I5 4690k vs AMD FX8350
- Thread starter jujar14
- Start date
Solution
TheFluffyDog
Honorable
- Oct 22, 2013
- 469
- 0
- 10,960
Go with the FX platform, your gonna miss out on a more premium product, but you can do more with the FX, like the FX helps alleviate bottlenecks from multitasking, so streaming while gaming, running a program in the background, things like that, but the intel will provide a much more rocksolid platform with lower temps and more consistent results. I always recommend i5's for systems running 1 powerful GPU (400+ USD ) or a system designed around High end gaming where you want refresh rates of 120+ and are running GPU's capable of pushing that out.
However the FX wont have a problem running almost every game at 60+hz so as long as you dont have a crazy screen you will never know the difference, and the FX will perform much better when you have multiple programs eating up interger calcs.
However the FX wont have a problem running almost every game at 60+hz so as long as you dont have a crazy screen you will never know the difference, and the FX will perform much better when you have multiple programs eating up interger calcs.
Jdogz427
Reputable
- Aug 3, 2014
- 549
- 0
- 5,160
TheFluffyDog is right. I have the fx-8350 and it performs very well. I can run 10 different programs, including recording and streaming programs and only take fps hits of like 2 or 3 at the max. sometimes i take hits of 1 or less. but that is my build in my system, but either way, the 8350 is very good at multitasking and will beat out the i5 in multitasking while the i5 will beat out the 8350 in gaming by itself while running no other programs.
cin19
Titan
- Mar 14, 2011
- 15,726
- 218
- 112,340
I recommend to get the intel Xeon e3-1230 V3 with H97 MB like MSI H97 PC MATE. Because it is equal to i7 like i7 4770, and for overtime you can get much lower annual commercial energy cost too, check the link: http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Xeon-E3-1230-v3-vs-AMD-FX-8350
Also I add the link for the e3 1230V3 review, it is better than fx8350, but you pay more than the fx8350 build (please note you need the aftermarket cooler for fx8350 too).
http://www.computerbase.de/2013-10/intel-xeon-e3-1230-v3-test/
Also I add the link for the e3 1230V3 review, it is better than fx8350, but you pay more than the fx8350 build (please note you need the aftermarket cooler for fx8350 too).
http://www.computerbase.de/2013-10/intel-xeon-e3-1230-v3-test/
cin19
Titan
- Mar 14, 2011
- 15,726
- 218
- 112,340
You can see the performance from the review I post by click each sub tilte, for example, I don't understand that language, but you can see the number.
games http://www.computerbase.de/2013-10/intel-xeon-e3-1230-v3-test/5/#diagramm-borderlands-1920-x-1080
some software http://www.computerbase.de/2013-10/intel-xeon-e3-1230-v3-test/4/#diagramm-winrar-real
games http://www.computerbase.de/2013-10/intel-xeon-e3-1230-v3-test/5/#diagramm-borderlands-1920-x-1080
some software http://www.computerbase.de/2013-10/intel-xeon-e3-1230-v3-test/4/#diagramm-winrar-real
Brunostako
Honorable
- Dec 16, 2013
- 2,349
- 1
- 12,960
First, what do you need to do in your PC?
Facts, the FX-8350 is a lot cheaper than intel i5 and it is near at same level of multi threading performance (if you manage to use all cores), the i5 beats it in single threaded tasks.
Facts, the FX-8350 is a lot cheaper than intel i5 and it is near at same level of multi threading performance (if you manage to use all cores), the i5 beats it in single threaded tasks.
Brunostako
Honorable
- Dec 16, 2013
- 2,349
- 1
- 12,960
You will get better performance with the i5 on gaming and with AutoCAD.
4 strong cores are still better than 8 weak cores on gaming, because games don't use more than 4 cores right now. Better to be strong.
I really don't know how AutoCAD scales in performance with more cores, but for work Intel is usually better.
But then comes the price... If you can afford it go with Intel, if not go with AMD, is by no way bad, but Intel is better.
4 strong cores are still better than 8 weak cores on gaming, because games don't use more than 4 cores right now. Better to be strong.
I really don't know how AutoCAD scales in performance with more cores, but for work Intel is usually better.
But then comes the price... If you can afford it go with Intel, if not go with AMD, is by no way bad, but Intel is better.
cin19
Titan
- Mar 14, 2011
- 15,726
- 218
- 112,340
For games the cpu does not use more than 4 cores, but AutoCAD need more cores, and here you can see the Xeon is in the system requirements but not the fx8350. http://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/autocad/troubleshooting/caas/sfdcarticles/sfdcarticles/System-requirements-for-AutoCAD-2015.html
Yes, the price may over your budget, and you can get the E3 1230 V2 and the H77 I think it will be in your range, and you will have better performance than the fx8350, and similar the E3 1230 V3, but v2 is old model. And that is your call, either fx8350 or e3 Xeon.
Yes, the price may over your budget, and you can get the E3 1230 V2 and the H77 I think it will be in your range, and you will have better performance than the fx8350, and similar the E3 1230 V3, but v2 is old model. And that is your call, either fx8350 or e3 Xeon.
Brunostako
Honorable
- Dec 16, 2013
- 2,349
- 1
- 12,960
Brunostako
Honorable
- Dec 16, 2013
- 2,349
- 1
- 12,960
Actually, a LGA1155 platform build would be very adequate.
The performance increase from 3rd gen to 4th gen core is quite insignificant, it was more about power consumption and some new instructions than raw performance.
If you manage to get a 3rd gen i5, i7 or Xeon for "cheap", you're good to go. And the MoBos should be very cheap now, a H77 should be enough.
Even 2nd gen still delivers good performance.
The performance increase from 3rd gen to 4th gen core is quite insignificant, it was more about power consumption and some new instructions than raw performance.
If you manage to get a 3rd gen i5, i7 or Xeon for "cheap", you're good to go. And the MoBos should be very cheap now, a H77 should be enough.
Even 2nd gen still delivers good performance.
Brunostako
Honorable
- Dec 16, 2013
- 2,349
- 1
- 12,960
That's correct.
But server CPUs are not always better than consumer CPUs. Don't miss any other option just because is not a Xeon.
Server CPUs are made to resist more punishment from the user and have some unique instructions for server kind of tasks. But (in raw performance) a 3rd gen Xeon with 4 cores/8 threads, 3.5 GHz base/ 4.1GHz turbo will perform the same as a 3rd gen i7 with 4 cores/8 threads, 3.5 GHz base/ 4.1GHz turbo because they are from the same architecture.
But server CPUs are not always better than consumer CPUs. Don't miss any other option just because is not a Xeon.
Server CPUs are made to resist more punishment from the user and have some unique instructions for server kind of tasks. But (in raw performance) a 3rd gen Xeon with 4 cores/8 threads, 3.5 GHz base/ 4.1GHz turbo will perform the same as a 3rd gen i7 with 4 cores/8 threads, 3.5 GHz base/ 4.1GHz turbo because they are from the same architecture.
i want this pc to last me like 7 years untill i will have saved £20 for 84 months for my next pc. i will punish it.
aren't i7s better than i5s?
i wont really overclock because i dont know how. but i will want turbo.
is there even that much of a noticeable difference between the i54690k @ 4.5ghz and the e3 at 3.7ghz difference?
aren't i7s better than i5s?
i wont really overclock because i dont know how. but i will want turbo.
is there even that much of a noticeable difference between the i54690k @ 4.5ghz and the e3 at 3.7ghz difference?
Jdogz427
Reputable
- Aug 3, 2014
- 549
- 0
- 5,160
unless you are doing something more than dedicated gaming, and browsing, i5 is enough. if you plan on rendering or doing really cpu intensive multitasking things then go for an i7, but other than that stick with the i5 and get a better gpu with the money you save
Brunostako
Honorable
- Dec 16, 2013
- 2,349
- 1
- 12,960
Yes, i7 are better than i5, but for very few reasons.
The main difference is Hyper Threading (HT), i7 (and Xeon) have it, i5 don't. This allows each core to manage 2 processing threads, so a 4 core CPU work as a 8 core (lower performance than if it really had 8 cores, between Intel CPUs only). I don't know is there's any other significant difference, like more cache or other instructions.
Both i7 and i5 (and Xeon) have turbo mode enabled, only i3 and lower don't have it.
In multi threaded tasks, the Xeon will win near always. Only in single threaded or not well threaded tasks the i5-4590K will win because, clock for clock, Haswell (4th gen) is faster than Ivy Bridge (3rd gen).
The main difference is Hyper Threading (HT), i7 (and Xeon) have it, i5 don't. This allows each core to manage 2 processing threads, so a 4 core CPU work as a 8 core (lower performance than if it really had 8 cores, between Intel CPUs only). I don't know is there's any other significant difference, like more cache or other instructions.
Both i7 and i5 (and Xeon) have turbo mode enabled, only i3 and lower don't have it.
In multi threaded tasks, the Xeon will win near always. Only in single threaded or not well threaded tasks the i5-4590K will win because, clock for clock, Haswell (4th gen) is faster than Ivy Bridge (3rd gen).
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question HP Omen - Fresh Windows Install, Whoops the Option for WiFi is Just /Gone/- Started by axo88
- Replies: 1
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram