3570k vs 3470 Budget Gaming Build

saverill4 · May 14, 2013

Alright, so this is my first post, so if its in the wrong section(i believe its correct) please forgive me.

So im building my first gaming rig, and so far i have everything set out good.
But for my cpu, i see a good deal on amazon for a i5 3470 for 180$ and the 3570k for 210$
I know the 3570k is the "best" gaming cpu, but is it worth the money over the 3470?

I understand the 3470 is 3.2 ghz and 3570k is 3.4 ghz, so is the .2ghz = 200mhz going to change anything IN gaming?
And because im on a budget, im getting an H61 chip set motherboard, therefore overclocking in sort of out the equation. So the unlocked multiplier is nothing to me at the moment. just the extra 200Mhz

Games im building this pc for is the Arma series, Dayz(standalone aswell) Bf3, and other similar games, mostly the arma series and Dayz.
Which from my understanding is very CPU intensive.

My gpu is a Radeon 7870.

8350rocks · May 14, 2013

For budget purposes, you might consider the AMD FX6350 + 970 series MB. Would probably allow you to spend more money elsewhere in your system...like RAM or HDD or even a SSD. Plus you could OC the FX6350 for far less money than the i5's and get even more performance.

If you're stuck on intel...go 3470...you won't notice the difference and you couldn't OC the 3570k on the MB you fit in your budget.

carowden · May 14, 2013

the difference would most likely go unnoticed. and because youre getting the h61 motherboard i would just get the 3470. to answer your question (is it worth the extra $30) i really do not think so in this situation. the 3470 is still going to play the same games with almost the exact same performance of the stock 3570k (which is all you would get with your chipset).

Geekkid · May 14, 2013

The 200MHz difference shouldn't impact your performance in games in a significant way. The big draw to the 3570K is the overclocking potential and as you stated, your chipset won't allow that. Any of the Sandybridge or Ivy Bridge i5s should be good for gaming. Unless you are planning on getting a Z77 motherboard in the future, the 3570K doesn't really do anything that the 3470 won't.

Au_equus · May 14, 2013

if you haven't bought the GPU yet, you might want to consider using the $30 difference to bump the GPU to a 7870XT (Tahiti LE)

saverill4 · May 14, 2013

So lets say, i were to switch to a b75 chipset Motherboard....Would it be worth it to get that and the 3570k? or stilll no?

carowden · May 14, 2013

saverill4 :

no b75 doesnt allow overclocking either. you'll need something like a z75 or z77 to make a 3570k really worth it

4745454b · May 14, 2013

Plus you could OC the FX6350 for far less money than the i5's and get even more performance then a stock 6350.

FIFY. OC'd or not I don't think the 6350 will catch even the 3470 in games.

Seeing as you have the h61 chipset the 3570K isn't going to help you. I'd buy it if you think you might upgrade the board at some point soon. But as others have said because you can't OC don't bother buying the k chip. Spend the money elsewhere.

saverill4 · May 14, 2013

Geekkid :

Alright, seems to me that the 3470 is the way to go.
I do have one more question? can z68 motherboards overclock? if not then i wont worry about it, and just get a 3470.

carowden · May 14, 2013

saverill4 :

z68 can, it will require a bios update for use with either of the processors youre looking at because they are ivy bridge

saverill4 · May 14, 2013

So, if a z68 can, would it be worth it to buy that and the 3570k, and eventually overclock? I wont overclock until i get fairly familiar with the system. And will the update pose any problem with anything to get it running?

4745454b · May 14, 2013

The H61 would as well wouldn't it? Same generation. He might be better off going down to a SB CPU as well. No bios issues, loses only a bit of speed, and cheaper as well.

saverill4 · May 14, 2013

So between a z68 and 3570k vs. 3470 and h61....What would be better? if the price was 30$ difference in cpus as 15$ in motherboards?

carowden · May 14, 2013

he means second generation core i3/i5/i7 (SB=Sandy Bridge). and yeah i guess the h61 would need a bios flash. he raises a good point about swapping to an older one and still getting a good processor, just cheaper. I am currently using an i5 2500k (sandy bridge, predecessor to the i5 3570k) and it is very nice.

4745454b · May 14, 2013

idk. $45. Doesn't sound like a lot to get a much better board and CPU. I personally would try to find the money and get it. But then again for a budget build, probably not worth it. If that $45 can bump your video card up to something better it's better spent there.

8350rocks · May 14, 2013

4745454b :

The FX6350 is clocked @ 3.9 GHz putting it on par with the FX8350 @ stock velocity in games. The FX8350 performs as well as any i5.

The FX6300 on the other hand...is a different animal. However, that CPU is also $112 now.

4745454b · May 14, 2013

You want that WoW picture again? (I think it was WoW.) Ah heck, I'll post it anyways.

Intel can do 3D gaming at 60Hz, not so for Vishera.

Not even 60FPS.

I know the 6350 isn't in here, I can't seem to find any benchies for it. But considering how poorly these chips do, adding another GHz isn't going to change much. Their single threaded performance just isn't there yet. Hopefully AMD can keep improving it.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/5

8350rocks · May 14, 2013

LOL. You post the last version of WoW (the MoP WoW benches are much closer btw) and SC2 benches? That's funny...what else is in your repertoire? Skyrim maybe? Planetside 2 as well? That's not at all surprising.

Pull up Bioshock Infinite, Crysis 3, Tomb Raider, BF3 multiplayer, Metro 2033, Crysis Warhead....the list of games that are within margin of error is far longer than the list of those with any sort of gap, by a long shot.

Additionally, you have GTA 5 on the horizon, BF4 and many other games that will use 4+ cores. Still think single thread performance is an important metric? (maybe you're a fan of iTunes...I suppose that's the only other valid argument) Either way, intel has it's strengths and AMD has it's own. They do overlap though, quite a bit actually. So, what it boils down to is simply this:

GPU is a much bigger difference maker in games than CPU. The i5-3570k and the FX8350 will both be fine with any GPU you can throw at them. If, by going AMD over intel, you can bump up a notch in GPU, that is a more worthy place to spend your dollars. Far more games are GPU bound than CPU bound, and your dollars go a lot farther there than they will nitpicking a few FPS difference in CPU.

4745454b · May 14, 2013

I hear claims. I don't see benchies.

8350rocks · May 15, 2013

4745454b :

http://teksyndicate.com/videos/amd-fx-8350-vs-intel-3570k-vs-3770k-vs-3820-gaming-and-xsplit-streaming-benchmarks

http://www.techspot.com/review/655-bioshock-infinite-performance/page5.html

http://www.techspot.com/review/645-tomb-raider-performance/page5.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crysis-3-performance-benchmark-gaming,3451-8.html

http://www.techspot.com/review/642-crysis-3-performance/page6.html

http://teksyndicate.com/videos/crysis-3-benchmarks-amd-fx-8350-vs-intel-i7-3770k-both-overclocked

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/dota-2-performance-benchmark,3481-8.html

http://www.techspot.com/review/458-battlefield-3-performance/page7.html

See...you won't miss 0-5 FPS in any game.

whyso · May 15, 2013

If you play mmos then intel is generally better.

4745454b · May 15, 2013

First tek syndicate link. (I really hate this site. His output is VERY hard to follow because its just a dump of info.)

8350: Crysis 2 1080 - 29.84
3570k -Crysis 2 1080 - 39.520

So in your first link you give us a case where the 8350 can't hit/can barely hit 30FPS while the 3570 can do that and 33% more?

http://www.techspot.com/review/458-battlefield-3-performance/page7.html

Before we discuss the individual CPU performance tests, let’s just take a quick look at how the AMD FX-4100 processor scales when testing between 2GHz and 4GHz. When paired with the single-GPU GeForce GTX 580 the average frame rate goes almost untouched. This suggests to us that Battlefield 3 is not very CPU demanding, at least not enough to max out a quad-core processor

I purposefully linked games where there was a difference. Yes, i fully admit. Most games, nearly all, will be fine with either CPU. I care about those few games where the AMD CPU for some reason can't keep up all of sudden. If you want to buy a CPU that can handle 8/10 or 9 out of 10 games that's fine. But don't kid yourself or con others by saying you can OC a 6xxx or 8xxx and everything will be fine. Because there will be a game here and there where it won't. As I already linked.

8350rocks · May 15, 2013

You missed the part where the FX8350 beat the intel CPUs @ 1440p...but, I digress.

My point is, if you're not into those games...then what's the point of pitching them to someone? If they only play FPS games...then Skyrim and WoW make no difference. If they don't like RTS, then SC2 isn't a valid argument either. It just depends on what you're going to play more. For some people intel makes sense, for the vast majority...it won't make a difference. (80-90% to quote your numbers)

whyso · May 15, 2013

throw out techsyndiacte because the numbers make no sense. How on earth are you getting a cpu bottleneck at 1440p max settings?

8350rocks · May 15, 2013

whyso :

Cryengine 3 would be my guess...

EDIT: Correction

3570k vs 3470 Budget Gaming Build

Honorable

Distinguished

Honorable

Honorable

Distinguished

Honorable

Honorable

Titan

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Titan

Honorable

Honorable

Titan

Distinguished

Titan

Distinguished

Titan

Distinguished

Distinguished

Titan

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Share this page