AMD Fx 8350 or core i5 4670k for nextgen games ???

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
S

sabutoros

Honorable
Dec 12, 2013
15
0
10,520
iam building my first ever gaming rig :)!!
i have finalized on these two rigs ... iam really confused to choose which one of the two will run the nextgen games better .....

the rigs are :

gpu: zotac gtx 760 AMP 2gb ddr5
processor: core i5 4670k 3.4ghz LGA1150
motherboard: Asus Z87-A
Ram: 2X4 gb corsair vengeance ddr3
PSU : corsair GS600W (600watts)
hardisk : 1tb seagate
aircooler: coolermaster hyper evo 212


OR


gpu: zotac gtx 760 AMP 2gb ddr5
processor :
AMD FX-8350 4ghz
motherboard :
Asus M5A99FX Pro
Ram : 2X4 corsair vengeance ddr3
psu: corsair vengeance GS600W
harddisk:
1tb seagate
Air cooler : cooler master hyper evo 212

which of the two rigs will be better ???
i want to play watch dogs on ultra ......
the game needs a 8 core processor for that...... so going for a fx 8350 with a nvida gpu over a i5 4670k better ??

and if i go for the fx 8350 rig ....then its corresponding motherboard asus M5A99FX only supports
PCIe X16 2.0 but the gpu card is 3.0 ......
so will it reduce performance on using 3.0 card on a PCIe X16 2.0 ????

and is a 600W psu enough ??

and i also heard that the nextgen games will be multithreaded ones rather than single threaded one....
so is really getting a fx8350 over a i5 4670k preferable?

sorry for these many questions being asked :D ! iam totally new to this.....

thanks in advance :)
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
goodguy713

goodguy713

Distinguished
Oct 23, 2009
1,177
0
19,460
fyi nothing comes close to saturating a 2.0 16x slot.. 3.0 is pretty much a marketing gimick.. now something like a titan 780 ti or 290x might take advantage.. but for that 760.. non issue i would say that i would spend the extra cash and get the i7 4770k if your concerned about multiple cores you sound like your more fixed on the intel.. rig .. is that graphics card a done deal? or can you change it.?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

sabutoros

Honorable
Dec 12, 2013
15
0
10,520


i live in india .... and i really cant go for a i7 cuz its a little pricey compared to i5 ... and abt the graphics card part.... no its not a done deal... i can still change it if u insist getting a better gpu card ......
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

sabutoros

Honorable
Dec 12, 2013
15
0
10,520


can a quad core i5 4670k run watch dogs on ultra ?? cuz the game recommends a octa core processor to do so...
iam finne going with 4670k if it can run watchdogs on ultra ...
and people say fx 8350 is better in running multi-threaded programs compared to 4670k.......and all the nextgen games are multithreaded....
so thats making me think a lot between these two .... :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
goodguy713

goodguy713

Distinguished
Oct 23, 2009
1,177
0
19,460
my friend a 8350 and a 280x should be more then enough .. honestly get your self an 8320 save your self a few buck overclock it a little.. you might even be able to get away with a 270x. personal preference aside if you were going to go 4670k save your self some money and go with the 3570k there is only like a 2 to 4 percent difference between them and overclocked will match stock settings.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Divyanshu Sah

Divyanshu Sah

Honorable
Dec 6, 2012
474
0
10,860
If cost is no problem, then i5 4670k is better than fx 8350. For playing watch dogs on ultra you need a gtx 770.
There is no problem if you run a pcie 3.0 card on pci-e 2.0 slot. There would only be a difference of 2% or 3 % in performance.
For the psu, 700w would be enough.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
mauller07

mauller07

Splendid
Mar 28, 2010
2,801
0
21,960


the r9 280x / 7970 Ghz edition is better than the 770, especially with mantle being released.

with newer games that are made for PS4 and Xbox One the 8350 will be the better choice as they will be using many more threads.

the only reason we were stuck with games using 3 or 4 threads in the past is because of the xbox 360 having a tri core power-pc cpu and they design the games for the lower common denominator so all next gen games will use more than 4 threads seeing as how the ps4 and xbox one will be using atleast 6 of the 8 cores available.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
F

Fredrik Aldhagen

Honorable
Jul 16, 2013
70
0
10,630


1. The PS4/Xbone CPUs are 8 core as you say, BUT they're very low clocked (1.6ghz and 1.75ghz respectively), and 2 cores are reserved for the OS. Any decent quad-core CPU should have no problem keeping up with them.

2. While FX8350 has more cores, the Intel cores still have better IPC.

3. If price is an issue, go with an FX-6300, it's closely priced to an i3 and has the same number of cores available as the consoles. If price isn't an issue, go with i5 or i7 (the hyperthreaded cores in i7 should also benefit from the multithreaded workloads of next gen games)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

sabutoros

Honorable
Dec 12, 2013
15
0
10,520




is R9-280x already available in india ????
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ASHISH65

ASHISH65

Splendid
Oct 15, 2012
5,964
0
27,310


yes - http://mdcomputers.in/sapphire-graphics-card-dual-x-r9-280x-3gb-ddr5-oc.html?filter_name=r9
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

sabutoros

Honorable
Dec 12, 2013
15
0
10,520


so can i go for fx8350 and dual X R9-280X ??? will it be good ??
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
mauller07

mauller07

Splendid
Mar 28, 2010
2,801
0
21,960


1+2. This is where you forget that the 8350 can run 8 lighter threads in parallel that would normally run on the console where as the quad core intels can only run 4 in parallel so
3. because of this the IPC advantage goes out the window as many lighter threads can be executed simultaneously when a highly threaded game is run, just look at the cpu charts for more modern games such as metro and bf4, the 8350 and very expensive intels which use hyper threading and 6 cores are very very close if not tied.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
D

Darkresurrection

Honorable
Sep 15, 2013
721
0
11,160
in old or single threaded games yeah i5 4670k>fx 8350 currently and for moderately threaded games i5 4670=fx 8350, and in the near future fx 8350> i5 4670k, let's review these benchmarks here
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 fx 8350>i5 3570k)
http://www.hardwarepal.com/batman-arkham-origins-benchmark/8/ (batman Arkham Origins fx 8350= i7 4770k after AMD's catalyst release)
http://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)
http://www.techspot.com/review/645-tomb-raider-performance/page5.html (Tomb raider 2013)
a lot of more incidents which shows these CPUs enjoy actually the same performance, in one game one beats the other, in the other game there is another scenario, but something is for sure, in crysis 3 for example i5-3570k uses 80% percent of it resources AMD fx 8350 just uses 60% in COD ghost i5 4670k uses 44% of its resources fx 8350 only uses 25%
in the future fx 8350> i5 4670k, wanna bet!? just look at these links
* where is the i5 in UBISOFT's system requirements!? http://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=4546&game=Watch%20Dogs Ubisoft has confrimed that this game is heavily threaded, and has promised i5 owners can hit HIGH sttings!! NO ULTRA SETTINGS
* When Capcom says its new engine takes full advantage of i7, which is good news for fx owners, Capcom really means it http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/132533/sponsored_feature_resident_evil_5_.php?print=1
* Epic says the more cores the better http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/unreal-engine-4-needs-lots-of-processors and read also http://www.shacknews.com/article/70348/epic-talks-unreal-engine-4
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

sabutoros

Honorable
Dec 12, 2013
15
0
10,520



i think iam settling to fx 8350 !!! :D !! will gtx 760 AMP be fine ?? cuz getting sapphire dual X R9-280X makes me buy a 750 watt psu ...so these things make me exceed the budget !! so is the gtx 760 AMP -- FX 8350 a good combo ...???? i know R9 performs better but stillll.....

or will it really be a stupid move to buy a gtx 760 AMP 2gb oc over a dual X R9-280X ......
buying a sapphire dual X R9-280X with its corresponding psu brings 65 dollars more than what my budget is :/

wat say ???
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
D

Darkresurrection

Honorable
Sep 15, 2013
721
0
11,160
It makes a great combo, but if I were you, I would go with R9-290 for 400$ it will cost less than dual r9-280x, will work with a decent 650w PSU and will nuke anything you throw at it...I personally went with this rig, fx 8350+r9-290 as well can you buy an r9-290?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

sabutoros

Honorable
Dec 12, 2013
15
0
10,520



bro..its a definite no !! here in india gpu prices are like a way tooo crazyy !! an powercolor R9-290X costs 774 dollars :/
but anyways thank u all for ur advices..... iam happy going for gtx 760 AMP and FX 8350 :)!!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
D

Darkresurrection

Honorable
Sep 15, 2013
721
0
11,160


Congratulations bro...It is a great gaming rig, play hard :)
Don't forget to close the post, when you feel you don't have any other questions
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
F

Fredrik Aldhagen

Honorable
Jul 16, 2013
70
0
10,630






MOH Warfighter: That benchmark suggests the game is poorly threaded as the 4 core FX-4170 beats FX-8350 to the third place with 1 FPS, thanks to a higher clockspeed.
Black Ops 2: Same thing really, at least now FX-8350 comes ever so slightly ahead of FX-4170.
For both the above, notice that the Intel CPUs achieve parity while at a 500 mhz lower clockspeed.
Crysis 3: Ok, FX-8350 shows some advantage. Do note that this is on rather low graphical settings, 720p with no AA/AF.
BF3: They're within a few FPS of eachother.
Arkham Origins: Again, they're within a few FPS of eachother.
Tomb Raider: This benchmark suggests the game is not CPU bound. i5, i7 and all the FX CPUs are pretty much tied.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
mauller07

mauller07

Splendid
Mar 28, 2010
2,801
0
21,960
Fredrick, if the games are running fine on the quad core amd's as well as the Intel's it means it is balanced well over 4 threads which is shown by dual and tri core phenoms at same clocks not doing as well as quads.

In the past we would have games using 3 or fewer fat threads where higher IPC helps but since the IPC disparity does not make a large difference shows the games are well threaded.

Saying the game is not CPU bound or badly threaded because the Intel's, 8 core and quad core amds are comparable with poor analysis is simply a strawman argument
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
D

Darkresurrection

Honorable
Sep 15, 2013
721
0
11,160

well, fanboyism is still alive!!! and excuse me can't one overclock fx 8350 to 5ghz where haswell fails to go above 4.3 ghz because it is damn hot (according to tomshardware)!!! where AMD wins you say, it is not CPU bound!! when AMD smokes i7-3770k regarding price performance things as well, you say slightly better on the contrary it is funny where i7-3770k gives 70fps in a game and fx 8350 gives 64 fps you call it a colossal victory :lol: well everyone is familiar with these statements of yours, your words are so old and I am sorry that even my grand dad can't stop laughing at the moment, but it is a shame you can't hit ultra settings with the i5-4670k and you are bound to play high settings, and this engine is going to be used for upcoming Ubisoft's engine, it is a shame that Epic games says in order to see the full potential of unreal engine 4 you are going to need something like fx 8350 or i7-3770k and never mention the i5, the sad part is that we are going to the future and not the past , so bear with it fx 8350>i5 4670k
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
F

Fredrik Aldhagen

Honorable
Jul 16, 2013
70
0
10,630


You were saying FX-8350 was a better choice. I've never said that Intel CPUs crushes AMD's, just that the PS4/Xbone APU being 8 core does not automatically make the FX-8350 better.

If the games were well threaded then the FX-8350 and FX-6300 these games would show a clear advantage over FX-4170 or FX-4300. The only game among those benchmarks that shows that is Crysis 3.



I've never quoted any benchmarks, I've just analyzed the ones you linked to. The only one where FX-8350 was clearly better was Crysis 2.

The Tomb Raider shows a 2 ghz difference in clock speed making a difference of between 1 and 3 fps. I'd say that suggests the game is CPU bound, but if you have a different explanation I'd love to hear it.

As for fanboyism, did you miss my previous post where I said that FX-6300 was a good choice if money was an issue? I'd say that the benchmark shows the FX series can still keep up with the i5 and i7, but they don't show it to be superior to them.



As for the Ubisoft and Epic comments, I disregard those as hype from the publisher (remember Activision saying CoD Ghost NEEDING 6 GB RAM?).
 
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