Intel Core i5-4440 or a AMD FX-6300 for gaming?

[Legolas8181]

I was going to go with the i5 but switching to the FX has allowed me to save money as well as get a better graphics card in the 280X Toxic rather than the 2780X Toxic. I will overclock one day but not for now. If I am going to overclock how much extra power will I need if I OC both COU and GPU:

FX-6300
Sapphire R9 280X 3GB Toxic
Asus M5A97
650W
Corsair Carbide 300R

Everything else is coming out my current computer like a 2TB HDD and a 64-bit OS.

 

[rds1220]

Well if all you are doing is playing games I would go with the I5. The thing is you say you might want to over clock but you can't really over clock the I5 4440. You need to get an unlocked (k) version to do that.

 

[Legolas8181]

Well if all you are doing is playing games I would go with the I5. The thing is you say you might want to over clock but you can't really over clock the I5 4440. You need to get an unlocked (k) version to do that.

And for that I would need to spend £175 over the £132 I would on the 4440 and yet with the FX-6300 that is already overclockable with a base clock speed of 3.5GHz for under £100.

 

[PepitoTV]

So the decision is FX 6300+R9 280x vs i5-4440+R9 270x. The first one will offer much better gaming performance as the GPU is the one that will take the highest load so the CPU should just be able to feed it.

 

[rds1220]

If you aren't going to over clock and you are comparing a stock I5 vs a stock 6300 the I5 is the better CPU. If you want to over clock then it is up to you.

 

[Embra]

The AMD combo is the better gaming setup.
What brand and model PSU?

 

[Legolas8181]

The AMD combo is the better gaming setup.
What brand and model PSU?

Corsair 80+ Gold

 

[Embra]

Good to go!

 

[Woodspirit]

Would this fx6300 be still better in terms of budget if I pair it with a 1 gb ddr5 card?

 

[Lessthannil]

I would get the I5 4440. The 270x is not a bad GPU at all; it will max out most games on 1080p and you might be able to sneak in some levels of anti-aliasing.

 

[Silver Wolf]

Though generally AMD was better at gaming, I have found the newer games (at least that I play) tend to be more memory and process intensive than before and so Intel CPU's have worked better for me...

 

[chrisso]

the i5 is a top tier games performance cpu and will remain so for years. The amd cpu is way behind, clocked or not.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html

You get what you pay for.

 

[Silver Wolf]

I appreciate that link, I use this one to compare cpu's. Look at the performance of the 2 processors side by side.

 

[chrisso]

Well, you can use whatever data suits your agenda, but that is an overall general computing use comparison, and the Tom's hardware cpu chart is strictly based on games performance with a wide range of games benchmarked on every architecture. The poster here is looking for
GAMING performance, so your comparison chart is obviously of little
help.

 

[Silver Wolf]

Well, you can use whatever data suits your agenda, but that is an overall general computing use comparison, and the Tom's hardware cpu chart is strictly based on games performance with a wide range of games benchmarked on every architecture. The poster here is looking for
GAMING performance, so your comparison chart is obviously of little
help.

There is no need to get snippy. I merely pointed out where my data and thoughts were coming from. And as stated by myself, I have noticed many games coming out are more memory intensive which tends to be more Intel's style than AMD's. Hence GAMING is better suited with a system that handles memory better and i5 will out perform most AMD CPU's.

Which is probably why the chart YOU provided actually lists the Intel CPU's higher than AMD CPU's.

-- EDIT --
Also, please point out what my agenda is since you feel it is not answering the question at hand. I do see your agenda is pushing AMD CPU's due to your disrespectful tone, but I simply stated my experience and showed some comparison data. If that site is biased, then show me data on that and I will gladly change to an un-biased site. It is as you stated however straight data, though it does also have available benchmark data so you can see the processors comparison at certain functions.

 

[chrisso]

The site isnt biased, it is looking at cpu's from a laymans point of view,
and it is done in a not quite expertly fashion by people who have little interest in gaming as a single entity. You know this and so do I , but the poster doesnt so to show that comparison in this instance is misleading and I have no idea why you would do it. You say 'i appreciate that link, I use This one to compare side by side, insinuating the data is of similar relevance, when you know it isnt.
If you cant be truthful, say nothing.

 

[Silver Wolf]

I am no less a layman than anyone else, however I do like to see other things than just a narrow field. I would prefer to get a larger view than one so narrow since even if the user is using their computer mainly for gaming, they will undoubtedly use it for other activities as well.

 

[chrisso]

When in a hole, one might be wise to stop digging.

 

[WhiteSnake91]

Honestly the i5 is better, you can go with a lesser power supply as well like a good 500watt and save money too...intel uses less power. Any i5 is very stout, even if you can't overclock it. Don't know for sure with other models but I know for sure with the ivy bridge 3470 you can tinker with it and get all 4 cores to turbo boost to 4.0ghz which is really nice, I think on some haswell they don't have turbo boost from what I've read *shrug*

 

[VenBaja]

What games will you be looking to play? Because that's very important. While an FX-6300 may perform fine for most singleplayer games, it will get absolutely stomped by the i5 4440 in multiplayer. I used the FX-6300 up until this past summer, and in BF3's mutliplayer I was struggling on 64 player servers, even when overclocked. So if you're looking to play some next-gen first person shooters online, I would steer clear of the FX-6300.

P.S. - Most benchmarks you're going to find for games will reference the singleplayer component, which is not an accurate depiction of what you'll experience in large multiplayer games. If you look up singleplayer BF4 benchmarks for instance, they will show i3's hanging within a few frames per second of i7's, which, if you've played the multiplayer component at all, you'll know is not representative.

 

[Rohit 13]

dude go with intel i5 and gtx 750 ti

 

[TechsavvyAMD]

650W PSU is enough for overclocking FX 6300.......

 

[st3v30]

You will need to OC that FX 6300 to make that r9 280X shine,so get your self a nice cooler when you go shop for parts.