Opinion & Fact: Intel vs. AMD (primarily gaming use)

[logainofhades]

FX 8320 over a 4770k if on any kind of budget. The FX 8320 is $170 cheaper than a 4770k. That $170 would be better spent towards a better graphics card. You can get an FX 8320 and gtx 770 for a similar cost as a 4770k and a GTX 650 ti boost. If you think a 4770k and 650ti boost would beat an FX 8320 with a GTX 770, you really have some issues.

 

[Master-flaw]

Well since most differences seem to have been said already I will just leave this here. Don't just trust the Forum, trust the experts. A whole lot of intel in the top tier and no AMD

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html

On one hand, the AMD FX-8350 is only $30-40 cheaper than i5-4670K. I don't know if this would sway me in favor of AMD, (1) considering i5 normally has faster per-core performance, (2) i5 runs cooler (edit: more power efficient), and (3) FX-8350 is not truly 8 core. It has 8 integer cores, but only 4 FPUs. On the other hand, the FX-8320 is right now $80 cheaper than i5-4670K, so I guess it does save you slightly more change.

However, i5-4670K still remains a fundamentally "cheap" CPU, being priced $230-240 in today's dollars. And, i5-4670K remains effectively as fast as the more expensive i7 CPUs for single threaded stuff, and it's not given that your applications will use enough threads to benefit from hyperthreading in the i7. Relatively speaking, CPUs are so cheap now that arguing about whether you save $30-40 bucks by going with Intel or AMD is almost inconsequential. I remember when Pentium II 400MHz, Intel's top CPU, at the time of release cost $800, and that's in 90s dollars. Back in those days, it might have been totally worth it to buy a CPU that cost 3x times less and then overclock it.

you see the difference for me is the 8320 costs £109 in the uk and the processor you mentioned cost 170, my motherboard cost £60 along with my 7870 xt what cost £165 , so what I pay for an intel processor and mobo i was able to add money and buy this over the standard 7870 what was £125 at the point of buying with money saved towards my cm212evo+ for my processor at 4 ghz i max out at 40-45c only because of the crappy cooler my graphics card has but I dont have to turn on the heating at least

Did the same thing with my original set-up...
7870XT/8350 came out to 250-260 as an 3570K and cheapest Z77 board came out to around 320-340 after months of shopping...A lot of people like to buffer the two into being in the same price range but the 3570K and Z77 about 6 months ago WAS around $80-100 dollars more than getting an 8350 and 970 board.
I say let them think what they want...I was the one looking at the prices on PCpartpicker and the one ultimately dishing out the cash...I'd be pissed if I went with the 3570K and 7850 lol...

I get a much higher frame-rate with my setup then going 7850 and 3570K...a lot of times AMD just makes sense.

 

[cheapo gamer]

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html passmarks benchmarking website , I upgraded from a 77701gb and a phenom II 555 BE 4core unlock and overclock to 3.8ghz glad i did. it was the 8320 and the 7870xt or keep the phenom and get a gtx770, but i only need a new sli/xfire capable psu and any of the 7870 xt/le and the 7950/7970 to add more juice but thats years to come

 

[Coal Felpz]

I am getting a Intel® Core™ i5-4670 3.40 GHz 6MB Cache and running that with the R9 280x instead. I have (someohw) read ALL of your replies and some of you... I cannot thank enough. Those of you who provided me with articulate insight and even graphs were the true helpers, really changed my entire perspective around. I think that despite being an i5, the quad-core 3.4GHz should be enough to take on every game I need as well. Knowing the PURPOSE and affect of having more cores really helped me here.

As for those of you who simply trolled and sided with AMD just because you wanted to... I do not want your help again.
But again, thanks to everyone. I hope this i5 will do the trick with the R9 280x.