Fx-8350 vs core i5

[ah_adel93]

AMD Fx-8350 or Intel Core i5 4550 for gaming ?

 

[dantethedemonkiller]

Not at all u can see latest games like watchdogs and bf 4 wants an 8core CPU don't go for i5
If u r a devoloper like me u can go for i5 but I think 8350 is better and if u'll see benc
hmarks 8350 beats even initial i7s ie 2nd and 3rd gens in gaming for more go to game-debate.com and click on image of watchdogs which is saying can you run it fill and see specs it is worlds most specs demanding game it shows what fixture games wants

 

[ah_adel93]

Thanks for ur answer , i got another question , should i upgrade my gpu OR cpu ?
i got : amd athlon ii x2 AND ati radeon hd 6670 .

 

[coolcole01]

Both

 

[Shodoman]

Both. Upgrading to any of those processors means also a new motherboard. Get a fx 6300 and a Radeon 270 if you have the money. Otherwise just get a new processor now and raise money for a video card later.

 

[ah_adel93]

so a new processor with the 6670 isn't so bad ? because honestly i cant afford radeon R9 + a new processor :/

 

[coolcole01]

If you can only get one get the cpu for now a higher gpu in the future

 

[ah_adel93]

If you can only get one get the cpu for now a higher gpu in the future

Thanks pal

 

[Shodoman]

As you are not planing on OC-ing go with the i5. It is more efficient including power wise. Also get a h97 motherboard. You don;t need the Z lines, those are for OC.

 

[coolcole01]

Also if by chance you do want to oc look for a z87 board there are crazy good deals right now got an asrock z87 extreme6 for 85 bucks the other day from Microcenter

 

[ah_adel93]

i was thinking about a Core i5 4570 and maybe a gigabyte h81m s2pv , what do u think ?
it 's within my budget because , i cant afford h97 MoBo nor the z87 . because believe it or not , the z87 costs 187$ here (@ egypt) .

 

[wh3resmycar]

Not at all u can see latest games like watchdogs and bf 4 wants an 8core CPU don't go for i5
If u r a devoloper like me u can go for i5 but I think 8350 is better and if u'll see benc
hmarks 8350 beats even initial i7s ie 2nd and 3rd gens in gaming for more go to game-debate.com and click on image of watchdogs which is saying can you run it fill and see specs it is worlds most specs demanding game it shows what fixture games wants

i call BS on this one.

get a haswell i5 instead.

 

[Shodoman]

i call BS on this one.

get a haswell i5 instead.

Might want to read the second graphic again because it's an argument against your statement. And what is the source of the other graphs?
And why do you guys pick such a messed up game for bench marking. People with the same build are getting different experiences in Watch Dogs.

 

[dantethedemonkiller]

Ok dude i have a haswell i5 4670k I have never felt less then anyone but in above benchmarks only Tom's hardware is true that's why we r here I know that u have seen game debate ultra requirements for it so if u want to be a hacker developer or a game designer and a gamer with all that u cab go for i5 4670 only Tom's hardware is saying the truth game debate is saying truth sites we believe says 8350 is better for gaming and i5 is better for development I think u can see urself plz don't listen to fanboys

 

[JOOK-D]

i call BS on this one.

get a haswell i5 instead.

Might want to read the second graphic again because it's an argument against your statement. And what is the source of the other graphs?
And why do you guys pick such a messed up game for bench marking. People with the same build are getting different experiences in Watch Dogs.

2nd bench was an Ivy i5, not haswell. 1st source I believe is techspot, second is GameGPU.

wh3resmycar seemed to be responding to dantethedemonkiller's misinformation.

In any case OP, take the i5. It will win in literally 99.9% of games on the market. Additionally, the FX/AM3+ has no upgrade path.

 

[JOOK-D]

Ok dude i have a haswell i5 4670k I have never felt less then anyone but in above benchmarks only Tom's hardware is true that's why we r here I know that u have seen game debate ultra requirements for it so if u want to be a hacker developer or a game designer and a gamer with all that u cab go for i5 4670 only Tom's hardware is saying the truth game debate is saying truth sites we believe says 8350 is better for gaming and i5 is better for development I think u can see urself plz don't listen to fanboys

It's easy to tell the difference, especially in minimum framerates. So only 1/3 benches of those benches are valid because it happens to suit your argument (even though it doesn't since that's an ivy i5)?

Gamedebate and CPUBoss... complete waste of time.

8350 is not better for gaming. It matches a Haswell i5 in roughly 2 or 3 titles. That's it. There are thousands on the market where the i5 wins, since games are still not effectively utilising more than 4 threads, if that.

 

[wh3resmycar]

2nd bench was an Ivy i5, not haswell. 1st source I believe is techspot, second is GameGPU.

and a haswell i5 will be slower?

 

[Zircoben]

The I5 is superior over all for games in general, and in minimum frame rates and frame time variance,.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html

This sites conclusions are that AMD cannot compete with any 3 year old intel i5.
This forum is inundated with people needing help with AMD machines overheating or motherboard failures and cpu compatibility questions.
The intel pc will use less electricity and last longer.
You choose.

Cannot agree with you more!

Intel i5-4570 (I think you mean...) will beat the FX-8350 in nearly everything.

i5-4570
*Faster at most games right now
*Uses lot less power (it does add up on your bill)
*Ability to upgrade to better CPUs (i7,Broadwell [if Z97], Xeon)

FX-8350
*Slower at games now, but maybe will get better taken advantage of
*Better at intense mulittasking
*Ability to upgrade...? Not sure. (LIKELY a dead socket)
*Especially on OC, uses considerably more power... ($10-$40 a year)

I think that the better choice is the i5. Most benchmarks have the i5 leading the FX-8350 leading by a considerable measure, besides video encoding and tasks that use many threads. In raw computing and gaming, the i5 takes the lead.

Even when the FX-8350 is using EVERY thread, the i5 is not far behind at all. You really cannot go wrong with the i5. It will save you money in the long run, provide a better path of upgrade-ability, as well as give you better performance in most tasks.

IF you can, get the 4690 or 4590. Those are brand new. That will make it an even better choice.

Hope I could help with your decision!

 

[dacquesta1]

If your primary concern is gaming then go Intel, this shouldn't even be a discussion anymore. The only way I would recommend the FX-8350 is if you plan on doing heavily multi-threaded workloads (ie video transcoding).

 

[wdmfiber]

Windows will only recognize the FX 8350 as 4 core CPU, with 8 threads/logical processors.

Initially when the "bulldozer" architecture was new, Windows would treat AMD CPU's as advertised(example: 8 core). It was a disaster; FX cores are weak to begin with, but the 2nd core in each "shared resource" module is extra weak. A Windows "patch" so the cores weren't loaded sequentially helped a lot. But if future games ever "recommend" an 8 core CPU; no one will be playing it on old 2012 FX chip.

There are some funny reads/forum threads from FX owners looking for "lost/missing" cores. They are "devastated" when they pull up task manager for the first time, lol.

 

[Zircoben]

Windows will only recognize the FX 8350 as 4 core CPU, with 8 threads/logical processors.

Initially when the "bulldozer" architecture was new, Windows would treat AMD CPU's as advertised(example: 8 core). It was a disaster; FX cores are weak to begin with, but the 2nd core in each "shared resource" module is extra weak. A Windows "patch" so the cores weren't loaded sequentially helped a lot. But if future games ever "recommend" an 8 core CPU; no one will be playing it on old 2012 FX chip.

There are some funny reads/forum threads from FX owners looking for "lost/missing" cores. They are "devastated" when they pull up task manager for the first time, lol.

Wow, that was extremely informative. I didn't know that. So this myth about 'futureproofing' and the advantages of 8 threads doesn't even exist at all, because the AMD 8-cores only have 4 real cores?

 

[dantethedemonkiller]

OK first all of u here I know i5 4670 wins from 8350 but future games demand more cores that's why even I am upgrading to i7 4770 cause we all know Intel is expensive and we all know amd gives more at less 8350 is 4ghZ with 8cores and truth is that all future games demand more cores that's why even corei5 4670k(which I have ) has to be upgraded if not now might be next month/year which will cost

 

[leeb2013]

I wouldn't say they demand 8 cores, rather they can utilise 8 cores. 8 weak cores are still no better than 4 strong cores.

 

[vmN]

No. The core I5 4670k will be sufficient enough for way more than an year.

Games will in most scenarios always prefer stronger core architecture. This is because the way games are constructed, it is hard splitting up the processes without running into multiple other issues.

@dantethedemonkiller
You do realize the core I7 4770k is basically an core I5 4670k with slightly more L3 cache and SMT (hyper-threading) enabled?

 

[wh3resmycar]

again. please drop the BS about having more cores being better for the future. the number of cores do no matter, the uarch does.

just look at the old phenom2x6. people kept on suggesting that cpu because it has 6 cores and you will be "future proof".

http://www.techspot.com/review/827-watch-dogs-benchmarks/page5.html

amd themselves admitted the MOAR COARS strategy failed, only die hard amd fanboys think otherwise.