Cores or GHz? (AMD)

[James14198]

I have the choice between an AMD FX-4170 4.2 GHz (Quod Core) or an AMD FX-6100 3.3 GHz (Six Core). Me and some friends are starting a gaming channel on YouTube, so it's primary use is going to be for screen capture/gaming.

The question really boils down to should I go with clock speed or Cores? Shall I go with a fast quod core or a slower six core?

Thanks,
James

PS.
I use Bandicam to capture my screen - if any one knows, how many cores can that use?

 

[obsama1]

I would get neither. Piledriver, the successor to Bulldozer comes out on the 24th next week. It will use less power while being faster/more powerful. The FX-4350 will cost $125. Wait and see how it turns out.

 

[jay_nar2012]

I would say more cores, you can probably overclock the FX 6100 to the same clock speed as the FX4170.

 

[jaguarskx]

If by "capture" you mean recording your gaming session to a video file, then you will want more cores. Video encoding is CPU intensive. Granted the vast majority of games only use 2 cores, but if you know you will be playing current games and future games that will be using gaming engine capable of using more than 2 cores then a 6 core CPU will come in handy.

 

[DJDeCiBeL]

If by "capture" you mean recording your gaming session to a video file, then you will want more cores.

That may be true, to some extent, but I think there's a point where raw speed overcomes the need for more cores.

I don't know Bandicam and how it works, but I'll base my opinion hereafter on FRAPS.

I know there are many people out there (including myself) that have no issues recording with a quad core. I mean, the max that FRAPS can record at is 60 FPS, and most newer quad core CPU's out there that can do that with the right GPU.

I would say disk speed is just as important (if not more so) than the CPU for that.

I said this in another thread about recording and I'll say it here too. Streaming is where a 6+ core/thread CPU would come in handy. Recording (especially with FRAPS, that doesn't use much compression), isn't really insanely hard on the CPU.

 

[maestro0428]

I would also wait for Piledriver to come out. Better performance at better prices. You can't beat that.

 

[edogawa]

Intel i5, don't waste your money on AMD.

 

[UnlimitedBanana]

While edogawa is right on Intel I5's being better. I'm gonna say this: Dump both of those crappy Buldozzers and just get an old-school Phenom II quad or hexa core, like the x4 965 or 970, or the x6 1090t if you can find it for a decent price. Those chips beat the living crap out of the FX's ANY DAY of the week.
~UnlimitedBanana

 

[James14198]

Having had time to reflect, either of these will be good enough for the video recording (plus I'll likely get an SSD too). I will probably wait for Piledriver to come out, but assuming I don't, which would you think I should choose for gaming?