Solved

CPU for architecture - type work and occasional gaming

Hy guys.
I'm looking to build a pc for arch - type work ( BIM software, Max Vray for rendering and presentation purposes , a little Photoshop ) and some gaming ( not a hardcore gamer, but i'm a FPS fan and would like to be able to play 1-2 of the latest games with good detail ) .
The budget and components have been chosen ( 8 gb ram , gtx 660 or 760 if i can strike a good deal ) , xcept for the CPU.
Initially i was set on an FX 8320 + aftermarket cooler but some guys suggested a range of intel cpu-us . I'm kind of a noob when it comes to the details so maybe you can help me make a choice.
I'm also looking at fx 8350, intel I5 Sandy-Bridge or Haswell OR - and this was a surprise to me but i guess it makes sense - a Xeon Quad-Core E3-1230 v2 3.3GHz, which is a i7 minus some graphic capabilities.

Thank you.
64 answers Last reply Best Answer
More about cpu architecture type work occasional gaming
  1. If you do any type of 3-D rendering for architecture you should bump the RAM up to 16GB and this will also certainly help Photoshop which can use as much RAM as you have. I don't know all that much about the architecture software to advise you on a CPU. I do a lot of photography and put an i5 Ivy Bridge into my computer. Photoshop works fine with it and it's certainly all you would need for gaming.
  2. I would go with the 8350, if you're willing to overclock. If not, I would go with a 4770.
  3. the fx will be your friend here buddy.it has the power to handle this and do it in a timely manner, which is important for work afterall.
    you will be pleasantly surprised with the fx. i run an 8350 and 16gb aand i use it quite heavily.
  4. I would go with the 8350, if you're willing to overclock. If not, I would go with a 4770.
  5. I would go with the 8350, if you're willing to overclock. If not, I would go with a 4770.
  6. I've received plenty of suggestions for bumping up the ram to 16 gb to pair up nicely with the rest of the config, so i may just do that. i also want to run the ram at 1600 mhz .

    And i'm also NOT interested in OC anytime soon, or in doing any other experiments .
  7. With the FX series, OCing is less of an experiment and more of a... you just do it. If you definitely do not want to, get the 4770k. 16gb of RAM would be nice, but you want 1866, not 1600 with any more than 8.
  8. the 4770 is a nice choice with its 6 cores and 12 threads. but i would still place my money on the fx for those specific tasks mentioned.
  9. Not the 4770k. The 4770. The k means it's unlocked for overclocking, no reason to spend extra for that if you won't use it. Get the 4770!
  10. Brain fart yeah the 4770 is a quad core, get the 8350 instead, it is much better for what you need (cores are good).
  11. indeed.
  12. Thanx for your instant responses guys, i'm really impressed ( first time user on this forum :D ) .
    Anyway, i'm looking at the CPU prices in my country and the 4470 is a little out of my budget. I was shooting for something in the fx 8320 - i5 range. FX 8350 seems too wild for my needs and i7 is too expensive.
    I'm still curious what you guys think of the Xeon i was talking about in my initial post.
  13. Definitely do not get that Xeon, an FX4100 would be better for half the price. The 8320 is great too, but the 8350 is fairly future proof, and really not much more expensive than an 8320.
  14. xeons are more server grade than consumer evel cpu's.
    you could use them in a desktop sure.
    but nowhere near the performnce of the fx. and the 8320 is also a very fine choice to make.
    and you are welcome for the replies. its what we are here for.
    in fact, the 8350 is just a higher clocked 8320 honestly.
  15. They are pretty similar, but the 8350 does pull ahead when overclocked, and because he's not overclocking, is probably the better choice anyway.
  16. psh, the 8350 pulls ahead of everything.
    save for the 16 core xeons but hey, they haz 16!
  17. Now that's just overkill. Definitely get the 8350 if it's in your budget.
  18. OK guys. i get it :)
    AMD would be the right choice, but i'm still unsure of any of the i5 variety could be a worthy opponent of FX 8xxx.
    There are I5's that are more expensive than the fx8350, but basic math tell me that they are slower than the AMD CPU's. For instance i see 6 mb cache at i5 vs 8 mb at AMD. Frequencies ar about the same , but Intel is fabricated with 22 nm techonolgy and i read that they are cooler .
    The biggest dif. is that FX's are 8core vs Intel 4core. I'm very unsure wether the soft that i'm using ( or the games ) make better use of the 4 core or the 8 core pack.
  19. there is no i5 that is a worthy opponent to the fx 8xxx
    couple i7's come close and two beat it.
  20. Best answer
    The reason why Intel is more expensive for seemingly slower processors is because they actually have 4 cores, while an AMD like an FX4100 has 2 cores that are hyperthreaded to function like it has 4 cores. The 8xxx series is better because it would be faster than Intel even without twice as many cores. Intel IS much cooler than AMD, but that's just because awesomeness runs hot. Unless you're in the Sahara desert, the temps shouldn't matter if you have a decent cooling setup.
  21. Ewok nailed it there buddy.
  22. okay guys , i guess i'm sold on either 8320 or 8350 :)
    Here's a motherboard that i'm thinking it would pair well with the CPU

    http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/ASUS-M5A97-R20-Motherboard/1772
  23. That is exactly what I was about to suggest, great motherboard, I have the previous one myself (M5A97, no LE, R2.0 blahblah) and love it. Great for overclocking, and a really nice bios that you can use your mouse in.
  24. i am running that exact board.
    it is awesome.
    i love it. i swear by asus.
    and it looks nice to boot!
  25. i presume there are no problems in bumping the ram at 1600 mhz right ? would it need a bios update or any other voodoo ?
  26. Just a goat.
  27. Nah, it can OC RAM no problem, especially to 1600.
  28. The 8320 makes a very good option if you are going to overclock. It is just the 8350 just clocked a bit lower. So, you can overclock the 8320 basically as much you can do to a 8350.

    Also you can go for the Intel Xeon E3 1230 V2. It is almost equal to the i7 3770 and costs only 220 dollars. So it would make a very good option.
  29. for cooling purposes i've received the following sugestions :

    Sunbeam Core-Contact Freezer --- http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835207004
    Zalman CNPS10X Optima 2011 ---- http://zalman.com/global/product/Product_Read.php?Idx=461
  30. It isn't just the 8350 with a lower clock, it is a slightly different processor, though not that different. For what this guy needs, he really, REALLY needs the 8 cores of an 8320/50.
  31. For cooling, I suggest a Coolermaster Hyper 212 Evo, best cooler for your money hands down.
  32. dual xeons would be awesome. little overkill, but awesome.
  33. It would be, though I think one 83xx is ideal in this situation.
  34. yeah....but no :))
  35. An FX 8350 is great. But the i5 4670k is better :)

    I say get that and a 760 with 8gigs of ram. perfect!


    Please pick me as solution if it helped!


    4 more away from CPU's expert! :D
  36. what is " a 760 " ? A motherboard ?
  37. Did you read any of this thread? The reason why Intel is more expensive for seemingly slower processors is because they actually have 4 cores, while an AMD like an FX4100 has 2 cores that are hyperthreaded to function like it has 4 cores. The 8xxx series is better because it would be faster than Intel even without twice as many cores. Intel IS much cooler than AMD, but that's just because awesomeness runs hot. Unless you're in the Sahara desert, the temps shouldn't matter if you have a decent cooling setup. I said that earlier. Also, he needs 8 cores. Also he isn't overclocking so the 4670k is useless to him (it's a card made for overclocking)
  38. A 760 is a video card. You mentioned it in your first post.
  39. ewok93 said:
    Did you read any of this thread? The reason why Intel is more expensive for seemingly slower processors is because they actually have 4 cores, while an AMD like an FX4100 has 2 cores that are hyperthreaded to function like it has 4 cores. The 8xxx series is better because it would be faster than Intel even without twice as many cores. Intel IS much cooler than AMD, but that's just because awesomeness runs hot. Unless you're in the Sahara desert, the temps shouldn't matter if you have a decent cooling setup. I said that earlier. Also, he needs 8 cores. Also he isn't overclocking so the 4670k is useless to him (it's a card made for overclocking)



    Delluser, the gtx 760 is a Graphics card.

    Missed the part of the OC.

    I say an i5 4570 is good but if it comes down to those two....Id say get the AMD FX 8350 :)
  40. The 8350 is obviously better if he isn't overclocking, though it's up to him and how much he wants to spend.
  41. The 8350 is obviously better if he isn't overclocking, though it's up to him and how much he wants to spend.
  42. ewok93 said:
    Did you read any of this thread? The reason why Intel is more expensive for seemingly slower processors is because they actually have 4 cores, while an AMD like an FX4100 has 2 cores that are hyperthreaded to function like it has 4 cores. The 8xxx series is better because it would be faster than Intel even without twice as many cores. Intel IS much cooler than AMD, but that's just because awesomeness runs hot. Unless you're in the Sahara desert, the temps shouldn't matter if you have a decent cooling setup. I said that earlier. Also, he needs 8 cores. Also he isn't overclocking so the 4670k is useless to him (it's a card made for overclocking)


    Also, just checked your specs, it says you have a seagate barracua 500MB 7200rpm HDD? I think you mean 500GB :)
  43. Nah. I don't need much storage.
  44. I have the fx 8350 and the cooler master hyper 212 plus. my temps are very low even under high use.
    I payed 27 dollars for the cooler brand new.
  45. you're right... i guess i'm used to receiving CPU advices together with the proper motherboard, not a videocard.

    Btw , you guys are cool with me picking either a 660 or 760 ? I'm thinking that soonr or later i'm gonna start experimenting with the cuda technology .
  46. The 760 is nice, but so is the 7970 for around the same price.
  47. ewok93 said:
    The 760 is nice, but so is the 7970 for around the same price.


    Mhh...7970 kills the 760. If he can get a 760, ...wait how much is the 7970 you're looking at? if its 300-360 and he can afford it, i say get a normal R9 280x if he can, even better, Sapphire toxic R9 280x. We are going a bit overboard.

    If he can get a 7970 but not an r9 280x, 7970 is the way to go!


    Delluser, make sure to pick a best answer :) Ewok was here more so he deserves it.
  48. If you really want a 760, you ca afford a 7970. And that is much better IMO. I dont think it needs to be questioned. As for the CPU we are done with that, FX 8350 is the way to go.


    Can you afford a 300$ gpu or 360$? Whats your budget?
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs