Vishera or Ivy Bridge for December build?

[Augray37]

I need to build a computer for some friends by December. They want to use it mostly for photo/video editing, games, and a little folding. I've already bought them a GTX 670, a 128 GB SSD, a heatsink, and some RAM, but I can't decide between AMD (FX-8350) or Intel (i5-3570k) for the CPU. It looks like Vishera is pretty good with multi-threaded apps e.g. photo/video editing. But it's still not as good at everyday tasks as Intel, or at gaming in CPU bound games. The upside as I see it is that it's not a dead socket, and steamroller should be a major improvement. LGA 1155 is a dead socket however, but...it's just better right now, especially once it's overclocked. I wish I could wait until Haswell came out, then it would be a no brainer, but alas, it isn't an option. Argh...I can't decide, any opinions are welcome, thanks!

P.S. I plan on creating a VM for them to run final cut pro on it, would more cores (aka vishera) be advantageous?

 

[rds1220]

I need to build a computer for some friends by December. They want to use it mostly for photo/video editing, games, and a little folding. I've already bought them a GTX 670, a 128 GB SSD, a heatsink, and some RAM, but I can't decide between AMD (FX-8350) or Intel (i5-3570k) for the CPU. It looks like Vishera is pretty good with multi-threaded apps e.g. photo/video editing. But it's still not as good at everyday tasks as Intel, or at gaming in CPU bound games. The upside as I see it is that it's not a dead socket, and steamroller should be a major improvement. LGA 1155 is a dead socket however, but...it's just better right now, especially once it's overclocked. I wish I could wait until Haswell came out, then it would be a no brainer, but alas, it isn't an option. Argh...I can't decide, any opinions are welcome, thanks!

P.S. I plan on creating a VM for them to run final cut pro on it, would more cores (aka vishera) be advantageous?

If you were to go Intel the I7 would be better than the I5. The I5 is great for gaming but it doesn't always do great in really heavy threaded stuff like video editing, video/audio compression and folding at home.The I7 with it's slightly larger cache and hyperthreading does much better. I would go with an I7 if you can afford it.

 

[BuddiLuva]

If you consider the LG 1155 a dead socket with little life expectancy then you have already answered your own question. I reckon the 8 core will be beneficia in all aspects except for gaming like you said, however if you plan on doing folding etc and especially running more than one VM at one time then the FX is the way to go. Not to forget that you can OC the FX model well also.

 

[nekulturny]

If they're only doing occasional video/photo editing, you will find the i5 quite up to the task. In my opinion, the i7 is really only justified if this were the primary purpose of the system (such as a professional who does this for a living), if gaming and daily browsing, watching movies, basic day to day computer usage most people do, the i7's HyperThreading brings little to nothing to the table for those tasks.

As far as the 8350. Its not a bad CPU, it would be a good choice as well at it's price range.

As far as sockets going EOL, buy a system for what it can do for you today, not what it might or might not be able to do a few years from now. Due to the way computer hardware advances, pretty much any CPU upgrade (in 3 years to throw out a number), is going to include a new motherboard for best results anyway. If you find yourself needing to upgrade a CPU before that time, either 3 things have happened, 1. Your needs changed, 2. You're doing it "because you can", or 3. You didn't buy the right CPU to meet your needs in the first place (IE. Buying a cheaper CPU now with the idea that you can upgrade it later).. Save more and buy the right CPU that you think meets your needs, rather than buying 2 CPUs and having one sit on a shelf as a paperweight.

 

[rds1220]

I see no point in getting the Piledriver you get more out of the I7. With the I7 you are getting an all around better processor that is great for both lightly threaded programs and heavy threaded programs. If you are gaming you turn off the hyper threading and you have a great gaming CPU. You decide to do heavy threaded work just go into the BIOS turn on hyper threading and you have a great CPU for doing heavy threaded work. About the only thing Bulldozer and Piledriver does half decent is heavy threaded work. So with AMD you get a CPU that is good in heavy threaded programs but lousy in single threaded programs. With the I5 you are getting a CPU that is good at single threaded programs but not so great in heavy threaded programs. With the I7 you are getting an all around good CPU that is good at BOTH single and multi threaded programs. BTW in your post above you seem to be forgetting that he is also doing Folding At Home. Giving that he is adding Folding At Home into the mix it makes it even more worth it to get the I7.

 

[BuddiLuva]

I see no point in getting the Piledriver you get more out of the I7. With the I7 you are getting an all around better processor that is great for both lightly threaded programs and heavy threaded programs. If you are gaming you turn off the hyper threading and you have a great gaming CPU. You decide to do heavy threaded work just go into the BIOS turn on hyper threading and you have a great CPU for doing heavy threaded work. About the only thing Bulldozer and Piledriver does half decent is heavy threaded work. So with AMD you get a CPU that is good in heavy threaded programs but lousy in single threaded programs. With the I5 you are getting a CPU that is good at single threaded programs but not so great in heavy threaded programs. With the I7 you are getting an all around good CPU that is good at BOTH single and multi threaded programs. BTW in your post above you seem to be forgetting that he is also doing Folding At Home. Giving that he is adding Folding At Home into the mix it makes it even more worth it to get the I7.

I see a great reason in not buying an I7. Its called.......Price
HOWEVER
IF OP is crappin the money and money isn't an issue then definitely I7

 

[rdc85]

I say go with the FX....

In normal everyday task (that not need to much processing) both proc is more than capable to do it...
it became irelevant which one is better (U don't need extreme to watch movie, or typing )

I'm not sure about VM but if it's well threaded then FX is way to go..

about "future" steamroller or haswell. I tend's to not think about it...
Future is unpredictable, we cannot know until it actually arives and benchmarked... (It could be good or disappointment)

edit: ps if u can afford i7.. I7 is a good choise, amd still had notthing to compete with it... (but I rather sink the extra money at SSD)

 

[rds1220]

Except this isn't an everyday computer for checkig emails and watching youtube video's. This is going to be a computer that is going to be demanding on both the CPU and GPU. Like I said look back at my post above. The Piledriver will be fine in heavy threaded programs but not so great in single threaded programs like games which this person is going to be using the computer for. The I5 will do great in games but not so great in heavy threaded programs like video editing and folding at home. Again if this person can afford an I7 it would be the best all around processor, it will cover the best f both worlds.

 

[rdc85]

but watching movies, checking email, and reply at Tom's is my every day task...

Hehee.... (I'm guess it differs for each person)

 

[-Fran-]

@OP

Is there a price ceiling for the build? Any build that needs MOAR CORES will be better off with an AMD build for sure, but if you got the money I agree with rds1220, the i7 will fare better most of the time. Don't know where you live, but Microcenter is getting rid of the i7 2700K they have and are selling them at usd$220 with a usd$50 discount on the motherboard. That's a sick deal if you ask me.

Cheers!

 

[BuddiLuva]

Except this isn't an everyday computer for checkig emails and watching youtube video's. This is going to be a computer that is going to be demanding on both the CPU and GPU. Like I said look back at my post above. The Piledriver will be fine in heavy threaded programs but not so great in single threaded programs like games which this person is going to be using the computer for. The I5 will do great in games but not so great in heavy threaded programs like video editing and folding at home. Again if this person can afford an I7 it would be the best all around processor, it will cover the best f both worlds.

What i understood was that the user would be doing 3 things. Gaming, Using multiple VMs and Video/photo editing.
Only reason I said that was because the FX will be more useful in 2/3 of those things.
But if the user is much more heavy on the games, less of the vmware and editing/rendering, and doesn't mind spending an extra bit of money then, sure I5 is the way to go.
But I wouldn't splash out that much for an I7

 

[wr6133]

I'd take FX in this one, if it was just gaming then the i5 but as you want to do other things that benefit from the extra pseudo cores (sorry I just can't call them real cores) then FX. i7 doesn't justify the extra cost for "a little folding" and as you are pairing it with a single GTX670 unless you are playing something seriously CPU bound the 83xx is not going to really trail behind (to say it would would be to say it will bottleneck a single GTX670 which is just BS)

As to socket life and upgrades listen to Nekulturny

 

[rds1220]

What i understood was that the user would be doing 3 things. Gaming, Using multiple VMs and Video/photo editing.
Only reason I said that was because the FX will be more useful in 2/3 of those things.
But if the user is much more heavy on the games, less of the vmware and editing/rendering, and doesn't mind spending an extra bit of money then, sure I5 is the way to go.
But I wouldn't splash out that much for an I7

No he will also be doing Folding At Home too.

photo/video editing, games, and a little folding [At Home].

I've never done Folding At Home but from what I have read it goes up there with stuff like Auto CAD as being VERY CPU demanding. The I5 is a great CPU but I'm not sure if it will be able to handle something as demanding as Folding At Home. The extra memory cache and hyperthreading of the I7 won't help in games but it should help in video editing, compressing audio filest (which he isn't doing but I'm just trying to make a point) and Folding At Home. My point is yea the Pile Driver and I5 cost less but you are getting the best of just ONE area, either just gaming (the I5) or just heavy threaded work (Piledriver.) The I7 cost more but you are getting an all arounf better CPU that can handle the most demanding games with ease and knock out the most CPU intensive work pretty fast. Again if the person can go wit the I7 it will be the best choice.

 

[BuddiLuva]

No he will also be doing Folding At Home too.

photo/video editing, games, and a little folding [At Home].

I've never done Folding At Home but from what I have read it goes up there with stuff like Auto CAD as being VERY CPU demanding. The I5 is a great CPU but I'm not sure if it will be able to handle something as demanding as Folding At Home. The extra memory cache and hyperthreading of the I7 won't help in games but it should help in video editing, compressing audio filest (which he isn't doing but I'm just trying to make a point) and Folding At Home. My point is yea the Pile Driver and I5 cost less but you are getting the best of just ONE area, either just gaming (the I5) or just heavy threaded work (Piledriver.) The I7 cost more but you are getting an all arounf better CPU that can handle the most demanding games with ease and knock out the most CPU intensive work pretty fast. Again if the person can go wit the I7 it will be the best choice.

True, can't really deny that. But if the person can afford it is the real issue, we'd all love to end up with an I7. Even I would, but its just too expensive. If money isn't an issue then sure go with the I7 win win in all situations.

 

[Augray37]

I see no point in getting the Piledriver you get more out of the I7. With the I7 you are getting an all around better processor that is great for both lightly threaded programs and heavy threaded programs. If you are gaming you turn off the hyper threading and you have a great gaming CPU. You decide to do heavy threaded work just go into the BIOS turn on hyper threading and you have a great CPU for doing heavy threaded work.

These people aren't hardware savvy like us. having to go into the BIOS to do anything would be a major inconvenience.

@everyone else

Yeah, it might be better to just get an i7. It's just...I already spent more money than I wanted to on the GTX 670, so I'm trying to save some money elsewhere. The build doesn't have a concrete budget, more of a "try not to go over $1000, cuz it's not the end of the world but it's possible I might not be able to make rent that month if you do" budget. really, how much will a few SECONDS on SOME applications make? Once the i5-3570k is OC'd it will be even better. Idk.

 

[$hawn]

My vote goes for FX 8350

For video editing and folding, the FX is simply a fantastic chip at that price range. You probably have seen the multi threaded benchmarks yourself. In some cases like x264 encoding, it even ties with the much more costlier i7-3770K !!!

For running VM's, the FX will make the i5 piss in its pants....more cores is definitely better here

For gaming, I'm not sure you'll make out the difference between an FX and an i5 for the next 3 yrs or so, unless you play at a resolution of 800x600, and can differentiate between 200 fps and 250fps on a monitor that refreshes @60Hz!!! But by then games would probably be optimized to use even more cores, putting the FX in a better position than it is now

People keep cribbing bout single threaded performance of the FX's, but you fail to realize how fast today's CPU cores are, especially when you compare them to what we had a few years ago. I personally feel that single core performance of any modern day chip is more than good enough, coz most heavy duty applications have already been optimized for multiple cores, or to use the GPU for acceleration.

I don't know why rds1220 time and again blindly spreads hate against AMD, but for the usage scenario's you've mentioned, i'm pretty sure the FX is correct choice

Cheers, all the best, and remember that more better compiler optimizations for Vishera are on the way

 

[$hawn]

If you are gaming you turn off the hyper threading and you have a great gaming CPU. You decide to do heavy threaded work just go into the BIOS turn on hyper threading and you have a great CPU for doing heavy threaded work.

By that logic, even an FX user can go to the BIOS and disable a core from each module, and get ~15% more performance for gaming by avoiding the windows7 scheduler issue!!!

http://techreport.com/review/21865/a-quick-look-at-bulldozer-thread-scheduling/2

 

[rds1220]

My vote goes for FX 8350

For video editing and folding, the FX is simply a fantastic chip at that price range. You probably have seen the multi threaded benchmarks yourself. In some cases like x264 encoding, it even ties with the much more costlier i7-3770K !!!

For running VM's, the FX will make the i5 piss in its pants....more cores is definitely better here

Multi threaded programs is about the only thing that Bulldozer and Piledriver does half decent in but it still gets beaten out by the I7 in most programs. As for the few times it actually beats out the I7 it's still just barely in most cases.Now before you go throwing a pissy fit and throw out cherry picked benchmarks let's look at some benchmarks. Also in some cases that I5 that will piss it's pants beats out your beloved crappy Piledriver.

For gaming, I'm not sure you'll make out the difference between an FX and an i5 for the next 3 yrs or so, unless you play at a resolution of 800x600, and can differentiate between 200 fps and 250fps on a monitor that refreshes @60Hz!!! But by then games would probably be optimized to use even more cores, putting the FX in a better position than it is now

Ok this is compleatly pointless and pretty much irrelevant.

People keep cribbing bout single threaded performance of the FX's, but you fail to realize how fast today's CPU cores are, especially when you compare them to what we had a few years ago. I personally feel that single core performance of any modern day chip is more than good enough, coz most heavy duty applications have already been optimized for multiple cores, or to use the GPU for acceleration.

Because it's fact. While the Piledriver is better than Bulldozer it is still far, far behind Intel in single threaded programs and the bench marks prove that. No one is saying that AMD processors can't give playable frame rates because they can. You'd prefer we ignore the facts like crappy lightly threaded performane and in the case of Bulldozer bottlenecking high-end GPU's because it doesn't faor your favorite brand. Again let's look at some benchmarks

I don't know why rds1220 time and again blindly spreads hate against AMD, but for the usage scenario's you've mentioned, i'm pretty sure the FX is correct choice

Blindly spreads hate against AMD, lol yea ok. The fact is that AMD offers nothing over Intel which is in most cases faster and more effcient than AMD's CPU's or APU's. I'm not going to recommend a lower-performing CPU specifically for gaming because you'd prefer we ignore all the problems with AMD's architecture because it doesn't favor your CPU brand. Like I said if this person could afford an I7 it would be the much better choice since it does great in both heavy threaded and lightly threaded programs.

 

[wr6133]

I try to remain neutral as to AMD/Intel and I own both and recommend either depending on budget and need but I have to say I hate that BF3 singleplayer benchmark its a terrible indication of a CPU's actual power and a useless indication of what framerates you will get in multiplayer BF3 (which lets face it is what people buy the game for).

I think you need to stop shouting i7 though the OP's budget would be skating on thin ice with that, I would maintain that as a compromise for his multitude of uses the FX is the attractive option in this case

 

[rds1220]

I try to remain neutral as to AMD/Intel and I own both and recommend either depending on budget and need but I have to say I hate that BF3 singleplayer benchmark its a terrible indication of a CPU's actual power and a useless indication of what framerates you will get in multiplayer BF3 (which lets face it is what people buy the game for).

I think you need to stop shouting i7 though the OP's budget would be skating on thin ice with that, I would maintain that as a compromise for his multitude of uses the FX is the attractive option in this case

BF 3 is just one game with linked benchmarks, look at the others there, Mist of Pandaria and Elder scrolls there too. As for the second part we know the I7 is out of range and it would have ended there had Shawn not posted his usual trolling flaimbait crap. He wants to start an argument I'll give it to him and back it up with benchmarks.

 

[InvalidError]

If you were to go Intel the I7 would be better than the I5. The I5 is great for gaming but it doesn't always do great in really heavy threaded stuff

The i7 is only ~30% faster than i5 in most of those for a ~50% higher price so not really worth it unless editing/rendering is time-critical to the user.

 

[rds1220]

The i7 is only ~30% faster than i5 in most of those for a ~50% higher price so not really worth it unless editing/rendering is time-critical to the user.

Yes I agree and we already have established that the I7 is out of price range so it's irrelevant.

 

[Reynod]

Guys can we take off the shiney troll badges, put the hockey masks away, take the spud guns out of your pockets and stop sharpening up sticks?

Someone will lose an eye and then there will be tears ... again.

 

[-Fran-]

Guys can we take off the shiney troll badges, put the hockey masks away, take the spud guns out of your pockets and stop sharpening up sticks?

Someone will lose an eye and then there will be tears ... again.

Ah, you're no fun, reynod! haha.

I think the OP can consider himself answered at this point, right? Can you confirm that, Augray37?

Cheers!

 

[Augray37]

Well, my question now is, how much would more cores (vishera) benefit me if I ran a virtual machine for Mac applications?