Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

I3 3225 vs. a10 5700

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 12, 2012 1:50:58 AM

Hi guys, I was wondering which CPU I should go with. I'll be using the integrated graphics and doing some light gaming. Most likely some League of Legends at 1600 x 900. I want to be able to run a solid 60 fps, at high settings. The a10 is supposed to benchmark slightly better than the i5 2500k, but I've heard some nice things about intel processors. Is the a10 worth waiting for? I will not be overclocking and want this to last 2-3 years.

More about : 3225 a10 5700

a c 93 à CPUs
September 12, 2012 3:03:51 AM

The A10 has better integrated graphics than any intel chip right now. However, the IGP on the A10 still isn't that great for gaming. You're not getting high settings at 60FPS at 1600x900 with integrated graphics, period. You will need to buy a discrete graphics card for that.

If you do buy a separate graphics card, go for an Intel CPU, they perform better in gaming tasks provided they are paired with a decent graphics card. The AMD APU has better gaming performance if you don't buy a graphics card, but it won't last you three years without upgrading to a graphics card at some point at the very least.

Make sure to get a better power supply if you do go for a discrete GPU, a graphics card will increase you system's power requirements.
m
0
l
a c 283 à CPUs
September 12, 2012 3:24:43 AM

sonicers said:
The a10 is supposed to benchmark slightly better than the i5 2500k


Are you talking about this http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+A10-5700+AP...

PassMark is the most unreliable, unbelievable, and inaccurate benchmark you could ever use to compare CPU's.

If an A10-5700 ever beats a 2500K in the real world, with real benches that are actually accurate, I'll eat bull feces...

With that said, Supernova is right. You won't max out any game with the integrated graphics on either the A10 or i3.
m
0
l
Related resources
September 12, 2012 10:57:27 PM

Haha okay, so which one should I go with? I'm on a budget so no discrete graphics card. I've got no problem with lowering the resolution, so would any of the 2 be able to play 60fps at say, 1337 x 768?

I guess I could go with a Pentium 2120 and buy a GT 430 or something, but it's not preferred since it will cost like 30 dollars more, and I don't want to have to lower my standards to Pentium level.
m
0
l
a c 283 à CPUs
September 12, 2012 11:01:44 PM

Without a discreet GPU, go with the A10. At a lower res, you still won't max anything out, but 60-ish FPS should be attainable with medium settings (high-ish, if the game isn't very intensive).
m
0
l
September 12, 2012 11:49:56 PM

Ok yeah, I can live with medium settings. I'm used to very low at the moment so, it'll still be a nice change. Are there any GPU's that are like under 70 dollars that y'all would recommend, supposing I go with a cheaper i3 3220? I'll save up a bit longer if it means 60 fps.
m
0
l
a c 93 à CPUs
September 12, 2012 11:58:01 PM

Best thing under 70 dollars right now would be the Radeon HD 6670 DDR3. That card will outperform the A10's integrated graphics and give you a better chance of 60FPS, although at probably medium settings depending on the resolution.
m
0
l
a c 283 à CPUs
September 13, 2012 12:08:39 AM

^ To add to that, I think it's possible to do Hybrid Crossfire/Dual Graphics with the 6670 and the A10. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/a10-5800k-a8-5600k-...

Quote:
Like Llano, Trinity supports Dual Graphics configurations—cooperative rendering using the on-die Radeon engine and a discrete card of roughly comparable potency. Although I don’t have any of the models AMD lists in its support matrix, I did discover that a Radeon HD 6670 does the trick as well.



Our baseline blue bars represent the Radeon HD 7660D built into the A10-5800K APU. The green bars are our Radeon HD 6670 on its own. And the red bar is both graphics engines working cooperatively.

At 1280x720 there isn’t enough graphics load to let Dual Graphics shine before this platform runs into a processor bottleneck. The gap opens up at 1680x1050, though, and continues to show off the benefit of Dual Graphics at 1920x1080, where the integrated Radeon HD 7660D and Radeon HD 6670 average almost 100 FPS.
m
0
l
September 13, 2012 12:10:15 AM

What's the difference between the 6670 DDR3 and DDR5? Are there any large performance differences?

m
0
l
a c 93 à CPUs
September 13, 2012 2:11:33 AM

The DDR5 version of the card is slightly faster due to the faster memory. It also tends to be $20 more than the DDR3 version. Thing is, for only $15-20 more than the DDR5 version of the 6670 you can get the Radeon HD 7750, which is considerably faster than either 6670 card while using slightly less power. The 7750 might be a better choice if you were going with an Intel platform as I don't think it can do dual graphics with the Trinity APUs.

The 6670 will likely work with trinity using dual graphics mode, as all the 7000 series card below the 7750 are just rebadges of their 6000 series equivalent, so a 7670=6670, etc. The 7000 series cards below the 7750 also seem to be OEM only right now, I don't think I've seen any of them for sale with any retailers.
m
0
l
September 13, 2012 3:57:47 AM

Supernova1138 said:
The DDR5 version of the card is slightly faster due to the faster memory. It also tends to be $20 more than the DDR3 version. Thing is, for only $15-20 more than the DDR5 version of the 6670 you can get the Radeon HD 7750, which is considerably faster than either 6670 card while using slightly less power. The 7750 might be a better choice if you were going with an Intel platform as I don't think it can do dual graphics with the Trinity APUs.

The 6670 will likely work with trinity using dual graphics mode, as all the 7000 series card below the 7750 are just rebadges of their 6000 series equivalent, so a 7670=6670, etc. The 7000 series cards below the 7750 also seem to be OEM only right now, I don't think I've seen any of them for sale with any retailers.
I'm


How much faster is slightly faster? Like ~5 fps more, or ~10 fps more?

I'm not going to spend that much money on a 7750 because at that price point I'd rather go with a GTX 550ti or a 7770.

Also, the HD 6570 is on the same tier as the HD 6670 according to Tom's Hardware, but cheaper. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Would this be a better investment, since it should be similar performance for much less money?
m
0
l
a c 93 à CPUs
September 13, 2012 4:24:46 AM

The performance difference between the DDR3 and DDR5 6670 varies depending on game and the settings used. The faster memory helps most with more memory intensive GPU tasks like higher res textures, anti aliasing, that sort of stuff. On lower graphics settings the difference between the two cards can be smaller, on higher settings, there can be a larger gap.

As for the 6570 vs. 6670 DDR3. They are the same GPU, the 6670 is clocked 150MHz higher than the 6570 though, and only costs $11 more than the 6570. I'd still say get the 6670 unless you are extremely strapped for cash. Below the 6670 you get to cards that aren't going to be that much better than the APU's integrated graphics.
m
0
l
a c 116 à CPUs
September 13, 2012 4:26:52 AM

sonicers said:
Would this be a better investment, since it should be similar performance for much less money?

IMO, the 6650/6570 is not a big enough improvement over the A10 IGP to bother with. If you are that tight on budget and currently play on very-low settings, I would say get the A10 for now so you can play most stuff at medium and get yourself a "real" GPU once you can afford something really worth upgrading to.
m
0
l
September 13, 2012 5:07:56 AM

Is the A10's IGP roughly equivalent to the HD 6570?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 13, 2012 5:50:32 AM

sonicers said:
Is the A10's IGP roughly equivalent to the HD 6570?

Yes, the A10 uses the new southern islands chip, the 7570D IGP.
m
0
l
September 13, 2012 12:40:30 PM

So then there wouldn't be any real point to spend more on say, an i3 and a seperate 6570.
m
0
l
a c 116 à CPUs
September 13, 2012 12:50:48 PM

sonicers said:
So then there wouldn't be any real point to spend more on say, an i3 and a seperate 6570.

The i3 is a better gaming CPU but there is not much point getting that only to pair it with a marginally better GPU.

If you cannot afford at least a 6750, get the A10.
m
0
l
September 13, 2012 10:52:02 PM

My suggestion would be the i3 3225.. since you are using the IGP, the hd 4000 fits in perfectly... you can even play games at your resolution with pretty good frame rates.. with its avail for $148 on amazon... the processor is a tad faster than the i3 2120....
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 14, 2012 1:07:09 AM

OK, the A10 5700 has no problem maxing LoL 60 fps, that game doesn't require much.

The A10 is a LOT better for gaming than the i3 if you don't have a dedicated gpu.

If all you want is to run LoL and other non demanding games, the A10 shouldn't be a problem.
m
0
l
September 14, 2012 1:12:54 AM

Well I'm thinking of buying Crysis 2 or BF3 in the future. I want to be able to run these at at least medium settings at a medium to low resolution at a minimum of 40 fps, like I'd be okay with medium settings for 13:7. Would the A10 be okay for that?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 14, 2012 2:40:28 AM

should be doable for crysis 2 but bf3 might only run with most setting on low.
m
0
l
September 15, 2012 12:23:20 AM

thanks. what about dota 2?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 15, 2012 7:53:32 AM

dota 2 should be no problem.
m
0
l
September 16, 2012 3:15:54 AM

sweet deal. thanks for all your answers!
m
0
l
!