AMD FX-8320 or Intel Core i5 3570k
Tags:
- Core
-
AMD
-
CPUs
- Intel i5
-
Intel
Last response: in CPUs
landsavage
June 5, 2013 10:19:27 AM
It's time to upgrade guys. Noticing some stuttering in some games I'm playing and I don't like it. Not to mention trying to stream anything is almost impossible. I am running an E8400 with the FSB OC'ed to 400mhz(core) to keep it 1:1 with my 400mhz(core) RAM. I'm listing my current rig using CPUz
https://www.sugarsync.com/piv/D7089725_65259594_6874030
I just ordered a GTX 650 Ti Boost 2GB (Overclocked) for the system, which I am sure will help quite a bit. However two barriers with my older MoBo is that it uses PCIe 2.0 and I quote this from NVidia's site
"1 - GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST supports PCI Express 3.0. The Intel X79/SNB-E PCI Express 2.0 platform is only currently supported up to 5GT/s (PCIE 2.0) bus speeds even though some motherboard manufacturers have enabled higher 8GT/s speeds."
and it's SATAII, which barriers my HDD http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... . I've been running this drive now for about 1 year and its amazing, but it would be nice to have SATAIII and get the full effect (since I'm upgrading and all =] ).
So what it boils down to is I was reading an article on Toms, http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-o... , and was torn between the Phenom II X4 965, AMD FX-4300, and the Core i5 3570k. Mainly because of price, but also, the Phenom II X4 965's RAM rating's and price are lower (1333mhz), while the FX-4300's was much higher (1866mhz), and of course the Core i5 3570k's just leading the path in speed (at a higher price) and the fact that AMD doesn't make any PCIe 3.0 boards, which I am not sure if it would make much of a difference to be honest, but you can't trust 90% of what you read online. Then to make things more difficult I find this on the bench-marking site I usually use https://www.sugarsync.com/piv/D7089725_65259594_6874903 , which appears to place the FX-8320 eight-core above the Core i5 3570k in both speed and value per dollar. Why wasn't this FX-8320 showcased in the Toms article? Do these numbers not relate to gaming as this is obviously an overall benchmark? I am thinking, "if this is even remotely close to the intel in terms of gaming, wouldn't it dominate due to price and overall performance outside of gaming?"
What do you guys think? Any personal experience with the FX-8320 vs the Core i5 3570k? I like the fact that the FX-8320 sports a 8mb cache with the higher 1866mhz RAM speeds, and of course the lower price. Am I missing something? Is there a completely different processor I should be looking at all together? It's hard to justify the price on the Intel chips which so many high powered/low cost AMD chips out right now. Will that PCIe 2.0/3.0 difference really hurt me?
https://www.sugarsync.com/piv/D7089725_65259594_6874030
I just ordered a GTX 650 Ti Boost 2GB (Overclocked) for the system, which I am sure will help quite a bit. However two barriers with my older MoBo is that it uses PCIe 2.0 and I quote this from NVidia's site
"1 - GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST supports PCI Express 3.0. The Intel X79/SNB-E PCI Express 2.0 platform is only currently supported up to 5GT/s (PCIE 2.0) bus speeds even though some motherboard manufacturers have enabled higher 8GT/s speeds."
and it's SATAII, which barriers my HDD http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... . I've been running this drive now for about 1 year and its amazing, but it would be nice to have SATAIII and get the full effect (since I'm upgrading and all =] ).
So what it boils down to is I was reading an article on Toms, http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-o... , and was torn between the Phenom II X4 965, AMD FX-4300, and the Core i5 3570k. Mainly because of price, but also, the Phenom II X4 965's RAM rating's and price are lower (1333mhz), while the FX-4300's was much higher (1866mhz), and of course the Core i5 3570k's just leading the path in speed (at a higher price) and the fact that AMD doesn't make any PCIe 3.0 boards, which I am not sure if it would make much of a difference to be honest, but you can't trust 90% of what you read online. Then to make things more difficult I find this on the bench-marking site I usually use https://www.sugarsync.com/piv/D7089725_65259594_6874903 , which appears to place the FX-8320 eight-core above the Core i5 3570k in both speed and value per dollar. Why wasn't this FX-8320 showcased in the Toms article? Do these numbers not relate to gaming as this is obviously an overall benchmark? I am thinking, "if this is even remotely close to the intel in terms of gaming, wouldn't it dominate due to price and overall performance outside of gaming?"
What do you guys think? Any personal experience with the FX-8320 vs the Core i5 3570k? I like the fact that the FX-8320 sports a 8mb cache with the higher 1866mhz RAM speeds, and of course the lower price. Am I missing something? Is there a completely different processor I should be looking at all together? It's hard to justify the price on the Intel chips which so many high powered/low cost AMD chips out right now. Will that PCIe 2.0/3.0 difference really hurt me?
More about : amd 8320 intel core 3570k
-
Reply to landsavage
landsavage
June 5, 2013 12:33:35 PM
SR-71 Blackbird said:
Core i5 3570k < Get this or the FX8350 Will that PCIe 2.0/3.0 difference really hurt me < No
I own 1-3570k and 2-FX8350's , my results say 3570k is the better gamer.
I had that in mind that it probably was. I am just looking at these price tags, $150 vs $220, thats a 50% increase in price. Is it like 10% difference in frame rates? If so I would still take the FX for that amount of savings.
-
Reply to landsavage
m
0
l
Related resources
- Intel Core i5 3350P vs AMD FX-8320 - Forum
- Intel Core i5 4440 or AMD FX8320 - Forum
- AMD FX-8320 vs Intel i5 3570K, and 3770K - Forum
- AMD FX8320 or Intel Core i5 3450(non-K)? - Forum
- ¿¿¿AMD FX8320 3.5Hz or Intel i5 3570k??? - Forum
-
Reply to 8350rocks
m
0
l
-
Reply to L Helps
m
0
l
L Helps said:
SR-71 Blackbird said:
Core i5 3570k < Get this or the FX8350 Will that PCIe 2.0/3.0 difference really hurt me < No
I own 1-3570k and 2-FX8350's , my results say 3570k is the better gamer.
glad somebody has both and I need to ask this: What is better for gaming and video editing?
8350 i also own more than 1 of both
-
Reply to catshannon
m
0
l
catshannon said:
L Helps said:
SR-71 Blackbird said:
Core i5 3570k < Get this or the FX8350 Will that PCIe 2.0/3.0 difference really hurt me < No
I own 1-3570k and 2-FX8350's , my results say 3570k is the better gamer.
glad somebody has both and I need to ask this: What is better for gaming and video editing?
8350 i also own more than 1 of both
Is there a big difference when gaming?
-
Reply to L Helps
m
0
l
There are a few games where there is a greater than margin of error difference...but it's not a great many of them. The gap has closed some on Skyrim, but that one is the one real outlier. Everything else is pretty close. You really can't tell the difference between 65 FPS and 66.2 FPS, and even if it's as much as 4-5 FPS you still won't be able to see it.
-
Reply to 8350rocks
m
0
l
8350rocks said:
There are a few games where there is a greater than margin of error difference...but it's not a great many of them. The gap has closed some on Skyrim, but that one is the one real outlier. Everything else is pretty close. You really can't tell the difference between 65 FPS and 66.2 FPS, and even if it's as much as 4-5 FPS you still won't be able to see it.yep kindoff knew it was within margin of error, It's just the great amount of fanboys on this forum that keeps make me rethink my build. You're a fanboy(not offending you) too but you atleast say the truth and base your awnsers.
-
Reply to L Helps
m
0
l
On CPU intensive games the i5 will win by a pretty good amount. Synthetic benchmarks also show it blowing away the FX 83xx in terms of per core performance. So in conclusion, CPU intensive games favor the i5, while GPU intensive games are fine on either. Though if you want to have this CPU for awhile, the FX 8320 is the better option.
-
Reply to montosaurous
m
1
l
landsavage
October 11, 2013 11:51:20 AM
I've not yet made a purchase so sorry I haven't closed this thread. I am actually taking interest into the 8320 now. 40 bucks cheaper, maybe 10% difference in performance. I use cpubenchmark.net (PassMark) to find most of my numbers. I am on a e8400, and according to their numbers the 8320 checks out about 4 times faster. I almost feel like that is plenty.
Am I being mislead?
Am I being mislead?
-
Reply to landsavage
m
0
l
Best solution
landsavage said:
I've not yet made a purchase so sorry I haven't closed this thread. I am actually taking interest into the 8320 now. 40 bucks cheaper, maybe 10% difference in performance. I use cpubenchmark.net (PassMark) to find most of my numbers. I am on a e8400, and according to their numbers the 8320 checks out about 4 times faster. I almost feel like that is plenty. Am I being mislead?
No, it would be a great option for you.
-
Reply to 8350rocks
Share
landsavage
October 11, 2013 1:45:28 PM
Related resources
- Solvedintel core i5 vs amd fx-8320 Forum
- SolvedIntel I5 or AMD FX-8320 3.5GHz 8-Core Processor? Forum
- SolvedAMD FX 6300 vs. Intel Core i5 3570K Forum
- SolvedAMD 8320 vs Intel core i5 3570K Forum
- SolvedAMD 8320 vs Intel core i5 3570K Forum
- Solvedwhat is better for gaming intel core i5 3570k or amd fx 8350 Forum
- SolvedIntel Core i5 3570K vs AMD FX 8350 Forum
- SolvedAmd Fx8350K vs Intel Core I5 3570K For Nxt Generations Gaming Forum
- AMD fx 8320 vs Intel core i5 3570k ?? Forum
- Intel Core i5 3570k vs AMD FX-8350 Forum
- SolvedFX8320 or Intel core i5 4570? Forum
- SolvedIntel Core i5-4670K vs AMD FX-8320? Forum
- SolvedAMD FX-8320 vs Intel Core i5-4590 Forum
- SolvedAMD FX-8320 or Intel i5 4670k? Forum
- SolvedIntel Core I5 3570K vs Intel Core I5 2500K Forum
- More resources
!