Processor worthy of Battlefield 3 and Arma 3

[industrialdonut]

For the past two or three weeks I have been searching all over the internet for parts to build my gaming "rig" with, and the main thing I am truly stuck on is picking out my CPU/Processor. So, I have first posted a thread on Battlelog (forums of Battlefield 3, since I used to be a console gamer) asking about this and one guy mentioned that an AMD Phenom II x4 965 Black Edition would do the job just fine. I took that into consideration, and was in fact thinking I was done with picking out my CPU but then I started getting all these comments from my friends and just lots of people saying I need a better CPU like an i5-2500k or a AMD FX-8120 or even an i7!! The thing is, those are quite expensive and really, the only system requirement for Battlefield 3's CPU is a Quad-Core, which the Phenom II is. So basically, since I want to really OWN Battlefield 3 and like play High/Ultra in that game, I want to know if a Phenom II x4 965 BE will work well or not, and also since in the future I want to play Arma 3 when it comes out, if you guys think that it could work for that too (not on Ultra settings though, because Arma is INSANE when it comes to being played on computers) so just tell me your thoughts, thanks.

 

[najirion]

i5-3570k is the best gaming cpu to date.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-4.html

here's an old review,

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-fx-pentium-apu-benchmark,3120-4.html

even i3-2100 can beat FX 8150. i5-2500k was top during that period.

note: test were done using the same gpu (Radeon HD 7970), amd with 990fx chipset board, intel with an P67 chipset board (its an old intel chipset, might even be better with z68 or z77)

 

[industrialdonut]

i5-3570k is the best gaming cpu to date.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-4.html

here's an old review,

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-fx-pentium-apu-benchmark,3120-4.html

even i3-2100 can beat FX 8150. i5-2500k was top during that period.

note: test were done using the same gpu (Radeon HD 7970), amd with 990fx chipset board, intel with an P67 chipset board (its an old intel chipset, might even be better with z68 or z77)

Gee that was sure helpful getting told that an intel i5 is so great, like I haven't heard how good they are already. You didn't even mention the Phenom II, that is what I want feedback of, not the intel i5-3570k ok?

 

[najirion]

Phenom II can still kickass but well.. it's an older technology since bulldozer processors are already up even though many call them a failure. Performance wise, phenoms can relatively match intel's sandy and ivy bridge processors (as you can see FPS in BF3 are not really that varied and all of them can pull of good FPS in the game with respect to the graphics card). However, efficiency and power consumption tells a very different story. Check these articles below:

power consumption:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-power-consumption-efficiency,3060-11.html

efficiency:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-power-consumption-efficiency,3060-13.html

even though the older phenom is a lesser watt-eater than the FXs, intel processors still have the least wattage. Just look at i5-2500k's peak wattage compared to FX 8150.. The FX's is like 200% of the i5's. Well, most phenom II processors are off of most recent benchmark tests. Some popular phenoms like six-core Phenom II X6 1100T, x4 980 and x4 955be are still popularly tested.

 

[mocchan]

I personally own a Phenom II X4 955 OC'd @ 3.8Ghz (basically same chip as 965) paired with a GTX560 Ti.

It's a very modest chip, and it gets the job done. I get decent performance in games such as Battlefield 3 on Multiplayer, Dirt 3, Skyrim, Blackout Retribution, and tons of F2P MMO's :lol:

Anyway getting to the point, I would prefer to get an AMD Phenom II X4>AMD FX chips. BUT! If I had the option to choose between an i3 21xx or Phenom II X4, I would take the i3 in a heartbeat. It's a dual core, but it does a wicked job of playing games.

However, Phenom II is extremely old, so I wouldn't favor that over some of the more recent CPU's that could be obtained for a very reasonable price. Like the i5 2400 for example, it's very reasonably priced at $189.99...it might seem like a lot but taking into consideration that the Phenom II X4 965 is $109.99, and thinking of the performance difference, I don't think that $80 means much.

 

[wr6133]

The Phenom II will do fine in BF3 especilly when overclocked. However if your budget allows the i5 get it its better as long as you can still get a very good graphics card. There is no point getting an i5 if it means you get a crap graphics card as most games are limited by the GPU you use.

example would be the PII 965 with a gtx580 is going to run BF3 at higher settings than an i5 with a GTX560ti.

If you want to run BF3 at 1080p ultra settings (with high FPS) your going to need a GTX580 minimum preferably a gtx670 or 680 so start with that building block and then choose the rest of your components.

and for the love of god never build a gaming rig based on multi threaded power consumption figures.... seriously the amount of £ per year under normal usage is not significant.

 

[FinneousPJ]

The Phenom II will do fine in BF3 especilly when overclocked. However if your budget allows the i5 get it its better as long as you can still get a very good graphics card. There is no point getting an i5 if it means you get a crap graphics card as most games are limited by the GPU you use.

example would be the PII 965 with a gtx580 is going to run BF3 at higher settings than an i5 with a GTX560ti.

If you want to run BF3 at 1080p ultra settings (with high FPS) your going to need a GTX580 minimum preferably a gtx670 or 680 so start with that building block and then choose the rest of your components.

and for the love of god never build a gaming rig based on multi threaded power consumption figures.... seriously the amount of £ per year under normal usage is not significant.

Good post. I'll reiterate. GPU is most important. Phenom II is fine, i5 is better. Consider your budget

 

[Uther39]

The Phenom II will do fine in BF3 especilly when overclocked. However if your budget allows the i5 get it its better as long as you can still get a very good graphics card. There is no point getting an i5 if it means you get a crap graphics card as most games are limited by the GPU you use.

example would be the PII 965 with a gtx580 is going to run BF3 at higher settings than an i5 with a GTX560ti.

If you want to run BF3 at 1080p ultra settings (with high FPS) your going to need a GTX580 minimum preferably a gtx670 or 680 so start with that building block and then choose the rest of your components.

and for the love of god never build a gaming rig based on multi threaded power consumption figures.... seriously the amount of £ per year under normal usage is not significant.

Bang on the button ^+1

Phenom 956 + gtx580 is better than

i3/i5 + gtx 560ti.

 

[PrecisionMission]

Just FYI, 90% of the games there won't be much difference between the Phenom II 965 and the i5 3570k.

Arma 3 however is a completely different animal (assuming it's similar to Arma 2). I had the 965 BE + 7870 and STRUGGLED to get above 50 FPS (20-30 in cherno) at low/medium settings. The i5 will show VERY differently in the ARMA games for sure (as well as other CPU intensive games such as shogun).

Here's a link for several CPU benchmarks, no 965 BE on the list but they do feature the slightly better 6 core Phenom II, which benchmarks quite poorly in comparison to the i5.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2012/05/01/intel-core-i5-3570k-cpu-review/6