Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Choose between 2 gaming rig i5 4690 vs FX 8320, *final decision

Tags:
  • Cooler Master
  • CPUs
  • Hard Drives
  • Gaming
  • RAM
  • Crossfire
  • Cooling
  • Build
  • Motherboards
  • GPUs
  • Performance
  • Processors
Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 3, 2014 9:05:22 PM

between these two build which is better in overall gaming performance?
note: i will be using this pc solely for Gaming

~build 1
-i5 4590/4690
-ASRock - H81M-DGS
-Sapphire R9 270x dual X
-8GB ram 2x4 GB
-WD 1TB 64mb chace
-Cooler Master V750 80+gold

~build 2
-FX 8320
-MSI - 760GM-P34 (FX)
-Sapphire R9 270x dual X
-8GB ram 2x4 GB
-WD 1TB 64mb chace
-Cooler Master V750 80+gold
-Cooler Master - Hyper 212X Turbo / Enermax - ETS-T40-TB

the reason i choose low entry mobo for both build is because in the next 4-6 month i will bought better mobo another R9 270x and crossfire both build with it with 2 x x8/x16 pcie set up.

the game i will be playing were mostly new release and next gen like BF4,DA I and TW 3, eventhough there a chance i play old games but maybe only on occasion when i'm feeling for it hahaha

oh and i'm doesnt really know how too OC, but if i have too choose the FX build i will learn it and OC the cpu to 4.0-4.5 whichever is safer^^

thanks for helping^^

More about : choose gaming rig 4690 8320 final decision

a b à CPUs
a b 4 Gaming
a b V Motherboard
September 3, 2014 9:21:45 PM

I would go with the intel build.. Intel is by far the better build for gaming:
http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-4690-vs-AMD-FX-83...

The AMD chip is also pretty solid, though you would need to overclock to match the intel's power (which means more money spent on a CPU cooler)
AMD = Budget Gaming
Intel = Quality build / Performance
m
1
l
September 3, 2014 9:32:23 PM

ok.. i will wait for another response though^^
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 109 à CPUs
a b 4 Gaming
a b V Motherboard
September 3, 2014 9:54:44 PM

I'd go with the Intel i5 easy; for gaming it's performance is almost unrivalled. Most, if not all games utilise quad-cores at maximum, hence the i5 having stronger single-cores will provide the most performance. To conclude, go with the i5.

Next, I'd change your PSU. Try purchasing a SeaSonic, XFX, Antec, Corsair (avoid CX series) or EVGA unit. EVGA PSUs are decent quality, yet more towards the affordable end. Any of the aforementioned PSU manufacturers will most likely last longer than your selected Cooler Master PSU.

All the best. :) 
m
0
l
September 3, 2014 10:22:34 PM

well its true that CM psu were not rated well, but i heard its only in 600W< and the one i choose has 80+gold certified as well, and i dont think that the 80+ organization will easily certified the PSU without proper step. and thats why this PSU can compete again others 80+gold PSU just fine. not too mention at its price if i were too change too another cpu of your brand i will only get at best 80+bronze PSU
oh and that PSU get high rating on techpowerup.com
thanks anyway for your response
m
0
l

Best solution

a b à CPUs
September 4, 2014 12:05:29 AM

The MSI P34 is apt to blow a VRM or induce major throttling trying to run an FX-8320. Looks like a terrible combination to me. If you're going to cheap out that badly on the motherboard don't bother, it's a waste of your time.

The PSU size should be quite a bit different between a locked i5 build and an FX build. There's nearly a 100W disparity in power dissipation between these 2 platforms at stock clocks under a load, ~200+W if you overclock the FX chip. The locked i5 build can run on a nicely made 550W PSU (and yes, that's enough for a SECOND R9 270X). The FX build should probably have a 750W PSU, and the V750 appears to be very well made and would be a good match to an FX-8320+270X+270X.

All that said, 2x270X doesn't make any sense in a world where the R9 290 exists, as it has precisely double the core config of a 270. All the performance of a 2x270 combo, none of the crossfire penalties. You can save yourself a lot of headache just buy a nice H97 or 970 chipset board now for ~$80-90 and skip the future crossfire plans, then just upgrade the single GPU config in the future, selling the existing GPU at that time. The ASRock Fatality and MSI "gaming" branded H97/B85 boards are worth a look as they offer great quality onboard sound, making them a fantastic value for a gaming rig. For the FX build option, look no further than the 970A-UD3P for $85.

The locked i5-4590/4690 will perform as well as, or better than the overclocked FX-83XX in gaming depending on the specific game. There aren't really any games at this time that will run better on the overclocked FX chip by any margin greater than a margin of error. In older and/or, poorly threaded games with lots of units/players, the i5 will run up to ~30-40% faster (depending on how high the FX is clocked).

On the other hand, the overclocked FX 8 core chip can achieve higher execution throughput than the locked i5 overall. This can't be leveraged by real-time workloads like gaming very well but does free up some available compute resources for use on background tasks. Whether this has a positive effect on gaming is debatable.

The argument for the FX build is the novelty of performance tuning and big superficial numbers.
The argument for the i5 build is the guaranteed top-shelf plug-n-play performance in all sorts of games regardless.
Share
September 4, 2014 12:23:40 AM

mdocod said:
The MSI P34 is apt to blow a VRM or induce major throttling trying to run an FX-8320. Looks like a terrible combination to me. If you're going to cheap out that badly on the motherboard don't bother, it's a waste of your time.

The PSU size should be quite a bit different between a locked i5 build and an FX build. There's nearly a 100W disparity in power dissipation between these 2 platforms at stock clocks under a load, ~200+W if you overclock the FX chip. The locked i5 build can run on a nicely made 550W PSU (and yes, that's enough for a SECOND R9 270X). The FX build should probably have a 750W PSU, and the V750 appears to be very well made and would be a good match to an FX-8320+270X+270X.

All that said, 2x270X doesn't make any sense in a world where the R9 290 exists, as it has precisely double the core config of a 270. All the performance of a 2x270 combo, none of the crossfire penalties. You can save yourself a lot of headache just buy a nice H97 or 970 chipset board now for ~$80-90 and skip the future crossfire plans, then just upgrade the single GPU config in the future, selling the existing GPU at that time. The ASRock Fatality and MSI "gaming" branded H97/B85 boards are worth a look as they offer great quality onboard sound, making them a fantastic value for a gaming rig. For the FX build option, look no further than the 970A-UD3P for $85.

The locked i5-4590/4690 will perform as well as, or better than the overclocked FX-83XX in gaming depending on the specific game. There aren't really any games at this time that will run better on the overclocked FX chip by any margin greater than a margin of error. In older and/or, poorly threaded games with lots of units/players, the i5 will run up to ~30-40% faster (depending on how high the FX is clocked).

On the other hand, the overclocked FX 8 core chip can achieve higher execution throughput than the locked i5 overall. This can't be leveraged by real-time workloads like gaming very well but does free up some available compute resources for use on background tasks. Whether this has a positive effect on gaming is debatable.

The argument for the FX build is the novelty of performance tuning and big superficial numbers.
The argument for the i5 build is the guaranteed top-shelf plug-n-play performance in all sorts of games regardless.


well i think the mobo in fx were a bit too much of me, i did that because i want too evenly macthes the budget between the 2 build. and truthfully i'm a bit biased toward the i5 4590 build over the fx 8320 and i5 4690, since there's only a bit difference performance between the i5 and a more complicated set up of the fx 8320. what makes me hesitate to pick the i5 build were because the amd build + mantle can improve the performance quite significant.

and also i prefer 2x r9 270x crossfire than a single r9 290 since 2 r9 270x only cost around 411.50 dollars and 1 r9 290 cost 466.69 dollars. and from benchmarks review 2x R9 270x crossfire will beat R9 290 in gaming performance
m
0
l
September 4, 2014 12:27:03 AM

so is it better to choose the i5 build?
something like this
i5 4690
better mobo
r9 270x
8gb ram
1tb hdd
lower watt psu(550-650) but with decent quality
m
0
l
a c 109 à CPUs
a b 4 Gaming
a b V Motherboard
September 4, 2014 8:22:05 AM

exdias said:
well its true that CM psu were not rated well, but i heard its only in 600W< and the one i choose has 80+gold certified as well, and i dont think that the 80+ organization will easily certified the PSU without proper step. and thats why this PSU can compete again others 80+gold PSU just fine. not too mention at its price if i were too change too another cpu of your brand i will only get at best 80+bronze PSU
oh and that PSU get high rating on techpowerup.com
thanks anyway for your response


The 80+ Gold status does NOT hold any value and does not imply that it is a better PSU. The 80 Plus scheme only rates power supplies on energy efficiency, period. Even if the CM power supply you desire has better energy efficiency, it does not imply that it is of better quality than a 80+ Bronze unit.

SeaSonic produce the best power supplies in the business, hence you're paying for quality parts. In return the efficiency of the PSU is reduced.

It's completely your choice however as always, but if you want a better quality PSU, please see my previous post.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 4, 2014 10:11:57 AM

exdias said:

well i think the mobo in fx were a bit too much of me, i did that because i want too evenly macthes the budget between the 2 build. and truthfully i'm a bit biased toward the i5 4590 build over the fx 8320 and i5 4690, since there's only a bit difference performance between the i5 and a more complicated set up of the fx 8320. what makes me hesitate to pick the i5 build were because the amd build + mantle can improve the performance quite significant.


Mantle works on any CPU. It's not AMD specific there, only GPU specific. The compute overhead reductions of advanced API's like Mantle/DX12 benefit ALL CPUs.

exdias said:
and also i prefer 2x r9 270x crossfire than a single r9 290 since 2 r9 270x only cost around 411.50 dollars and 1 r9 290 cost 466.69 dollars. and from benchmarks review 2x R9 270x crossfire will beat R9 290 in gaming performance


Performance can only be "compared" in terms of FPS if all things are "equal." Frame pacing on crossfire is always going to be worse than on a single GPU, therefor, any slight advantage you see on a bar graph that only show FPS is highly misleading. Slightly higher FPS with less precise frame pacing is not actually an advantage. The only time a dual GPU solution makes sense is if the render performance out-paces a single card solution by a wide enough margin to significantly overcome the frame pacing disadvantages. It's also important to note that not all games even support CFX/SLI configurations, and then there's a large number that do support it, but not very well. Any example you can find demonstrating a pair of 270X's performing better than a single 290 would have to be a cherry picked example that does not represent the vast trends.

Furthermore, the 2GB VRAM of the 270X does not "scale" up when multiples are used because all of the texture data must be duplicated into both frame buffers anyway. The 290 has 4GB VRAM, the 2x270X configuration is still just 2GB VRAM effectively. The 290 is better suited to the ever-increasing texture data found in modern big-world game titles, and better suited to running with better post processing or higher resolution settings.
m
0
l
!