Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

i5 3570k +MSI Z77A-G43 or FX 8350+ ASUS M5A97 R2.0

Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 1, 2013 1:54:34 AM

I am desperate at my desk, don't know which way to go, on Thursday I am out to finalize my current rig, and still I can't seem to be able to make up my mind....
CRYSIS 3 tempted me EA's announcement regarding frosbite 3 put me further in doubt that I should go with AMD, please speak you minds....
October 1, 2013 2:26:28 AM

Darkresurrection said:
I am desperate at my desk, don't know which way to go, on Thursday I am out to finalize my current rig, and still I can't seem to be able to make up my mind....
CRYSIS 3 tempted me EA's announcement regarding frosbite 3 put me further in doubt that I should go with AMD, please speak you minds....

An i5 will be both much faster on lesser well threaded games and also has a lot more OC overhead on air cooling for future "headroom" and draws up to 100w less power. AMD's are slightly cheaper. Personally I went with i5 and haven't regretted it at all.
October 1, 2013 2:32:05 AM

BSim500 said:
Darkresurrection said:
I am desperate at my desk, don't know which way to go, on Thursday I am out to finalize my current rig, and still I can't seem to be able to make up my mind....
CRYSIS 3 tempted me EA's announcement regarding frosbite 3 put me further in doubt that I should go with AMD, please speak you minds....

An i5 will be both much faster on lesser well threaded games and also has a lot more OC overhead on air cooling for future "headroom" and draws up to 100w less power. AMD's are slightly cheaper. Personally I went with i5 and haven't regretted it at all.

what if developers decided to go crysis 3 or bf4 way!? all way long from 2014 on...

Related resources
October 1, 2013 2:38:43 AM

Darkresurrection said:
what if developers decided to go crysis 3 or bf4 way!? all way long from 2014 on...

Even in heavily multi-threaded games, not all areas are well threaded. That's why an 3570 vs 8350 have similar average fps but the i5-3570 has much higher minimum fps:-
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crysis-3-performanc...

New cross-platform games written for 8 cores are written for consoles in mind which run at only half the speed of both CPU's you mentioned. There simply isn't going to be a case where engines max out 8x desktop 4GHz PC cores because they'd stutter like hell on a console that runs at only half the speed:-
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-1820785/cores-...

Edit: People assume that games will be written to max out all 8 cores of an FX-8350. They won't - they'll be written for 1.75-2.00GHz console CPU's primarily in mind as a baseline (as they have been for the past decade now). As for Crysis 3, an 8-core AMD is less than 10% faster than a 4-core AMD, which just goes to show how even "heavy engines" scale. Likewise with ARMA3 which uses 8 cores - in the sense 1 core is loaded 90% and the rest as little as 8%.
October 1, 2013 12:15:08 PM

BSim500 said:
Darkresurrection said:
what if developers decided to go crysis 3 or bf4 way!? all way long from 2014 on...

Even in heavily multi-threaded games, not all areas are well threaded. That's why an 3570 vs 8350 have similar average fps but the i5-3570 has much higher minimum fps:-
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crysis-3-performanc...

New cross-platform games written for 8 cores are written for consoles in mind which run at only half the speed of both CPU's you mentioned. There simply isn't going to be a case where engines max out 8x desktop 4GHz PC cores because they'd stutter like hell on a console that runs at only half the speed:-
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-1820785/cores-...

Edit: People assume that games will be written to max out all 8 cores of an FX-8350. They won't - they'll be written for 1.75-2.00GHz console CPU's primarily in mind as a baseline (as they have been for the past decade now). As for Crysis 3, an 8-core AMD is less than 10% faster than a 4-core AMD, which just goes to show how even "heavy engines" scale. Likewise with ARMA3 which uses 8 cores - in the sense 1 core is loaded 90% and the rest as little as 8%.

I am gnawing at me since this noon I suppose you are right about it...I am still sketchy though, did crysis 3 show all the power of fx 8350!? how about i5 3570k!? and how about bad ports of next gen games?! if you are positive with all these questions what do you think of the mobo msi i mean!?

October 1, 2013 1:02:48 PM

Actually, I would go with an FX 8320. Use some that money towards a better GPU if you can.
October 1, 2013 2:54:50 PM

logainofhades said:
Actually, I would go with an FX 8320. Use some that money towards a better GPU if you can.

to be honest i've been scratching my head to the point, it's bleeding, the more I think of this, the less I can understand, will future games run well on these 8 cores!? i mean if not why i should i go with them? I am an amd fan my self, when i see this architecture i say well amd has a point, just like next gen gaming consoles, 8 weakcores rather than 4 strong ones...but then i hesitate when i see some benchs...

Best solution

October 1, 2013 3:57:30 PM
Share

Darkresurrection said:
logainofhades said:
Actually, I would go with an FX 8320. Use some that money towards a better GPU if you can.

to be honest i've been scratching my head to the point, it's bleeding, the more I think of this, the less I can understand, will future games run well on these 8 cores!? i mean if not why i should i go with them? I am an amd fan my self, when i see this architecture i say well amd has a point, just like next gen gaming consoles, 8 weakcores rather than 4 strong ones...but then i hesitate when i see some benchs...



BF4 Beta Benchmarks are out, and the FX 83XX series beats the i5s. Pretty handily in fact...go AMD.
October 2, 2013 12:32:34 AM

8350rocks said:
Darkresurrection said:
logainofhades said:
Actually, I would go with an FX 8320. Use some that money towards a better GPU if you can.

to be honest i've been scratching my head to the point, it's bleeding, the more I think of this, the less I can understand, will future games run well on these 8 cores!? i mean if not why i should i go with them? I am an amd fan my self, when i see this architecture i say well amd has a point, just like next gen gaming consoles, 8 weakcores rather than 4 strong ones...but then i hesitate when i see some benchs...



BF4 Beta Benchmarks are out, and the FX 83XX series beats the i5s. Pretty handily in fact...go AMD.

I was dying to hear such a thing man!!! this is going to leave no doubt to go AMD again like the past hurrrray!!! do you have the link pal!?

October 2, 2013 1:17:25 AM

8350rocks said:
Darkresurrection said:
logainofhades said:
Actually, I would go with an FX 8320. Use some that money towards a better GPU if you can.

to be honest i've been scratching my head to the point, it's bleeding, the more I think of this, the less I can understand, will future games run well on these 8 cores!? i mean if not why i should i go with them? I am an amd fan my self, when i see this architecture i say well amd has a point, just like next gen gaming consoles, 8 weakcores rather than 4 strong ones...but then i hesitate when i see some benchs...



BF4 Beta Benchmarks are out, and the FX 83XX series beats the i5s. Pretty handily in fact...go AMD.

I found some...http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/battlefield-4-beta... go AMD!!!!

!