looking to upgrade from AMD fx-6300 to intel or stay with AMD

[callmeduty]

ok so my fx-6300 died after 3 long years of use and much happiness. An i'am looking to upgrade. I'am looking at a new mobo and cpu for my build. For mobo i go to gigabyte or asus, but as for cpu thats where i am torn should i stay amd and go for the 8350 or should i go for intel I5-4590?

Now my budget for this is around $300 for the cpu and mobo.

As a list of parts i have left from my old build are
1 xfx R9 390
1 500gb Crucial ssd
1 Seagate Barracuda 1tb
16gb of DDR3 Hyper X ram
A 750w corsair 80+ bronze PS
An for a cooler a hyper evo 212

As far as games i play Fallout 4, ark survival evolved, minecraft Modded, world of tank, and ALOT of games on steam.

I would love honest opinions none of this fanboy stuff and i want to stay with DDR3 ram

 

[Tradesman1]

I'd go the 4590 and pair it with an H97 mobo like the Asus H97 Plus

 

[callmeduty]

will the 4590 have any problems bottlenecking my 390? or would it be better to spend the extra $20 on a i5-4690K. i know nothing about intel and would i see a boost in fps with ever cpu's.

 

[Bossyfins]

Yes. Intel CPUs perform a lot better compared to their AMD counterparts. A 4590 will NOT boittle neck a GPU. If you go 4690k, then go with a z97 board.

 

[Tradesman1]

Yes. Intel CPUs perform a lot better compared to their AMD counterparts. A 4590 will NOT boittle neck a GPU. If you go 4690k, then go with a z97 board.

________________

+1

 

[callmeduty]

ok so iam sold on team blue lol but witch one 4590 or 4690k would i see a difference, as of right now at a local microcenter there is only $20 difference

 

[Bossyfins]

No differnce, one CPuP you can OC, the other you can't. I'd get the 4690k and a cheap z97 board. They give you 40$ off more if you buy a CPPU and mobo together

 

[callmeduty]

ok thank very much

 

[Bossyfins]

Which Microcenter are you near by?

 

[callmeduty]

about 45 mins west of the columbus ohio store

 

[Bossyfins]

http://www.microcenter.com/product/443766/GA-Z97MX-GAMING_LGA1150_mATX

That motherboard paired with
http://www.microcenter.com/product/434177/Core_i5-4690K_35GHz_LGA_1150_Boxed_Processor

Is a good combo.

 

[Outlander_04]

I would not buy a haswell processor. The line is dead

Either move to a skylake build or drop another FX chip in your current system.

 

[Bossyfins]

When was the line dead?

 

[Outlander_04]

When was the line dead?

Haswell is dead now . Probably not in production by now as skylake production ramps up .
Haswell and DDR3 are dead ends .


http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/core-i5-6600k-processor-review-desktop-skylake.html
Is also very interesting . Its a review of skylake but one of the processors included in the comparison is the FX 8350 which is often outperforming the intel i5's
The exception is some games where the intels appear to have a clear lead . Until you factor in the likelihood of the OP using a 60 Hz monitor which of course means that any frames over 60 are dropped and never displayed anyway . That means the intel does not have any significant advantage as a gamer in regard to the experience of the person playing the game .


The OP can do as big or small an upgrade as they feel like but they will not get extra game performance by using an intel unless they already have a 144 Hz monitor

 

[Tradesman1]

When was the line dead?

__________________

It's not 😉 Don't know where people come up with this junk, maybe they 'think' because a newer line of CPUs is out that an older line just disappears. They really need to follow the industry a bit. The Ivy Bridge CPUs (i.e. 3570K and 3770K are nearing End of Life, of course they preceded the Haswell and also of course the Haswell refresh.

Intel has continued their plans for new CPU releases as scheduled and normally the CPU line is maintained for a 2 to 3 year period, which should take manufacturing/availability through the end of 2016, beginning of 2017, during which will probably see the EOL of the original Haswell (4670K/4770K) (much as they did with EOL for the SB CPUs.

For gaming right now, yes the 8350 is viable, though would be much better with Haswell, Haswell refresh, or Skylake (even the IB 3570K, 😉 though as mentioned it's EOL, though not announced, has effectively been reached with the demise of the mobo makers support for the 1155 socket).

If me, if wanting a strong lasting platform, I'd move to Haswell/Skylake, AMD has already (a couple years back) announced they weren't going to proceed with the planned FX CPU upgrades to either Steamroller or Excavator, instead choosing to go with the APU route which didn't really pan out. And are taking a new tact of towards what they call Zen, which we will have to wait and see how it pans out (hopefully well, but not counting on it personally). I've got a nice 8370 rig and it doesn't begin to compare to my Haswell's (all in sig) or the Skylake (6600K, Hero, 32GB TriZ 3200) I'm currently playing with (nnor actually did it compare to the 3570K build I sold early this year in anticipation of Skylake)

 

[callmeduty]

i know that a skylake would be better but i dont have the money to go buy a mobo, ram and a cpu
and i would need to buy a mobo for a new FX chipset, plus when i bought my 6300 people said it was outdated and i still ran it, i dont care if it is The New chip set, i just want a good chip that will last for another 3 years

 

[Tradesman1]

Haswell is good and could use your current DRAM and other components - takes it to mobo-CPU

 

[Outlander_04]

The smart option is to buy an FX 8320 and overclock to 8350 speeds .
The computer will still be competitive with an i5 in most tasks . Check the link above and see how the 8350 is often beating the i5's in encoding and other heavy lifting
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/core_i5_6600k_processor_review_desktop_skylake,11.html

In games like BF4, Crysis etc you will also see no improvement by switching to intel
Even when you do see higher frame rates its often not contributing to an improved experience .
As i mentioned earlier a 60 Hz monitor can NEVER show more than 60 fps on the screen . If one computer is indicating 70 fps and another is indicating 120 fps both appear on screen as 60 fps . All the additional frames are just dropped by the monitor because it can not display them . It doesnt matter what fraps is telling you .
Benchmarks that show low resolutions and high fps are utterly meaningless to anyone except fans and marketing execs .

As for haswell being obsolete . Definitely . Not made any more and the only parts available are those already in the supply chain.
If you do want to spend the money and switch to intel then ignore haswell and move to skylake . The i5 6500 makes a lot of sense when you pair it with an Asrock board . Overclocking is available even on the cheaper locked processor

 

[Tradesman1]

Outlander_04

Gee now we've gone from 'probably not in production' to 'Not made anymore' in what less than 2 hours? Which is it? Has there been an EOL announcement? 😉 Any documentation from Intel? or are we suppose to go on your contradictory statements. Not that what a manufacturer says is always the truth or fact, I'll freely admit that, i.e. if we believed all then there would be SteamRoller and Excavator CPUs on the desktop, likewise we never saw Broadwell K model CPUs on 1150

 

[Outlander_04]

You can guarantee there will not be any significant production of Haswell .
Presumably if intels yields at 14 nm were not so good they may have Haswell running to meet demand , but its much more likely that they have closed the production line already .
Either way history can guide us here . Within 12 months of the release of DDR3 boards the supply of DDR2 shrank and became relatively expensive . The same pattern has followed with intels i5's . In 12 months all that is left is .....left overs .

Very disappointing that AMD never advanced from Piledriver in FX cpu's . The release of the highly OCed 9XXX series was a joke .

Whichever it is with Intels production I stand by my comments . I would not invest in a new DDR3 system at this time . Either AMD or Intel .
I understand why people on a restricted budget might , but they should probably be buying AMD because that is where the best bang for buck is .

What the OP should do is really about how much he is willing to spend and what he expects to achieve .
If I had a runnign AM3+ build that needed a new processor I'd spend $130 on that FX 8320 and use the system for 2 more years before moving to a completely new system

 

[Bossyfins]

The smart option is to buy an FX 8320 and overclock to 8350 speeds .
The computer will still be competitive with an i5 in most tasks . Check the link above and see how the 8350 is often beating the i5's in encoding and other heavy lifting
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/core_i5_6600k_processor_review_desktop_skylake,11.html

In games like BF4, Crysis etc you will also see no improvement by switching to intel
Even when you do see higher frame rates its often not contributing to an improved experience .
As i mentioned earlier a 60 Hz monitor can NEVER show more than 60 fps on the screen . If one computer is indicating 70 fps and another is indicating 120 fps both appear on screen as 60 fps . All the additional frames are just dropped by the monitor because it can not display them . It doesnt matter what fraps is telling you .
Benchmarks that show low resolutions and high fps are utterly meaningless to anyone except fans and marketing execs .

As for haswell being obsolete . Definitely . Not made any more and the only parts available are those already in the supply chain.
If you do want to spend the money and switch to intel then ignore haswell and move to skylake . The i5 6500 makes a lot of sense when you pair it with an Asrock board . Overclocking is available even on the cheaper locked processor

NO higher FPS. But bettr minimums. That is what matters. The fact you are saying it is good for 'other heavy lifting' shows the FX line of CPUs were meant for high task loads where more cores are required.Like a server environment. Apparently, some AMD employees even said they were server CPUs, and AMD wanted to make it a desktop CPU. How true is that, I can not say, but it's performance comes from heavy work.


As for haswell to be dead. Skylake motherboards have sold 20% than haswell. And even now, I see more haswell CPUs being sold than skylake due to costs. So no, it isnt dead. And no, he is gaming not editing. An i5 will suit him fine.

 

[Outlander_04]

The smart option is to buy an FX 8320 and overclock to 8350 speeds .
The computer will still be competitive with an i5 in most tasks . Check the link above and see how the 8350 is often beating the i5's in encoding and other heavy lifting
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/core_i5_6600k_processor_review_desktop_skylake,11.html

In games like BF4, Crysis etc you will also see no improvement by switching to intel
Even when you do see higher frame rates its often not contributing to an improved experience .
As i mentioned earlier a 60 Hz monitor can NEVER show more than 60 fps on the screen . If one computer is indicating 70 fps and another is indicating 120 fps both appear on screen as 60 fps . All the additional frames are just dropped by the monitor because it can not display them . It doesnt matter what fraps is telling you .
Benchmarks that show low resolutions and high fps are utterly meaningless to anyone except fans and marketing execs .

As for haswell being obsolete . Definitely . Not made any more and the only parts available are those already in the supply chain.
If you do want to spend the money and switch to intel then ignore haswell and move to skylake . The i5 6500 makes a lot of sense when you pair it with an Asrock board . Overclocking is available even on the cheaper locked processor

NO higher FPS. But bettr minimums. That is what matters. The fact you are saying it is good for 'other heavy lifting' shows the FX line of CPUs were meant for high task loads where more cores are required.Like a server environment. Apparently, some AMD employees even said they were server CPUs, and AMD wanted to make it a desktop CPU. How true is that, I can not say, but it's performance comes from heavy work.


As for haswell to be dead. Skylake motherboards have sold 20% than haswell. And even now, I see more haswell CPUs being sold than skylake due to costs. So no, it isnt dead. And no, he is gaming not editing. An i5 will suit him fine.

I am sure there are some games that will have better minimums with a skylake processor . Im also sure there are games that have higher minimums with an FX processor . Its all about how the game engine uses the cpu's resources .

As for server/desktop . It was designed to be both . As are intel chips . Those socket 1150 and 1151 Xeons are the exact same cpu cores . What was your point?

Interesting to hear that "Skylake motherboards have sold 20% than haswell.", even though I have no idea what that means .
Possibly intel is having difficulty with its 14 nm process?

 

[Bossyfins]

Yes, it depends on the engine, but most of the time, intel has better minimums.

Server chips. The IPC for the fx line is not good. Obviously 2 different types of architecture but, it was best suited for heavy, workloads, what servers do. When AsRock released the BIOS to OC non k SKUs, the 8320 became obsolete because the performance was basically the same for the same or lesser cost. Xeon are server chips, yes. But you can use an i5 or i7 in aserver environment as well. But, Xeons have more server options, ECC, etc.

As for the 20% thing, I had seen an article, still havent found it, but I will. It said something along the lines that Skylake motherboards are selling less due to the cost and the sheer aspect that intel's IPC improvement between haswell->skylake or even sandy bridge -> skylake was not big enough for them to move to the new platform. If anything, skylake will become big when haswell reaches EOL, but by that time, intel will have brought new CPUS

 

[Tradesman1]

Outlander_04
Actually at this point, the idea that Haswell sells more than Skylake is nothing more than common sense and in part, is the basis of your own 'argument' as to being cost-effective. Skylake costs more, going with a K model means investing in a CPU cooler, if going to do it and do it right, they also need to invest in DDR4.

Amd had a plan with FX for the desktop and jumped out to soon with BullDozer (i.e. the 8150) which was a failure, then they again jumped the gun on PileDriver (skipping the improved cores and MC that was planned) much as they have recently done with their GPUs, they continually make/announce plans to one up Intel or nVidia, then fail to make the advances, so in response to the newer offerings offered by Intel/nVidia they rush out what they have which isn't quite to prime time.

You're very correct on the 9xxx wasn't so much a failure as it was aimed at a publicity stunt to lay claim to the fastest 'stock' CPU available on the market, the high price was to infer it was a match and better than anything Intel had available. (It's also why they didn't send any of them out for review (if you wanted to review one you had to stroll out to a store and fork over almost 1K (ridiculous yes, but there were those that did, I put up part of the cost for one for testing with another builder (shame on me 😉 ), and it was immediately revealed why none went for review.....findings across the board were the almost 1K 9590 at 4.7 was easily outperformed by a stock 4770K (3.5) at little over 1/3 the cost of the 9590. Obviously their stunt backfired, currently one can buy a brand new 9590 for about $230-$240 (down price wise by about 2/3rds, where the 4770K (new or used) are often selling for more than the original retail.

As far as problems with the 14nm CPUs, again, let's use a little common sense, the CPUs are new, and being a new size - obviouskly the mobos are new, this also calles for a new chipset, and thisng are a bit more complex when you throw in a whole new version of DRAM......and then - let's not forget that most are going with Win10 (yes, a brand new OS).....in other words just abourt EVERYTHING is brand new - so problems are to be expected - even with long time builders

 

[Bossyfins]

Outlander_04
Actually at this point, the idea that Haswell sells more than Skylake is nothing more than common sense and in part, is the basis of your own 'argument' as to being cost-effective. Skylake costs more, going with a K model means investing in a CPU cooler, if going to do it and do it right, they also need to invest in DDR4.

Amd had a plan with FX for the desktop and jumped out to soon with BullDozer (i.e. the 8150) which was a failure, then they again jumped the gun on PileDriver (skipping the improved cores and MC that was planned) much as they have recently done with their GPUs, they continually make/announce plans to one up Intel or nVidia, then fail to make the advances, so in response to the newer offerings offered by Intel/nVidia they rush out what they have which isn't quite to prime time.

You're very correct on the 9xxx wasn't so much a failure as it was aimed at a publicity stunt to lay claim to the fastest 'stock' CPU available on the market, the high price was to infer it was a match and better than anything Intel had available. (It's also why they didn't send any of them out for review (if you wanted to review one you had to stroll out to a store and fork over almost 1K (ridiculous yes, but there were those that did, I put up part of the cost for one for testing with another builder (shame on me 😉 ), and it was immediately revealed why none went for review.....findings across the board were the almost 1K 9590 at 4.7 was easily outperformed by a stock 4770K (3.5) at little over 1/3 the cost of the 9590. Obviously their stunt backfired, currently one can buy a brand new 9590 for about $230-$240 (down price wise by about 2/3rds, where the 4770K (new or used) are often selling for more than the original retail.

As far as problems with the 14nm CPUs, again, let's use a little common sense, the CPUs are new, and being a new size - obviouskly the mobos are new, this also calles for a new chipset, and thisng are a bit more complex when you throw in a whole new version of DRAM......and then - let's not forget that most are going with Win10 (yes, a brand new OS).....in other words just abourt EVERYTHING is brand new - so problems are to be expected - even with long time builders

Sums up what I try to say, better.