Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Need Final CPU Help: AMD or Intel Build?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 4, 2012 9:50:12 PM

For the past month I've been doing colossal research into computer parts, how multi-cores work, what GPU's do, and non-stop Internet searching of differences between AMD and Intel. And I'm lost.

My initial research lead me to building an AMD computer (my first time), because they're the "most bang for your buck" of the two. Their products are usually cheaper and usually one or two-steps below an Intel alongside any of their own.

The thing is, after reading some real descriptive, detailed, and lengthy comments by some people online at TomsHardware, Anand, or somewhere else they persuaded me to the beginning again to go down the route of Intel for knowledge-sake. After belittling and destroying AMD's quarterly market shares, quality of their computer parts and something else, I just can't decide.

So my budget is more than 800$, but if I could miraculously hit around 600$ at the end, great. I'm building this custom computer for high-end music producing, and playing games with at least moderate graphics. I'm more concerned about CPU-intense games than GPU-intense games.

-AMD FX 4100 Quad-Core Processor: (110.00$)

-AMD Radeon HD7850 or HD7750/70?: (100-200$)

-ASUS AMD+ Motherboard most likely: (80-150$)

-ATX/ATX+ Mid-Tower or Full-Tower: (100-200$)

-High-end Sound card for music: (50-150$)

-700-1000PW PSU: Hopefully around (50-100$)

-G.SKILL Ares Series 16GB (4 x 4) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3-1600: (88.99$)

My concerns are:

1. Can Intel components give me an Intel-computer with comparable parts being same prices but better performance?

2. I'm not concerned about ultra-high graphics, but great performance for games, software, but most importantly which choice is better down the next 2-3 years if I wanted to upgrade my AMD CPU or Intel CPU to something superior? I really don't want to end up making an Intel-board to only find out the "AMD FX 4170 Quad-Core Processor" or that "Trinity" is far superior to anything Intel-based later on.

3. I'm truly concerned if I do go AMD, will the AMD FX 4100 Quad be great for FL-Studio at max settings, Galactic Civilizations, Civilization 5, etc to handle intense CPU-usage?

So can anyone help me with my dilemma? It feels like I'm half-way through some game, and I have to permanently decide between siding with the AMD faction, or the Intel faction. Y'know, either the Atlas or Daishi...
a b à CPUs
March 4, 2012 9:58:46 PM

Intel hands down. You could upgrade to Ivy Bridge in the future with 1155 while for AMD, Trinity, aka Piledriver, will be using a FM2 socket. The AM3+ sockets are dead. Trinity will be oriented towards extreme budget users. CPUs from AMD are just sub par when comparing to Intel.

You got it wrong. Intel has the best price/ performance ratio.
m
0
l
a c 186 à CPUs
a b À AMD
a b å Intel
March 4, 2012 10:02:28 PM

i3-2100 and asrock z68 extreme 3 gen 3. or i5-2500k and asrock z68 extreme 3 gen 3.
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 480 à CPUs
a c 122 À AMD
a c 119 å Intel
March 4, 2012 11:14:57 PM

Most games only use 2 cores likes that games you listed. A Core i3-2100 can come very well against AMD's more expensive Phenom II X4 980; matching or beating the X4 980 in every game benchmark tested. This includes Mafia II which is known to be able to use 4 cores. The FX-4100 does not compare to the X4 980.

I don't know what FL-Studio is but if it can make use of 4 cores then maybe it will perform better with the FX-4100. For most people 16GB of RAM is overkill, but if you know that amount of RAM is beneficial to the programs you use then that's okay. Otherwise 8GB is fine.
m
0
l
a c 186 à CPUs
a b À AMD
a b å Intel
March 4, 2012 11:23:45 PM

I was running fl on a c2d e8600 and 1gb of RAM perfectly fine!
m
0
l
March 4, 2012 11:32:36 PM

Intel is better. Even an AMD quad core has a hard time beatting an Intel dual core.
A i3-2100 is good but you can also get the i3-2120 which gives you a little boost in performance.
m
0
l
March 5, 2012 12:23:12 AM

No question go with Intels Sandy Bridges. As someone said you have it backwards. Price to performance the Intel Sandy Bridges can't be beat.
m
0
l
March 5, 2012 1:33:04 AM

I've just been dealing with this problem as well. For some reason I want to love AMD, but on nearly every benchmark test I've found Intel simply outperforms, plus the 1155 socket will be compatible with the new Ivy bridge.
m
0
l
March 5, 2012 3:16:48 AM

I bought the FX-6100 and had it OC'ed to 4 Ghz. I sold it after a month and picked up an i3 2120. Games loaded 20 - 30% faster on average, and frame rates were up a bit too. Go with the i3 2120. Better yet, go for a quad core i5. Yeah, its at least $50 more, but its well worth it.
m
0
l
March 5, 2012 5:00:37 PM

Oropher said:
I've just been dealing with this problem as well. For some reason I want to love AMD, but on nearly every benchmark test I've found Intel simply outperforms, plus the 1155 socket will be compatible with the new Ivy bridge.


What do you want to buy. Do you want to buy for performance or just to brag about the AMD inside sticker on the front of your case.
m
0
l
March 12, 2012 7:28:55 AM

Sorry I didn't reply back to y'all. Thank you guys so much, I'm going Intel, plan on asking another Community Question. You guys are really good at this.
m
0
l
!