FX 8320 Vs Intel 4440
- Thread starter aakarshan
- Start date
Shneiky
Distinguished
- Aug 21, 2011
- 2,323
- 1
- 20,960
AMD CPUs are not better for streaming. I7 streams even better. It is not a question of AMD is better for this or Intel is better for that, it is question of price / performance for the particular use case. You can use 150 bucks AMD or 300 bucks I7.
For the majority of games, the CPU usage is between 2-4 threads. This leaves the FX8300 (like 8320, 8350 and the new 8370 or whatever was the number) series with half of their threads idling or under very light load. This is why in most games - the I5 wins. Where in games that use more threads - the 8300 series wins. Same goes for professional software.
Over-clocking FX 8300 series does not bring much. If you over-clock with 10% - you gain around 10% productivity. It also requires a lot of power and more cooling.
Overclocking Intel however usually brings more % productivity. I have a certain project with animation rendering with Mental Ray. When I disable turbo boos and run 3.5 GHz - I render a frame for 29-30 seconds. When I run at 4 GHz I render a frame in 22-23 seconds. That is 1/7 more MHz for around 1/4 more productivity. Is over clocking helping and how much it scales is very task dependent.
http://us.hardware.info/reviews/5135/22/amd-fx-9590-and-fx-9370-review-amds-return-to-the-high-end-market-benchmarks-hd-7970-hitman-absolution-1920x1080-medium
Here is a review of the FX 9370 and FX 9590 which also includes I5s and 8320. They 9000s are exactly like a 8320/8350 but just over clocked from the factory. The I5 4440 wins most of the times.
For the majority of games, the CPU usage is between 2-4 threads. This leaves the FX8300 (like 8320, 8350 and the new 8370 or whatever was the number) series with half of their threads idling or under very light load. This is why in most games - the I5 wins. Where in games that use more threads - the 8300 series wins. Same goes for professional software.
Over-clocking FX 8300 series does not bring much. If you over-clock with 10% - you gain around 10% productivity. It also requires a lot of power and more cooling.
Overclocking Intel however usually brings more % productivity. I have a certain project with animation rendering with Mental Ray. When I disable turbo boos and run 3.5 GHz - I render a frame for 29-30 seconds. When I run at 4 GHz I render a frame in 22-23 seconds. That is 1/7 more MHz for around 1/4 more productivity. Is over clocking helping and how much it scales is very task dependent.
http://us.hardware.info/reviews/5135/22/amd-fx-9590-and-fx-9370-review-amds-return-to-the-high-end-market-benchmarks-hd-7970-hitman-absolution-1920x1080-medium
Here is a review of the FX 9370 and FX 9590 which also includes I5s and 8320. They 9000s are exactly like a 8320/8350 but just over clocked from the factory. The I5 4440 wins most of the times.
- Apr 29, 2006
- 29,241
- 437
- 93,590
Duplicate thread. Please stick to ONE thread.
http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2275599/4440-8350.html#14104818
http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2275599/4440-8350.html#14104818
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
[SOLVED] Is it safe to use a recapped PSU for a long time ?- Started by zwtch_17
- Replies: 7
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram