I am currently looking to build a PC with all of my parts set, but I am unsure about the CPU. I am looking to get an 8150 to run things like Crysis 3, but I'm unsure about both sides of the whole arguement. Could someone explain what all of the pros and cons are.? All I know is that the AMD has more cores for photoshop/streaming and a higher clock for cheaper, but apparently Intel CPU's have better overclocking ability. I'm mainly not sure about the benefit of Intel's hyperthreading and stuff.
Do I need Intel (over AMD) for gaming?
- Thread starter RoJoBro13
- Start date
random stalker
Honorable
- Feb 3, 2013
- 764
- 0
- 11,360
pros of an intel i5 /4 cores/>
- lower TDP which makes the CPU easier to cool
- massive lead in singlethread and lightly multithreaded apps - aka internets, games, etc...
pros of AMD FX8350 /4x2 cores/
- price
- slight advantage in heavily threaded apps - aka cinebench, rendering...
> HT - well, enabling it doubles the dore count and you get aroud 30-40% increase in power /if the application can use it/.
> overclocking - both are fine (K series for intel). As a general rule of thumb, AMD needs to run at at least 30% greater clock than Intel to remain competive.
- lower TDP which makes the CPU easier to cool
- massive lead in singlethread and lightly multithreaded apps - aka internets, games, etc...
pros of AMD FX8350 /4x2 cores/
- price
- slight advantage in heavily threaded apps - aka cinebench, rendering...
> HT - well, enabling it doubles the dore count and you get aroud 30-40% increase in power /if the application can use it/.
> overclocking - both are fine (K series for intel). As a general rule of thumb, AMD needs to run at at least 30% greater clock than Intel to remain competive.
CPU and GPU
Honorable
- May 18, 2013
- 97
- 0
- 10,640
With the next gen consoles coming out with AMD based CPUs. I theory games could be betterly fashioned for AMD based systems.
jaguarskx
Titan
- Apr 19, 2006
- 27,979
- 3
- 84,965
Perhaps, the following benchmark can help. The review was written back in Feb 2013 so that's why you don't see any Haswell or Richland CPUs/APUs listed.
Source: http://www.techspot.com/review/642-crysis-3-performance/page6.html
jaguarskx
Titan
- Apr 19, 2006
- 27,979
- 3
- 84,965
If you are curious about CPU scaling in games then you can check out several of TechSpot's CPU scaling reviews in the following link. Scroll down to the Gaming GPU/CPU Performance section.
http://www.techspot.com/guides-gaming.shtml
http://www.techspot.com/guides-gaming.shtml
random stalker
Honorable
- Feb 3, 2013
- 764
- 0
- 11,360
well, that AMD hardware can be easily replaced with intel+nvidia 
http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Xbox-One-Games-E3-Were-Running-Windows-7-With-Nvidia-GTX-Cards-56737.html
http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Xbox-One-Games-E3-Were-Running-Windows-7-With-Nvidia-GTX-Cards-56737.html
davidgermain
Distinguished
- Nov 18, 2005
- 201
- 0
- 18,690
Personally, it does not really matter unless you are looking for a last few percent of performance. In a couple of years everything will change when AMD gets the Xbox One and PS4 fully running with developers behind them.
When this happens you will want to upgrade to get all the cool shiny shiny, so at the moment build the best you can afford and what you will be happy with.
And lot's of gaming these days is limited by your network latency.
When this happens you will want to upgrade to get all the cool shiny shiny, so at the moment build the best you can afford and what you will be happy with.
And lot's of gaming these days is limited by your network latency.
L Helps
Honorable
- Jan 4, 2013
- 737
- 0
- 11,060
earl45
Distinguished
- Nov 10, 2009
- 434
- 0
- 18,780
8350rocks :
In case you missed the benchmarks posted above, these are at High settings...
Remarkably, the results are actually even closer!
If your system didn't run it well, then it was user error.
This chart show me why AMD charge so little for the FX-8350, it has
4 more core's then the i5 3550 and running at 500 to 700Mhz faster,
with little to no gains in Avg. FPS and for all the extra's it has over the
i5 3550 it lose 10 FPS on Min. FPS, this is just PATHETIC!
8350rocks
Distinguished
- Mar 14, 2013
- 6,235
- 0
- 18,460
earl45 :
8350rocks :
In case you missed the benchmarks posted above, these are at High settings...
Remarkably, the results are actually even closer!
If your system didn't run it well, then it was user error.
This chart show me why AMD charge so little for the FX-8350, it has
4 more core's then the i5 3550 and running at 500 to 700Mhz faster,
with little to no gains in Avg. FPS and for all the extra's it has over the
i5 3550 it lose 10 FPS on Min. FPS, this is just PATHETIC!
That was Tom's test...several other sites did not record a similar discrepancy.
sdogg1m
Honorable
- Jun 10, 2013
- 167
- 0
- 10,710
Answer to the OPs question:
Do you need Intel for gaming? No! AMD high end processors can tackle the latest games.
The main advantages of Intel are fasting processing and lower TDP. However, you pay more for the processor. Intel's fastest processor costs $150 more than AMDs. Also, the motherboards for Intel cost more on average.
Enthusiasts usually don't mind paying extra money for the "latest and greatest" but if you are budget conscious then AMD gives more processor per dollar.
Do you need Intel for gaming? No! AMD high end processors can tackle the latest games.
The main advantages of Intel are fasting processing and lower TDP. However, you pay more for the processor. Intel's fastest processor costs $150 more than AMDs. Also, the motherboards for Intel cost more on average.
Enthusiasts usually don't mind paying extra money for the "latest and greatest" but if you are budget conscious then AMD gives more processor per dollar.
earl45
Distinguished
- Nov 10, 2009
- 434
- 0
- 18,780
8350rocks :
earl45 :
8350rocks :
In case you missed the benchmarks posted above, these are at High settings...
Remarkably, the results are actually even closer!
If your system didn't run it well, then it was user error.
This chart show me why AMD charge so little for the FX-8350, it has
4 more core's then the i5 3550 and running at 500 to 700Mhz faster,
with little to no gains in Avg. FPS and for all the extra's it has over the
i5 3550 it lose 10 FPS on Min. FPS, this is just PATHETIC!
That was Tom's test...several other sites did not record a similar discrepancy.
I was only commenting on what you posted, nothing more.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
Question Help in troubleshooting possible graphics card issue?
- Started by nort99
- Replies: 3
-
Question RX 6600 visual glitches right after upgrading to it- Started by Wamek
- Replies: 4
-
News US sanctions transform China into legacy chip production juggernaut — production jumped 40% in Q1 2024- Started by Admin
- Replies: 35
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram