Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

i5 4440 gtx 760 gaming vs fx 8320 r9 280x

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Intel i5
  • AMD
  • Next Generation
  • Games
  • Build
  • Gtx
  • Radeon
Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 20, 2014 3:46:18 AM

im getting a budget build to play next-gen games alothough i would be palying a couple of old games like cod 4 and stuff...so my challenge im facing with this build is that i have 2 options
1. fx 8320 with r9 280x
2.i5 4440 gtx 760

processor wise the i5 is a good choice i feel but the gfx card in option 1 is way better , this whole thing is confusing me. i dont like to say this word much but this one's gotta be atleast 90% "future-proof" for me. IMO if i take the i5, my build will be upgradable to the next-gen broadwell's.

So, am i making the right decision cuz i heard the fx 8320 doesnt perform well in games like call of duty which are optimized badly. (P.S im a game developer so i know my stuff , pls dont try to against me on this point cod fans)

SO, yeah thats it .

the motherboard i will be taking for build 1 will be m5a97 r2.0 (is it good ?)
the motherboard for build 2 will be the msi z87g43 military class 4

my psu - corsair vs 650 ( sorry i cant change it , its already bought)

More about : 4440 gtx 760 gaming 8320 280x

a c 93 à CPUs
February 20, 2014 3:53:27 AM

Go for combo number 1.
280x is far better solutions, and that is were you would notice the biggest difference.

Btw optimized doesn't mean it run better on more threads. PS. a game developer would know that.
m
0
l
February 20, 2014 6:58:13 AM

vmN said:
Go for combo number 1.
280x is far better solutions, and that is were you would notice the biggest difference.

Btw optimized doesn't mean it run better on more threads. PS. a game developer would know that.


nop , i meant that if games like call of duty put more pressure on single core in this processor where each core is comparatively weak instead of spreading its threads across the cores , some games like watch dogs maybe doing this exact thing.

so ur sure with the combo1 right ? but will this be "future proof" cause i heard amd wont be manufacturing further processors for the am3+ socket and i wont be able to upgrade it later. (ik nothing can be future proof but just depending on the longest time this build will stay and the lowest posssible cost to upgrade in the future )

m
0
l
Related resources
February 20, 2014 9:05:18 AM

Nope, go for the second option- fx 8320 and 280x. It is far more future proof, assuming you'll be playing on 1080p and you'd get the 2gb version of 760. Let me tell you something- 2gb Vram on cpu is no future proof at all, some games right now can go above it like 2,2 gb. And there is no point in 4gb version, becouse the time 2gb is bad the 760 will be slow anyway. And also, it is big debate fx-8320 vs i5. But if you want play new games-fx. If you want play old games - i5.

Again, the i5 is not worth now. Why ? Old games usually utilise 1 or 2 cores so yeah it is better performance per core for intel, but these games are easy for fx anyway. Because frankly 200 or 250 fps who cares ??
m
0
l
a c 93 à CPUs
February 20, 2014 10:26:23 AM

2GB is still futureproof.
Only if you are playing at higher resolutions OR playing with anti-alias you could use more vram in some heavier game. For 1080p 2GB will still stay futureproof.

FX wont be better in the future. I5 will still stay stronger in games.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 20, 2014 11:37:14 AM

If you will be playing CoD4 then tbh you won't experience any performance difference between the two. Why? Because you will be hitting the +60 frame cap on both platforms. Unless you are tring to hit the 120 fps mark because you have a 120hz+ monitor(in which case you are playing for performance and not quality, lower texture/res = highrer fps = it doesnt matter), both setups will do this juuuust fine.

I think it's just a matter of personal preference here but honestly what is Intel gonna bring to the table with Broadwell? If their upgrades follow the likes of their previous upgrades, _nothing_ (yeah maybe lower TDP).

I'd go for the FX. Then you have a stronger GPU > Better performance in GPU heavy games.. Fun
m
0
l
a c 93 à CPUs
February 20, 2014 11:50:24 AM

If you don't look into the architecture, then sure it seems like nothing.
Then the performance increase from piledriver to SR is also pretty small....
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 20, 2014 11:57:54 AM

That is very true. Tbh I jumped into this thread because this is a seriously tough question. That's just my 2c tho

This question is more along the lines of predicting the future. If you look at the steam surveys most people still run dual/quad core CPU's so the developers will still push to make games playable at that rate. So whether and 8 core is future proof is really tough. AMD is doing a damn good job promoting Mantle to mix things up a bit.
m
0
l
a c 93 à CPUs
February 20, 2014 12:03:48 PM

AMD is no more future-proof than a i5.
AMD know they can't rush multi-threaded games(If they knew, why would they release a entire line with quad cores)
Even if games is utilized for 8 threads a i5 will still be just as good.
m
0
l

Best solution

February 21, 2014 12:23:09 AM

vmN said:
AMD is no more future-proof than a i5.
AMD know they can't rush multi-threaded games(If they knew, why would they release a entire line with quad cores)
Even if games is utilized for 8 threads a i5 will still be just as good.

And now you shown some hardware ignorance. The future games will improve in physics, graphic and stuff. So therefore it need better hardware. Quad core ? I'm sorry to say this but it's fact. 80% people tell you should buy intel, no matter what. That's FALSE. But you are a game developer. you should already know that. But take a look at upcoming game The Thief ( http://community.eidosmontreal.com/blogs/Thief-PC-Requi... ) As you can see recommended is i7 or 8core AMD. Why ? Future games WILL need more than 6 cores. I5 have just 4. I don't understand at all why people are buying intel ???? It make no sense, just a overpriced quad core..Open your eyes and see the truth !!
Share
a c 93 à CPUs
February 21, 2014 12:31:13 AM

Future games will always improve and need more computing power, that isn't something new.
I'm not a game developer..

I bet an i3 gonna run that game.

At some point games will utilize more threads, that is correct, but the time hasn't come yet.
Intel is more expensive for a reason. They manufacturer their own product(reason why they are so ahead of AMD in a architecture point of view), which is extremely expensive.

Also AMD haven't released a 8 core piledriver CPU yet.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 21, 2014 12:57:53 AM

Romenfousek said:
vmN said:
AMD is no more future-proof than a i5.
AMD know they can't rush multi-threaded games(If they knew, why would they release a entire line with quad cores)
Even if games is utilized for 8 threads a i5 will still be just as good.

And now you shown some hardware ignorance. The future games will improve in physics, graphic and stuff. So therefore it need better hardware. Quad core ? I'm sorry to say this but it's fact. 80% people tell you should buy intel, no matter what. That's FALSE. But you are a game developer. you should already know that. But take a look at upcoming game The Thief ( http://community.eidosmontreal.com/blogs/Thief-PC-Requi... ) As you can see recommended is i7 or 8core AMD. Why ? Future games WILL need more than 6 cores. I5 have just 4. I don't understand at all why people are buying intel ???? It make no sense, just a overpriced quad core..Open your eyes and see the truth !!


Also because THIEF is gonna be running Mantle so obviously they choose the two CPU's that are best fitted to run Mantle. Depending on how well they implement it, AMD could get better performance than Intel..

And yeah as vmN says, AMD doesn't actually have a "true" 8 core out there.. Its 4 modules with 2 cores per module. It's getting there but not entirely..
m
0
l
February 21, 2014 1:32:16 AM

I'm going with the amd build, btw I'm gonna play at 900p only but I like to have the msaa and anti aliasing at high. So, even for a game like thief.. Which is very demanding as you know it.. I should be able to go above 50 for right? (ultra) and us the m5a97 motherboard good for over clocking the fx 8320 to the 8350 clock? And also will it be good for crossfire...
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 21, 2014 1:38:54 AM

Good choice...
the 760's nice but I wouldn't even give it a year before you have to pair back a few settings in order to play@1080p comfortably.
GPU's tend to degenerate really fast and getting a $300 tier cards the best option.
The 8350 will probably last just about as long as the 280X giving a bit more balance to the system.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 21, 2014 1:39:05 AM

Aditya Angara said:
I'm going with the amd build, btw I'm gonna play at 900p only but I like to have the msaa and anti aliasing at high. So, even for a game like thief.. Which is very demanding as you know it.. I should be able to go above 50 for right? (ultra) and us the m5a97 motherboard good for over clocking the fx 8320 to the 8350 clock? And also will it be good for crossfire...


If you choose the M5A970 Pro/Evo then sure, go nuts. The other versions have a 4+2 phase so it can be done but most would prefer 6+2 or 8+2.
m
0
l
a c 93 à CPUs
February 21, 2014 1:44:28 AM

madsmagnus said:
Also because THIEF is gonna be running Mantle so obviously they choose the two CPU's that are best fitted to run Mantle. Depending on how well they implement it, AMD could get better performance than Intel..

AMD have a greater impact on lower end systems.
Mantle doesn't give a AMD CPU more performance than a Intel CPU.
m
0
l
February 21, 2014 2:30:33 AM

Aditya Angara said:
I'm going with the amd build, btw I'm gonna play at 900p only but I like to have the msaa and anti aliasing at high. So, even for a game like thief.. Which is very demanding as you know it.. I should be able to go above 50 for right? (ultra) and us the m5a97 motherboard good for over clocking the fx 8320 to the 8350 clock? And also will it be good for crossfire...

Great choice.. You won't regret. :) 
m
0
l
February 21, 2014 2:53:28 AM

So can you guys recommend me a good motherboard? I'm planning to overclock the fx 8320 to 4.5ghz(the clock of fx 8350).. Maybe a future crossfire. Btw in my country the r9 280x costs 260$ while the 760 costs 230$.

Is the m5a97 r2.0 good and will the 2.0 pcie slot make a difference?

Hmm and is the xfx r9 280x 3gb gdr5 a good one? (non o.c) and if I oc the gpu will my motherboard take damage (m5a97)

My motherboard budget is maybe 10$ more than what the m5a97 costs
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 21, 2014 3:38:54 AM

Aditya Angara said:
So can you guys recommend me a good motherboard? I'm planning to overclock the fx 8320 to 4.5ghz(the clock of fx 8350).. Maybe a future crossfire. Btw in my country the r9 280x costs 260$ while the 760 costs 230$.

Is the m5a97 r2.0 good and will the 2.0 pcie slot make a difference?

Hmm and is the xfx r9 280x 3gb gdr5 a good one? (non o.c) and if I oc the gpu will my motherboard take damage (m5a97)

My motherboard budget is maybe 10$ more than what the m5a97 costs


Gigabyte GA-990XA-UD3 <-- It's kickass and somewhat cheap.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 21, 2014 3:39:26 AM

vmN said:
madsmagnus said:
Also because THIEF is gonna be running Mantle so obviously they choose the two CPU's that are best fitted to run Mantle. Depending on how well they implement it, AMD could get better performance than Intel..

AMD have a greater impact on lower end systems.
Mantle doesn't give a AMD CPU more performance than a Intel CPU.


No but it does give more headroom for the GPU to perform, making the difference between Intel and AMD smaller.
m
0
l
a c 93 à CPUs
February 21, 2014 3:46:42 AM

I think it would be better to say: It is making the difference between high-end CPUs and low-end CPU smaller.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 21, 2014 3:50:49 AM

vmN said:
I think it would be better to say: It is making the difference between high-end CPUs and low-end CPU smaller.


Potato potato, we both know we are talking about the same thing :p 
m
0
l
a c 93 à CPUs
February 21, 2014 3:56:32 AM

Not really, as fx 8xxx is considered high end, and intel does have low-end CPUs too.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 21, 2014 7:25:14 AM

vmN said:
Not really, as fx 8xxx is considered high end, and intel does have low-end CPUs too.


But the overall result is the same. I know what you are getting at but the fact of the matter is that we are seeing a bigger middleclass CPU being created and lesser different types. A stabilization of the computer 3D market, and how it is controlled. More focus can be put into researching more efficient architecture within the GPU. ARM cores are flying up all over the place because their architecture is great. Noone is winning this so far, only ARM.
m
0
l
February 21, 2014 2:58:23 PM

Completely depends on games, if you are playing games like cod, you can go with the integrated graphics, lol :)  Though fx 8320 is a lot better choice with r9 280x, cause you will need this graphics only in games that are supporting more than 4 cores while cpu and motherboard combo is gonna be like 100pounds/135 dollars lower.
m
0
l
February 21, 2014 3:50:16 PM

Romenfousek said:
vmN said:
AMD is no more future-proof than a i5.
AMD know they can't rush multi-threaded games(If they knew, why would they release a entire line with quad cores)
Even if games is utilized for 8 threads a i5 will still be just as good.

And now you shown some hardware ignorance. The future games will improve in physics, graphic and stuff. So therefore it need better hardware. Quad core ? I'm sorry to say this but it's fact. 80% people tell you should buy intel, no matter what. That's FALSE. But you are a game developer. you should already know that. But take a look at upcoming game The Thief ( http://community.eidosmontreal.com/blogs/Thief-PC-Requi... ) As you can see recommended is i7 or 8core AMD. Why ? Future games WILL need more than 6 cores. I5 have just 4. I don't understand at all why people are buying intel ???? It make no sense, just a overpriced quad core..Open your eyes and see the truth !!


So you base your entire speculation on the future by the recommended specs for one game?

You seem to think the only aspect of a processor that is relevant is how many cores it has.

You say most people suggest Intel "no matter what", and then argue with a guy who recommended the AMD combo.

Brand loyalty at its finest, no different than the Intel fanboys.
m
0
l
!