Which one would perform better with these tasks ?

Im inbetween the buying of a 2500k and fx8120.
Theyre both unlocked and good processors, but which one performs better doing these things:

Playing battlefield 3 WHILE recording with fraps.
Playing battlefield 3 WHILE livestreaming it to twitch.tv

Im sure i will get a great performance while doing not these tasks with any of these processors, but which one performs better while recording and livestreaming ?
39 answers Last reply
More about which perform tasks
  1. i5-2500k, but recording would depend on hard drive speed and where you are recording from. First install the game onto an ssd and record to an hdd. As for livestreaming that would depend on your internet connection!!
  2. Well, wouldnt the 8 cores be a benefit over the 4 core 2500k ?
    And yes, i have a seperate HDD for recording and my internet speed is really good.
    And my OS + game will be on SSD
  3. Anyone ?
  4. 8120 better in mega tasking..
    that's mean if you running 4 or 8 program simultaneously..

    if you running just 2 program..(multitasking), processing power of 2500k still better than 8120.

    also in gaming, if you play in hd (1920) resolution, there's almost no difference, no matter what processor that you use.

  5. cheti said:
    Well, wouldnt the 8 cores be a benefit over the 4 core 2500k ?
    And yes, i have a seperate HDD for recording and my internet speed is really good.
    And my OS + game will be on SSD


    The FX-8120 is "sort of" an 8-core processor. It has four Bulldozer modules, each of which can handle two threads. The improvement in performance from running a second thread in the module is better than that of running two threads per core using Intel's Hyperthreading but not as good as (but less expensive than) having 8 actual cores. Where between the two it sits varies heavily depending on your task. The FX-8120 acts much more like a real 8-core CPU in tasks like rendering and video encoding, but more like a quad-core in other tasks.

    The i5-2500K would likely be the better CPU as most games don't use more than 2-3 threads, and the per-thread performance of the i5-2500K is higher in Windows games than the FX-8120. The extra threads of the FX-8120 may help with making the system feel smoother if you are doing much processing of the video, such as doing an on-the-fly encoding when recording or if you are running a lot of stuff in the background. The game will run slower than the i5-2500K (usually by an amount that does not matter, such as getting 80 fps when the i5-2500K can get 100 fps) but will be less stuttery. Alternatively, you can get a Sandy Bridge that has HyperThreading enabled, like the i7-2600K or i7-2700K and also be able to handle 8 threads. That should give you at least as good of performance in any situation as the FX-8120 but at a considerably higher price.

    If the video recording is simply a dump-to-disk, its performance will depend on how fast your hard drive is and how busy it is. The recommendation to run the game off an SSD and dump video to an HDD is a good one.
  6. So fx8120 would handle better me having skype, msn, teamspeak, xsplit(livestreaming program), itunes, steam and BATTLEFIELD 3 open at the same time ?
  7. not just open..but working and using processor power.

    such as, video rendering with vegas, 3d animation rendering with max, converting video with cyko, watching 2 blueray video, while gaming..


    who will do that task anyway..:D
  8. So basically - if i have the money: Get a 2600k/2700k.
    If i dont have it: get a fx8120
    If i want ONLY gaming and have no money: get a 2500k.

    is that correct ?
  9. i prefer like this..

    if i have much money: Get a 2600k/2700k.

    If i dont have that much money: get a 2500k.

    If i want ONLY gaming and have no money: get a 2500k.

    if i don't have money, but still want to do some gaming and multitasking stuff: get 960T, unlock it, overclocking it till last juice and hope that next amd processor (piledriver or whatever) will be better and not making big dissappointment..(just like i do..:D )
  10. But if i dont have that much money and want to livestream/record games WHILE getting good performance from battlefield3, guild wars 2, diablo 3 etc.

    Also, 2500k + equivalent mobo of the one that i would get with fx8120 is the same amount of money that i would get fx8120 + mobo + SSD + razer abyssus mouse(my mouse is broken)

    I could get 2600k + mobo thoo... but then i would just have to stick with my 5400rpm sata2 hdd and get no ssd which is ***.
  11. cheti said:
    But if i dont have that much money and want to livestream/record games WHILE getting good performance from battlefield3, guild wars 2, diablo 3 etc.

    Also, 2500k + equivalent mobo of the one that i would get with fx8120 is the same amount of money that i would get fx8120 + mobo + SSD + razer abyssus mouse(my mouse is broken)

    I could get 2600k + mobo thoo... but then i would just have to stick with my 5400rpm sata2 hdd and get no ssd which is ***.


    So it sounds like the FX-8120 would be the better fit for you, since it would allow you to purchase the SSD and mouse for the same price as the i5-2500K + motherboard. The FX-8120 will perform well in modern games- hitting that 30 fps minimum required for good gameplay will be much, MUCH more dependent on your GPU than your CPU with the CPUs we are talking about here.
  12. well ive got a 560 OC on 925mhz by factory and im getting a mobo thats SLI compatible so i can collect some more money and get SLI :P

    Anyways, so you would suggest an fx8120 + ssd + mobo rather than a 2500k + mobo for livestreaming and recording games.
  13. 2500k + equivalent mobo = fx8120 + mobo + SSD + razer abyssus mouse

    can i know what brand/chipset/type mobo that you want to buy..?
    get a best board that you can afford while you choose 8120 as your processor.
    because, 8120 is s*ck when running in standart clock (3.1Ghz), but great while overclocking.

    in standart condition, performance is par with 960T unlock..(somehow 960T unlock is little bit better.)
    that's why i suggest about 960T. cheaper than 8120, but you still got about performance point.

    And it will serve you well for livestreaming and recording games.

    4 core for game, and 1 core for live streaming and 1 recording games....
  14. Quote:
    Anyways, so you would suggest an fx8120 + ssd + mobo rather than a 2500k + mobo for livestreaming and recording games.


    I wouldn't get that combo (8120/SSD/Mobo) JUST for that task, but if you can't get a SSD AND the 2500K + mobo and mouse, then yeah, that's probably the better option for a total overall balanced build for you.
  15. i dont get it tho, i will have skype, steam, teamspeak, battlefield 3 and itunes or winamp running at the same time. That means playing battlefield3, while answering questions on chrome, listening to music and streaming with xsplit.

    How is 4 cores better than 8
  16. what motherboards are you looking at? If you're worried about 1 PCIe socket only running at X8 instead of X16 it doesn't matter as the difference is so tiny it doesn't matter
  17. Well...
    http://www.galador.ee - this is the place im gonna buy from (translate with chrome).
    I want the best bang for the buck - max cost 450 euro.
    Best solution:
    Cheap as possible
    + SSD
    + MOBO
    + CPU
    + Can handle livestreaming + answering to questions on chrome + itunes + battlefield 3 + skype + teamspeak AT THE SAME TIME.
    + Razer mouse (30-50 euro)
  18. Also i want to be able to get SLI and overclock fx8120/2500k/2600k
  19. cheti said:
    i dont get it tho, i will have skype, steam, teamspeak, battlefield 3 and itunes or winamp running at the same time. That means playing battlefield3, while answering questions on chrome, listening to music and streaming with xsplit.

    How is 4 cores better than 8


    different technology cause different output of processor power..

    for example like this. 4 tigers againts 8 wolves....:D
    that's what happened with intel and amd..

    actually fx 8120 is not really 8 core, but just 4 module, which is each module consist 2 processing unit.
    like hyperthreading in intel, but amd choose to use physical unit rather than virtual like intel.

    so you can said fx 8120 "just" another quadcore variation from amd.....
  20. Go for the FX, people seem happy with it and for that number of tasks then I reckon it will be better.
  21. Quote:
    How is 4 cores better than 8


    As Quaddro said, the 8120/8150 isn't a "true" 8 core processor. Quaddro explained it quite well actually. That's why a variant of the Phenom II x6 is better overall (well, one of the reasons).
  22. well, 2500k doenset have hyperthreading and is 4 cores..how is it better than 8120 tho... i will be rendering videos with vegas aswell after recording my gameplay of bf3, gw2 etc.
  23. Quote:
    well, 2500k doenset have hyperthreading and is 4 cores..how is it better than 8120 tho


    Better (read faster and more efficient) architecture. My question is why do you need to render in Vegas AND record gameplay at the same time anyway?
  24. DJDeCiBeL said:
    Quote:
    well, 2500k doenset have hyperthreading and is 4 cores..how is it better than 8120 tho


    Better (read faster and more efficient) architecture. My question is why do you need to render in Vegas AND record gameplay at the same time anyway?



    i guess maybe he think will boring when waiting vegas movie rendering , and not have time to wait, he play game again and also recording and livestreaming it.. ;)

    4 tasks in the same time..rendering vegas movie, playing game and recording it also livestreaming ..... :D

    wow..watch your electricity bill... :pt1cable:


    *actually i think..maybe you'll need dual xeon class processor for all those tasks....:D
  25. Eh, I actually missed that he said rendering AFTER recording, and in that case, the 8120 MIGHT be better, but if you have a CUDA capable card, that's much quicker than the processor can ever be anyway, not to mention the speed that Quick Sync with a 2500K can encode (render), which is even quicker than CUDA.
  26. nonono, i might have misexpressed myself or you didnt get the idea:
    I will be doing these processes at the same time:
    Playing battlefield 3 + skype + teamspeak 3 + itunes or winamp + msn messenger + steam + livestream at twitch.tv + chrome is opened on another screen to answer questions

    OR

    I will be doing these:
    Playing battlefield 3 + recording + skype + msn + steam + teamspeak 3


    When I render my videos i usually just leave it to render and go to sleep/out/shop/take a *** or w/e :D
  27. Quote:
    When I render my videos i usually just leave it to render and go to sleep/out/shop/take a *** or w/e :D


    Yeah, as I said in my post above, I missed that part. Anyway, for what you ARE doing at the same time, the only things that are processor intensive are the game and streaming or the game and recording (which, as has already been said, is more dependent on disk speed than anything else).

    My honest opinion is that the 8120 will probably be slightly better for JUST those tasks (especially in BF3), but worse for every day usage and rendering (if you use Quick Sync or CUDA), so it's your call.
  28. well i use my computer for the stuff above, i also videorender sometimes (with vegas) and photoshop, i listen to music, watch movies, do schoolwork on microsoft office (excel,powerpoint etc.) and when i have free time i livestream my battlefield 3 :)
  29. To be honest, they will do the same things and do them well. I have never bogged a 2500K, nor have I bogged down a FX 8120 or older Phenom II with work loads and a get great gaming experience. The FX is strong in intensive thread usage programs.

    The good part is that a 8120 costs around $180 opposed to $220 which does help.
  30. Well, when I said worse for every day tasks, I didn't mean horrible, it's just that the 8120 lacks the pure compute power in singe threaded apps that the 2500K offers. But yes, where more than 4 threads are involved, the 8120 excels.
  31. Okay, im gonna go with the fx8120 then, thanks ! :)
    What psu would i need ?
    Atm i have a:
    gigabyte ep43t ud3l
    intel pentium e6500 2.9ghz
    gtx560 oc 925mhz
    corsair gs600 600W
    2x4gb 1333mhz corsair vengeance
    5400rpm sata2 hdd
    1 case fan

    I will be changing:
    Mobo will be 990fx-d3 from gigabyte
    Cpu will be fx8120
    I will be adding:
    corsair or kingston ssd 60 or 90gb, dno yet.
    5 more case fans

    In the future i will add another gtx560 - how much will i need then ?
  32. Rather look at a;

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131754

    It will pay you back in time.

    For a PSU, any quality 650w unit will serve your purpose and will take a SLI 560 setup.
  33. Since you plan on SLI in the future, I would get a good quality 750-800W PSU. That may be a little more than you need, but it just gives you some headroom.
  34. cheti said:
    nonono, i might have misexpressed myself or you didnt get the idea:
    I will be doing these processes at the same time:
    Playing battlefield 3 + skype + teamspeak 3 + itunes or winamp + msn messenger + steam + livestream at twitch.tv + chrome is opened on another screen to answer questions

    OR

    I will be doing these:
    Playing battlefield 3 + recording + skype + msn + steam + teamspeak 3


    When I render my videos i usually just leave it to render and go to sleep/out/shop/take a *** or w/e :D


    None of that is processor intensive except for Battlefield 3, those background tasks will eat up virtually no CPU resources, I've been able to do all that for years even on a single core except BF3 of course. :lol:

    A single core in an I5 is much faster than a single core in FX, that is how a 4 core I5 can out perform the 8 core FX even in most tasks that use all 8 cores on the FX, but to be honest in your given work load you won't see a big difference in performance either way.
  35. so, i should just get the fx8120 cause its cheaper and does everything what i want, even tho with 2500k i would get a little bit better performance ?
  36. Also, you could check out whatever you think would be the best upgrade for me:
    http://www.galador.ee - translate it into english with chrome - BUDGET is 450euros
    and the best solution for me would be:
    mobo
    cpu (has to be overclockable, a bit futureproof, run bf3 without a missed beat + be able to multitask livestreaming or recording or both at the same time)
    ssd (this is a must have basically, it has to fit windows 7 64bit os, guild wars 2 (25gb), some programs (photoshop etc.) and basically it should be at minimum 60gb and at maximum 90gb)
    3 120mm fans (this is nice to have, gonna get better cooling for my bitfenix merc beta case)
    a good quality mouse (logitech, razer, corsair, steelseries, roccat - not a priority)
    basically - ssd, mobo, cpu are the MUST have things..


    If you ahve time and are interested: http://www.galador.ee - BUDGET is 450 euros.
  37. Adding my 2 cents:

    My rig (see my signature) does similar tasks to what you're aiming to do with your rig. I am able to game while building code (more intensive on the SSD and CPU than anything you're looking to do other than video rendering). Recording and live-streaming shouldn't be that CPU intensive. Video rendering is going to use all the CPU cores it can get its hands on so your going to need to restrict the number of cores it can use (whether on an i5/i7 or FX-8xxx) otherwise you're going to lag no matter what.
  38. so whether its fx8120 or 2500k - livestreaming guild wras 2 and battlefield 3 will be a noproblem ?
  39. If you can afford the extra to get a Intel setup go for it, it is very balanced and will handle what you need it to. If not a 8120 is a interesting chip, but more than good enough to do what you need.
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Battlefield Processors Performance Product