Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

8120 vs. 2500k

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 31, 2012 2:35:09 AM

I would like to start off this thread by saying I already know that the 2500k is the superior processor. So you may be wondering, why have this thread in the first place. The reason I am asking is the price difference between the two. And in your head, your probably going well the 2500k is cheaper too. Well, at Microcenter, not anymore.

I was planing on using the 2500k in my build, but I went on microcenter's website today and noticed their new bulldozer deals page.

Enter Microcenter: http://www.microcenter.com/specials/promotions/AMDbundl...

2500k + sabertooth P67: $380 - $50 instant discount = $330.
8120 + sabertooth 990FX: $380 - $100 instant savings = $280
2500k + z68 extreme 4 = $340 - $50 instant discount = $290 (I use extreme4 for the intel because they have no extreme 3 motherboards at my local store and the amd uses an extreme 3 board for the combo)
8120 + 990fx extreme3 = $330 - $100 instant savings = $230.
8120 + 970 fxa extreme 4 = $200 (motherboard is free)

The rest of my build plan consists of:
RAM: 8GB 1866 Patriot Memory
Case: CM Storm Trooper
Hard Drive: Hitachi 500gb 7200rpm drive
Cooler: CM Hyper 212

And I already have:
XFX 5770 GFX Card
650W Power supply

Do you guys think I should shell out the extra cash for the Intel or go with the AMD route?

More about : 8120 2500k

a c 186 à CPUs
January 31, 2012 2:35:43 AM

2500k.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 31, 2012 3:28:41 AM

if you game, theres no reason to get the bulldozer. If you just want a cpu for video editing and such then the bulldozer makes some sense.
m
0
l
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
January 31, 2012 3:30:35 AM

Spend the few extra $$$$. TH did a guide on the budget processors, and intel's dual core chips were out performing AMD's 8 core chips. Go with intel. . .
m
0
l
a c 146 à CPUs
January 31, 2012 3:39:31 AM

for gaming the I5 is the best you can get in terms of price to performance.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 31, 2012 3:43:53 AM

Do yourself a huge favor and get an SSD. Between the 8120 and 2500K you will notice very little difference. Between an standard HDD and SSD you will notice a world of difference.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 31, 2012 8:54:46 AM

halolll said:
I would like to start off this thread by saying I already know that the 2500k is the superior processor. So you may be wondering, why have this thread in the first place. The reason I am asking is the price difference between the two. And in your head, your probably going well the 2500k is cheaper too. Well, at Microcenter, not anymore.

I was planing on using the 2500k in my build, but I went on microcenter's website today and noticed their new bulldozer deals page.

Enter Microcenter: http://www.microcenter.com/specials/promotions/AMDbundl...

2500k + sabertooth P67: $380 - $50 instant discount = $330.
8120 + sabertooth 990FX: $380 - $100 instant savings = $280
2500k + z68 extreme 4 = $340 - $50 instant discount = $290 (I use extreme4 for the intel because they have no extreme 3 motherboards at my local store and the amd uses an extreme 3 board for the combo)
8120 + 990fx extreme3 = $330 - $100 instant savings = $230.
8120 + 970 fxa extreme 4 = $200 (motherboard is free)

The rest of my build plan consists of:
RAM: 8GB 1866 Patriot Memory
Case: CM Storm Trooper
Hard Drive: Hitachi 500gb 7200rpm drive
Cooler: CM Hyper 212

And I already have:
XFX 5770 GFX Card
650W Power supply

Do you guys think I should shell out the extra cash for the Intel or go with the AMD route?

Ask them if they will price match.
m
0
l
January 31, 2012 9:28:31 AM

Definitely go for 2500k. Bundle with Z68 motherboard ready for IB for future proof upgrade. Get yourself a 7950 gpu card and your games will run smoothly.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 31, 2012 9:34:39 AM

halolll said:
I would like to start off this thread by saying I already know that the 2500k is the superior processor. So you may be wondering, why have this thread in the first place. The reason I am asking is the price difference between the two. And in your head, your probably going well the 2500k is cheaper too. Well, at Microcenter, not anymore.

I was planing on using the 2500k in my build, but I went on microcenter's website today and noticed their new bulldozer deals page.

Enter Microcenter: http://www.microcenter.com/specials/promotions/AMDbundl...

2500k + sabertooth P67: $380 - $50 instant discount = $330.
8120 + sabertooth 990FX: $380 - $100 instant savings = $280
2500k + z68 extreme 4 = $340 - $50 instant discount = $290 (I use extreme4 for the intel because they have no extreme 3 motherboards at my local store and the amd uses an extreme 3 board for the combo)
8120 + 990fx extreme3 = $330 - $100 instant savings = $230.
8120 + 970 fxa extreme 4 = $200 (motherboard is free)


So which two are you actually considering? If it's the $200 FX vs. the $330 i5 I might be inclined to say go with the FX. Is the Intel better? Certainly. Is it more than 50% better (330/200 = 165%)? Nope. Like somebody said, that $130 is worth an SSD for the AMD build; or a new GPU which has a much bigger impact for gaming - your 5770 isn't exactly high end.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 31, 2012 9:40:21 AM

halolll said:
I would like to start off this thread by saying I already know that the 2500k is the superior processor. So you may be wondering, why have this thread in the first place. The reason I am asking is the price difference between the two. And in your head, your probably going well the 2500k is cheaper too. Well, at Microcenter, not anymore.

I was planing on using the 2500k in my build, but I went on microcenter's website today and noticed their new bulldozer deals page.

Enter Microcenter: http://www.microcenter.com/specials/promotions/AMDbundl...

2500k + sabertooth P67: $380 - $50 instant discount = $330.
8120 + sabertooth 990FX: $380 - $100 instant savings = $280
2500k + z68 extreme 4 = $340 - $50 instant discount = $290 (I use extreme4 for the intel because they have no extreme 3 motherboards at my local store and the amd uses an extreme 3 board for the combo)
8120 + 990fx extreme3 = $330 - $100 instant savings = $230.
8120 + 970 fxa extreme 4 = $200 (motherboard is free)

The rest of my build plan consists of:
RAM: 8GB 1866 Patriot Memory
Case: CM Storm Trooper
Hard Drive: Hitachi 500gb 7200rpm drive
Cooler: CM Hyper 212

And I already have:
XFX 5770 GFX Card
650W Power supply

Do you guys think I should shell out the extra cash for the Intel or go with the AMD route?


First off, I checked that 970 fxa extreme 4. the review I found said its an overclocking beast. http://www.ocinside.de/go_e.html?http://www.ocinside.de...

thats a saving of $90, you can put that into upgrading or adding a 2nd 5770. As for toms article, you have already addressed one of the issues, crappy memory = crappy results. Seems ok for intel systems to be tested at their supported setups, but not ok for AMD.

Seems no one at toms wants to verify this situation. http://www.madshrimps.be/articles/article/1000220/AMD-F...
thats a 6 and 8.5% boost just from using faster memory, but only 2 games tested.

As long as your buying the system for overclocking, the 8120 won't dissapoint you at all. sure, the 2500k might be slightly faster, but 90% of your limit is the video card, but with the toms article, its missing 2-10% boost from memory. I have done limited actual testing, but the 2 games i did check were huge difference from 1333 and 2000. I just leave it where it runs, 4.7ghz, 2133 memory, 233 FSB.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 31, 2012 10:06:59 AM

noob2222 said:
First off, I checked that 970 fxa extreme 4. the review I found said its an overclocking beast. http://www.ocinside.de/go_e.html?http://www.ocinside.de...

thats a saving of $90, you can put that into upgrading or adding a 2nd 5770. As for toms article, you have already addressed one of the issues, crappy memory = crappy results. Seems ok for intel systems to be tested at their supported setups, but not ok for AMD.

Seems no one at toms wants to verify this situation. http://www.madshrimps.be/articles/article/1000220/AMD-F...
thats a 6 and 8.5% boost just from using faster memory, but only 2 games tested.

As long as your buying the system for overclocking, the 8120 won't dissapoint you at all. sure, the 2500k might be slightly faster, but 90% of your limit is the video card, but with the toms article, its missing 2-10% boost from memory. I have done limited actual testing, but the 2 games i did check were huge difference from 1333 and 2000. I just leave it where it runs, 4.7ghz, 2133 memory, 233 FSB.


Well, at 1080p, max settings. The TH's test used a 7970 and DDR3-2000mhz.. unlocking the full AMD FX potential you told about... so there's no additional gain here to consider.

Skyrim, Just Cause 2, Starcraft 2, are CPU limited, and i5-2500k have a huge lead.
Dirt 3, Metro 2033 are almost no CPU limited yet i5-2500k leads
BF 3 isn't CPU limited (maybe are if multiplayer playing)

You have some massive performance at skyrim and starcraft 2.. even the FX-8120@4.2GHZ with DDR3-2000 can't match the i5-2400 @stock.. sadly there's no other games to check if this kind of gains apply.
About the OC.. i5-2400 is a nice piece of hardware... what say about i5-2500k? Consider that they even stock are a winner, imagine if you OC it.
m
0
l
January 31, 2012 11:16:06 AM

The two games I will mainly be playing are BF3 and SWTOR
m
0
l
January 31, 2012 1:37:37 PM

FinneousPJ said:
So which two are you actually considering? If it's the $200 FX vs. the $330 i5 I might be inclined to say go with the FX. Is the Intel better? Certainly. Is it more than 50% better (330/200 = 165%)? Nope. Like somebody said, that $130 is worth an SSD for the AMD build; or a new GPU which has a much bigger impact for gaming - your 5770 isn't exactly high end.


I should probably elaborate. My question is which one of the above solutions would give me the best price/performence ratio. I am currently a senior in high school and so I am trying to go with the most budget friendly solution that will still be playable in games. Either one of these CPUs would be a major upgrade for me since I am currently on a amd 65nm tri-core at 2ghz. (I bought the computer way before I knew anything about how they actually worked.) Im guessing that the reason that SWTOR is unplayable in PvP is because of the CPU bottleneck. BF3 is playable up to 32 players, but 64 players causes rediculous fps drops. If I was to go with an Intel I wouldnt be getting Ivy bridge and would instead wait for haswell, which leds to my intel specific question: What motherboard would provide the best prive/overclocking performence. My final question is would it be worth it to get a second 5770 or just to save up for a more powerful single card solution?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 31, 2012 1:58:24 PM

BF3 single player is very GPU limited. Multiplayer is another story.

For gaming, any SB processor is ahead of anything AMD has right now.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 31, 2012 2:38:33 PM

halolll said:
I should probably elaborate. My question is which one of the above solutions would give me the best price/performence ratio. I am currently a senior in high school and so I am trying to go with the most budget friendly solution that will still be playable in games. Either one of these CPUs would be a major upgrade for me since I am currently on a amd 65nm tri-core at 2ghz. (I bought the computer way before I knew anything about how they actually worked.) Im guessing that the reason that SWTOR is unplayable in PvP is because of the CPU bottleneck. BF3 is playable up to 32 players, but 64 players causes rediculous fps drops. If I was to go with an Intel I wouldnt be getting Ivy bridge and would instead wait for haswell, which leds to my intel specific question: What motherboard would provide the best prive/overclocking performence. My final question is would it be worth it to get a second 5770 or just to save up for a more powerful single card solution?

The best price/performance is definitely the cheapest offer. The best performance is the most expensive one - however it does not scale linearly.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 31, 2012 5:05:32 PM

vitornob said:
Well, at 1080p, max settings. The TH's test used a 7970 and DDR3-2000mhz.. unlocking the full AMD FX potential you told about... so there's no additional gain here to consider.

Skyrim, Just Cause 2, Starcraft 2, are CPU limited, and i5-2500k have a huge lead.
Dirt 3, Metro 2033 are almost no CPU limited yet i5-2500k leads
BF 3 isn't CPU limited (maybe are if multiplayer playing)

You have some massive performance at skyrim and starcraft 2.. even the FX-8120@4.2GHZ with DDR3-2000 can't match the i5-2400 @stock.. sadly there's no other games to check if this kind of gains apply.
About the OC.. i5-2400 is a nice piece of hardware... what say about i5-2500k? Consider that they even stock are a winner, imagine if you OC it.

TH article used 2000 memory clocked in at 1333, check the setup.

besides that, the results aren't necessarily cpu caps, but entire platform differences. SB has the pci-e on chip, amd is still on the motherboard, you gain some speed there. Games love memory bandwidth for the most part, and Intel has that one covered as long as the memory speeds are slow.
m
0
l
!