Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

8 Core steamroller vs i5-4670k

Tags:
  • Core
  • CPUs
  • Intel i5
Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 30, 2013 2:16:02 PM

Which would be better for gaming and video editing

More about : core steamroller 4670k

a b à CPUs
July 30, 2013 2:22:47 PM

The steamroller hasn't been released yet so nobody can really answer that question.
m
0
l
Related resources

Best solution

August 10, 2013 6:20:10 PM

With all of the information that exists regarding Steamroller, one can speculate that an 8-core Steamroller CPU would definitely outperform an i5-4670K in terms of video editing. It has double the cores, with each core having IPC improvements of 20-30% from the previous version. Most video editing software utilizes multi-core, thus the Steamroller advantage there.

With regard to gaming, it would really depend on the game. If the game supports more than 4 cores, yes, the Steamroller chip would outperform the Intel, however, if the game is limited to just 4 cores, then the Intel chip would outperform the Steamroller.

Although Steamroller cores will have improved IPC over the previous generation (again, 20-30%), it will still be under Haswell IPC at the same clock, however, as we have seen with the FX9590, AMD is pushing clocks as high as they can, and with the higher clocks, the IPC is catching up to Intel. Even with the older Piledriver architecture behind the FX9590, it's single core IPC has risen with the higher clock rates and almost catches it up with Sandy Bridge performance and again, that is with their older architecture. Given up to 20-30% improvement with Steamroller, we can expect performance to surpass Sandy Bridge and possibly even Ivy Bridge, giving performance somewhere between Ivy and Haswell.

With the given numbers we have from existing parts, we can calculate a speculative outcome. For example, with the FX9590 scoring 1.34 in Cinebench 11.5 Single Thread we can add 20-30% performance to that which would give 1.61-1.74. This would theoretically put Steamroller anywhere from just under Ivy Bridge, to outperforming Haswell (stock clocks).

So, if and that's a big "if", AMD holds true to their 30% performance increase over Piledriver, then yes, Steamroller would be competitive with Intel even at a single core level and considering that video editing uses multi-cores and that the future of video games will be based around 8-core AMD parts, I would actually say that an 8-core steamroller would be the best choice.

Here is an article backing up the idea that AMD 8-core parts are better for futureproofing a PC over a 4 core Intel part.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-future...

However, if AMD does not release news of an 8-core Steamroller CPU for the future, even I, myself, will be picking up a 4770K. It all depends on what AMD will be doing in the future and hopefully they reveal this information soon.
Share
August 11, 2013 10:09:12 AM

Games past and some present rely on single threaded performance. Some games present and all games future will rely on multi-threaded performance and again, that is where AMD has an advantage over Intel. They own the entire console industry and thus, the video game market, and gaming will end up being optimized for AMD 8-core CPU's in the future. To future-proof a system today for video encoding and gaming, one should get an 8-core AMD processor. The article I posted stated that EVERY video game developer that was posed with the question of what is better for future-proof gaming, and it was the FX8350, not the Intel 3570K. It's not a bunch of "rubbish", just because it doesn't agree with Hajifur's rants, it's a decent article, which displays many game developers opinions. Who should one trust, the people developing games now and for the future, or some Intel fanatic who refuses to accept that AMD actually has an advantage? I know who I've been ignoring and it won't change anytime soon.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
August 11, 2013 10:22:42 AM

Intel has 10 times the amount of money and employees that AMD has so obviously Intel is better, but who cares because AMD is still good and they keep the prices of Intel CPU's down. I don't know why there is always so much argument about this when your GPU is going to make a bigger difference in gaming than the CPU, and AMD makes GPU's that are about 1000 times better than Intels.
m
0
l
a c 210 à CPUs
August 11, 2013 3:01:12 PM

mlscrow said:
With all of the information that exists regarding Steamroller, one can speculate that an 8-core Steamroller CPU would definitely outperform an i5-4670K in terms of video editing. It has double the cores, with each core having IPC improvements of 20-30% from the previous version. Most video editing software utilizes multi-core, thus the Steamroller advantage there.

With regard to gaming, it would really depend on the game. If the game supports more than 4 cores, yes, the Steamroller chip would outperform the Intel, however, if the game is limited to just 4 cores, then the Intel chip would outperform the Steamroller.

Although Steamroller cores will have improved IPC over the previous generation (again, 20-30%), it will still be under Haswell IPC at the same clock, however, as we have seen with the FX9590, AMD is pushing clocks as high as they can, and with the higher clocks, the IPC is catching up to Intel. Even with the older Piledriver architecture behind the FX9590, it's single core IPC has risen with the higher clock rates and almost catches it up with Sandy Bridge performance and again, that is with their older architecture. Given up to 20-30% improvement with Steamroller, we can expect performance to surpass Sandy Bridge and possibly even Ivy Bridge, giving performance somewhere between Ivy and Haswell.

With the given numbers we have from existing parts, we can calculate a speculative outcome. For example, with the FX9590 scoring 1.34 in Cinebench 11.5 Single Thread we can add 20-30% performance to that which would give 1.61-1.74. This would theoretically put Steamroller anywhere from just under Ivy Bridge, to outperforming Haswell (stock clocks).

So, if and that's a big "if", AMD holds true to their 30% performance increase over Piledriver, then yes, Steamroller would be competitive with Intel even at a single core level and considering that video editing uses multi-cores and that the future of video games will be based around 8-core AMD parts, I would actually say that an 8-core steamroller would be the best choice.

Here is an article backing up the idea that AMD 8-core parts are better for futureproofing a PC over a 4 core Intel part.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-future...

However, if AMD does not release news of an 8-core Steamroller CPU for the future, even I, myself, will be picking up a 4770K. It all depends on what AMD will be doing in the future and hopefully they reveal this information soon.


+1

@ OP: Listen to this guy.

hafijur said:
miscrow amd piledriver fx series are one of the worst cpus for gaming as games require good single thread performance to calculate things quickly.

Look here similar clock speed intel half the cores due to like 2.1x better ipc can be seen on superpi and on those benchmarks the i5 4670k beats the fx8320 or matches it with half the cores. So games won't magically become better. If steamroller improves 10-15% better ipc it will still be about 85-90% lower ipc to intel cpus.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/837?vs=698


Not this Intel troll.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
August 11, 2013 3:50:57 PM

Give it up hafijur, everyone knows Intel is better, but not that much better like you say. Tomshardware is suppose to be about helping people, not arguing and praising some big evil corporation. Maybe you can start your own religion and worship Intel.
m
0
l
a c 210 à CPUs
August 11, 2013 4:02:41 PM

hafijur said:


You are really quoting a 14 year old obsolete benchmark as if it has any relevance at all? LOL!!!
m
0
l
a c 210 à CPUs
August 11, 2013 4:18:35 PM

hafijur said:
The 4670k with half the cores beats an fx8320 at a lot of multithreaded tasks at similar clock speed. Reason is performance per core intel are just over 2x better. This shows up in super pi and translates in to what we see in the below link. Intels haswell cpus do just over 2x the workload of these piledriver cpus with half the cores at same clock speed hence why the below benchmarks show this on multithreaded 4 cores vs 8 the 4670k holds it own.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/837?vs=698


So you're saying a 50% increase in price over the 8320 is worth a 15-20% performance gain?

perf/dollar: 8320 > 4670k

m
0
l
a b à CPUs
August 11, 2013 6:21:44 PM

hafijur said:
Perfomance per watt the i5 4670k is around 2.1x better and has its own igpu to. So the fx9590 what a 20% performance gain over an fx8350 with same technology is worth you guessed it 5x the price or 500% to emphasize it.

Imagine intel selling a haswell i7 4770k and putting the clock speed to turbo to 5ghz and base clock 4.7ghz and charging £600 lol. They used to do that with the p4 or HT dual core Pentium extreme editions but this amd is a new level of taking the mick. They are selling the same product for basically a rip off with memory card type packaging to add insult. Imagine if intel did this you will be trolling how greedy intel are and how unethical it is to do this. This is when you know amd are desperate and don't care about consumers. Some people will actually buy it seeing 5ghz but its slower then a stock i7 4770k.

I hope steamroller amd have a suprise in terms of actual cpu performance but amd have seemed to hit a wall last 4 years with little innovation and hsa is all they have to save them and apus and console market.


The whole haswell series is nothing more than a rebranded ivy bridge, and Intel released it like it was something new that everyone needs. AMD, NVidia and Intel are all guilty of this. AMD is just looking to see if anyone is a sucker so they can make a few dollars.
m
0
l
August 12, 2013 1:04:11 AM

Haifjur, give it up, seriously. As all the video game developers have said, an 8-core AMD CPU is better for futureproofing a system today for gaming in the future. Maybe today, most games favor the single thread performance, but going forward, games will be favoring multi-thread performance, where AMD beats Intel, considering their costs. There is nothing you can say that will change that fact. An FX8350 is $179. A 4770K is $339. Intel costs almost twice as much.

As you can see on this site, AMD is very competitive with Intel in terms of performance, however, once you take value into consideration, AMD by far, absolutely destroys Intel in terms of value.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8350+Eig...

In fact, AMD is almost twice as good as Intel in terms of Price to Performance ratios, especially the FX8320
m
0
l
August 12, 2013 2:36:07 AM

Hafijur. We know that intel is the best there BUT every great product has flaws. Like Intel using cheap soldering on there cpus THATS WHY people cant reach a high overclock unlike AMD that you can push an 8350 at 5ghz.

I know intel is better in SINGLE THREADED PERFORMANCE. Im really unbiased here.

Did you know that HASWELL has bad UPGRADES. Like Onboard GPU? Who uses that?! If laptops it would be nice BUT we use desktop FOR BETTER Performance.
And THATS WHY WE BUY GPU. And AMD is really an 8-core not a 4 core with hyperthreading.
Why did intel increase there onboard gpu? To catch up with AMD's APU.

You should do your homework better. And i know that the 9590 is a bad move for AMD. But they want to achieve that intel doesnt have.

And that benchmark you post. I would trust more if it came from Tom's HW, Cpu benchmark and alot more popular websites.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
August 12, 2013 3:47:00 AM

About that benchmark...

Read this.

Hafijur is a renowned troll. You need only look at his post history to realize that. Check out that 3930K VS 9350 thread for prime examples.
m
0
l
August 12, 2013 5:11:41 AM

Hafijur. Do you think power consumption is noticeable in real world problems?

Like spending 20 bucks more for haswell (except for future upgrade)?

Lemme tell you. You will just save like 1-5 bucks a year! People dont really see a BIG JUMP on this. Like people give a fuck on power consumption. Seriously!

For laptops. It is good! Because more battery life.

Unless you compare this Haswell on a 9590. Then you will see a difference.

You are just a troll. An Steamroller hasnt been release it. -_-
m
0
l
August 12, 2013 10:42:35 AM

Hajifur, you've lost almost all credibility with your ridiculous posts. All you've managed to do is show the entire Tom's community that what you have to say is completely worthless. If your goal was to promote Intel, I can almost guarantee that you've managed to do just the opposite as now your words fall on purposely deaf ears. GRATS!!!
m
0
l
August 12, 2013 10:55:35 AM

I'm still laughing on that "Revolutionary Power Consumption" :lol: 

for Laptops its great. but for Desktops. NO! :lol: 
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
August 12, 2013 11:48:10 AM

Yeah he's a clown. Every time there is any kind of discussion about Intel vs AMD he jumps in out of nowhere and starts speaking nonsense about power consumption, Comparing 22nm with less cores to 32nm with more cores, obviously the smaller lithography less cores will win.
m
0
l
a c 210 à CPUs
August 12, 2013 12:02:55 PM

MajinCry said:
About that benchmark...

Read this.

Hafijur is a renowned troll. You need only look at his post history to realize that. Check out that 3930K VS 9350 thread for prime examples.


mlscrow said:
Hajifur, you've lost almost all credibility with your ridiculous posts. All you've managed to do is show the entire Tom's community that what you have to say is completely worthless. If your goal was to promote Intel, I can almost guarantee that you've managed to do just the opposite as now your words fall on purposely deaf ears. GRATS!!!


Genzo said:
I'm still laughing on that "Revolutionary Power Consumption" :lol: 

for Laptops its great. but for Desktops. NO! :lol: 


swilczak said:
Yeah he's a clown. Every time there is any kind of discussion about Intel vs AMD he jumps in out of nowhere and starts speaking nonsense about power consumption, Comparing 22nm with less cores to 32nm with more cores, obviously the smaller lithography less cores will win.


+1
m
0
l
August 12, 2013 12:20:06 PM

Ivy Bridge-E is much better than HASWELL.

I would go for a 4820K and the chipset is x79.

would just wait and buy it on Oct or Nov.
m
0
l
!