Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

FX-8120 or i5 2500k (again)

Last response: in CPUs
Share
a b à CPUs
March 20, 2012 6:07:21 PM

Hi, sorry about this but yet again I'm asking the question FX8120 or i5 2500k as have so many others.
* The i5 is £30 more than the AMD.
* The most CPU intensive thing I'll be doing is video editing on "Videopad video editor".
* I don't game much but the graphics card I have (HD6770) should bottleneck before either of the other two.
* I'm not bothered about power usage but overclocking ability will be a factor.
* Should I wait until Ivy bridge?
* I'm upgrading from a Pentium D @ 2.8Ghz.

More about : 8120 2500k

a b à CPUs
March 20, 2012 6:30:01 PM

Get the 2500k, it beats the 8120 at everything, and by a noticeable amount. It is also one of the best overclocking chips on the market right now.

Ivy bridge will give you about 15% more horsepower, slightly reduced electricity costs and the same price point. Up to you if you feel like waiting about 5-6 weeks is worth it or not.
a b à CPUs
March 20, 2012 6:42:35 PM

theres one cavaet ive found about the 2500k. it doesnt support vr-d. its a feature that lets you directly tie hardware to a virtual machine. ie, you could use the graphics from the 2500k, the hd3000 for a virtual machine directly. cant do this with a 2500k but you can with a 2400. (so stupid)

id still go with the 2500k though. mines a beast, goes over 5ghz on air
Related resources
March 20, 2012 6:49:19 PM

2500K is hard to beat in almost all occasions. I would only recommend AMD on budget builds. Anything you are going to be using a lot of CPU power I'd run Intel every time. At least for now. As for the vr-d, , they probably do not include it because it is a K model. Most people overclocking are probably not too concerned with virtualization features. :whistle: 
a b à CPUs
March 20, 2012 8:44:54 PM

its a shame, because it would make use of the hd3000 thats just sitting there doing nothing

virtu is junk
a c 473 à CPUs
March 20, 2012 8:56:40 PM

Hmmm... tough call. If you play games, then the easy answer would be the Core i5-2500K.

However, since you are doing video editing, then that's different...

I would say go for the FX-8120 if the programs you use can make use of 8 core. Otherwise, if the programs you use can only take advantage of 4 or less cores, then the Core i5-2500k would be the CPU to buy.

Click the following for some benchmarks:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=288

If you look at the benchmarks for DivX 6.8.5 the Core i5-2500k performs better even though the FX-8150 (the FX-8120 is not listed as on option) is 300MHz faster. I believe DivX only uses 2 cores.

Looking at the x264 Pass 1 & 2 encoding benchmarks, the FX-8150 does not performs as well as the Core i5-2500k in the first pass. However, the 1st pass is generally pretty quick compared to the 2nd pass which is more time consuming. The FX performs better in the 2nd pass, so overall the FX edges out the Core i5 in the long run; by the time a video has been completely encoded with the FX, the Core i5 is still chugging along.

Windows Media Encode 9 benchmark swings performance back in favor of Intel, but I believe it is designed to only use 2 cores.
March 20, 2012 8:57:22 PM

get the i5 2550k. same as the 2500k, but without the integrated gpu. also faster out of the box. fx is good. but an 8100 model is just as expensive as a core i5. and if youre like me, and like microatx builds, amd has NO motherboards out. only am3 has good ones. if you must get an fx, the 6 core will perform just as well, and overclocks better than the 8 core.
a b à CPUs
March 21, 2012 3:11:06 PM

thanks for all the advice, i'll get the ivy bridge i5 as the money for this is coming in 3 or so weeks so it won't hurt to wait a couple more. :wahoo: 
March 22, 2012 5:04:03 PM

I would recommand you to go with i5 2500k with a P67 mobo and a good gfx card.the fx series with buldozer architecture has only 4 physical cores as 2modules for each core .so it does not give you much of an octa core..i5 2500k is the best option or go for i7 2600k at 300$ or so..thinking cheap old amd phenom 2 x6 1100 or even 1075 is a better option. :D 
March 22, 2012 5:04:07 PM

I would recommand you to go with i5 2500k with a P67 mobo and a good gfx card.the fx series with buldozer architecture has only 4 physical cores as 2modules for each core .so it does not give you much of an octa core..i5 2500k is the best option or go for i7 2600k at 300$ or so..thinking cheap old amd phenom 2 x6 1100 or even 1075 is a better option. :D 
March 22, 2012 5:04:12 PM

I would recommand you to go with i5 2500k with a P67 mobo and a good gfx card.the fx series with buldozer architecture has only 4 physical cores as 2modules for each core .so it does not give you much of an octa core..i5 2500k is the best option or go for i7 2600k at 300$ or so..thinking cheap old amd phenom 2 x6 1100 or even 1075 is a better option. :D 
July 13, 2012 1:15:35 AM

Obviously people think a gaming processor is best for video rendering? lol im sorry 4 cores vs (8 cores) 8 cores will win and it has been proven that the fx series is more of a work processor atleast the 6 and 8 core...4170 is good for gaming and my 6100 is great at gaming and beats the 2500k in video rendering but if i were you go with the 8150...Is faster than the 8120 (Dunno how but at same clock speeds 8150 is faster) and it beats the hell out of everything accept 3930k at video rendering.
a c 86 à CPUs
July 13, 2012 7:28:36 AM

EchoOne said:
Obviously people think a gaming processor is best for video rendering? lol im sorry 4 cores vs (8 cores) 8 cores will win and it has been proven that the fx series is more of a work processor atleast the 6 and 8 core...4170 is good for gaming and my 6100 is great at gaming and beats the 2500k in video rendering but if i were you go with the 8150...Is faster than the 8120 (Dunno how but at same clock speeds 8150 is faster) and it beats the hell out of everything accept 3930k at video rendering.

this thread is nearly 4 months old. and your wrong by the way, about nearly everything you said.none of the FX series ARE "great" for gaming. my 4 generation old core 2 duo is better for gaming than an fx 4100/6100. an i5 2xxx is "great" for gaming, however.
a b à CPUs
July 13, 2012 3:57:32 PM

I've bought an i5 3570k now so your arguments towards the FX are pointless, why comment on a 4month old post?
!