i5-4670K versus FX-8350

Caleb026

Reputable
Feb 17, 2014
3
0
4,510
Before you continue; please take note that I'm really tired when I was making this thread, so I might did something wrong in this post. So feel free to correct me. Also I'm a beginner when it comes in system building.

Okay, so I've posted this thread because I want to ask what is the best CPU for my gaming system. A lot of people say that i5-4670K is one of the best CPU for gaming.

But I'm not really sure if it is worth it to buy the i5-4670K rather than the FX-8350; since the FX-8350 is a lot more cheaper than the i5-4670K.

Some people say that the i5-4670K is better than the FX-8350, and I kinda agree with that. But I saw a lot of benchmarks that showed me that the i5-4670K isn't really 100% better than the FX-8350.

Benchmarks of the i5-4670K and the FX-8350:
http--www.gamegpu.ru-images-stories-Test_GPU-Action-Battlefield_4-test-bf4_proz_2.jpg


za92nangvfd6ic8fg.jpg


In the first benchmark you can see that the FX-8350 is a little bit better than the i5-4670K, but my point here; is that for the price of FX-8350 it can still match with the i5-4670K, which cost more than the FX-8350.

I'm also wondering, if I choose the FX-6300 will it do a huge performance lose in my games?

Also, if possible I would like you guys to suggest a processor for me. And if you're going to suggest a processor please look below.

System Usage: Gaming, recording, and editing
Overclocking: Maybe
Budget Range: $100-200 USD/₱6,000-10,000 PHP
Preferred Website: http://pcx.com.ph/

Credits:
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i5-4670K+%40+3.40GHz&id=1921
http://www.bf4blog.com/battlefield-4-retail-gpu-cpu-benchmarks/
 
First off, NEITHER of those 2 benches are what I would call trustworthy.

If your strapped for cash then a slightly overclocked FX 8320 is for you, it will do just as well as a 8350 and come close to a 4670K in most cases.

HOWEVER if you want more consistent performance, especially in games that are more single threaded, like skyrim, then the I5 is the better choice.
When the 8350 does do better than the I5 is usually due to an optimization by the developer of the specific game or because the game can actually use more than 4 threads effectively.
 
The I5 is better but not 100%, the FX is a good CPU for the money and can keep up with the I5 in many things and even beat it in few but overall looses. The Argument that you came up with in the beginning is the one that should sell the FX, that is; it is cheaper but not better.
Going with the FX6300 I would only do if on tight budget since the FX8320 is not much more but can equal the FX8350 easy with mild OC.
 

Caleb026

Reputable
Feb 17, 2014
3
0
4,510
Okay guys. The reason why I like the FX-8350 is because for its price it can still match with higher processors like the i5-4670K. I also think that choosing the FX-8350 might be a really good choice; since games in the future might use more than 4 cores.

And, if I'm going to choose the i5-4670K over the FX-8350 how much performance I can get? 5 FPS? 3 FPS? 4 FPS?
 

JoshuaPinto

Honorable
Feb 10, 2014
177
0
10,760
The core i5 is definitely the better choice. Intel is much more reliable than AMD. I have replaced ten AMD CPUs to every one Intel CPU. The i5 may not have as many cores or Ghz or it might be a little more expensive. But it will be worth it for the money
 


I find that VERY hard to believe. Motherboards, maybe, CPUs, no...
 

vmN

Honorable
Oct 27, 2013
1,666
0
12,160
The only way the FX 8320 would outperform a 4670k would be if it was pure integer instructions, then it's the fx clockrate that is the winning factor.
Odds of only integer instructions in the real world? 1%

But if you throw any kind of SIMD into the mix, this is where intel will get it huuuuuge come-back.


+1 Novuake