Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Higher GHz AMD-Trinity or lower GHz i5

Last response: in CPUs
Share
June 6, 2013 1:22:36 AM

Hello Tom's Hardware!
I'm building a micro atx build for someone who wants to emulate games most of the time. The major worry being PCX2and it's cpu usage, I'm torn between a higher clocked, presumably hotter AMD A10-5800K Trinity 3.8GHz <-click and a more expensive, slower clocked, probably cooler Intel Core i5-3350P Ivy Bridge 3.1GHz <-click.

I've tried looking on the internet and I can only find people arguing about the on-chip graphics, and I'll be buying a separate card anyhow! Then people say the i5 is more efficient with its clock so it is better, others yet say with the brute force of the Amd chip it will be better, I can't tell who is right!

Anyone with level-headed advice is welcome to comment please
a c 178 à CPUs
June 6, 2013 1:35:21 AM

The i5 is faster, because it's architecture is more effective, and thus handles more instructions per clock cycle. This more than cancels out the A10's faster clock speed.

The A10 has better integrated graphics, if you plan to use those. Both will be beaten by a mid-range dedicated GPU.

FYI: Richland (A10-6800K) is out and somewhat faster, but still gets toasted by a dual-core i3 with hyperthreading in some workloads - is it single- or multi-threaded?
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 189 à CPUs
June 6, 2013 1:46:13 AM

Toms front page they just tested the new Richland apu. The apu will game if you cash strapped. The test showed a older i3 with a gpu was still getting higher frame rates. The 100w vs 77w CPU power pretty lame the only issue with newer CPU is using a good sized heat sink with good fans to keep the noise down. Amd CPU the new Richland CPU do get a boot with newer high speed DDR ram. One thing also to know is game stress goes up as video size goes up. If he games at res under 1600 by 900 most any gpu will be fine as you hit that 1600 by 900 or higher you have to put money into the gpu to keep games playing good frame rates.
Share
Related resources
a b à CPUs
June 6, 2013 4:52:12 AM

Emulating games can be done on just about any modern processor. Even the lower end first generation AM1 platform should be able to handle all the way up to PS1 and dreamcast games.

AMD A10-5800K Trinity 3.8GHz Will do just fine.
m
0
l
June 6, 2013 7:34:17 PM

Someone Somewhere said:
The i5 is faster, because it's architecture is more effective, and thus handles more instructions per clock cycle. This more than cancels out the A10's faster clock speed.

The A10 has better integrated graphics, if you plan to use those. Both will be beaten by a mid-range dedicated GPU.

FYI: Richland (A10-6800K) is out and somewhat faster, but still gets toasted by a dual-core i3 with hyperthreading in some workloads - is it single- or multi-threaded?


The latest build of PSX2 is only threaded for two cores the creator said, But I will be loading up other games, like GTA4 that I'm sure will benefit from 4 cores. Thanks for the input guys. I am kind of cash strapped ($800 total or less I'm hoping)
Now i'm sort of looking between AMD's A8-6500 Richland 3.5GHz or i5-3570K Ivy Bridge 3.4GHz.

Is intel's chip going to give me 2x the preformance for 2x the price pretty much?

Edit:
Hell It looks like Intel's Core i3-3220 Ivy Bridge 3.3GHz might keep pace than the high end AMD stuff in number crunching and it's cheaper? I'm getting a separate gpu anyway. Did I read the charts right in that review smorizio?
m
0
l
a c 178 à CPUs
June 6, 2013 10:07:11 PM

AMD's APUs and FX chips are aimed at different markets - if you intend to get a dedicated GPU, an FX-6300 or 6350 is likely the better option.
m
0
l
!