Solved

2500k or 8150

I've currently got a x4 840 and a 5970 . i think the x4 840 is holding back the 5970 in bf3 64 player multiplayer . so i want to upgrade my CPU but i cant decide on the i5 2500k for $325 (including mobo ) or the 8150 for $225 , another option could be to go for the 1100t for $225. remember this only for bf3 multiplayer I don't play any other intensive games .
25 answers Last reply Best Answer
More about 2500k 8150
  1. Obviously the i5 is better but if your mobo can hold the FX it's a lot cheaper. Honestly I don't think the i5 is $100 better if you're not made of cash.
  2. im getting this at the end of august , do you think piledriver will be out by then .
  3. Best answer
    Actually BF3 multiplayer likes the FX 8 cores better than the 2500K because it can actually use all 8 cores. Someone had linked me a bench to it, but I'm not at home, I'm at a hotel with my laptop, I'm gonna have to find it.
  4. HA found it:

    http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/10/11/amd_bulldozer_fx8150_gameplay_performance_review/2

    9_breaker said:
    im getting this at the end of august , do you think piledriver will be out by then .


    Think Christmas presents, that seems to be. Good news is, AMD so far is looking like they're going to meet or exceed their 10% performance improvement for this year from their road map based on Tom's first look in the new Trinity APUs. FX-8350/8320s I think will be the model numbers.
  5. Interesting. I guess that further solidifies the choice.
  6. who knew . thanks for the help guys .anyway the road map said q3 2012 , why Christmas .
  7. 9_breaker said:
    who knew . thanks for the help guys .anyway the road map said q3 2012 , why Christmas .


    History, AMD delayed Bulldozers initial release, and further FX-4170/6200s were released over a month late. And you're welcome.
  8. I like how they mistakenly call the 2500k an i7 in those graphs. :)
  9. Just a heads up but you didn't say if your motherboard is AM3 or AM3+. Some AM3 motherboards do not support AM3+ chips and other AM3 motherboards do a crap job of support. If you have an AM3+ motherboard I think the decision is easy, go with the 8150. IF you have an AM3 motherboard I would consider the Intel route more.
  10. am3+ , i wouldn't make a mistake like that .
  11. Best answer selected by 9_Breaker.
  12. nekulturny said:


    i beg your pardon but that is very old and states:
    Quote:
    Battlefield 3 Open Beta Multiplayer

    We used the latest build of Battlefield 3 Beta to play in multiplayer. Please note that BF3 does not contain all the features the full version will include, this means the driver multithreading might not be enabled yet.


    i would like to suggest looking at this post
    http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1038216217&postcount=74
    to show the cpu usage in BF3 as a better reference . .
  13. Quote:



    i beg your pardon but that is very old and states:


    The operative word being "might". If it were not, how do you explain the 8 core cpu with well known WEAKER individual core performance outperforming a CPU with KNOWN stronger individual core performance? I mean seriously, lets be realistic here.

    If you have multiplayer results between the two CPUs in question here by all means, post them, but lets not deal in hypotheticals if we can help it.

    It seems to me like you're grasping at straws, I mean its bad enough some Intel people on these forums have to act like the jock making fun of the slower fat kid, do you really have to steal his backpack from him too? Let the Bulldozer have its small victory and leave it in peace until you can prove it isnt warranted.
  14. nekulturny said:
    Quote:



    i beg your pardon but that is very old and states:


    The operative word being "might". If it were not, how do you explain the 8 core cpu with well known WEAKER individual core performance outperforming a CPU with KNOWN stronger individual core performance? I mean seriously, lets be realistic here.

    If you have multiplayer results between the two CPUs in question here by all means, post them, but lets not deal in hypotheticals if we can help it.

    It seems to me like you're grasping at straws, I mean its bad enough some Intel people on these forums have to act like the jock making fun of the slower fat kid, do you really have to steal his backpack from him too? Let the Bulldozer have its small victory and leave it in peace until you can prove it isnt warranted.

    DUDE!
    :pfff:
    nevermind, i actually HELPED YOU PROVE YOUR CLAIM!
  15. LOL.. Its early in the morning and I'm sticking to that defense.
  16. Anonymous said:
    DUDE!
    :pfff:
    nevermind, i actually HELPED YOU PROVE YOUR CLAIM!

    [:lutfij:2] [:lutfij:1]
  17. nekulturny said:
    LOL.. Its early in the morning and I'm sticking to that defense.

    thats ok, i sent you a scathing PM! :lol:
  18. Dun worry, its not the first one I've ever gotten and it sure won't be the last lol.
  19. 9_breaker said:
    am3+ , i wouldn't make a mistake like that .


    You know how it is on Toms you never know how savvy the OP is, glad you got it covered.
  20. I'd actually say just get an 8120 and clock it up rather than pay more for an 8150, but its up to you. Then again if you're looking at doing the upgrade later this year, I'd hold off for the PileDriver 8320 or whatever its gonna be.
  21. Too many cats.
  22. amuffin said:
    Too many cats.


    And who doesn't like ....
  23. il go for piledriver .
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Battlefield Multiplayer