I started looking into the 2500k/2550k, and from what I read, apparently Windows (Vista/7 specifically) cannot make use of all 8 cores, which is why the i7 lines supposedly work out better (because Windows can make use of HT). So 4 cores with HT > 8 cores without, from what that research was saying.

My favorite builds years and years back were AMD, and they (in my opinion) completely spanked the Intels of the day. I think the P4 and Celeron may have been on top afterwards, but it was neck and neck between the few that I used.

I think I may stick with the 2550k purely due to it's overclocking capabilities. I've never OC'd anything, ever - and want to try and do it for once. If that boosts a "cheap" processor ($100 less than it's i7 counterpart, at least), yet gives me a .5 Ghz ~ 1Ghz increase in performance, I'm good with it.

Lucky me, Newegg has the Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD3H LGA 1155 on combo today with this processor, so it'll save me about $20 (and the board has the 3D UEFI BIOS listed on it, which is great as I really want to see what all the fuss is about, copmared to the "old blue", lol).

Thanks again everyone for the advice. I'll still monitor the thread post, if anyone wants to continue offering advice/debate. I won't be purchasing the system until I can make up my darned mind on a case...I like the Switch 810, but am looking for a smaller "Full" tower (yea, right...this thing is "Extra Full"), or a Mid of similar features.

Then I'll make the purchase and blow a crapload on next day shipping due to impatience...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Crap, I've never selected an answer on Tom's HW forums...can I only select one "best answer"? I mean, is there a way to give credit where credit is due? If anyone has used Expert's Exchange or the TechNet forums, the multiple answer feature is what I'm talking about.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

Buy what makes you feel good man it's your cash to spend AMD and Intel both offer great options and I use both and they both work just fine.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Exactly. I'm 100% impartial to the brand wars between AMD/Intel and ATI/Nvidia. I use what is compatible with what I have (or what I'm going to purchase), and whichever is "on top" at the moment. Right now, although I've had great success with AMD in the past, Intel seems to be leading the relay race at the moment.

I don't plan on upgrading to Ivy Bridge until at least a year or so, but perhaps AMD will come out with something better by then? If so, I may pick up one of those instead of the IB chips of the time.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

Thats your opinion AMD makes 60fps a reality and contrary to what the rhetoric and sales propaganda you have been sold on AMD work GREAT for gaming.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

You want to run games faster get a better GPU it will make more frames than an i7 2600K OCed to 6ghz can of that I assure you LOL.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


I agree with you for the power rig but it is the same for HTPC's. Intel just can't cut it in HTPC's. The kind of advantages intel has in high end are the same kinds of advantages AMD has in HTPC's. The fact that your AMD HTPC was "cheap" doesn't change this.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


agreed. trinity looks really interesting too. i might grab that for a lappy.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


How about we cut it off here? The first thing you said was Intel Trolls and this and that. The OP asked a legitimate question, which overall the answer is that there is no 100% equivalent AMD CPU to the 2550K. Although he should just save a bit of money and get the 2500K and go for a Asus P8Z77 instead of a Gigabyte or ASRock.

But still, enough of calling the others Intel Trolls and such. There are more agreeing that the 2500/2550K are the best gaming CPU than there are not.



How can Intel not cut it in a HTPC? If a old Athlon 64 X2 6000+ I have can, then why could a Pentium G630 not? If I did do a new HTPC and went Intel, I would go with a low end dual core and a HD5450/6450 for the low profile as a HTPC is mainly video recording/playback.

I guess it all depends on how you view it though. The only advantage I see AMD having in HTPCs is that their Llano and soon Trinity will have a better IGP. But thats it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom