Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

FX-8350 or FX-8320

Last response: in CPUs
Share
June 5, 2013 6:35:15 PM

Which processor would be good for photo editing? Also, how much ram is recommended for moderate photo editing? I'm trying to put together a office computer, photo editing, and gaming machine for my brother. I already have bought a Sapphire 7970 Vapor X for $399 from newegg.

More about : 8350 8320

a b à CPUs
June 5, 2013 6:49:01 PM

I'm thinking 8350 & 16 GB=4x4 should be good. Not to pricey either.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 5, 2013 7:03:01 PM

If you don't have a motherboard yet, go Intel, they are faster for the money. Both AMD processors are good for multithreaded apps though. I use 32GB in my system so when I am editing I can run a 16GB RamDisk for storing images and my scratch disk. Very fast. Otherwise 16GB is plenty (8 would probably be fine too) as I have never used that much when photo editing (although when encoding and rendering I have).
m
0
l
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
June 5, 2013 7:05:19 PM

What maestro said. AMD is good to a point but Intel is better for the money and will generally last longer (pertaining to hardware evolution).

12 GB - 16 GB should be fine.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 5, 2013 7:24:17 PM

What ever platform is cheaper 8350 vs i5 there is very little between them
m
0
l
a c 210 à CPUs
a b À AMD
June 6, 2013 6:27:17 AM

FX 8350 + 2x4 GB RAM @ 1866 MHz should be plenty...if he isn't rendering/encoding he won't need more than 8 GB, and 8 is plenty for games.

If you're overclocking, save a few bucks and buy the 8320...if you're not overclocking, the increase in stock clock speed on the 8350 is worth the extra $30-40.
m
0
l
June 6, 2013 7:22:46 AM

8350rocks said:
FX 8350 + 2x4 GB RAM @ 1866 MHz should be plenty...if he isn't rendering/encoding he won't need more than 8 GB, and 8 is plenty for games.

If you're overclocking, save a few bucks and buy the 8320...if you're not overclocking, the increase in stock clock speed on the 8350 is worth the extra $30-40.


Yea I plan on overclocking and pairing whatever processor with a Corsair h80i water cooler. Which is better for editing, Intel or AMD? I noticed if he spends $50-$60 more he can get a new Haswell i5-4670k processor with a MSI Z87-GD65 Gaming board for $401.00.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?Ite...
m
0
l
a c 210 à CPUs
a b À AMD
June 6, 2013 8:20:43 AM

Haswell isn't worth the money...

Additionally, adobe partners with AMD to optimize software for their architecture. If you use photoshop, then you're going to see great performance from the AMD CPU. That's not to say intel wouldn't also be competitive there, but the 8350 does really well in photoshop rendering/editing.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8350-vishera-rev...

This one is editing functions speed:



This one is H.264 encoding:



Note the FX 8350 is faster at editing than all intel CPUs, and in encoding only the 3770k is marginally faster.

The FX8350 is money well spent for your brother.
m
0
l
June 6, 2013 9:06:48 AM

That's about it for AMD and it's only because they have more physical cores. In MOSTLY everything else, Intel wins.

If you want value, then AMD will always win, however Intel is more about performance/quality.

You should always pick according to what you are doing. Who cares if AMD is better in one that Intel isn't or the other way around? If you're going to buy a car for your family, then you wouldn't buy a two door sports car. For the difference, I would go 3770k instead of either, simply because photo editing isn't all he is doing.
m
0
l
a c 210 à CPUs
a b À AMD
June 6, 2013 9:30:53 AM

So you're referring to gaming right?







Here is the ever popular cinebench compiled on Intel's ICC compiler...





m
0
l
June 6, 2013 9:34:49 AM

You just proved my point lol.
m
0
l
a c 210 à CPUs
a b À AMD
June 6, 2013 9:37:01 AM

The difference is minimal at best with a comparable CPU from intel...most of those the difference is less than the margin of error for the benchmark. I don't consider .4 FPS difference a victory either way.

Additionally AMD wins or ties in the benchmarks where multiple monitors are used...(note Metro 2033/BF3/AVP with resolution 5760x1080 and 4800x900)

Except if you look at the couple that have the i7-3960X in them...though that CPU + MB will cost you $1300 before you buy any other piece of your system, so I doubt we're considering it.
m
0
l
June 6, 2013 10:20:51 AM

YYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA..............NO! Not even considering the i7-3960x! The processor and motherboard costs as much as my AMD rig! No way I can justify the let alone recommend it to someone I'm trying to keep on a budget. Another dumb question. Is there a difference between PCIe 3.0 and PCIe 2.0?
m
0
l
a c 210 à CPUs
a b À AMD
June 6, 2013 10:41:12 AM

PCIe 3.0 x8 = PCIe 2.0 x16
m
0
l
a c 737 à CPUs
a c 135 À AMD
June 6, 2013 11:09:54 AM

andycal said:
YYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA..............NO! Not even considering the i7-3960x! The processor and motherboard costs as much as my AMD rig! No way I can justify the let alone recommend it to someone I'm trying to keep on a budget. Another dumb question. Is there a difference between PCIe 3.0 and PCIe 2.0?


There is a difference, but none you will notice. There isn't a single gpu solution that can fully saturate a 2.0 graphics slot, much less a 3.0. :)  Since it looks like you want to overclock, then I suggest the 8320 and use money saved for something elsewhere or just pocket it.
m
0
l
!