AMD FX 8350 vs Intel i5 4670k

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
S

Swalka

Honorable
Dec 4, 2013
15
0
10,510
Hi guys,

I'm currently looking to build a gaming PC to replace my xbox 360, I've already got a few parts together and am looking for advise on my CPU.

I've got a case with 1TB HDD and an optical drive. My girlfriend bought me 8GB 1866 MHz RAM and I'm looking at the Raedon R9 270X. I'm not going to overclocck yet, but in the near future I probably will.

I'm trying to decide between an AMD FX 8350 with a Asus M5A99FX Pro motherboard or a Intel i5 4670k with a Gigabyte Z87X-D3H.

Thanks :)
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
vmN

vmN

Honorable
Oct 27, 2013
1,666
0
12,160
Go with the 8320, simply because it's a underclocked 8350. Then get a better GPU for the money you save.
A good motherboard with the 8320 is the GA-990FXA-UD3.
You should have enough money leftover for a 280x atleast.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
N

napster007

Honorable
Dec 1, 2013
30
0
10,540


With AMD's new mantle technology coming, I suggest you go with fx8350 and the R9270X. Also if you have the budget why not aim for the 9 series processor?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
vmN

vmN

Honorable
Oct 27, 2013
1,666
0
12,160

The 9xxx series are simply a 8320 overclocked.
I would recommend core i7 over the 9xxx series.


 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Z

ZionZA

Honorable
Nov 5, 2013
686
0
11,160


Mantle has nothing to do with the CPU side. Mantle is only on the GPU side
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

Swalka

Honorable
Dec 4, 2013
15
0
10,510


Do they overclock to equal then? Or will the 8350 go higher than the 8320?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
logainofhades

logainofhades

Titan
Moderator
Apr 27, 2009
37,536
3,210
143,290


I second this suggestion. According to HWBOT, the average overclock for the 2 is roughly the same. (Less than 100mhz difference. Closer to like 50mhz.)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
M0kujin

M0kujin

Honorable
Nov 18, 2013
202
0
10,760
For future gaming, Game developers as of now are taking advantage of the multicore support for gaming and with PS4 and XBone with 8 cores CPU released, expect that they will be making games with multicore support like BF4. FX 8350 will be on the advantage side comapare to 4670k on future games, but as of now 4670k is slightly better than 8350: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Cj8RP4kEGo
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

Swalka

Honorable
Dec 4, 2013
15
0
10,510


Yeah, but the consoles' CPUs are 1-2GHz per core aren't they? Why would a PC with 4x3.4GHz be slower? Do you know how many cores BF4 makes use of at the moment?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
D

Darkresurrection

Honorable
Sep 15, 2013
721
0
11,160


Go with fx 8320 overclock to 4.0 ghz, and here you go with your fx 8350, overclock to 4.5 ghz you fx 9370 is ready all and all for 140$, generally this is the whole story in old single threaded games fx i5 4670k>fx 8350, current moderatly threaded games fx8350=i5 4670k, heavily threaded games fx 8350>i5 4670k and the fx edges with i7 3770k and might even perform better than that as in crysis3, streaming fx 8350> i5 4670k, rendering fx 8350> i5 4670 you might also look these benchmarks they might help you decide
http://www.techspot.com/review/591-medal-of-honor-warfighter-benchmarks/page6.html (MOH warfighter fx 8350 performs as well as i7-3960x)
http://www.techspot.com/review/601-black-ops-2-performance/page5.html (call of duty black ops 2 fx 8350 performs as well as i7-3960x)
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Crysis-3-PC-235317/Tests/Crysis-3-Test-CPU-Benchmark-1056578/ (crysis 3- fx 8350 better than i7 3770k and just below i7-3950x)
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/reviews/1598/pg6/amd-fx-8350-processor-review-battlefield-3.html (BF3 )
http://www.hardwarepal.com/call-duty-ghosts-benchmark-cpu-gpu-performance/5/ (COD ghost Identical performance)
www.hardwarepal.com/battlefield-4-benchmark-mp-cpu-gpu-w7-vs-w8-1/4/ ( battlefield 4 ultra HD FX 8350 equal to i7-4770k)
http://www.hardwarepal.com/battlefield-4-benchmark-mp-cpu-gpu-w7-vs-w8-1/8/ ( battlefield4 full HD the same scenario)
www.hardwarepal.com/batman-arkham-origins-benchmark/8/ (batman Arkham Origins fx 8350= i7 4770k after AMD's catalyst release)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
D

Darkresurrection

Honorable
Sep 15, 2013
721
0
11,160
Now the Interesting part is that Unreal Engine 4 is said to enjoy up to 8 cores, the new Capcom (Panta Rhei) engine which is written for the next gen consoles is optimized for multi core cpus upto 8 cores, which will be used in resident evil 5 for the first time the new UBISOFT engine which will be used in watch dogs is heavily threaded http://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=4546&game=Watch%20Dogs as you can see the recommended setting is i7 4770k or fx 8350, which is a sign, the game is heavily threaded, this engine is going to be used for next assassin creed and other ubi games Regardless of these comparisons, both cpus are great, but if I wanted to choose one again, I would go with fx 8350 , this cpu is a beast really, like i5 3570k or i5 4670k, they are all great CPUs, now it is just the matter of preference, I prefer FX-8350, because n the long run FX-8350 will be far better than any i5, as it happened in crysis 3, and yet crysis 3 only used 60% of the power of FX-8350 in which FX 8350 was better than i7-3770k and 80% of i5-3570k was used in that game, can't wait to see the day fx 8350 reaches its 85% usage and i5-3570k or 4670k are both out of resources. maybe in watch dogs! undoubtedly in crysis4!!! those guys who say engines are not optimized for 8 cores actually don't know anything about this industry
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
JOOK-D

JOOK-D

Dignified
Aug 28, 2013
3,910
0
15,960


+1

Graphics card is most important in gaming. I'd say you'd even be good with an FX 6300 if it leaves you room for an even better graphics card, not sure what the prices are where you live.

Some other motherboards you could look at: ASUS M5A97 R2.0, Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3, ASUS M5A99X.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
M0kujin

M0kujin

Honorable
Nov 18, 2013
202
0
10,760


guess you dont know whats the benefit of more cores huh? I agree that 4670k per core is more powerful than 8350, but in reality if you are using a program that uses multicore like for example 3DsMax, when rendering it uses all of those 8 cores at once at 100%, so basically if you have 4 cores even if its more powerful per core, its limited to only 4 and its not that is it, the distribution of processing power is limited to 4. So in those cases, 4 cores will be at disadvantage. Thats why in using multicore programs fx 8350 is almost on par with 4770k because of hyperthreading.

In future games specially with mantle, from what I know and the resources available it will be easier to port games from PS4/XBone to PC and vice versa. So what i am saying before that game devs will ultilize those 8cores in gaming from here onwards. Im not forcing anyone to jump wagon on 8 cores or anything, just stating the information I know. But my suggestion if you're not going with FX 8350, go with 4770k not 4670k. :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
M0kujin

M0kujin

Honorable
Nov 18, 2013
202
0
10,760


as you can see, if you watch the video BF4 uses all of those 8 cores at once, so the performance distribution is better, that's the advantage of more cores. Even if the core clock of consoles is only 2ghz per core, it is properly distributed per core.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
azzazel_99

azzazel_99

Splendid
Apr 19, 2008
4,015
0
23,460
Yes 8 core better for outside of games but the op point of the build is gaming only and as it is now the intel 4 cores are faster than amds 8core am I wrong? Eventually games may be written specifically for 8 cores but right now most are not. Next gen games and next gen 8 core processors im sure will be much more desired/required for gaming.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
JOOK-D

JOOK-D

Dignified
Aug 28, 2013
3,910
0
15,960


In some instances, yes you are wrong. You're correct, the majority of games are not written for more cores. I honestly don't see any point in spending more than around $160 on a CPU, the less you spend on that, the more you have for a better GPU and consequently better performance than an expensive CPU could give.

I don't know if anyone's said it yet but OP you should go for an FX 8320 in my opinion, it's just an underclocked FX 8350 and you can easily clock it to those speeds.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
M0kujin

M0kujin

Honorable
Nov 18, 2013
202
0
10,760


yes you are right, as of now not many games are utilizing multicore support, but future wise it would be safer IMO to go with 8 cores because seeing the path of gaming goes, 8 cores may in the near future be the standard of gaming.

In linus test even 2 cores has no significanct improvement compare to 4 cores on battlefield 3, so that means it doesn't utilize multicore. thats why FX 8350 however can still do something like this > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZ1WrQZc4wA because there is still a lot of extra cores available on doing other task.

right now 4670k is better at gaming but there's also no problem with fx 8320 / 8350, Its just the matter of preference.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

Swalka

Honorable
Dec 4, 2013
15
0
10,510


I'm in the UK, so the 280X would cost me about an extra £60, which I would fit into the budget by downgrading to a FX 6300, but I don't know how future-proof that would be. I guess I could find the cash, but would it be worth it?

Plus thanks to everyone for the advise, it's cleared a lot up already :)
 
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