AMD FX 8320 Vs i5 4670K

Hey guys. Im really stuck on what to chose. I want a new CPu as my X4 760K seems to struggle a bit when it comes to gaming when paired with this GPU. Bf4 i get horrible frame dips. My choice is either one of these. I already have a Hyper 212 for Overclcoking


Intel Choice

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: Intel Core i5-4670K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor (£161.99 @ Aria PC)
Motherboard: MSI Z87-G45 Gaming ATX LGA1150 Motherboard (£104.24 @ Scan.co.uk)
Total: £266.23
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-03-26 12:36 GMT+0000)


AMD Choice - May change board to the Sabertooth

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: AMD FX-8320 3.5GHz 8-Core Processor (£105.59 @ Aria PC)
Motherboard: Asus M5A99FX PRO R2.0 ATX AM3+ Motherboard (£99.99 @ Amazon UK)
Total: £205.58
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-03-26 12:37 GMT+0000)

All i do is gaming and schoolwork and am looking to maybe get a 880 or something nearer the end of the year to replace my 270X. So which is the better option? Also, if intel seems the best idea is Devils canyon worth the wait due to better TIm? i wouldn't be upgrading really until late april early june so im thinking if it helps a month wont hurt much.


Thanks Guys!
22 answers Last reply
More about amd 8320 4670k
  1. i would go for i5 4670k build its best cpu for gaming
  2. What settings are you trying to play BF4 on?

    I've always had doubts with a 8320 and a very high end card. If the 880 is anything like the 780ti, I wouldn't use a 8320 for it.
  3. I'd grab the 4670k option.

    Here's a 3rd option:

    PCPartPicker part list: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/1Webc
    Price breakdown by merchant: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/1Webc/by_merchant/
    Benchmarks: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/1Webc/benchmarks/

    CPU: Intel Xeon E3-1230 V3 3.3GHz Quad-Core Processor (£179.99 @ Aria PC)
    Motherboard: ASRock Z87 Pro3 ATX LGA1150 Motherboard (£68.24 @ Scan.co.uk)
    Total: £248.23
    (Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
    (Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-03-26 13:55 GMT+0000)

    Similar performance to an i7 4770, though no ability to overclock.
  4. Danzas4321 said:
    Hey guys. Im really stuck on what to chose. I want a new CPu as my X4 760K seems to struggle a bit when it comes to gaming when paired with this GPU. Bf4 i get horrible frame dips. My choice is either one of these. I already have a Hyper 212 for Overclcoking


    Intel Choice

    PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

    CPU: Intel Core i5-4670K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor (£161.99 @ Aria PC)
    Motherboard: MSI Z87-G45 Gaming ATX LGA1150 Motherboard (£104.24 @ Scan.co.uk)
    Total: £266.23
    (Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
    (Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-03-26 12:36 GMT+0000)


    AMD Choice - May change board to the Sabertooth

    PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

    CPU: AMD FX-8320 3.5GHz 8-Core Processor (£105.59 @ Aria PC)
    Motherboard: Asus M5A99FX PRO R2.0 ATX AM3+ Motherboard (£99.99 @ Amazon UK)
    Total: £205.58
    (Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
    (Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-03-26 12:37 GMT+0000)

    All i do is gaming and schoolwork and am looking to maybe get a 880 or something nearer the end of the year to replace my 270X. So which is the better option? Also, if intel seems the best idea is Devils canyon worth the wait due to better TIm? i wouldn't be upgrading really until late april early june so im thinking if it helps a month wont hurt much.


    Thanks Guys!


    Intel. Consumes less power and there are many more reasons in my opinion.
  5. JOOK-D said:
    Similar performance to an i7 4770, though no ability to overclock.

    lol 4770 can't oc either, do you mean 4770k?
  6. barto said:
    What settings are you trying to play BF4 on?

    I've always had doubts with a 8320 and a very high end card. If the 880 is anything like the 780ti, I wouldn't use a 8320 for it.


    I have an fx8350 @4.7 with two GTX 780 Hydros and don't run into CPU bottlenecks unless I get really stupid with settings.
  7. palladin9479 said:
    barto said:
    What settings are you trying to play BF4 on?

    I've always had doubts with a 8320 and a very high end card. If the 880 is anything like the 780ti, I wouldn't use a 8320 for it.


    I have an fx8350 @4.7 with two GTX 780 Hydros and don't run into CPU bottlenecks unless I get really stupid with settings.


    If you had it a 5ghz you would match a stock 4670k on a single 780 on bf4 and that can use all cores.

    So I agree with barto, seems silly you are trying to run 2 with it.


    Overclocked 4670k is the clear winner.
  8. maxalge said:
    palladin9479 said:
    barto said:
    What settings are you trying to play BF4 on?

    I've always had doubts with a 8320 and a very high end card. If the 880 is anything like the 780ti, I wouldn't use a 8320 for it.


    I have an fx8350 @4.7 with two GTX 780 Hydros and don't run into CPU bottlenecks unless I get really stupid with settings.


    If you had it a 5ghz you would match a stock 4670k on a single 780 on bf4 and that can use all cores.

    So I agree with barto, seems silly you are trying to run 2 with it.


    Overclocked 4670k is the clear winner.


    And I have yet to find a situation where it doesn't scream. There is a lot more to performance then setting "ultra" and running a single player timed demo. And btw, it does go to 5Ghz, I just keep it at 4.7 because the whole reason I went custom WC was to reduce noise and I prefer my cooling solution to be running quiet.
  9. palladin9479 said:
    maxalge said:
    palladin9479 said:
    barto said:
    What settings are you trying to play BF4 on?

    I've always had doubts with a 8320 and a very high end card. If the 880 is anything like the 780ti, I wouldn't use a 8320 for it.


    I have an fx8350 @4.7 with two GTX 780 Hydros and don't run into CPU bottlenecks unless I get really stupid with settings.


    If you had it a 5ghz you would match a stock 4670k on a single 780 on bf4 and that can use all cores.

    So I agree with barto, seems silly you are trying to run 2 with it.


    Overclocked 4670k is the clear winner.


    And I have yet to find a situation where it doesn't scream. There is a lot more to performance then setting "ultra" and running a single player timed demo. And btw, it does go to 5Ghz, I just keep it at 4.7 because the whole reason I went custom WC was to reduce noise and I prefer my cooling solution to be running quiet.


    Agree with you on that, ultra is not necessarily optimal.

    There gets a point when the difference gets to be so minor from very high or high to ultra that it is not worth the fps hit.

    That aside, why spend so much money on gpu's to be forced to lower settings because of the cpu?
  10. Quote:
    That aside, why spend so much money on gpu's to be forced to lower settings because of the cpu?


    Because I'm not forced to lower the settings. The two 780's are required because I do 3D Vision gaming.

    Due to how 3D vision works there is very little additional load placed on the CPU but the load on the GPU will double. nVidia's drivers are very well tuned for multithreaded rendering along with myself actually needing a CPU that does eight threads at once. It gets a bit technical after that but I didn't blindly select my components for no good reason.

    Also I don't upgrade every time there is something new on the market, changing anything inside my 900D requires me to set aside two evenings two drain the system, modify it with new components, then do overnight leak testing and finally a day of stability testing. So I do periodic system refreshes every year or two, I was running the system with a 8350 and two 580 hydros, before that a Phenom II 980 with two 580 hydro's, then a Phenom II 980 with two 285's modified with WB's. There is a pattern here where I stagger CPU replacements with GPU replacements. So next purchase will most likely be an Intel platform with these 780's if AMD doesn't come out with something to address high performance desktop.

    So when addressing systems you must remember the time scales people are using along with the time of purchase.

    Now since the OP is considering buying all this now, we can organize it based on his/her options right now and the cost they are willing to pay. What I see is a very lopsided comparison as one solution is nearly $100 USD more expensive then the other. That additional money should be placed towards a higher powered GPU in the cheaper option, or the second option reduced to the approximate cost of the first. Otherwise it's a false choice as anyone with sense is going to automatically pick the more powerful combo which also happens to be the more expensive one. It's why total budgets should always be the first thing to take under consideration.
  11. Alpha3031 said:
    JOOK-D said:
    Similar performance to an i7 4770, though no ability to overclock.

    lol 4770 can't oc either, do you mean 4770k?



    Yessir.
  12. Go for Intel. Better power consumption.
    Also, the 4670k is the Tom's Hardware's best high end CPU! So, no question in that.
    But if you're tight on budget, the 8320 is not a bad option.
  13. I wont recommend CPUboss as reference.
  14. Another OP is getting dips in his fps when when playing borderlands 2 with an 8350 and a 780 ti.

    I'm assuming the 8350 is enough for borderlands 2 - Do you recommend any optimizations or configurations to improve the performance with such a set up for bl2?
  15. palladin9479 said:
    I have an fx8350 @4.7 with two GTX 780 Hydros and don't run into CPU bottlenecks unless I get really stupid with settings.


    You have a special case that many people wouldn't be able to do.







    Source: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crossfire-sli-scaling-bottleneck,3471-11.html

    Obvious points: Both CPUs are clocked higher and at the same clock. We both know that doesn't mean equal performance. The i5 has almost identical performance in video games as the i7. The 680 GTX is a rebadged 770 GTX which is significantly weaker than the 780 ti.

    If I had to guess, I would bet that the margins would be even greater if the 780ti and 290x were tested like this. Do those margins matter? That's really an opinion. I'm sure the gaming would still be enjoyable regardless of the CPU. However, there's no question that the 4670k would be a wiser choice in order to fully use the 780ti.
  16. Quote:
    If I had to guess, I would bet that the margins would be even greater if the 780ti and 290x were tested like this. Do those margins matter? That's really an opinion. I'm sure the gaming would still be enjoyable regardless of the CPU. However, there's no question that the 4670k would be a wiser choice in order to fully use the 780ti.


    Depends highly on the game and settings. Some settings stress the CPU with greater scene setup and geometry work while others are purely GPU related. What your seeing there is single thread performance, games that use a single render thread to do everything which is typically indicative of an older game or a poorly programmed one. DX11 has support for multithreaded rendering along with better ways to handle setup and geometry.

    "Bottlenecks" rarely form anymore these days, not unless we set some very unrealistic parameters to force it. For example the above test had a GTX680, if I was to run the exact same test but instead give the 8350 a 780, would it score higher numbers? Yes it would. The 8350 isn't "holding back" the dual 680's, the software isn't making use of all available resources. The only way to truly test for bottlenecks isn't FPS charts, but utilization graphs. If you see the GPU's pegged at 100% then they are not being held back.

    Also you really might want to check the absolute numbers. The differences they were getting to make those large charts were on the order of 98 fps on the 8350 with the bi7 kicking 130fps.

    Both are far beyond the 1920x1080x60 that people will be playing at and are more of a demonstration on how much they can push it. It wasn't until they got into insanely large resolutions that there was an actual difference between the two and often it wasn't a very big one due to the GPU's being the primary limiter. I think we can all agree that playing 5760x1080 is a "special case" that many people won't be able to do.

    So yes, a fx8350 will push a 780 at 1920x1080x60 to 100% GPU utilization. There will still be parts of the game, especially if it's not very well threaded, that a Intel i5 will be faster at. The difference will be in the cost vs acquire performance and that's up the to consumer to decide.
  17. This is a never ending discussion.
    For what I've seen in countless threads on this very topic, both are pretty amazing CPUs. But it all comes down to the following.....

    Reasons to buy FX 8320:
    1.Cheaper
    2.if you've already planned on buying a coller
    Reasons to buy i5 4670k
    1.Power Consumption
    2.Low Heating
    3.you can always buy a cooler any other time in the world for this CPU, if you're not overclocking.
    4.better compatibility with Nvidia cards

    So, I guess it's pretty much the case.
  18. amanchandra said:
    This is a never ending discussion.
    For what I've seen in countless threads on this very topic, both are pretty amazing CPUs. But it all comes down to the following.....

    Reasons to buy FX 8320:
    1.Cheaper
    2.if you've already planned on buying a coller
    Reasons to buy i5 4670k
    1.Power Consumption
    2.Low Heating
    3.you can always buy a cooler any other time in the world for this CPU, if you're not overclocking.(You can do it to with the fx 8320)
    4.better compatibility with Nvidia cards


    And they are not the only reasons, their are far more for both CPUs.
  19. @vmN I would love to know more from you.
  20. Shoot me a pm with your question then.
  21. It's Simple - AMD is good if you're on the Budget - Intel if you want to go high End and concerned about your electricity bill, both will handle modern games without any problems...
  22. I have the intel chip and my sons build has the AMD,,both run great (personally i prefer my 4670k:))
Ask a new question

Read More

Motherboards AMD Intel i5 CPUs