AMD guy Switching to Intel

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
C

Crazy_Ivan55

Distinguished
Apr 15, 2011
95
0
18,660
Hello my current PC setup is not cutting it in alot of games. I have a AMD FX 8320 on a ASRock 970 Pro3 with a XFX Radeon HD 7950 black edition and I want a more fitting CPU especially for WoW, Skyrim, and BF3. My CPU also uses far too much power for my 600 watt PSU.

The CPU's I am considering are these mainly: Intel i7 3820 which needs a more expensive LGA 2011 board and compatible cooler, an Intel i7 3770k which is on the high end of my budget, or the Intel i5 4670k which I can get a high end Mobo with the lower price.

What I'm asking is which of these CPU's is best for Gaming and possibly becoming a Youtuber later.

I am not buying another AMD cpu, even when my frame rate is higher than my friends i7 2600k, it looks slower im assuming due to skipped frames or something, bottom line it doesnt look smooth when it should.

Thanks for help
 
Solution
ElMoIsEviL
One thing I'd like to mention on the Multi tasking thing and people linking to this article here: http://techreport.com/review/23750/amd-fx-8350-processor-reviewed/9

You see AMDs FX-8350 struggling, seemingly, under a multi tasking scenario. A few things wrong with this picture. Skyrim is a DX9 game that uses two Cores at most. Skyrim also makes heavy usage of Intel optimizations (as is written on my Skyrim box). This game runs better on Intel period. From the same article: http://techreport.com/review/23750/amd-fx-8350-processor-reviewed/5.

So the 8350 goes from 77FPS to 62FPS.
The Intel 3770K/3570K both go from 104FPS to 86 and 84FPS respectively.

8350 has a 15FPS loss
3770K has a 18FPS loss
3570K has a 20FPS loss.

99th percentile...
Sort by date Sort by votes
C

Crazy_Ivan55

Distinguished
Apr 15, 2011
95
0
18,660
For BF3 it is but if im on 64 player it will drop to 30 with lowered settings and call me spoiled but it hurts my eyes at that framerate, and the settings are lowered. For skyrim it runs great unmodded until i get to whiterun or another city and it drops to 35-40 when in the wild its around 70 fps... and i generally want higher fps anyway.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
C

Crazy_Ivan55

Distinguished
Apr 15, 2011
95
0
18,660
Ive tried overclocking it but when i get to 4ghz its using too much power and turns windows aero off, also stutters heavily until i restart. But I have looked at the benchmarks and I simply want an intel cpu for the higher framerate in cpu intensive games

Thank you guys for responding!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
computernewb

computernewb

Distinguished
Aug 9, 2010
1,025
0
19,360


in that case the i5 overclocked should be just fine
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1654043

by the way what resolution are you playing at?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Tabris DarkPeace

Tabris DarkPeace

Honorable
Jul 3, 2013
683
0
11,360
Changing to a Core i5 (not Core i7) will make a huge difference in minimum frame rate, and that's the only frame rate that counts.
- If you're multi-tasking, and the other tasks are hammering the CPU then you do not want HyperThreading or half-arsed cores with resource contention problems (despite AMD's best efforts at rebranding a web farm server CPU as a desktop 'extreme gamer' one).
- That said, the old Athlon's and Opteron's were great... the new ones just plain suck.

The minimum frame rate should be about 38.6% of the average which most people never consider.
Your weighted minimum frame rates (lowest percentiles) would typically be much higher, at ~ 55% of your average.

Peak frame rates don't matter anywhere near as much; many limit their frame-rate to 300fps or less to avoid sags in performance.
- The average will be lower as the number of frames rendered so quickly drops, but it lifts the minimum fps scenario's, etc.

It's also nice if every frame is rendered within +/-25% of the time taken to 'honestly' render the preceding frame, at lower frame rates this is far more perceivable than just getting under 48fps.
- Constantly fluxing between 40fps and 48fps is also very bad for the eyes, even though these are both below current refresh rates.
- Most gamers can feel this before they can see it.
- AMD's x/2 : x 'fake core' CPU's have major problems in this dept.

Once you get going you should be able to visually discern the difference between 64fps and 80fps in multiplayer FPS's within about 20 minutes of gameplay.
- Both of these frame-rates are above the refresh rate, but both are under the polling rate of USB mice. (125 to 128 for most mice; some do 500 or more).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
C

Cazalan

Distinguished
Sep 4, 2011
2,672
0
20,810


Sounds like the Corsair A70 can't keep up with the OC.

Try one of these with 8 heatpipes (instead of 4) and horizontal vapor chamber.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835103189

Worst case scenario you reuse the HSF on your new Intel system. It fits all.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Tabris DarkPeace

Tabris DarkPeace

Honorable
Jul 3, 2013
683
0
11,360
If the CPU cannot be kept cool for more than 3 seconds at peak loads on a given heatsink you're overclocking so much that it will begin to throttle itself back.

That said, I congratulate you on deciding to go with an Intel system for the better minimum frame rates regardless.

AMD's time in the sun was when they acquired the DEC Alpha EV6 and related research, since the days of the Athlon 64 / Opteron vs Pentium 4 they have really slacked off.

Rewarding AMD by purchasing their lower end gear is not going to encourage them to invest in R&D!
- The die hard fans can keep them afloat, but this only hurts the industry as a whole since the company is not going to change direction; instead they want PC's to become more like consoles and 'drip feed' R&D improvements.
- The AMD worth funding existed between 1998 and 2006; they're gone now.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
C

Crazy_Ivan55

Distinguished
Apr 15, 2011
95
0
18,660


Thanks but I'm already going with a water cooled solution for this new setup, either the Corsair H60 or H80 because I probably wont need a 240mm radiator cooler. Also It is keeping the temps good because even when it turns aero off the overclock stays on and I do a temp reading after so many hours and at idle (which is where the problems start) it was still room temp, about 80 degrees Fahrenheit, at load I was getting about a 5-10 degree increase but was unplayable due to the stutter.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
C

Crazy_Ivan55

Distinguished
Apr 15, 2011
95
0
18,660


Thank you for your insight, these are the answers I am looking for. However I would still like to know if its even worth getting an i7 Ivy Bridge or i7 Sandy Bridge-E over the i5 since I plan on FRAPSing/video editing and live streaming. Because my budget is around $600 as of now, feel free to post any alternate CPU's that I could look into. The budget is for a CPU and Motherboard.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
C

Crazy_Ivan55

Distinguished
Apr 15, 2011
95
0
18,660


Yea I have noticed this when I do LAN parties with my friends, and one of my friends has a i7 2600k with a GTX 680. So what we did is we both played team fortress 2 and found 2 places in singleplayer where the fps was equivalent on both our systems with the same exact settings and his looked twice as smooth as mine even though we had the same FPS. We tried switching monitors and it was the same story.

Even his laptop (ASUS G75) looked smoother on BF3 and it has a i7 3630QM @ 2.4GHz, a mobile processor!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ElMoIsEviL

ElMoIsEviL

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2006
2,361
1
19,965
One thing I'd like to mention on the Multi tasking thing and people linking to this article here: http://techreport.com/review/23750/amd-fx-8350-processor-reviewed/9

You see AMDs FX-8350 struggling, seemingly, under a multi tasking scenario. A few things wrong with this picture. Skyrim is a DX9 game that uses two Cores at most. Skyrim also makes heavy usage of Intel optimizations (as is written on my Skyrim box). This game runs better on Intel period. From the same article: http://techreport.com/review/23750/amd-fx-8350-processor-reviewed/5.

So the 8350 goes from 77FPS to 62FPS.
The Intel 3770K/3570K both go from 104FPS to 86 and 84FPS respectively.

8350 has a 15FPS loss
3770K has a 18FPS loss
3570K has a 20FPS loss.

99th percentile frame times show some interesting results as well in this same scenario.

3770K/3570K have a 17.2/18.3ms 99th percentile frame time when running Skyrim alone
3770K/3570K have a 22.7/24ms 99th percentile frame time when multitasking
A difference of 5.5/5.7ms respectively

8350 has a 27ms 99th percentile frame time when running Skyrim alone
8350 has a 32.7 99th percentile frame time when multitasking
A difference of 5.7ms

Basically the FX-8350 takes less of a hit even-though this is an Intel favoring Title. The author of the article seems to be oblivious of this fact as he doesn't even mention it.

And the last aspect of the review is meaningless as they admit that it was a single frame in which the FX took 50% more time than the Core i5/i7s which is responsible for the result.

So as a fact check. AMD 8350 cpus DO perform better at multi tasking than the i5 3570K or i7 3770K (at least when running an Intel favored Game while transcoding and surfing the web). In that they take less of a hit. Even the 3770Ks hyperthreading can't help it take less of a loss than the FX-8350.

What does this mean for games which, unlike Skyrim, use up to 4 cores (or more)? "Simple answer the FX-8350!" you say. No not so simple. Intel's 3570K and 3770K take a larger hit once a Dual Core game is run. If you run a 4 core game the 3570K will be taxed that's for sure. Both the FX-8350 and i7 3770K will have some resources left over but the FX-8350s FPU resources may be taxed. So like the 3770K, the FX-8350 will have execution resources available but not FPU. What will determine which takes the larger loss is basically the answer to the age old question... SMT vs. CMT. I'm afraid I don't have an answer to this one (don't feel like looking for one but if someone is be my guest).

Peace.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
ElMoIsEviL

ElMoIsEviL

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2006
2,361
1
19,965


Please read the post above. It answers your multi tasking claim (with your own link no less).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
C

Crazy_Ivan55

Distinguished
Apr 15, 2011
95
0
18,660


Alright I'm having a hard time understanding this. What I got from this is that if you use an intel CPU it is being more heavily taxed than the AMD CPU because it has less cores? Well yea but that's not my issue here, the issue is that the AMD CPU's have slower individual cores, so having more cores for gaming becomes null especially if it only uses 2 threads. Also I know for a fact that the CPU latency is having an effect due to the test I did with my friend. So regardless of what you think of AMD, I am disappointed with my current AMD FX Bulldozer CPU and would like a Intel CPU (since individual cores are faster) this coming 4th quarter of 2013. Honestly due to your wording I cannot tell if you are for or against AMD, Intel, or the reviewer of the article, so sorry if I don't understand your wording.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
griptwister

griptwister

Distinguished
Oct 7, 2012
1,437
0
19,460
Ignore hafijur, He talks out of his butt a lot. Let me ask you this sir, did you download the latest graphics drivers for your GPU? Is your CPU running at 4GHz? What speed is your memory running at. Screen shot your BIOS and come back.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ElMoIsEviL

ElMoIsEviL

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2006
2,361
1
19,965


The difference between 1.05 and say the 1.54 of a 3570K in Cinebench 11.5 isn't "2x faster with 1 thread". Sorry to say. That's 146% not 200%. So it is fair to say that, in Cinebench 11.5, a 3570K is around 1.5x more powerful, per core, than an FX-8320.

Source: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/4
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
griptwister

griptwister

Distinguished
Oct 7, 2012
1,437
0
19,460


Don't tell him that. He's going to mis-read it and spread lies all over the forums! lol.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
C

Crazy_Ivan55

Distinguished
Apr 15, 2011
95
0
18,660
Ok, yes my bad its a piledriver CPU. It is currently running at 4GHz but it gave me problems earlier on and if I make it even go 50Mhz higher it gives me the problem. Also I do not care about the benchmarks for productivity since this is mainly a gaming build with some FL Studio and microsoft word. Yes I have the latest drivers, I have installed them after using driver sweeper and cleaning the registry :) Memory is at 1600 MHZ

Thank you guys for responding though! Also I have been looking into the Haswell Xeon CPU's and they are becoming quite well known for performing like a i5 but alot cheaper and less power usage. Can anyone confirm this, I am talking about the Xeon E3-1230 V2 In particular.

Again sheer performance core for core, for gaming.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
griptwister

griptwister

Distinguished
Oct 7, 2012
1,437
0
19,460


I'm sure if you Overclocked them they'd do you good. I didn't even know the Haswell ones were out yet... Hmmm... I'm now considering now this as my next CPU... as I would like to save money. An i7 is essentially the same thing. I just wonder if you could use a z87 and OC it. What I've heard is the i7s have special optimizations for gaming. But I could know less about server CPUs.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
C

Cazalan

Distinguished
Sep 4, 2011
2,672
0
20,810


SuperPI is the most worthless benchmark of all. No program in the last 12 years has compiled for x87 performance, since SSE became available. Unless you're running 14 year old programs this benchmark has zero relevance.

It's right on the wiki:

"Super PI utilizes x87 floating point instructions. These instructions have been superseded by 3DNow! and Streaming SIMD Extensions."
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
C

Cazalan

Distinguished
Sep 4, 2011
2,672
0
20,810


SuperPI is the most worthless benchmark of all. No program in the last 12 years has compiled for x87 performance, since SSE became available. Unless you're running 14 year old programs this benchmark has zero relevance.

It's right on the wiki:

"Super PI utilizes x87 floating point instructions. These instructions have been superseded by 3DNow! and Streaming SIMD Extensions."
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom