Old gpu compared to 3570K integrated graphics.

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
E

elia127

Honorable
Jul 21, 2013
19
0
10,510
I have 2 builds in mind, 600 dollar budget. One is this: http://au.pcpartpicker.com/p/1lsXL
I don't have room in my budget for a card at the moment. I do have a Gigabyte GV-N210D2-1GI, I was wondering how it compares with the Intel 4000 graphics on the i5?
My other build option was covered in another post, here it is;
http://au.pcpartpicker.com/p/1l3TN

Edit: If I go the Intel route, I do plan on picking up a card later on, I am unsure when. It could be a while before I do, so I want to be able to do basic tasks etc in the meantime.
 
Solution
S
Probs years late for this, but the FX 6xxx would be work as good as an I5. Maybe not in single core preformances, but overall they're equal, or close to equal. Personally, I value price/Performance, an 130 for Fx 6300 vs 280 for an I5-K is kind of a no brainer. Only people I see that say AMD CPU's are "shit" are the people that seem to think Higher Price = Better thing. Like the Apple people.

1300 Aussie for a phone that would cost about 300-400 Aussie from another Vendor (Nokia).

The FX 6300 will not Bottleneck any GPU, its got alot of CPU power behind it. So why buy something that is overkill. That's my opinion at least.
Sort by date Sort by votes
S

Sovereign_Pwner

Honorable
Jun 14, 2013
75
0
10,660
The I5 Intergrated GPU IS better then the 210, alot better. The 210 compares to the Intel HD on the 1st Gen I5/I3.

I would personally say go with the AMD build of the FX-6300, but that's just my opinion. AMD guy here.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
E

elia127

Honorable
Jul 21, 2013
19
0
10,510


Really? Is there any reason besides AMD love? If the FX-6300 is right behind the 3570K in terms of (overclocked) performance then I would go AMD, but the i5's better performance is important, more important than a dedicated gpu at the moment. I'm not sure how much better the i5 is, especially considering the 100+ dollar difference in price.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
theonerm2

theonerm2

Splendid
Dec 28, 2009
4,113
81
25,140




Why is the CPU performance so important? What are you wanting to do with your computer?

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
E

elia127

Honorable
Jul 21, 2013
19
0
10,510


I don't really game, although that is probably due to the fact that I have a 5 year old laptop and a 6 year old PC, so with my new build gaming options will open up to me. Other than that, I'll be using it for studies (starting comp sci soon), media (music/movies).
My priority at the moment is to have a future-proof CPU, graphics aren't important, I'm happy to play new games on low if needed (I'm guessing the Intel 4000 graphics aren't that bad though).
As I said, if the FX 6300 is good compared to the i5 (maybe 80%?) then I can build that.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
theonerm2

theonerm2

Splendid
Dec 28, 2009
4,113
81
25,140
This is a decent AMD 6 core build with a dedicated graphics card so you can play games. http://au.pcpartpicker.com/p/1lvQY
It's similar to the AMD build that you posted but with a few differences. Overall cheaper and slightly better with a wireless network adapter.

You seem like you think you might want to game a little so I took time to put together a build that can game and sacrifices very little in other areas. Advantages for this build over the Intel one you picked out are much better gaming performance, 2x more RAM capacity, 2x more HDD space, and a much better power supply.

It fits your budget just as well as the Intel build does. The FX 6300 is the processor that I chose. The Core i5 3570K is around 30% faster on average though. In most tasks you won't be able to see a clear difference between the performance of most modern processors. And you surely won't be able to see that big of a difference just doing homework, simple programming, and for watching movies and listening to music. For those tasks alone it would be hard to justify spending more on a CPU. The price difference is about 94%... So you have to pay 94% more money for a Core i5 3570K to get an average of a 30% performance difference which will steadily drop over time in favor of the FX 6300 as more applications are designed to use more cores.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
E

elia127

Honorable
Jul 21, 2013
19
0
10,510


Nice build. I wasn't really taking the longevity of the FX 6300 into account, I probably should have considering the cores. Performance per dollar is much more important in a budget build than the slight edge the i5 would have, I suppose. Is cutting back on the motherboard going to have a big effect?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
theonerm2

theonerm2

Splendid
Dec 28, 2009
4,113
81
25,140


The main difference is that you will have no multi graphics card support with the cheaper motherboard. That's not that big of a deal though and most people actually recommend going with one card. Both motherboards have a 4+1 phase VRM design which limits overclocking a bit. The difference in performance between the two will be very small.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

Sovereign_Pwner

Honorable
Jun 14, 2013
75
0
10,660
Probs years late for this, but the FX 6xxx would be work as good as an I5. Maybe not in single core preformances, but overall they're equal, or close to equal. Personally, I value price/Performance, an 130 for Fx 6300 vs 280 for an I5-K is kind of a no brainer. Only people I see that say AMD CPU's are "shit" are the people that seem to think Higher Price = Better thing. Like the Apple people.

1300 Aussie for a phone that would cost about 300-400 Aussie from another Vendor (Nokia).

The FX 6300 will not Bottleneck any GPU, its got alot of CPU power behind it. So why buy something that is overkill. That's my opinion at least.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom