AMD FX 8350 or i5 4690k coupled with r9 280x? All round performance.

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
A

apetrovic321

Reputable
Dec 10, 2014
31
0
4,530
Ok, so first of all, I'm trying to build a relatively all-round PC which would be somewhat 'future-proof' for some years to come, that is - no excessive upgrading.

I am in serious doubt whether to go for the AMD's FX 8350 or the Intel's i5 4690k. I will almost certainly get an r9 280x GPU.
From what I've been reading, the FX would have to go with a more expensive motherboard (like sabertooth 990fx r2.0), and i5 would prove stable on a less expensive MB. Now, where I live, the FX 8350 costs about 150 euros, the Sabertooth costs 150 euros as well. I5 costs 190 euros, and there are good MBs for about a 100 euros (ASROCK Z97 Pro4 ?). It is 300 euros combined either way. I will probably OC in a year or two.

I will not be gaming 24/7, I will not be recording my games. However, I think that both combinations should be good to go for a couple of years offering quite good performance. I would possibly do some music production, and light video editing. (I also tend to open 50+ tabs in my browser)
Keep in mind that I don't want to spend a fortune on this PC, but am willing to spend about 600 euros which is, I think, no small amount of money.
I realize that i5 is a a stronger CPU, however, a lot of people say that FX is yet to shine with its 8 cores in the future, since software is going to bi optimized to utilize all the 8 cores. Is this really the case? Can i5 handle multitasking well?

What are your thoughts on this configuration?
I5 4690k (190e) , r9 280x (160e) , ASROCK z97 Pro4 (100e), 8gb of RAM (80e), 1tb HDD (50e), PSU (about 50e) and I'm not sure about the case.

P. S. Could I save even more on the MB, that is, would it be safe to overclock? Also I could get an i5 4590(locked) for 160 euros. The less I spend, the better. I still have to buy a monitor.

Sorry for the long question, but I would like to hear your opinion because I'm relatively new to this and I can't decide between AMD and Intel. Thanks in advance
 
Solution
Brunostako


Ok.

Both CPUs can do the job, but the i5 does it much better. What happens is that games right now don't benefit from the 8 cores of the FX CPUs, even when the combined performance of all the cores (Multi threaded performance) can outperform the performance of an i5, games use only up to 4 cores (more often less).
The performance per core of the FX CPUs (single threaded performance) is significantly lower than the i5's. So when only 4 cores...
Sort by date Sort by votes
A

apetrovic321

Reputable
Dec 10, 2014
31
0
4,530
Well, thanks for the quick answer. But, could you please elaborate a bit on why you think i5 is a better choice?
I've heard these FXs are not bad, and I really don't care if battlefield 4 is going to have 5 fps more on i5.
Also, what cheap overclockable motherboard would you recommend? Thanks
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
V

VenBaja

Distinguished
Nov 8, 2008
343
0
18,810
The 4690k is the better CPU. If you can afford it without issue, get it. I made the mistake of going with an AMD CPU that I figured was "good enough" as well. A few months later I sold the CPU and motherboard for a loss and moved to Intel.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Brunostako

Brunostako

Honorable
Dec 16, 2013
2,349
1
12,960


Ok.

Both CPUs can do the job, but the i5 does it much better. What happens is that games right now don't benefit from the 8 cores of the FX CPUs, even when the combined performance of all the cores (Multi threaded performance) can outperform the performance of an i5, games use only up to 4 cores (more often less).
The performance per core of the FX CPUs (single threaded performance) is significantly lower than the i5's. So when only 4 cores of the FX are used, its performance is similar to the FX-4300 and any Haswell i5 beats that. That issue is more evident with games that use less cores or depend more on the CPU.

And that's why i5s are better than FX for gaming, but only when playing at very high resolutions and graphics quality settings. If you're just thinking about 1080p mid-high settings a FX-4350 + R9 270 can do the job great.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
A

apetrovic321

Reputable
Dec 10, 2014
31
0
4,530


Thanks again ;]
I'm asking because I've seen many people keep saying that directx 12 and future games and apps are going to be more optimized for more cores. I would like this CPU to last, that is why. But I think i5 would do the job even then.
Could you tell me if this motherboard would be a good choice for a stable overclock - Asrock z97 pro4? I've read that people get 4.4-4.5 ghz smoothly.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
synphul

synphul

Champion
Mar 11, 2011
9,477
7
54,965
Another thumbs up for the i5. You asked about all around performance and that's basically where the i5 outperforms the 8350. Other than some rare instances of heavily threaded tasks where the 8350 edges out the i5 (and not by much), the i5 is a stronger performer. The core series compute more data per clock than amd so it can run a full ghz 'slower' and still outpace the amd chips. Most games the i5 outperforms the 8350 and when it comes to bf4 it's not 5fps, closer to 20fps which is considerable.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
DubbleClick

DubbleClick

Admirable
Jun 16, 2014
2,116
1
6,460
Even in games where 8 cores are used, the I5 still outperforms the 8350fx. With dx 12, that will not change. A better cpu will not suddenly become worse. Also, the lower your resolution the higher differences between cpu's will be, because at high resolutions it's all limited by your gpu. For 4k gaming, either won't make a difference with a r9 280x. For 1440p, probably a small one towards intel. At 1080p, I5 will have noticeable advantages.
As for the motherboard, I have not heard of the pro4. The asrock z97 extreme4 also sells for 100€, though.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

apetrovic321

Reputable
Dec 10, 2014
31
0
4,530


http://www.asrock.com/mb/intel/z97%20pro4/
It's fine in my opinion. It has 6 phase though, would it be stable on a, say 4.6ghz overclock?
It seems to me that it will be an i5 then.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
DubbleClick

DubbleClick

Admirable
Jun 16, 2014
2,116
1
6,460
http://www.asrock.com/mb/compare.de.asp?SelectedModel=Z97+Extreme4&SelectedModel=Z97+Pro4

You won't be able to SLI and it has some other downside, although the SLi loss may be the only noticeable. But since you plan on using an amd card anyway, it doesn't matter because both are crossfire capable.

As for the 6 phase vrm design, I'm myself on a gigabyte z97x-sli with only 4 power phases. Able to overclock my i7 4790k stable to 4.9ghz. I might probably hit 5.0ghz with a 12 vrm phase board, but either way I can't keep the cpu cool enough over 4.8ghz. And it has to be said that I at least for a pretty decent to great cpu, you'll mostlikely be limited by the cpu over the motherboard in any way. Haswell cpu's aren't that power hungry and don't put that much strain on the motherboard. If your i5 does 4.6ghz, which chances for are pretty good, the motherboard will allow it to easily.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

apetrovic321

Reputable
Dec 10, 2014
31
0
4,530


Let me get this straight, I'm not sure I understood you correctly. Basically, I will be good with either Asrock extreme or pro4 version with this cpu? Btw, I definitely won't be using two GPUs.
P. S. Would a 600w PSU be enough when I overclock? The GPU will eat up most, of course
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
DubbleClick

DubbleClick

Admirable
Jun 16, 2014
2,116
1
6,460
A 500w one will be plenty for a single gpu. I'm myself running an i7 4790k and a gtx 680 on a 450w psu. And yes, you'll be good with both motherboards. I just suggested the extreme 4 as it's better for the same price (at least here).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

apetrovic321

Reputable
Dec 10, 2014
31
0
4,530


OK! Thank you very much. Extreme4 is 20 euros more, but then again, I could pick an asus or msi for that price. We'll see, I am not in a hurry.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

apetrovic321

Reputable
Dec 10, 2014
31
0
4,530


Well, it is better to be on the safe side, that's for sure. Heck, i could even go for a 700w PSU. Would that be an overkill? Maybe 650w would be the sweet spot.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
DubbleClick

DubbleClick

Admirable
Jun 16, 2014
2,116
1
6,460
650w would almost be enough for SLI. The r9 280x has about a maximum power draw of 250w, a bit less if gaming. An oc'ed i5 draws about 150w-180w max, that makes 430w max. Count like 20w towards 10 hdd's and you're at 450w. Maximum power consumption, if stress testing both cpu and gpu. 500w is more than on the safe side. 700w could easily SLI.
The psu quality is more important than the wattage. I'd choose a good 400w psu over a bad 750w one any time.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

apetrovic321

Reputable
Dec 10, 2014
31
0
4,530


What do you think about SeaSonic M12II 620 Evo? (http://www.seasonicusa.com/M12-EVO-Edition.htm)
or Cooler master g700 (http://www.coolermaster.com/powersupply/g-series/g700/)
or THERMALTAKE Smart SE 630W SPS-630M (http://www.thermaltake.com/products-model_Specification.aspx?id=C_00001965)

A friend of mine has a similar rig and he has no problems with his cooler master b700. I do realize these are not quality PSU's, but if they turn out to be that bad I can always change them.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
DubbleClick

DubbleClick

Admirable
Jun 16, 2014
2,116
1
6,460
The SeaSonic one is actually amongst the best psu's. The thermaltake one is absolutely awful. I'd rather not run my pc for a while than use it. Not sure about the cooler master one. Thing is, if a psu is really bad, you can of course replace it. But if it is really bad, it probably blew up your whole computer before.

I guess you decided to crossfire in the future?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

apetrovic321

Reputable
Dec 10, 2014
31
0
4,530


Well, no, I don't think so at least. Maybe, but certainly not in the next 2-3 years.

The thing is, my friend has a similar configuration and he's using the cooler master 700w. Now I know it's not the greatest psu but he says it does the job well.

All 3 of them are about the same price, that's why I put them together. You think that this seasonic will do fine? Even on heavy load?

On http://www.sapphiretech.com it says that Sapphire tri x r9 280x needs 750w psu!!! Now, I know that's ******* but that's the main reason why I am having doubts.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
DubbleClick

DubbleClick

Admirable
Jun 16, 2014
2,116
1
6,460
I'm running an i7 4790k 4.7ghz and a gtx 680 oc'ed on a 450w psu and have yet to see my system consume more than 400w (rendering + playing gpu intensive game) at once. While only gaming, I get about 300w peaks, while only rendering like 150w tops. Now the 280x might have a little higher power draw than the gtx 680 (although I don't think theres noticeable difference) but it's still going to stay under 400w in any case.
As for these PSU's the SeaSonic is the best for sure. It's one of the best psu's ever made. As I said I'm not sure about the cooler master but I highly doubt that its going to be close to as good. The thermal take one is garbage. So if your choice is between those (if you want 220w puffer for.. i dont know, maybe 110 1tb hdd's?) the SeaSonic should be your choice for sure.

For reference: http://www.anandtech.com/show/5699/nvidia-geforce-gtx-680-review/19 (power consumption of WHOLE SYSTEM, 280x draws a bit less than 7970hd)
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/id-1804779/power-supply-unit-tier-list.html
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

apetrovic321

Reputable
Dec 10, 2014
31
0
4,530


Wow. Thank you so much! This answer has helped me a lot. I have overlooked this PSU when I checked the list you sent me when I went through it earlier.

I think that settles it then. This would've probably been the best answer, but since it is not really connected to the title, I'll have to give to Brunostako.

Again - many thanks to all of you!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
G

Galacticfox

Reputable
Jul 4, 2014
29
0
4,540


Hey man I know some time has past but I was sitting on the couch browsing threads and stumbled across this. I'll tell you I have the r9 280 (mildly overclocked) paired with a fx 6350, quite similar to the amd set up you've thought about. Now mind you I know the 8350 has a bit of a lead on the 6350 but this is in your favour. I rarely have troubles playing the most graphically demanding games (far cry 4, tomb raider, crysis 3, battlefield 4, the witcher 2 and so on) on ultra settings, with high shadow detail and decent anti-aliasing on and can achieve 45-60 fps in 1080p. Sometimes I want to buy a nice 990fx mother board and overclock to 4.7 or so, but then I always question why buy an am3+ motherboard. It's nearing the end of the am3+ days and next CPU upgrade will need a new motherboard too. I personally would suggest the i5 4690k with a less expensive motherboard as you could always replace it to overclock in later years. The i5 will out perform the fx 8350 any day and it's deffenitly future proof. I hope this helps, I wish I would have bought the 4690k lol
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom