Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Gaming CPU

Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 1, 2012 2:57:50 PM

Hello all I am building a new gaming pc and just had a couple of questions regarding the cpu. Now I know that the amd vs intel has been asked a hundred times and I have been doing my own research, but what I am looking for is a concrete example of say the fx 8150 vs the i7 2600k for gaming only. I know that the i7 has higher bench marks, but will i see that in games such as battlefield 3. Right now i have a amd phenom 2 1045t with a ati radeon hd 5770 and can run bf3 on high with a 30 fps. What I want in my new machine is to run bf3 on ultra at 60 fps. My concern is that buying the i7 is like buying a race car, but never going over 50 miles an hour. My budget is around 2000 so its not like I can't afford the i7 just wondering if I really need it for gaming only. The only reason I am leaning toward amd is its what I have now and its worked out fine, but with that said if I will get a noticeable difference with intel I will go that route.

More about : gaming cpu

a c 190 à CPUs
a b 4 Gaming
January 1, 2012 3:31:01 PM

Neither of those is a good choice, the i7 2600k provides no benefit over the i5 2500k for gaming, and the 8150 is unlikely to provide much performance over your 1045T in gaming so my choice would be neither, pick up an i5 2500k for significantly less than either of your two picks now. Bulldozer based chips really aren't great for gaming, they are better for heavily threaded applications while only a few games can even make use of 4 cores so their extra threads don't help at all.
Score
0
January 1, 2012 3:40:41 PM

Thank u hunter315 that's exactly the kind of answers I am looking for.
Score
0
Related resources
a b à CPUs
January 1, 2012 5:29:44 PM

you need to buy a better graphics card, 5770 cannot give you 60fps, and i5-2500k is enough, 8150 will not provide any benefit

try gpu upgrade first and then try cpu upgrade if needed
Score
0
a c 103 à CPUs
January 1, 2012 5:32:43 PM

+1, I'd look at getting a better card in there, then see if you still 'need' improvement
Moto
Score
0
a c 185 à CPUs
a b 4 Gaming
January 1, 2012 5:34:32 PM

Wait until haswell! :D 
Score
0
January 1, 2012 5:36:59 PM

Sorry I should have stated that I will be getting a new card im going with a whole new system. Going to check out the new 7970 and the gtx 580
Score
0

Best solution

January 2, 2012 3:48:34 AM

Just a few thoughts. If your principle use is gaming, I doubt you will see much benefit from a Core i7 vs a Core i5. I have a "lowly" Core i5 2300, and in real life, real world (synthetics be damned) performance it is 87-95% the CPU the Core i5 2500 is, even with a significant Mhz penalty at stock speeds. In gaming, that number is 95%+ (because most games aren't CPU bound!) Of course, overclockers see some benefits I can't realize, but that is a separate issue.

Even with this lowly CPU, if I set my priorities right, and processor affinities right -- I can video encode, play DiRT-3, run folding at home, run autodock, and occasionally break for an IRC/IM session if needed while running 3 displays on a simply Core i5 2300 + a 6870. My graphics card gets a workout, and yes, those apps run a bit slower doing this all at once -- but it does it without affecting game performance.

The days of being CPU bound are pretty much over. Intel is giving the mainstream sever/workstation level CPU's for dirt cheap (considering heavy multitasking).

If its just gaming, I don't see much of a need beyond a Core i5 2500K. Its got some overclocking headroom if you need/want it, and its quite a capable chip. If you do feel the need, the 2600K is all of that, and a bag of chips for your application -- overkill. For a heavy multi-tasker like myself, it might be worth it, but for the typical user, no.

So get the 2600K/2500K, throw major $$$ at your high end GPU (7970 looks nice, but early adapters pay a heavy penalty both in costs, and in not having the better performing version that comes out down the road), make sure you get a large SSD drive for the speed there. The one thing I really love about the 7970 is that it promises to actually be able to make eye-finity work. I have it on the Sapphire Flex 6870 1GB, and its just not enough memory, or horsepower to make it worthwhile.

AMD can compete in graphics cards, but AFA cpu's are concerned - that battle is over.


---
All of that being said, there are some cool consoles coming out -- PC games are getting fewer, and fewer. My decision to game with my PC only became viable because my graphics card could handle some of the scientific computing I also do with it, and more scientific apps are starting to utilize the graphics card (but its slow to change -- I did need it for open GL performance period, but I could have done that with a much lower card). For the type of money you are throwing around on this, you could build a nice home use desktop, and buy several consoles with a longer lifespan between mega $$ upgrades.

OTOH good emulators come out all of the time. Wii emulators are pretty good on the PC, and you get PC games too. Maybe it pays off, maybe it doesn't.
Share
January 2, 2012 5:02:06 AM

Thanks all for the reply's I will be going with the i5 over the i7 and saving about 100 bucks that i can put elsewhere in my new machine.
Score
0
January 11, 2012 11:57:38 PM

Best answer selected by dallasstoney.
Score
0
January 12, 2012 12:13:52 AM

Salt said:

---
All of that being said, there are some cool consoles coming out -- PC games are getting fewer, and fewer. .


BLASPHEMY!

300 years ago you would burn at stake, you heretic!



(I'm j/k for those too mental to get it!)
Score
0
!