Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Switched from Intel to AMD .. looking to go back to Intel, need help..

Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 3, 2013 3:23:40 AM

They still want $215 for an I5-2500K
They must be crazy
I built a box a year ago and paid $220 for one!!

I recently switched to an AMD A10-5800k and I can't stand this A10-5800k. I knew it might be slower than my old I5 but this is not going to work.

My biggest problem is single threaded apps/processes taking FOREVER. I don't need 20 cores.... 2 or 4 is fine.. but as far as I can see my only option for a little more performance is to pay a-lot more for an I7. Sigh.

I need to at least be where I was with the I5
To be sure I understand- if I go for a HT cpu, single core apps will get even worse because they'll only be able to use 12.5% of the total processing power. Is that correct? HT would be great to have in a-lot of ways if it were not for that!!

Does AMD not sell anything with the balls of an I5/I7??? I mean to say, what, you can sell me an 8 core cpu that's not a "true" 8 cores and you can't sell me something that can clock work as fast as an intel.. at all?

I want more powerful cores :(  My I5-2500k/z68 was a-lot better and I have my eye on the 3570k/z77 .... or the I7-3770k but they're killing me here with the price. Is the I5/I7 my only way out? No one wants to resurrect cyrix for awhile for me? :lol: 

As an aside- I HATED the graphics in the I5-2500k (driver issues, display issues, pffft.) PLEASE tell me the HD4000 is going to be better than the HD3000 was??? With the Z77 mobo I can use triple monitors, right?

a c 185 à CPUs
a b À AMD
February 3, 2013 3:29:33 AM

Single threaded=i3.
m
0
l
February 3, 2013 3:36:17 AM

amuffin said:
Single threaded=i3.


Well, I meant when something happens to only be using one core, it takes a long long time. Like when converting video with certain software, as an example. I definitely don't want an I-3 .... or are you saying I3 has better single core performance, or what?
m
0
l
Related resources
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
February 3, 2013 3:51:57 AM

I go for a i5-2500k or Core i5 3570K. For those who know me and have me do their builds, you’ll know that it’s just about the best processor you can get for the money today. With plenty of performance, top notch overclocking capability and enough horsepower to run any game you throw at it, the choice is a no brainer.


m
0
l
a c 118 à CPUs
February 3, 2013 4:21:26 AM

If you want single-threaded performance then there is no point going with i7 and the only reason to favor a 2500k/3570k is for higher clock speed and overclocking which none of the lower-end models support, otherwise the Celeron would be almost just as good.

As for why prices aren't going down, Intel has no competitive reason to bother dropping prices and since old generations get phased out before it gets much of a chance to overlap with the new generation stuff. Intel chips getting discontinued at the same price they got introduced at (almost no price drops) has been the norm since Core2's introduction. The ~$200 sweet-spot for mainstream-performance has been holding steady pretty much since then as well.
m
0
l
February 3, 2013 4:27:47 AM

InvalidError said:
If you want single-threaded performance then there is no point going with i7 and the only reason to favor a 2500k/3570k is for higher clock speed and overclocking which none of the lower-end models support, otherwise the Celeron would be almost just as good.

As for why prices aren't going down, Intel has no competitive reason to bother dropping prices and since old generations get phased out before it gets much of a chance to overlap with the new generation stuff. Intel chips getting discontinued at the same price they got introduced at (almost no price drops) has been the norm since Core2's introduction. The ~$200 sweet-spot for mainstream-performance has been holding steady pretty much since then as well.



Well, at least the market seems to have that $200+- spot in it. Thank god for that much. They still make celery chips? LoL.. seriously? How much cache do they have, now? 56kb? :lol: 
m
0
l
a c 185 à CPUs
a b À AMD
February 3, 2013 5:02:45 AM

Freddybaby said:
Well, at least the market seems to have that $200+- spot in it. Thank god for that much. They still make celery chips? LoL.. seriously? How much cache do they have, now? 56kb? :lol: 

Well, core performance is better than your A10....

m
0
l
February 3, 2013 5:44:32 AM

stantheman123 said:
I have a cheap option for you

Get 2 of these http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Lol but in all seriousness

A i5 3570k + zz7 asrock will fit your needs IMO




A i5 3570k + z77 ASrock is exactly what I have in mind..

Man, xeons are amazing these days I guess... I've read that they're going to start having a-lot more cores, too. I use to have a-lot of money and I always bought xeons. Back when 400mhz and a 2mb cache were a BIG deal. I had two of those suckers on one board and thought it was a spaceship.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 3, 2013 5:55:14 AM

You don't quite understand hyperthreading. Basically, each core is only about half used by a single stream of instructions, that's due to waiting for the results of a instruction so the next action can be taken. In hyperthreading, two sets of instructions are sent to each core so it is fully utilized.

In short, a single threaded program is about the same speed on an I5-3570K as an I7-3770K. But threaded applications are about twice as fast. So, only with applications that require over four threads will you see an advantage with an I7-3770K. Otherwise they are nearly the same speed. The I7-3570K has a larger cache, but that doesn't seem to make much of a difference in gaming.

Therefore, for gaming, get an I5-3770K. But, games are just on the edge of requiring more than four cores. For some future proofing you may want a 3770K, but it is expensive usually. However, I am seeing the I7-3770K on sale for $230 or so at times.
m
0
l
February 3, 2013 6:00:36 AM

babernet_1 said:
You don't quite understand hyperthreading. Basically, each core is only about half used by a single stream of instructions, that's due to waiting for the results of a instruction so the next action can be taken. In hyperthreading, two sets of instructions are sent to each core so it is fully utilized.

In short, a single threaded program is about the same speed on an I5-3570K as an I7-3770K. But threaded applications are about twice as fast. So, only with applications that require over four threads will you see an advantage with an I7-3770K. Otherwise they are nearly the same speed. The I7-3570K has a larger cache, but that doesn't seem to make much of a difference in gaming.

Therefore, for gaming, get an I5-3770K. But, games are just on the edge of requiring more than four cores. For some future proofing you may want a 3770K, but it is expensive usually. However, I am seeing the I7-3770K on sale for $230 or so at times.



I see. So what's happening with an old app is sitting there using "25%" of the cpu? That means it is sucking up 25% and if HT was enabled it'd say "12.5%" in task manager but be doing the same amount of work?

I definitely want to go with a HT cpu anyway- just because they seem so much better for day to day use.... I don't care about games at all (I know that's rare).. Riddle me this- where did you see the I7-3770 @ $230? Do you know where I could get the I5-3750K cheaper too?? I can't make it to a microcenter or whatever it is :( 
m
0
l
February 3, 2013 6:01:29 AM

amuffin said:
Well, core performance is better than your A10....


I'm pretty sure a sharp stick and writing the ones and zeros out in the sand would equate to quicker computing than this thing(the A-10). It's terrible.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 3, 2013 6:09:15 AM

Haha ^ thats pretty sad is it that bad?
m
0
l
February 3, 2013 6:10:45 AM

stantheman123 said:
Haha ^ thats pretty sad is it that bad?



I don't know that it's THAT bad. But I want my I5 back. I sure wish I could afford something A LOT faster than the I5, though. But- the I5 kept me from pounding the table or screaming- so ... it'll do :ange: 
m
0
l
February 3, 2013 6:11:22 AM

Intel doesn't drop the price on their CPUs because each generation is only about 15% better. If the 2500ks were $150, there would be no reason to get a 3570K.

Also, I'm not really sure what your gripe with the A10 is. I'm running WoW on ultra right now with an A10 with 1680x1050 resolution and getting ~45 FPS in Stormwind. No dedicated GPU. That's pretty amazing actually.

I figure A10 users are ahead of the curve since they'll be able to upgrade to the 6800K in July, crossfire it with a 7000 series card and eat Haswell for breakfast.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 3, 2013 6:13:24 AM

Freddybaby said:
I'm pretty sure a sharp stick and writing the ones and zeros out in the sand would equate to quicker computing than this thing(the A-10). It's terrible.


Yes, I'd recommend he not tell anyone in person he sold an Intel SB and bought an A10, yikes!
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 3, 2013 6:15:30 AM

One question. Why did you sell your i5? and got the a10? if you hated the graphics why didnt You get a discrete gpu like a 6770 or somthing
m
0
l
February 3, 2013 6:18:05 AM

hollocron said:
Intel doesn't drop the price on their CPUs because each generation is only about 15% better. If the 2500ks were $150, there would be no reason to get a 3570K.

Also, I'm not really sure what your gripe with the A10 is. I'm running WoW on ultra right now with an A10 with 1680x1050 resolution and getting ~45 FPS in Stormwind. No dedicated GPU. That's pretty amazing actually.



Since I don't play games, the graphics don't really help me... I must say that the graphics on the AMD chip are a-lot less of a hassle. The HD3000 on the I5-2500k was HORRIBLE. (I guess I will pray that the HD4000 on the I5-3570K has improved)

And, I do know that the A10-5800k is an "apu" kind of all in one type deal. You kind of sacrifice a touch of cpu balls in return for really good graphics, I suppose. But really- the I5 is also an APU, when you think about it.

I remember the days when an AMD cpu would blow the doors off of an intel speed wise... I never will forget my thunderbird 1333 processors. I had them overclocked straight to hell and they were faster than ANY intel out at that time.

Those things would run so hot you could be running at stock speeds, shut the computer off, punch it and THEN burn your cpu up when the hsf fell off. I use to be very aggressive with electronics when I could afford to be- I never will forget those AMD thunderbirds. I loved them, but they would always burn up when I punched the computer and the HS came off. Even if I shut it down first.

I just can't stand when I want to open a pile of things at once or encode some videos and it's taking a long time, you know? That is when I miss the I5
m
0
l
February 3, 2013 6:20:45 AM

stantheman123 said:
One question. Why did you sell your i5? and got the a10? if you hated the graphics why didnt You get a discrete gpu like a 6770 or somthing



Well every time my computer is getting close to being a year old, I sell it and use the money to put something new together. So I priced my the A10 system and everything and sold my old one for enough to buy the new one.

I'm about to do the same thing- but early this time (and make a little extra) to buy the I5 system - but - if I go with the I7 and can't find a good discount, I will end up paying more than I can sell this box fox :( 

But, that is not too bad considering that I still have a new computer on money I spent many years ago.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 3, 2013 6:21:46 AM

What if you wait for haswell? i doubt you can control your rage with that A10 Amd though for 4-5months haha
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 3, 2013 6:25:11 AM

stantheman123 said:
What if you wait for haswell? i doubt you can control your rage with that A10 Amd though for 4-5months haha


Not bad. The Ivy Bridge graphics is about 2X Sandy Bridge, and Haswell graphics is about 2X Ivy. . . .
m
0
l
February 3, 2013 6:26:50 AM

stantheman123 said:
What if you wait for haswell? i doubt you can control your rage with that A10 Amd though for 4-5months haha



4-5 months of this?
I'd rather get shot.. lol
m
0
l
February 3, 2013 6:27:46 AM

hollocron said:
That's understandable. I didn't know you weren't using it for gaming, or an HTPC. That's really the only reason to get an A10. I can imagine how the A10 would lack in the department you're using it for, however Intel HD 4000 graphics are pretty abysmal.



Do you know if the HD4000 will at least work? Without funny video issues and driver crashes and all of that?
m
0
l
February 3, 2013 6:30:54 AM

Freddybaby said:
Do you know if the HD4000 will at least work? Without funny video issues and driver crashes and all of that?


I'm not sure, although I think you'll need a dedicated card if you're going to do anything serious with HD videos. A 3570k with a GTX 660 would probably yield the best results without breaking the bank.
m
0
l
February 3, 2013 6:46:41 AM

hollocron said:
I'm not sure, although I think you'll need a dedicated card if you're going to do anything serious with HD videos. A 3570k with a GTX 660 would probably yield the best results without breaking the bank.



What do you mean "do anything serious" with them? You mean if I want to record and encode them? When I use to have to do that I always used a hauppague card that did all of the work so that my cpu stayed free ...

I've never had any problem just watching HD programs on either chip (the I5 or the A10)


Question of the hour: How much heat does the graphics portion of a cpu generate(on either the A10 or the I5)?

Would it perhaps speed up my processor in either case if I didn't use the integrated graphics, since there would be less heat to deal with?

What I mean is, if I buy an extremely inexpensive video card and shut the integrated cpu graphics off, will my cpu run a-lot cooler?? That would probably help a-lot, wouldn't it????
m
0
l
!