Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Intel i5 or AMD FX-6300 or AMD FX-8350

Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 27, 2013 6:25:05 PM

Hi guys, I have a question for you all. I'm about to start building my first gaming rig, and I am very torn apart with my cpu. I hear everywhere that Intel core i5 is better for gaming, but then the next guy says that the AMD FX-8350 performs better in real word tests. I'm willing to pay the extra for the intel i5-4670, if it will give me a noticeable difference in my gameplay. The games I'm going to play range anywhere from Minecraft, to Far Cry 3. I'm not going to be overclocking at all, and I'm not going to be playing games like Crysis 3 on Ultra settings with two monitors. Just one, 1080p Acer monitor.
My current part list:
Case: Ultra Xblaster Mid-Tower V2 Case
GPU: GIGABYTE Radeon R9 270X
RAM: 8GB Corsair Vengeance, or 8GB of whatever I can find for a cheap price
Power Supply: Unsure as of now, I'll pick this out whenever I know how many watts I'll need
Motherboard: GIGABYTE AM3+ AMD Motherboard (Link:http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/ite...)
If you know of anything that won't work together, let me know please! Also, my budget is no more than $600-$750.
October 27, 2013 6:37:43 PM

The FX-8350 will run almost anything on ultra. (with the right graphics card fo corse)
a b À AMD
a c 158 à CPUs
October 27, 2013 6:39:11 PM

If you go intel you'll need to find a different motherboard.
Other than that, I have the R9 270X coupled with an FX-8320 and I couldn't be happier. Plays games butter smooth at all times.
If I didn't do all kinds of gameplay videos and streaming, I would probably have settled with the FX-6300 or 6350 though.
Related resources

Best solution

October 27, 2013 6:44:10 PM
Share

To be honest, with your budget and getting a lower-end video card there is no point in buying that powerful of a CPU. I bought into the hype that you need this fancy stuff, got a i5 4670k and overclocked it to 4.6 GHz with a GTX 770 and honestly, I overspent because everygame I run on ultra, even BF4.

Honestly, for ram all you need is 8 GB of 1333 or whatever 2x4 gb. Case doesn't matter, Motherboard barely matters, overclocking matters only a little bit, make sure the powersupply has good reviews and is plus bronze rated and get the true rating on it.

I recommend getting a dual core, like a i3-4130, and the 270X will serve you for a good while for 1080p gaming.

The reason why there is a push for higher resolution gaming by the gaming industry is they're afraid they will lose their butt for graphics cards in the future, because the new consoles aren't very much more powerful as the previous generation, mantle might make a dent in DirectX Monopoly, and we're plateuing for graphical features on screen, and in the future games will rely on physics processing more, which could take the form of PhysX by nvidia (Unlikely) or the CPU (highly likely).

Since intel scores higher with single threaded performance and physics calculations, it's a no brainer to get especially since you can get an i3 which will perform slightly lower than an i5 depending on if you use a high end video card or not. But for a R9 270x, the i3 will more than suit your fancy.

EDIT: I have to say that as of right now, AMD's FX series are an utter flop and nobody should buy into it. It sucks down power like mad, has terrible performance, and isn't priced competitively enough for a person that has done their homework. Intel is simply better.

The only processors that gamers should buy that come from AMD are the APUs for extremely light gaming like source games/minecraft/ older games and the Athlon series.
October 27, 2013 7:05:47 PM

Okay, thanks for the answers guys! I've been doing some looking around on Tiger Direct, and I found I can get theEVGA GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST for $140, so could I get away with that and an Intel i3?
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
October 27, 2013 7:07:38 PM

But an i3 + GTX 650ti doesn't compare to FX-6300 + R9 270X. They are not in the same league.
October 27, 2013 7:09:33 PM

Pyree said:
But an i3 + GTX 650ti doesn't compare to FX-6300 + R9 270X. They are not in the same league.


So you are saying that I will have a noticeable difference?
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
October 27, 2013 7:35:26 PM

Jared_Waldron said:
Pyree said:
But an i3 + GTX 650ti doesn't compare to FX-6300 + R9 270X. They are not in the same league.


So you are saying that I will have a noticeable difference?


Yes. The R9 270X is a lot better than GTX 650ti. The i3 will beat the FX-6300 in single thread but not multithread. You will be better off with FX-6300 for future games.
October 27, 2013 7:38:49 PM

Pyree said:
Jared_Waldron said:
Pyree said:
But an i3 + GTX 650ti doesn't compare to FX-6300 + R9 270X. They are not in the same league.


So you are saying that I will have a noticeable difference?


Yes. The R9 270X is a lot better than GTX 650ti. The i3 will beat the FX-6300 in single thread but not multithread. You will be better off with FX-6300 for future games.


So how will I fare if I get the i3 processor and the R9 270X? Will the i3 bottleneck the 270X?
October 27, 2013 7:41:31 PM

VERY noticeable difference should we say. The point is choosing the right CPU without bottlenecking your GPU. Personally i'd recommend i5 because it will blow away any AMD processor and it should perform well with R9 270X. But then again we know that GPU will make much more difference than CPU for gaming, so if you want to allocate more budget for GPU, go for FX 6300 and get a better GPU than R9 270X
October 27, 2013 7:44:44 PM

Mordz said:
VERY noticeable difference should we say. The point is choosing the right CPU without bottlenecking your GPU. Personally i'd recommend i5 because it will blow away any AMD processor and it should perform well with R9 270X. But then again we know that GPU will make much more difference than CPU for gaming, so if you want to allocate more budget for GPU, go for FX 6300 and get a better GPU than R9 270X


I've heard that AMD processors are better for not-CPU heavy games like Call of Duty, is that true?
October 27, 2013 8:02:16 PM

Jared_Waldron said:

I've heard that AMD processors are better for not-CPU heavy games like Call of Duty, is that true?


I don't really know but according to various benchmarks an i5 would almost always win against any AMD processors. Even if it's true, very few games will perform better in AMD processors. Take a look at this : http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/battlefield-4-graph... see the performance difference, even an i5-2500k @stock still wins against FX 8350
October 27, 2013 8:05:25 PM

Mordz said:
Jared_Waldron said:

I've heard that AMD processors are better for not-CPU heavy games like Call of Duty, is that true?


I don't really know but according to various benchmarks an i5 would almost always win against any AMD processors. Even if it's true, very few games will perform better in AMD processors. Take a look at this : http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/battlefield-4-graph... see the performance difference, even an i5-2500k @stock still wins against FX 8350


Would I be okay to go with an AMD FX-6300 for awhile until I have the funds for an i5?
October 27, 2013 8:19:36 PM

Jared_Waldron said:

Would I be okay to go with an AMD FX-6300 for awhile until I have the funds for an i5?

Yes you would. But wouldn't it be more beneficial if you buy an i5 straight ahead? Well you may have to wait for the funds but it's worth the wait
!