Isn't the 3570k faster than FX-8350 for gaming?

Meatbag723 · Mar 2, 2014

I'm building a computer and I think I should get a 3570k. It's faster than the 8350 for gaming, right? Someone told me the 8350 is faster but benchmarks show the 3570k winning by a lot.

Here is my build: (I downgraded to a GTX 760)

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/30SAB

Devballs · Mar 2, 2014

Yes the intel processor has better single core performance which is what most games use. If you go by actual core clock the 8350 is faster, and has more cores, but I personally do not know too many programs that utilize that (aside from professional programs).

geofelt · Mar 2, 2014

The efficiency per clock of the intel chips is superior. Perhaps 30% better.
Here is one comparison :
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-processor-frame-rate-performance,3427-9.html

paitjsu sadff · Mar 11, 2014

from the newest Ubisoft AAA game called ''Watch Dogs'' scheduled to come out on may 2014 and looking in the future, i would say FX-8350...
looking at the PC requirements for this game, the Recommended specifications are as follow :

Recommended

Processor: Core i7 3770 @ 3.5Ghz or AMD FX-8350 @ 4.0Ghz
RAM: 8 GB
Video Card: 2048 VRAM DirectX 11 with Shader Model 5.0 or higher (see supported list)
Sound Card: Surround Sound 5.1 capable sound card
Supported Video Cards at Time of Release:
nVidia GeForce GTX460 or better, GT500, GT600, GT700 series;
AMD Radeon HD5850 or better, HD6000, HD7000, R7 and R9 series
Intel® Iris™ Pro HD 5200

Links for more information :
http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/10/08/watch-dogs-system-req...

http://ca.ign.com/wikis/watch-dogs/PC_System_Requiremen...

RobCrezz · Mar 11, 2014

paitjsu sadff :

All speculation though as its not out yet.

If it doesn't run well on a 3570k then its got terrible coding.

paitjsu sadff · Mar 11, 2014

RobCrezz :

i agree with you, but if i where to build a system today for future games i would rather have an 8 thread capable CPU...but these are no speculation these are the specs that have been posted by ubisoft's developpers, they have
the game in hands and know what they are doing, they recommanded that type of configuration for a reason...

RobCrezz · Mar 11, 2014

paitjsu sadff :

Where does it say that Ubisoft gave these specs?

I disagree. Although the 8350 has 8 cores, they are slower cores and older architecture. Its a great CPU ( I have one in my work computer and its very good at the tasks I give it), but for gaming I would be looking at the 4670k or 4770k for longevity, not the AMD 8 core.

Regardless of how well they can multithread games, IPC and single thread performance will always be important for games.

paitjsu sadff · Mar 11, 2014

RobCrezz :

are you saying that IGN or Pc Gamer made-up these specifications by themselves?
Of course they come from ubisoft otherwise they would have not published them...

and about IPC i do agree too that it is important in games...that is why the FX-43xx, FX-63xx and FX-83xx have only 30% les IPC per core compared to intel's flagship CPU...still it's way enough for anything...just look at the PS4 and xbox one they have way worse IPC than the FX cpu's and still they will run the same games
on 6 or 8 threads at a time...this is where the industry is going wheter you jump in the wagon or not...of course the 4770k will always lead the way, but the 4670k will trail behind the FX 8 core as the time will go by...

RobCrezz · Mar 11, 2014

paitjsu sadff :

RobCrezz :

are you saying that IGN or Pc Gamer made-up these specifications by themselves?
Of course they come from ubisoft otherwise they would have not published them...

and about IPC i do agree too that it is important in games...that is why the FX-43xx, FX-63xx and FX-83xx have only 30% les IPC per core compared to intel's flagship CPU...still it's way enough for anything...just look at the PS4 and xbox one they have way worse IPC than the FX cpu's and still they will run the same games
on 6 or 8 threads at a time...this is where the industry is going wheter you jump in the wagon or not...of course the 4770k will always lead the way, but the 4670k will trail behind the FX 8 core as the time will go by...

Yes thats exactly what I am saying, its not uncommon for sites to speculate themselves on specs, without them coming from the game maker/publisher.

Again what you are saying is speculation, you dont know that the 4670k will trail behind the FX 8 as time goes by. You say your self that the lower performance 8 cores in the consoles will be able to run the games, and you think a much faster quad wont? That makes no sense.

The majority of people who game on pcs are on Intel systems so I would be surprised if game makers alienated their biggest customer base (over 74% of gamers on steam are using Intel CPUS, 47% are on dual cores 44% on quads and only 4.7% on higher than quad).

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/?platform=pc

paitjsu sadff · Mar 11, 2014

RobCrezz :

paitjsu sadff :

Yes thats exactly what I am saying, its not uncommon for sites to speculate themselves on specs, without them coming from the game maker/publisher.

Again what you are saying is speculation, you dont know that the 4670k will trail behind the FX 8 as time goes by. You say your self that the lower performance 8 cores in the consoles will be able to run the games, and you think a much faster quad wont? That makes no sense.

The majority of people who game on pcs are on Intel systems so I would be surprised if game makers alienated their biggest customer base (over 74% of gamers on steam are using Intel CPUS, 47% are on dual cores 44% on quads and only 4.7% on higher than quad).

i didnt say that the all mighty and all powerfull intel quad core CPU will not be able to handle the games...the OP
asked if the i5 was faster then the FX-83xx in gaming...and it is...for now...
what you don't seem to realise is that we PC gamers are only about 10-12% of the market while 90% of the
people are gaming on console (Ps4 Xbox one and WiiU) and those are all 8 core AMD driven...PC gamers are a
negigeable portion of the market..

RobCrezz · Mar 11, 2014

paitjsu sadff :

RobCrezz :

paitjsu sadff :

Yes thats exactly what I am saying, its not uncommon for sites to speculate themselves on specs, without them coming from the game maker/publisher.

Again what you are saying is speculation, you dont know that the 4670k will trail behind the FX 8 as time goes by. You say your self that the lower performance 8 cores in the consoles will be able to run the games, and you think a much faster quad wont? That makes no sense.

The majority of people who game on pcs are on Intel systems so I would be surprised if game makers alienated their biggest customer base (over 74% of gamers on steam are using Intel CPUS, 47% are on dual cores 44% on quads and only 4.7% on higher than quad).

i didnt say that the all mighty and all powerfull intel quad core CPU will not be able to handle the games...the OP
asked if the i5 was faster then the FX-83xx in gaming...and it is...for now...
what you don't seem to realise is that we PC gamers are only about 10-12% of the market while 90% of the
people are gaming on console (Ps4 Xbox one and WiiU) and those are all 8 core AMD driven...PC gamers are a
negigeable portion of the market..

Ok, you carry on with your guesses, but thats all they are, not facts.

logainofhades · Mar 11, 2014

Even THG has reported these CPU requirements.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/watch-dogs-64-bit-system-specs-nvidia-amd,24536.html

paitjsu sadff · Mar 11, 2014

logainofhades :

exactly, the same specs i posted...

RobCrezz · Mar 11, 2014

logainofhades :

Yeah, Ive seen that. Not saying these are wrong, but they arent listed on ubisofts watch dogs site.

Anyway, the game is coming out on the xbox 360 and the Wii U, so ill be surprised if a i5 cant play it well :lol:

paitjsu sadff · Mar 11, 2014

RobCrezz :

it will run very well on the i5...OF COURSE MAN it will!
it's just im very tired of ppl saying that the FX cpu's are slow and powerhungry and shit like that
when in fact they are AT MOST 30% slower in single threaded games and up to 40% faster than
an i5 in well multi-threaded games...

RobCrezz · Mar 11, 2014

paitjsu sadff :

RobCrezz :

it will run very well on the i5...OF COURSE MAN it will!
it's just im very tired of ppl saying that the FX cpu's are slow and powerhungry and shit like that
when in fact they are AT MOST 30% slower in single threaded games and up to 40% faster than
an i5 in well multi-threaded games...

Where is it 40% faster?

enemy1g · Mar 11, 2014

To add to this. The FX series is power hungry tends to run hotter. There's no game out there that the 8350 would dominate an i5-3570k/4670k. However, there are games where Intel's single core performance is vastly superior, that the difference IS noticable.

MMOs and multiplayer games tend to LOVE Intel's stronger single core performance. Notable games would be WoW, LoL, and Skyrim.

Specifically, the 8320/8350 will need to be overclocked to be on par with a stock i5. Yes, I'll admit, the 8350 is better in -certain- aspects, but for gaming, there's no question that the i5 will be better, whether it be a slight advantage, or an incredible large one.

paitjsu sadff · Mar 11, 2014

RobCrezz :

well, in theory, if an application would scale very well, if we assume the core i5 is 30% faster per core (it's even a little bit less but lets round that up to 30%) and it has 4 of them, that makes it 4x 100% (400) where the 8 core FX would be 8x 70% (560) that if you do the maths ( 560/400 = 1.4) equals to 40% faster...that of course would be the ideal scenario where the CPU would be utilised to 100%...never happens...cause you know the FX has always a couple core to spare to run other applications, the OS and stuff, downloading content...etc...whereas the i5 has NONE

enemy1g · Mar 11, 2014

In practical use, the i5 is still fully capable of multi-tasking. According to you, the i5 has no extra cores to run ANYTHING but what you're currently running.

I frequently, meaning on a nearly daily basis, run three games, while maintaining high FPS; more than enough to run each game smoothly, while having firefox running twitch in the background. I don't download at the same time as I value my bandwidth.

The 8350 has its strengths, but is nowhere near the performance compared to the i5. Have you even seen the new Thief benchmarks? It's rather embarassing for AMD.

paitjsu sadff · Mar 11, 2014

enemy1g :

if i seen it ?! you BET !!! IT HAS BECOME THE 1st ARGUMENT FOR INTEL FANBOY NOW !!!
THIS GAME IS BASED ON THE AGE OLD UNREAL 3 ENGINE...IT USES 1 THREAD OF COURSE IT RUN
BETTER ON THE CORE i5...almost 30% better in fact...i know that, its new but at the same
time it's an OLD game !!! WAKE-UP PPL YOU INTEL FANBOYS ARE STUCK IN THE PAST AND REFUSE
TO SEE THE FUTURE !!!!

enemy1g · Mar 11, 2014

I'm not particularly stuck in the past, but looking forward, I still see Intel as being the dominant CPU manufacturer. And as I recall, AMD is stepping out of the high end CPU business, and focusing more on their APUs. So with that said, when AMD doesn't produce high end CPUs, will a 8350 still "beat" an i5?

So with Skyrim's Creation Engine, which is still a fair amount newer than the "ancient" Unreal 3 Engine, where's your excuse there? The performance difference is still major within that engine as well.

And as I've said, the 8350 does have it's strengths, but the i5 is still a superior CPU.

JOOK-D · Mar 11, 2014

paitjsu sadff :

Captain Caps Lock is back!

I assume this is in reference to me, since I was the one who linked you thief benchmarks as an example of a recently released title. I am not an intel fanboy, I am a performance fanboy. The intel is still the better choice for performance.

Georgehillier · Mar 11, 2014

Both CPUs will run games fine as long as you have a decent graphics card.

If you were to go with iIntel then I'd suggest going for a 4th gen CPU, not a 3rd gen.

logainofhades · Mar 11, 2014

paitjsu sadff :

You mad bro? :lol:

paitjsu sadff · Mar 11, 2014

JOOK-D :

paitjsu sadff :

Captain Caps Lock is back!

I assume this is in reference to me, since I was the one who linked you thief benchmarks as an example of a recently released title. I am not an intel fanboy, I am a performance fanboy. The intel is still the better choice for performance.

i must admit that made me laugh! have a good one, im done for the day...
edit : SORRY' IM DONE FOR THE DAY arrrrhhhhh

Isn't the 3570k faster than FX-8350 for gaming?

Reputable

Honorable

Titan

Honorable

Expert

Honorable

Expert

Honorable

Expert

Honorable

Expert

Titan

Honorable

Expert

Honorable

Expert

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Dignified

Honorable

Titan

Honorable

Share this page