i3 3220 or A8-5600K?

bayonet14

Distinguished
Jun 4, 2011
345
0
18,810
My GPU: Radeon R7 260X
RAM: 8.00GB Dual-Channel DDR3
Resolution: 1600x900 (20 inch monitor)
PSU: Generic 600watts

I narrowed down my choices to two, based on budget and availability, (I'm not from US).
Target AMD mobo and processor:
MSI a55m-P33 + a8 5600K

Target Intel mobo and processor:
BIOSTAR H61MGV3 + INTEL CORE i3 3220

Primary use: Gaming
Type of games: First person shooters, particularly Battlefield 4, Call of Duty Ghosts, other next gen games.

*I dont overclock, don't know it. Too risky.



 
Solution


beause intel cores are quite a bit better than amd cores. The i3 has L3 cache and much better performance per core. It uses less power and delivers equal or better performance (an i3 is about on par with an FX 6300). It also offers more consistent performance, just take a look at AMD benchmarks for battlefield 3 (where they are close to their intel counterparts) and skyrim (where they are MUCH lower).

The i3 is able to do well and has a MUCH better upgrade path than the A8. With the A8, you won't have anything worth upgrading to at all unless you get a new motherboard. Also...

bayonet14

Distinguished
Jun 4, 2011
345
0
18,810

Why an i3? It only has 2 cores. I understand it has hyperthreading but what does it got on gaming? A8 has 4 cores, which is needed in core intensive games
 

Skern

Reputable
Feb 17, 2014
68
0
4,660
Out of the two processors you have, the AMD has slightly better performance, but they are just about the same. So this leaves me to base my decision solely on the motherboard. The MSI mobo has more features then the biostar, making it a winner in my mind.

While Intel typically has better performance then AMD, since AMD seems to be taking a step back from the performance aspect of CPUs, if you're picking from the lower end CPUs, obviously due to budget or regional restrictions, they're all going to be about the same.
 

thdarkshadow

Honorable
Feb 6, 2013
895
0
11,160
The i3 has two VERY strong cores with hyperthreading and the a8 has four weak cores. The i3 is better in every way. In its worst situation it still ties the a8. If you could get the 6300 it's better but you said its not available so the i3 is the best choice
 

bayonet14

Distinguished
Jun 4, 2011
345
0
18,810

Will it do good in the type of games I'll be playing? My gpu is radeon r7 260x

 


beause intel cores are quite a bit better than amd cores. The i3 has L3 cache and much better performance per core. It uses less power and delivers equal or better performance (an i3 is about on par with an FX 6300). It also offers more consistent performance, just take a look at AMD benchmarks for battlefield 3 (where they are close to their intel counterparts) and skyrim (where they are MUCH lower).

The i3 is able to do well and has a MUCH better upgrade path than the A8. With the A8, you won't have anything worth upgrading to at all unless you get a new motherboard. Also the A8 is a complete waste with a GPU (the 5600k won't crossfire with the 260x).

If you go with the i3, you can save up for an i5 3470 or whatever you can afford and get much better performance than anything on FM2.

If you do go with AMD do yourself a favor and get the athlon x4 750k or 760k if it is available to make it worth its limitations. The athlon will do just as well as the a8.
 
Solution

bayonet14

Distinguished
Jun 4, 2011
345
0
18,810

Alright, it seems i3 is the better choice.You raise a good point
 


You'll be limited by your gpu in most cases (which will do fine at 900p resolutions). Big multiplayer maps in BF4 might be a problem (the only problem I can really think of to be honest) but the i3 won't do worse than the A8 to be sure. For singleplayer the i3 will do just fine in just about any game.