- Nov 11, 2013
- 49
- 0
- 10,560
Okay so recently I'd finished my rig which consists of the following parts
Case: fractal design define R4 windowed edition
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-970-D3P ATX
CPU: FX 8320 @ 4.6Ghz
RAM: G.Skill Ares 1600Mhz DDR3 RAM - 16Gb (4x4 config)
Mass-Storage: Seagate Barracuda 7200RPM 1TB HDD
SSD: Samsung EVO 840 120Gb
Misc storage: Two old 5200 RPM Hitachi drives, I'm not sure of their model sorry
CPU cooler: Corsair H100i
GPU: Gigabyte R9 290 Windforce 4Gb
PSU: Corsair CX 750M 80+ Bronze 750 Watt
Fans: 2x AF140 White LED silent editions, 2x SP120 Silent editions, 2x Fractal Design 120MM silent edition.
OS: Win7 Home Premium 64bit
So its a pretty fast system, the only issue I have is I kind of regret going with the 8320, don't get me wrong it's definitely not a bad CPU by any means in-fact its multitasking capability is unreal, but it leaves a lot to be desired when applications and games use very few of its numerous cores. As you know when utilizing all 8 cores the FX83xx CPUs can sit themselves between i5s and i7s in terms of performance but when all those cores aren't used, let's say 1-2 cores the performance is... well it could be better, its not bad, so I'm really not sure what I should do, and here's why:
AMD Mantle = lesser CPUs will no longer bottleneck gaming to the same degree that would be found with DirectX communication, but will this actually take off?
More cores = more future proof? Though I have seen an increase in cores used for gaming, and certainly rendering over the few years, I'm not sure I can see gaming using 8 cores within the next 2-3 generations, maybe 4-6 core within 3 generations? This is all speculation ofcourse. Plus this is irrelevant to the point but Intel looks to be supporting DDR4 before AMD.
Single core performance: As said above the core performance of AMD Bulldozer chips is not terrible but, when you compare, core for core against Intel AMD definitely are a ways behind.
Poor performance on terribly optimized games: I'm looking at you WoT and GW2...
So there's my reasons, of course I expect the trolls to come running in screaming ZOMG Y U GET BULLDOZER NOOB THE TDP SO BAD Y U NO I7 Y U NO META. Honestly I didn't care, back then I did no rendering, I played a few select games that didn't really care what CPU you had, GW1, BF3/4, LoL. And before you bash me over how AMD pulls so much more power than Intel, again its like 3 dollars a month where I live, seriously do you know how long it'd take to earn my money I'd spent on the i7 back with those power savings? I'd have bought a new system by the time I got it back...
I digress, I'm rambling here, here my choices anywho.
i7 4770k, why? Strong single core, works well with ALL CURRENT games, applications, less future proof if more cores do become necessary.
i7 4770(not k), why? To save I guess? But then why get an i7 if you don't OC lol.
i7 4820k, why? All the above of the 4770k, strong single core performance, more cores thus solving the core count issue, so I assume this would be the best bet for covering all areas of concern, though the most expensive but not by too much to turn me away from the processor
Stick with the FX 8320, why? Mantle could solve weak cores but what of optimization would Mantle fix that too? I'm not so sure, Though if additional cores are needed in the future then the 81xx/83xx series do look rather promising, but this is now and that is then.
I should also point out, budget isn't a concern I've nothing else I'd like to add to this build, aside from maybe another 290 at some point, cable sleeving,ditch the two stock case fans (they do a good job however and you cannot see them) though that's it, I also don't mind motherboard suggestions too for the Intel side, though anything Black/silver or Black/Blue would be nice, that's the colour scheme of the rig ^^. So what do you guys think? Should I go all out, or should I contain myself and stop the urge of trying to have the best of the best, maybe I'm nit-picking I'm not sure.
Thanks anyways.
Case: fractal design define R4 windowed edition
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-970-D3P ATX
CPU: FX 8320 @ 4.6Ghz
RAM: G.Skill Ares 1600Mhz DDR3 RAM - 16Gb (4x4 config)
Mass-Storage: Seagate Barracuda 7200RPM 1TB HDD
SSD: Samsung EVO 840 120Gb
Misc storage: Two old 5200 RPM Hitachi drives, I'm not sure of their model sorry
CPU cooler: Corsair H100i
GPU: Gigabyte R9 290 Windforce 4Gb
PSU: Corsair CX 750M 80+ Bronze 750 Watt
Fans: 2x AF140 White LED silent editions, 2x SP120 Silent editions, 2x Fractal Design 120MM silent edition.
OS: Win7 Home Premium 64bit
So its a pretty fast system, the only issue I have is I kind of regret going with the 8320, don't get me wrong it's definitely not a bad CPU by any means in-fact its multitasking capability is unreal, but it leaves a lot to be desired when applications and games use very few of its numerous cores. As you know when utilizing all 8 cores the FX83xx CPUs can sit themselves between i5s and i7s in terms of performance but when all those cores aren't used, let's say 1-2 cores the performance is... well it could be better, its not bad, so I'm really not sure what I should do, and here's why:
AMD Mantle = lesser CPUs will no longer bottleneck gaming to the same degree that would be found with DirectX communication, but will this actually take off?
More cores = more future proof? Though I have seen an increase in cores used for gaming, and certainly rendering over the few years, I'm not sure I can see gaming using 8 cores within the next 2-3 generations, maybe 4-6 core within 3 generations? This is all speculation ofcourse. Plus this is irrelevant to the point but Intel looks to be supporting DDR4 before AMD.
Single core performance: As said above the core performance of AMD Bulldozer chips is not terrible but, when you compare, core for core against Intel AMD definitely are a ways behind.
Poor performance on terribly optimized games: I'm looking at you WoT and GW2...
So there's my reasons, of course I expect the trolls to come running in screaming ZOMG Y U GET BULLDOZER NOOB THE TDP SO BAD Y U NO I7 Y U NO META. Honestly I didn't care, back then I did no rendering, I played a few select games that didn't really care what CPU you had, GW1, BF3/4, LoL. And before you bash me over how AMD pulls so much more power than Intel, again its like 3 dollars a month where I live, seriously do you know how long it'd take to earn my money I'd spent on the i7 back with those power savings? I'd have bought a new system by the time I got it back...
I digress, I'm rambling here, here my choices anywho.
i7 4770k, why? Strong single core, works well with ALL CURRENT games, applications, less future proof if more cores do become necessary.
i7 4770(not k), why? To save I guess? But then why get an i7 if you don't OC lol.
i7 4820k, why? All the above of the 4770k, strong single core performance, more cores thus solving the core count issue, so I assume this would be the best bet for covering all areas of concern, though the most expensive but not by too much to turn me away from the processor
Stick with the FX 8320, why? Mantle could solve weak cores but what of optimization would Mantle fix that too? I'm not so sure, Though if additional cores are needed in the future then the 81xx/83xx series do look rather promising, but this is now and that is then.
I should also point out, budget isn't a concern I've nothing else I'd like to add to this build, aside from maybe another 290 at some point, cable sleeving,ditch the two stock case fans (they do a good job however and you cannot see them) though that's it, I also don't mind motherboard suggestions too for the Intel side, though anything Black/silver or Black/Blue would be nice, that's the colour scheme of the rig ^^. So what do you guys think? Should I go all out, or should I contain myself and stop the urge of trying to have the best of the best, maybe I'm nit-picking I'm not sure.
Thanks anyways.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram