Amd FX 8320 or i5 2500k?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
N

nonnzz98

Honorable
Oct 23, 2013
14
0
10,510
wich one should I get, for gaming youtube video editing, and general usage. The GPU would be the same (An MSI GTX 660 Twin Frozr III edition) and the mother board would be similarly priced (Around 100 dollars) would overclock just a bit (maybe 4-4.2 Ghz)
 
Solution
maddogfargo


This is a pretty good reference overall. Depending on how many threads/cores the title can use, the new vishera core FX series compete well against current i5's and i7s in gaming. But the difference is so small and many new titles are better...
Sort by date Sort by votes
D

Darkresurrection

Honorable
Sep 15, 2013
721
0
11,160
Upvote 0 Downvote
C

CaptainTom

Honorable
May 3, 2012
1,563
0
11,960


The FX has twice the PCIe 2.0 lanes, USB 3.0 support, and sata 6GB/s support.

In addition to this, it is cheaper and more powerful. Definately get FX!

CPU from weakest to strongest: 2500k < FX-83x0 = 3570K < 4670 < i7's
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
D

Darkresurrection

Honorable
Sep 15, 2013
721
0
11,160

Dont lie through your teeth...fanboyism huh!? look here ( i chose them from tech spot, since it favors Intel and you cant nag about them)
1: http://www.techspot.com/review/591-medal-of-honor-warfighter-benchmarks/page6.html
2: http://www.techspot.com/review/642-crysis-3-performance/page6.html
3.http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=382066 battlefield 4 beta
and mor examples, these guys cant cope with this fact that they have payed more and get less in return, that;s a shame really, in older games i5 performs better but for new and future games 8320 beats the daylight out of any i5


 
Upvote 0 Downvote
H

huilun02

Splendid
Feb 29, 2008
4,324
0
24,960
I''m surprised people still consider buying the i5-2500k today. In most places its either out of stock or you can get an i7-4770 (non k) for the same price.

Check your local prices of i7-4770, i7-3770k, i5-4670k, i5-3570k, as well as Ivy and Haswell Xeons. Because any of those would be better than the 2500k, and definitely better than the FX 8320.

Link us to where you will be buying from, or country. So we can look for better options.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
D

Darkresurrection

Honorable
Sep 15, 2013
721
0
11,160

those games are old like your words, toms is biased, since it's the only site+pclab.pl, even a 6 year old child knows in poland that this website is the biggest intel fanboy in the world, which shows i5 2500k better than fx 8350, and it figures since tomshardware is intel's advertiser, go to any other site and see the real result...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
D

Darkresurrection

Honorable
Sep 15, 2013
721
0
11,160

If you wanna go for i7, he is right about it, i7 is better...but if you are stuck between i5 2500k i5 3570k etc and fx 8320 go fx 8320, specially if you don't want to upgrade in two years
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
rolli59

rolli59

Titan
Oct 27, 2007
47,790
283
130,890

I have seen all of those; Tech spot I5 3470 (it is not 2500K, let alone 3570K or 4670K) is one frame away from FX8350, GameGPU.ru is the only site that I have seen with those results in BF4.
Sorry but I trust Tom's better.
I have both FX8350 and I5 3570K both with HD7950 so I have my own comparison.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
D

Darkresurrection

Honorable
Sep 15, 2013
721
0
11,160
how about this one, why is tom's so different have you ever asked yourself!? http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Battlefield-4-PC-238749/Tests/Battlefield-4-Beta-Test-Prozessor-Benchmarks-Cores-1091016/ Toms is an intel advertiser, my uncle has 3570k and I have my fx 8350, we both benched our systems, we both play games ultra and we haven't noticed any difference, don't tell lies please
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
rolli59

rolli59

Titan
Oct 27, 2007
47,790
283
130,890

Tom is different because they are using high resolution and actually using the power of the GPU's by having game details high with AA enabled. This German one is done at 1280x720 (3570K higher than the 8350), Game GPU is 1680x1050 no AA enabled.

And remember OP asked about the 8320 which is 0.5GHz slower.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
maddogfargo

maddogfargo

Splendid
Nov 28, 2006
3,344
8
22,965


This is a pretty good reference overall. Depending on how many threads/cores the title can use, the new vishera core FX series compete well against current i5's and i7s in gaming. But the difference is so small and many new titles are better optimized for 4+ cores that it isn't going to matter as much as it did with Bulldozer.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
N

nonnzz98

Honorable
Oct 23, 2013
14
0
10,510


but what about the i7 980x, found a deal on that one used for like 100 dollars, is that a good cpu?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
D

Darkresurrection

Honorable
Sep 15, 2013
721
0
11,160



FX is much much better than any i5, it takes time to tell you that 8 cores matter, or on the intel side 4 cores and 4 threads matters, those who criticize single threaded performance of FX series lack provisional visions, yet in single threaded apps fx does an ok job, just play any game on ultra and yet when more processing is needed it provides you with that like crysis 3 that fx outperforms i7 3770k...some guys say in rome tottal wars 2 fx cpus give 44 fps average
and 18minimum, but they never say that i7 3770k gives 19fps minimum and 46fps maximum, 2 frame really!? and yet they consider this as a victory...or they say in this single threaded game fx gives 65 fps, i5 gives 90 fps...in real world terms can you really say the difference!? :heink:
 
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