I need help choosing between processors! (i5 4690k vs FX-9370)

Hello, I am planning on upgrading my PC soon. I specifically want to upgrade my CPU and motherboard (get a cooler). I have spent loads of time searching the internet to find the ideal processors and I have found myself stuck choosing between the i5 4690k and the FX-9370. The FX-9370 is better on paper but I have heard that the 4690k might be better, however I don't know if this is legitimate or just dumb intel fanboys... I'm hoping that someone can help me decide.

I have a budget of under £350 for a CPU, Cooler and Motherboard. I will be using my PC for a wide variety of things, mostly gaming but I will also use it for occasionally rendering video and possibly live-streaming I would love to hear some suggestions!

Thank you,
~Dan
15 answers Last reply
More about choosing processors 4690k 9370
  1. http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/vy3FmG

    This is best choice you can go with in my opinion.
  2. i5 all day
  3. I5 4690k.
    Explanation: Draws less power, doesn't require a high end motherboard and cooler, you can overclock it to ~4.4ghz even on basic coolers (212 plus), it's overclocked performance exceeds the 9370's performance, even in multithreaded applications and it's single core performance (or in anything that uses 4 or less threads, which is most software) kicks the fx's one off the table.

    Pros: Less heat, less power consumption, much stronger single core (gaming eg) performance, better price combined with mobo/cooler.

    Cons: On clock speed it's multithread performance (8 threads) is a bit behind the 9370's.

    For benchmarks google: I5 4690k review or 4690k vs 9370.
  4. Would this sort of combination be good?
    http://i.gyazo.com/d97f0810aa07bf88645d825a4a47b882.png
    (i5 4690k/MSI Z97 Gaming 7/ Coolermaster Hyper 212 Evo)
  5. I5 always, i built an amd machine first and i regretted building it and i wanted to go for intel just becoz of performance, if you are on a budget...then sure go amd...That combination is good, however i would go with an asus motherboard such as the asus z97m plus (Y) good reputation!
  6. TheStuffDanDoes said:
    Would this sort of combination be good?
    http://i.gyazo.com/d97f0810aa07bf88645d825a4a47b882.png
    (i5 4690k/MSI Z97 Gaming 7/ Coolermaster Hyper 212 Evo)


    It would be great. The motherboard seems to be good, although MSI has a pretty huge DOA rate (well, compared to others, in total it's just 2% anyway).
  7. I am an AMD fan but the FX 9*** chips are a total failure and not recommended for the average consumer. They use more than 200w of power and produce more heat than two i7 at the same time.

    You could have asked FX 8350 vs i5 4670, where the two are similar in performance. (The FX being better in multi tasking and the i5 better in single core operations).

    I would pick ASRock instead of MSI. Your call.
  8. PandaBear270 said:
    I am an AMD fan but the FX 9*** chips are a total failure and not recommended for the average consumer. They use more than 200w of power and produce more heat than two i7 at the same time.

    You could have asked FX 8350 vs i5 4670, where the two are similar in performance. (The FX being better in multi tasking and the i5 better in single core operations).

    I would pick ASRock instead of MSI. Your call.

    The reason I suggested the MSI was because I like the idea of the OC genie and the software it comes with looks decent. I'm a bit of a Overclocking/Bios noob so I thought it would be good.
    Should I still get the MSI, or....
  9. TheStuffDanDoes said:
    PandaBear270 said:
    I am an AMD fan but the FX 9*** chips are a total failure and not recommended for the average consumer. They use more than 200w of power and produce more heat than two i7 at the same time.

    You could have asked FX 8350 vs i5 4670, where the two are similar in performance. (The FX being better in multi tasking and the i5 better in single core operations).

    I would pick ASRock instead of MSI. Your call.

    The reason I suggested the MSI was because I like the idea of the OC genie and the software it comes with looks decent. I'm a bit of a Overclocking/Bios noob so I thought it would be good.
    Should I still get the MSI, or....



    Don't get your hands on auto overclocking tools. They might do quite okay by now, but you're still better off doing a manual oc. For example, reading reviews on those tools, it seems you usually get about 4.3ghz with 1.35v vcore on auto tool (4770k) but they have been able to tweak it to 4.6ghz with 1.36v vcore.

    Don't worry about getting your hands dirty, as long as you follow serious oc guides and keep calm (oc'ing takes time! don't expect anything under two full days to get a half decent oc if you're new to it) you'll be on the safe side. At least a lot safer than when using those tools.
  10. Oh, about the board, it seems to be a good one for it's price.
  11. TheStuffDanDoes said:
    PandaBear270 said:
    I am an AMD fan but the FX 9*** chips are a total failure and not recommended for the average consumer. They use more than 200w of power and produce more heat than two i7 at the same time.

    You could have asked FX 8350 vs i5 4670, where the two are similar in performance. (The FX being better in multi tasking and the i5 better in single core operations).

    I would pick ASRock instead of MSI. Your call.

    The reason I suggested the MSI was because I like the idea of the OC genie and the software it comes with looks decent. I'm a bit of a Overclocking/Bios noob so I thought it would be good.
    Should I still get the MSI, or....



    Ehm both will work. Just make sure it have the expansion slots that you need.
  12. PandaBear270 said:
    I am an AMD fan but the FX 9*** chips are a total failure and not recommended for the average consumer. They use more than 200w of power and produce more heat than two i7 at the same time.

    You could have asked FX 8350 vs i5 4670, where the two are similar in performance. (The FX being better in multi tasking and the i5 better in single core operations).

    I would pick ASRock instead of MSI. Your call.



    Agreed on all counts. The 9370 and the 9590 especially are fast. But you need a Sabertooth R2 and a really good AIO cooler and a case with great airflow. The trade offs are too steep imho.
  13. PandaBear270 said:
    TheStuffDanDoes said:
    PandaBear270 said:
    I am an AMD fan but the FX 9*** chips are a total failure and not recommended for the average consumer. They use more than 200w of power and produce more heat than two i7 at the same time.

    You could have asked FX 8350 vs i5 4670, where the two are similar in performance. (The FX being better in multi tasking and the i5 better in single core operations).

    I would pick ASRock instead of MSI. Your call.

    The reason I suggested the MSI was because I like the idea of the OC genie and the software it comes with looks decent. I'm a bit of a Overclocking/Bios noob so I thought it would be good.
    Should I still get the MSI, or....



    Ehm both will work. Just make sure it have the expansion slots that you need.


    I think I'll go with the MSI Z97 Gaming 7. I know a few other people who have it and I've never heard bad things. It seems to have more that enough expansion available and the UEFI and included software looks ideal for me. Thanks!
  14. The Xeon 1230v is much better than the i5 in my opinion as it has the same speeds and hyper threading so any heavy workloads like rendering or such, it will perform better.
  15. You are right, there are no reasons choosing the i5 over the E3 1230 V3 other than the iGPU or the overclocking if its a K module.

    A Xeon also equals to higher manufacture quality (server grade bin).
    This is why I am recommending it all the time in these forums.
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Intel Intel i5 PC gaming and You AMD Cooling Cost Motherboards Video Editing Performance Video Capture Quality