i5 4690k vs FX 8350

modernwar99

Reputable
Jul 9, 2014
1,166
0
5,960
Which build is better for gaming and why:

CPU: Intel Core i5-4690K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor ($209.99 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: ASRock Fatal1ty Z97 Killer ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($124.99 @ Newegg)

or

CPU: AMD FX-8350 4.0GHz 8-Core Processor ($174.29 @ Amazon)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($29.99 @ Micro Center)
Motherboard: ASRock 990FX Killer ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($117.00 @ Newegg)
I wouldn't be OC'ing the 4690k out of the box, I just want that option available in the future, and it's on sale :)
I would be OC'ing the 8350 to around 4.5GHz hopefully. Would the 4690k be worth the extra $10?
 
Solution
The FX-9590 really shouldn't perform worse than they FX-8350; they're exactly the same chip as the FX-8320, both just overclocked different amounts from the factory. As I mentioned, the FX-9590 has serious overheating problems and that probably throttles it back in games on the stock cooler.

Well, there are some trade-offs.

The first one and second one won't support SLI and won't get very good returns from Crossfire. Probably not a big deal, but it's worth mentioning.
The third one will perform well with SLI or Crossfire, but lacks an M.2 slot.
The audio is best on the second one (the Fatal1ty), and slightly lower quality on the first and third options.

I'd go for the second option personally, the ASrock Fatal1ty, as a better audio...
Games are barely able to use 4 at the moment. As games approach that time frame 8 overall weak cores wont compete with 4 strong cores.
The main reason other than performance to chose the i5 is the LGA 1150 socket and Z97 chipset. AM3+ will have no more CPUs released for the socket, where the Z97 will support all the way to i7s and refresh processors.
 


Overkill, yes, but you'd be able to keep it for several years and/or a couple video card upgrades without worrying about a CPU bottleneck.
 

modernwar99

Reputable
Jul 9, 2014
1,166
0
5,960


As opposed to an FX 8350 where I'd have nothing to upgrade to, so I'd have to buy a new CPU/mobo, correct?
 


Yes.
Even the FX-9590 has poor core-per-core performance and is just a heavily overclocked FX-8320 with extreme overheating issues.
 

modernwar99

Reputable
Jul 9, 2014
1,166
0
5,960
The FX 9590 performs worse than a stock 8350 in games anyways...

Also which of these mobos is better for the price:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157507&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&cm_sp=&AID=10446076&PID=3938566&SID=

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157501&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&cm_sp=&AID=10446076&PID=3938566&SID=

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157506&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&cm_sp=&AID=10446076&PID=3938566&SID=

ASrock seems to make the best lower end Z97 boards. The Gigabyte and MSI ones suck at OC'ing below the $150 mark.
 
The FX-9590 really shouldn't perform worse than they FX-8350; they're exactly the same chip as the FX-8320, both just overclocked different amounts from the factory. As I mentioned, the FX-9590 has serious overheating problems and that probably throttles it back in games on the stock cooler.

Well, there are some trade-offs.

The first one and second one won't support SLI and won't get very good returns from Crossfire. Probably not a big deal, but it's worth mentioning.
The third one will perform well with SLI or Crossfire, but lacks an M.2 slot.
The audio is best on the second one (the Fatal1ty), and slightly lower quality on the first and third options.

I'd go for the second option personally, the ASrock Fatal1ty, as a better audio chip is a noticeable improvement and M.2 or SLI/Crossfire aren't very relevant most of the time. I've also heard of people getting quite nice overclocks on the Fatality boards, for the price.
 
Solution