Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

3570k or 8350 Mobo

Tags:
  • Gaming
  • Intel
  • AMD
  • CPUs
  • Motherboards
  • Memory
Last response: in Motherboards
Share
July 5, 2013 8:54:29 PM

I'm getting all kinds of overwhelmed upgrading my CPU/Mobo.

This is purely for gaming, I was looking to spend ~$300, give or take--If an extra $100 will get me a longer lasting build, I'll gladly drop it to not have to worry about it again.

Currently:

965 with M4A77TD
Sapphire 7950 OC'd
2x2gb generic RAM, 2x4gb Kingston Ram, both 1333
1tb HDD and looking to put an SSD in soon (depending on how much this costs lol)
1DVD-rom
Dual Monitors (one for videos while playing some games, not always on)
Sniper Midtower case

I've been looking at either basically getting the 8350 with a strong Mobo, since it will most likely be compatible with coming CPU upgrades as well; or the 3570k with a relatively cheap Mobo that will allow for mild CPU/GPU Overclocking to offset the higher Intel cost and need to buy a new Mobo on next upgrade. I'm too paranoid to do anything but mild overclocking until the CPU is about dead (which I would be doing now to the 965 but the Mobo is just not working well with it).

As of right now, the closest I've found to what I would want/need in either setup is:

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/76YF (the intel with an AsRock z77 Pro3)

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/lf0j (The AMD with a Gigabyte 990fxa-UD5)

Are there any big downsides to either one, a better board (either in the same price range or worth the extra cash in noticeable performance or longevity) and am I missing anything else (outside of a fan, I've been waiting on that until I figure out the rest lol).

::edit:: Forgot the Bundle I was looking at from newegg: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?Ite... AMD with ASRock 990FX Extreme4

More about : 3570k 8350 mobo

a c 655 4 Gaming
a c 254 å Intel
a c 290 À AMD
a c 602 à CPUs
a c 1734 V Motherboard
July 5, 2013 8:59:43 PM

Go with the 3570K and the Rock, better CPU, better performance, better OC, handles more and faster DRAM, for gaming (or anything else, except maybe video rendering) the 3570K beats the 8350 hands down
m
0
l

Best solution

a b 4 Gaming
a b å Intel
a c 79 à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 6, 2013 12:58:32 AM

going either way, you'll end up with comparable performance. AsRock's extreme and pro series do tend to heat up a wee bit more than competition especially on the 1155 socket "K" cpus. Taking into account the fact that you think you may be ready to go for an upgrade later on, AM3+ will be compatible with steam roller. I personally do not believe that strongly in upgrade paths.

Yes the 3570K will be faster than 8350 in some titles and as you've already stated that this is a purely gaming build, there is no reason to account for any multi-threading advantage that the 8350 offers but the fact remains that gaming with that card with either of these cpus, you will be sitting well above 60 fps. Unless you use a 120 Hz monitor, you wont see any difference between the gameplay on either of these cpus.

A 990fx UD5 will however bring in tons of more features. Both cpus will handle the same amount and kinds of ram but as you already have ram kits, I doubt you'll buy new ones. Between these two cpus and considering the build's purpose, I'd go with whichever combo is cheaper.

you can refer to this review: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8350-vishera-rev...

here is an older similar thread: http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-1674468/intel-co...
Share
Related resources
July 6, 2013 5:33:45 AM

Is there a better motherboard I should be aiming for with the intel if the rock mobo has heat issues?

Honestly heat is a bit of an issue for me, I like to keep it as low as possible.

With the amd, what kind of features are there with the ud5 (was also thinking about the saber tooth) that I'd miss out on going with a cheaper mobo and/or the intel combo? It's hard to tell how much real life performance most of their features actually add.

::edit:: I will basically never use sli/crossfire, prefer solo cards, so that's not a feature that matters for me--would a m5a97 work just as well then?
m
0
l
a c 477 4 Gaming
a c 122 å Intel
a c 425 À AMD
a c 1012 à CPUs
a c 1384 V Motherboard
July 6, 2013 7:37:54 AM

Gigabyte 990fxa-UD5
m
0
l
a c 655 4 Gaming
a c 254 å Intel
a c 290 À AMD
a c 602 à CPUs
a c 1734 V Motherboard
July 6, 2013 7:38:30 AM

Never heard of the these so called heat issues, I run this very mobo, in AZ, at 4.7 24/7 a day with 32GB of 2400 DRAM, and system idles in low 30's, and as far as DRAM goes the top of the line 8350 is rated for up to 1866 at 1 stick per channel, 4 sticks drop to 1600/1333 a typical 3570K will run eaisly 4 sticks of 2133 and generally up to 2400, they also utilize the bandwidth much better
m
0
l
a c 477 4 Gaming
a c 122 å Intel
a c 425 À AMD
a c 1012 à CPUs
a c 1384 V Motherboard
July 6, 2013 7:39:26 AM

Never heard of the these so called heat issues? Me neither.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b å Intel
a c 79 à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 6, 2013 8:39:54 AM

"Heat Issues?" I hear you guys... that is why I was very careful in using the words " wee bit" but my bad(review knowledge, not experience talking here) if I conveyed the wrong idea to OP.... good thing Blackbird is here. He runs both of those chips...he can share his experience which would be a great thing

-Satyam
m
0
l
July 6, 2013 10:35:14 AM

Thanks guys, feel a lot more confident in those choices now. It's gonna come down to just which I can find a better deal on now.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b å Intel
a c 79 à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 7, 2013 10:58:06 PM

Tradesman1 said:
Never heard of the these so called heat issues, I run this very mobo, in AZ, at 4.7 24/7 a day with 32GB of 2400 DRAM, and system idles in low 30's, and as far as DRAM goes the top of the line 8350 is rated for up to 1866 at 1 stick per channel, 4 sticks drop to 1600/1333 a typical 3570K will run eaisly 4 sticks of 2133 and generally up to 2400, they also utilize the bandwidth much better


This is not an accurate description of the memory issue between FX and Core i cpus.
Officially 8350 supports 1866 MHz of ram and IB supports 1600. In this review: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8350-core-i7-377...
the cpus ran 2200 CAS9 ram @ 4.4 GHz stable. So it is wrong to say that the FX cpus see diminishing ram speed performance with more number of slots populated.

What is true however is that FX Integrated memory controller (IMC) is not as strong as intel's when it comes to total memory throughput. In a review here at Tom's : http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/do-it-yourself-buil...
The FX IMC operating at 1600 was beaten by Intel's IMC at 1333. but it is not an issue related to support rather it is an architectural drawback. In this review, the FX had to OC'ed to match the intels memory throughput performance.
m
0
l
a c 655 4 Gaming
a c 254 å Intel
a c 290 À AMD
a c 602 à CPUs
a c 1734 V Motherboard
July 7, 2013 11:12:38 PM

Officially yes, and the testing by AMD was done with 4 GB sticks, and it's up to 1 stick per channel, yes there are some very good 8350 chips out there, in fact the ones sent to reviewers are hand picked. If you look at AMDs BIOS and kernel guide you'll also find that the CPU was intended to be released at a lower core speed, it's actually native to 1333 DRAM, they raised the core clock (pre OCed so to say) to be able to run 1866, from there the speed it can support drops: see their own freq guide they released under pressure from many about their claims of running native 1866:

http://support.amd.com/us/kbarticles/Pages/ddr3memoryfr...

this is also the reason they normally have a max OC of about 1GHz, where the 3570K tends to be more like 1.5GHz
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b å Intel
a c 79 à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 7, 2013 11:41:05 PM

Valuable info Tradesman but in the link you provided, while talking about the 1866 support, with OCZ ram's example on a Crosshair V Formula, AMD has clearly stated that it is the motherboard that is limiting the 1866 operation to 2 dimms. They say that using more DIMMS would require the speeds to go down but from reading it, it seems more like a mobo limitation.
Do correct me if I am wrong.
m
0
l
a c 655 4 Gaming
a c 254 å Intel
a c 290 À AMD
a c 602 à CPUs
a c 1734 V Motherboard
July 8, 2013 8:25:37 AM

Doesn't matter which mobo, that's the freq limitations of the CPU itself, the FX line is actually native 1333, rather than release at the 'expected' lower multiplier of around 34 (would have been 3.4GHz) the set the base 40 or 4.0GHz, a preset OC, so it would be able to handle 1866 at 2 sticks to try and 1 up Intel and make the AMDs 'look' superior, but it backfired, many of us hammered AMD till they changed their advertising...The basically pushed them so high there is no real DRAM headroom for faster sticks
m
0
l
!