Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

I5 3450 or AMD FX 8120

Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 18, 2012 7:18:02 PM

Hello,
I will be using one of these processors to do some gaming (not much) with my radeon 7770, rendering and also editing with adobe cs6. I do not care about the price - I want to know which one will be best from me.

More about : 3450 amd 8120

a c 283 à CPUs
September 18, 2012 7:31:31 PM

If it were purely gaming, it wouldn't even be close (it would be the 3450 all day), but since you mention rendering, the 8120 is the best choice. Worse gaming performance, but the extra "cores" will help in rendering.
a c 283 à CPUs
September 18, 2012 7:34:29 PM

Although, since you say you don't care about the price, how about an i7 3770K? Great gaming performance and better rendering performance than the 8120.
Related resources
a b à CPUs
September 18, 2012 8:45:57 PM

You want FX-8150 or i7-2600 or i7-3770.
a c 146 à CPUs
September 18, 2012 8:57:46 PM

DJDeCiBeL said:
Although, since you say you don't care about the price, how about an i7 3770K? Great gaming performance and better rendering performance than the 8120.


You beat me to it, I was going to say the same thing. If you really don't care about price go with the I7 it will give the best of both sides. The I7 with hyper threading will render just as fast or faster than the Bulldozer and with hyper threading turned off will easily out perform the Bulldozer.
September 18, 2012 8:59:09 PM

for render go to the 8120
a c 146 à CPUs
September 18, 2012 9:06:01 PM

seko512 said:
for render go to the 8120


The Bulldozer offers nothing more over the I7 all it does is give you less. You get ok rendering performance and crappy gaming peformance. With the I7 you get the best of both sides, you get great rendering performance and great gaming performance. He said he is gaming and rendering and price didn't matter so there is no point in getting the inferior Bulldozer.
a b à CPUs
September 18, 2012 11:11:08 PM

He meant he doesn't care about the price difference between the two, he didn't say "I have an unlimited budget".

Obviously the 8120 is MUCH cheaper than a i7, and you get what you pay for.

a c 283 à CPUs
September 18, 2012 11:16:32 PM

geekapproved said:
He meant he doesn't care about the price difference between the two, he didn't say "I have an unlimited budget.


That's probably true, but if I had truly thought that he meant an unlimited budget, I would have said get a 3930K or 3960X...

As it is, the 3770K is the best choice within reason, then a 8150 if he's on a tighter budget.
a b à CPUs
September 18, 2012 11:43:39 PM

I fail to see how a 3770K is the best choice within reason. He never even said he desires to overclock his cpu and a unlocked multiplier cpu is the best choice? What reasoning is behind this?

a c 283 à CPUs
September 18, 2012 11:50:18 PM

geekapproved said:
I fail to see how a 3770K is the best choice within reason. He never even said he desires to overclock his cpu and a unlocked multiplier cpu is the best choice? What reasoning is behind this?


OK, disregard the "K" part, if you wish. Overclocking had nothing to do with that. A 3770 non-K exists, obviously, but it's not like it's so much less expensive that it makes much sense to get it. Therefore, the 3770K is the best choice.

As far as why it's the best choice, it's just plain better than a 8150 for everything he wants to do.
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2012 12:25:41 AM

Of course the 3770 is better, it's also $140 more than 8150. You get what you pay for.

With a 8120 budget ($160), I don't think he's going to get a 3770K ($330), that's MORE than double the price and it's surely not double as fast.
a c 283 à CPUs
September 19, 2012 12:35:13 AM

geekapproved said:
With a 8120 budget ($160), I don't think he's going to get a 3770K ($330), that's MORE than double the price and it's surely not double as fast.


That's exactly what I meant by saying that the 3770K is the best choice overall, but the 8120/50 will do, on a tight budget.

And a 3770K may not be twice as fast as a 8120, but it's still a sad state of affairs when you compare an 8150 to a 3770K. http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=551

The only two benches that a 8150 beats a 3770K in are the Civ 5 benches (which I consider an anomaly). Beyond that, the 3770K is definitely worth the extra cost, in my eyes.

Still, a 8120/50 will do on a budget, just with the caveat that you're leaving a lot of performance on the table.
September 19, 2012 1:41:47 AM

Those combination 3450 and 7770 just a nice n cheap choice, I'm using those with Ps CS5, Sony Vegas 10, Corel Draw, Dreamweaver CS 5 and after effects CS 5 and it work as I need it to :) 
a c 146 à CPUs
September 19, 2012 1:48:53 AM

geekapproved said:
Of course the 3770 is better, it's also $140 more than 8150. You get what you pay for.

With a 8120 budget ($160), I don't think he's going to get a 3770K ($330), that's MORE than double the price and it's surely not double as fast.


You like to keep saying you get what you pay for you seem to forget the lack of performance you get with the Bulldozer. Like Dj said

Quote:
Still, a 8120/50 will do on a budget, just with the caveat that you're leaving a lot of performance on the table.
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2012 3:42:45 AM

Fanboys will be fanboys. You don't get a $330 processor or it's performance with a $160 budget.

That's like saying to a guy that's looking at buying a V6 mustang for $20K and telling him it's worth it to buy the Shelby for $50K because the V6 lacks performance, even though he doesn't have more than $20K.
a c 283 à CPUs
September 19, 2012 3:47:39 AM

geekapproved said:
Fanboys will be fanboys. You don't get a $330 processor or it's performance with a $160 budget.


I am not a fanboy, thank you very much. I'm right down the middle and call like I see it.

Obviously you don't get $330 performance for $160. Who said you should? Certainly not me.

What I'm saying is that if your budget allows for it, the 3770K is the best choice. If your budget is tight, then sure, get a 8120/50. It's not as good, but it'll do. How is that being a fanboy?
a c 146 à CPUs
September 19, 2012 4:05:19 AM

DJDeCiBeL said:
I am not a fanboy, thank you very much. I'm right down the middle and call like I see it.

Obviously you don't get $330 performance for $160. Who said you should? Certainly not me.

What I'm saying is that if your budget allows for it, the 3770K is the best choice. If your budget is tight, then sure, get a 8120/50. It's not as good, but it'll do. How is that being a fanboy?


Neither am I and I was thinking the same thing so I agree 100% on all points.
a c 186 à CPUs
September 19, 2012 4:15:23 AM

i5 and a higher end GPU, you'll render on the GPU not the CPU!
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2012 10:58:36 AM

rds1220 said:
You like to keep saying you get what you pay for you seem to forget the lack of performance you get with the Bulldozer. Like Dj said

Quote:
Still, a 8120/50 will do on a budget, just with the caveat that you're leaving a lot of performance on the table.


:sarcastic:  I am going to go home and tell my Phenoms and FX's to perform badly, because according you you thats what they are supposed to be doing.

Your statments are blind biligerant myopic fanboism sentiment that just pick up a skewered bench and try to make a claim, if you don't use a AMD then don't pass comments because clearly you don't have a clue.

The OP would do well to overlook your opinion based on whatever the hell its based upon.

Overall the intel platform is the better option but thats not to say any AMD setup will not give you similar like peformance at the respective price points.
a c 146 à CPUs
September 19, 2012 4:22:54 PM

:pfff:  :pfff:  AMD fanboy's.........blindly buy inferior hardware then try to make excuse after excuse as to why it sucks. Like DJ said I call it like I see it and the benchmarks back it up. If you can't deal with that and you like buying inferior hardware that's your problem.
a c 146 à CPUs
September 19, 2012 5:23:50 PM

sarinaide said:
:sarcastic:  I am going to go home and tell my Phenoms and FX's to perform badly, because according you you thats what they are supposed to be doing.

Your statments are blind biligerant myopic fanboism sentiment that just pick up a skewered bench and try to make a claim, if you don't use a AMD then don't pass comments because clearly you don't have a clue.

The OP would do well to overlook your opinion based on whatever the hell its based upon.

Overall the intel platform is the better option but thats not to say any AMD setup will not give you similar like peformance at the respective price points.


By the way nice try calling me a fanboy but I probably own more AMD stuff than anyone here.

HP- Phenom II, Radeon 5570

Main gaming build- Had two dual Radeon 6970's

Dad's build- Radeon 6570

Backup gaming build- Phenom II 965 BE with one of the 6970's saved.

So nice try but the only thing you have proven is it is you who is the short sighted die hard fanboy. Only the most die hard of fanboy would desperatly try to defend inferior hardware, especially when they own that inferior hardware. Also only a fandoy would hold onto getting the newest version of "X" even if it's still inferior to the competion. Fools will be fools I guess.
a b à CPUs
September 20, 2012 6:56:44 AM

So you have a few AMD components that doesn't make you a fanboy how? If I cast back a while you made a post along the lines of "Its your mission to turn people against AMD products" that to me apart from being juvinile is rather fanboish to me.

You're just a fanboy in denial, yes I use every setup possible but I prefer my AMD setups because they all do over and above what I need them to do, If I figured they were hopeless I would stop using them, you on the other hand seem to just go around trumpeting the myopic sentiments of the naive with absolutely no first hand experience, other than reading skewed results. None of us "fanboys" ever go around telling people untruths about the performance of AMD setups, nor do we ever paint a picture of AMD being better, you on the other hand are calous in what you say, you basically hate AMD.

September 20, 2012 7:10:59 AM

How much does the OP want to spend anyway? Intel overall smashes AMD, no question. How much $$$?
a c 146 à CPUs
September 20, 2012 4:15:44 PM

sarinaide said:
So you have a few AMD components that doesn't make you a fanboy how? If I cast back a while you made a post along the lines of "Its your mission to turn people against AMD products" that to me apart from being juvinile is rather fanboish to me.

You're just a fanboy in denial, yes I use every setup possible but I prefer my AMD setups because they all do over and above what I need them to do, If I figured they were hopeless I would stop using them, you on the other hand seem to just go around trumpeting the myopic sentiments of the naive with absolutely no first hand experience, other than reading skewed results. None of us "fanboys" ever go around telling people untruths about the performance of AMD setups, nor do we ever paint a picture of AMD being better, you on the other hand are calous in what you say, you basically hate AMD.


:pfff:  :pfff: . Like I said I call it like I see it and I back it up with proven benchmarks from reliable sources, benchmarks you so conviently decide to ignore or brush off. Everytime someone says something negative about AMD you come sweeping in throwing a pissy fit making excuse after excuse or downright mis-information like Bulldozer is just as fast as or faster than an I7. You are a pathetic AMD fanboy that has to try to justify your buy in every thread possible. If you like buying inferior crap from AMD than thats your problem, I guess someone has to or they would have gone out of buisness a long time ago. When I build a gaming computer for myself I want the best not a crappy core 2 equivelant like the Bulldozer or a crappy Athlon II equivelant like the Llano APU's. Same for when I build computers for customers. It doesn't matter if it's for gaming or everyday use I want to give them the best for their money usually that's Intel. A dual core Pentium is pretty cheap and outperforms the Bulldozer and the APU's. Like I said if you like buying inferior crap from AMD that's your problem but don't come sweeping into every thread trying to defend your crappy buy with idiotic claims like sythetic benchmarks don't matter, or Intel pays people off you just make a fool of yourself.

Quote:
If I figured they were hopeless I would stop using them


Ha yea ok. Just like a drug addict says they can quit whenever they want but they just choose not to. You'll never stop buying AMD because your a fanboy and you buy into whatever BS they feed you, just like you fed into their 8 core scam.

BTW I don't "hate" AMD I just hate that thier CPU's are crap and offer no real competion to Intel. That's why I hope they go down the toilet and get bought out by Qualcomm or Samsung then maybe they won't suck so bad and can actually offer some real competition.
a b à CPUs
September 21, 2012 6:38:04 AM

Apologies to the OP if you haven't got the answer you're looking for. Closing this thread. If the combatants wish to continue their fight... please do so via PM.
!