Which CPU should I buy?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Solution
goonbar79


FX-8350 - 4Ghz - Turbo 4.2Ghz
i5-4570 - 3.2Ghz - Turbo 3.6Ghz

4570 should generally be 45%~60% faster (using 4 threads) to slightly slower (using 8 threads). If you OC the 8350 to 4.6Ghz, it could be faster using more threads (20~30% faster @ 8 threads+), but I still think 4570 is a better choice, all else being equal. As an added benefit, 4570 will have much less power consumption, and most likely better resale value in the future.

Some say that 8 core AMD will fare better in the future, but I think AMD's problem is per core efficiency, which will negate real performance benefit years from now, because by that time, other "cheap" cpu's could potentially offer better single +...
Sort by date Sort by votes


[strike]Both are 4 cores. The i5 is probably going to be better when compared core-per-core.

To get close to the i5 performance on a budget you at least need an FX 6300. It's still slower per core, but in games that can use all 6 cores it will be neck in neck with the i5.

When comparing current AMD and Intel CPUs, the number of cores your software and games can use to the full is the key factor.[/strike]

The 8350 is going to be better in the long run.

Right now, games that only use 2-4 cores will be better on the i5. As soon as you start using more cores the 8350 pulls ahead.

Tek Syndicate and Linus Tech Tips have recent comparison videos that go in depth at both stock and overclocked settings, on low and high core counts. You could watch those for more info.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


FX-8350 - 4Ghz - Turbo 4.2Ghz
i5-4570 - 3.2Ghz - Turbo 3.6Ghz

4570 should generally be 45%~60% faster (using 4 threads) to slightly slower (using 8 threads). If you OC the 8350 to 4.6Ghz, it could be faster using more threads (20~30% faster @ 8 threads+), but I still think 4570 is a better choice, all else being equal. As an added benefit, 4570 will have much less power consumption, and most likely better resale value in the future.

Some say that 8 core AMD will fare better in the future, but I think AMD's problem is per core efficiency, which will negate real performance benefit years from now, because by that time, other "cheap" cpu's could potentially offer better single + multi core performance. I think there would be better choices available. If you wanted more multithread performance, you can always upgrade to cpu with more core, especially since socket 1150 is new.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution


well not exactly the gpus on them are better but the actually cpus are slower than their fx brothers
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


In that case, the 8350 hands down. You won't be disappointed. Anyone citing huge performance differences in favor of Intel is using old benches off day 1 reviews or low thread counts. Basically, old info.

But don't take my word for it... :)

Check some recent gaming comparison vids by TekSyndicate, Linus Tech Tips, and Actrons FX 6100 (* OLD inefficient Bulldozer core mind you) -vs- i7 3770k BF3 comparison.

The 8350 will run games and most apps neck-in-neck with the i5 and i7 for less money. It wins some, it loses some, but the margin is so close it is pointless to switch platforms right now.

Don't get me wrong, I tell Intel guys the same thing. If you already have a current intel i5 or i7 platform, don't switch to AMD either. the honest truth is they are so close right now it is pointless.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Well, that changes everything... Stick with AM3+ cpus.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Well, then you should get a fx-8350. While the i5 4570 would be more ideal for gaming, the fx-8350 is still a great processor
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I benchmarked using a Reaper (DAW)monitoring CPU usage. i3 is sufficient but trails behind the AMD A6 APU by a good length. The i5 and A6 are about match. All depends on what software host your using.





 
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