FX 8120 vs i5 2320 vs X4 960T

[fanboy555]

I'm buying a new computer and I'm on a budget. I have to decide between:
FX 8120 + 870 = 240€
i5 2320 + Z68 = 265€
or X4 960T + 870= 190€
or all in for i5 2500k + Z68 = 295€
The GPU would be HD7850 or HD6950. I'm going to use it for games (1080p - BF3 multiplayer, Skyrim,...), and some video editing (Blender, Photoshop, AE). Which one would you recomeend?
Thanks for answers.

 

[cyansnow]

Hello.

The best choice would probably be the 2500k, for gaming. If you wanna save some cash, get the 960t, which is a great CPU, you could use the saved money on a better GPU, also.
At the end of the day, GPU>CPU in gaming, as long as it is semi-modern, and all of these are good CPUs and will do just fine.

 

[fanboy555]

What about fx 8120? If overclocked would it be faster than i5 2320?

 

[sarinaide]

In this instance the 8120 is by far the best choice, the 2320 is just meh and the Zosma is older PII design. There is a Intel is WAAAY better myopia going around and that is not entirely true, try per clock it is faster and more efficient but then again it is not a 8core chip, Sandy is at best 10-15~% faster but it is hardly noticable.

 

[seumas_beathan]

Wow real easy choice here. The i5 2500k is the best cpu up there, go for it and you will not be dissapointed

 

[wr6133]

I'd take the 960T and shove the change towards your GPU. You can OC it to hell and back, maybe make a 6 core from it.

I dont accept that in anyway the 8120 is a logical choice ever in that line up. For 8120 money you are in decent Intel area. If your an AMD lover or want to spare cash for other things 960T on an AM3+ board, sockets open then IF Piledriver delivers, if Piledriver doesnt deliver meh! The 960T should give you some decent mileage.

 

[fanboy555]

I know 2500k is the best choice, but it's just to expensive. I'm looking for a CPU that would be good for games for about 2 years, and that would bottleneck 7850 (or 6950). Looking at the prices it's now between X4 960T, X6 1055T, FX 6100, i5 750 and FX 8120 (most expensive option).

 

[truegenius]

if you can get that i5-2500k then there is no way to reject it.

If you cant then what about a i5-24xx + h61, as you cant oc 24xx and thus h61, it will save you some money for hd7970,

here is sb chipset comparision
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGA_1155

 

[fanboy555]

i5 2400 is only 10€ cheaper than 2500k so that is not an option. And h61 can't offer what I need.

 

[ebalong]

i5 2400 is only 10€ cheaper than 2500k so that is not an option. And h61 can't offer what I need.

Well, here's another way to look at it. The 8-core 8120 MIGHT be more useful with the video editing stuff, and I say might, because you need to compare performance in relevant programs between the AMD and the 2500K and decide if it would be useful. If you want to emphasize the gaming more, then I would cut out your middle two options (the 8120 and the i5-2320) and just consider either budget but still good performer 960T, and the more expensive but better performing 2500K.

The reason I would cut out the middle two from consideration is they are only 30-50 euros less than the 2500K, for less performance. If you are going to want to save money and accept a slight hit in performance, then save 100 euros and go with the 960T system. You get what I am getting at? Either choose the low one or the high one for gaming. I can't say for certain if the 2500K blows the hell out of the 960T in gaming (too lazy to look up comparisons), but the difference is probably noticeable (but again, the video card may make more of a difference here).

 

[Tavo_Nova]

FX 8120 + 870 = 240€
i5 2320 + Z68 = 265€
or X4 960T + 870= 190€
or all in for i5 2500k + Z68 = 295€

between these choices when it comes to gaming you won't notice that much different, specially if your grabbing a 7850 or higher,

now look into performance if you can utilize the cores of the fx then go with it, either way you go you will hardly notice the difference, both gaming and application and only notice them on benchmarks

 

[noob2222]

BF3 will see benefit from the 8120 setup over the 960T if it doesn't unlock to an x6, Even then the 8120 is slightly faster.

Did some quick testing today. 8120@4.6 ghz BF3 42 player map 6970 CF

4 cores (4100) - fps 30-55
6 cores (6100) - fps 60-95 few drops to 50s
8 cores (this) - fps 80-120, very few drops to 60s

very few websites did testing on mp, but here is one. http://www.sweclockers.com/artikel/14650-prestandaanalys-battlefield-3/5#pagehead

Roughly 8150 equals the 1100T, followed by the quad phenoms. anything below that is worthless.

Skyrim on the other hand favors Intel chips, but fps is still over 60 with the latest patch.
Photoshop loves the 8120.

 

[DryCreamer]

Fanboy,

The AMD CPUs don't have the SSE4.1 instruction sets (that the Intel chips have) that Adobe Premiere and AE use so they will perform much slower in those applications. The 2320 will outperform (by a significant margin) the FX chip and the 960T when encoding video in Adobe.

Dry

 

[DryCreamer]

if you want to get a i5 2320, you can't overclock it, you don't need the Z68 board, so you could probably save some money by getting a mid-level chipset like an H67

Dry