Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

The FX-8350 vs I5-3570k debate that has rustled the internet's jim


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 Justhavocman

Justhavocman

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 161 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece

Posted 27 January 2013 - 03:26 AM

I've seen it on countless forums , there's this guy with his first review and benchamrking  and now his second  which has really made a fuss over at overclock.net and other forums! 



#2 freddie

freddie

    Up the Arsenal

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 704 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Western Australia

Posted 27 January 2013 - 04:34 AM

8350 FTW!



#3 DanTheGamer11

DanTheGamer11

    When life gives you lemons, eat them.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3916 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 January 2013 - 04:50 AM

AMD FTW!

Processor AMD Phenom II X6 1055T @3.2Ghz
Cooler Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo
Memory 8GB 1.48V 1600Mhz DDR3 Crucial Ballistix Tactical
Motherboard Asrock N68C-GS FX
Graphics XFX HD 7950
Storage 1TB WD Caviar Blue HDD, 240GB Kingston Hyper X SSD, Thanks OCC & Kingston, makes a big difference  :)
Optical Disk Drive Sony Optiarc DVD/CD ReWriter
Power Supply Cooler Master GX 650W Bronze
Case Cooler Master CM690


#4 Justhavocman

Justhavocman

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 161 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece

Posted 27 January 2013 - 05:06 AM

I'm really skeptical regarding the validity of his results and benchmarks , i mean other reputable sites such as guru3d , overclock.net , overclockers.uk get completely different results!



#5 EuroFight

EuroFight

    I'm not lazy, I'm just energy efficient.

  • News Editor
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1608 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 27 January 2013 - 05:22 AM

Okay, looks like I'm gonna start the discussion then :lol:

 

I have an AMD FX-6100 in my gaming computer, and it provides all the performance I need (and extra headroom too), I appreciate it is no i5 3570K, but it provides what I need. The fact is, for someone on a budget, Intel processors are very expensive. Something like an i5 3570K will cost you around £170, whereas FX-6100s can be picked up for about £80, saving you £90, plus the difference in the cost of motherboards which, in my experience, can be very great. Additionally, I have a HD7770, which would bottleneck an i5 anyway, so there is no real benefit in going with the i5 in my case.

 

To sum up, the FX-6100 I have can max out the settings most games I have including Battlefield 3/Bad Company 2, Planetside 2, Metro 2033 etc. For gaming, the FX-6100 is more than ideal in the current generation, so the FX-8350 should suit the next generation in a similar manner.

 

I know some people need more power than the FX-series can provide, and that I believe is where the Intel line come in. These chips provide more performance than the FX line almost unquestionably. For folding, video editing or other work, an Intel processor would definitely be preferable. Also, in low-power non-APU products, Intel processors do appear to have the edge. On a side note, if I wasn't on a budget I would go for an Intel processor aswell.

 

So I'm not saying it is AMD vs Intel, because they are good for different things. Although people may say that AMD can compete with Intel for performance, I personally feel that the current technology is incapable of that. What AMD is capable of competing on, however, is performance for cost, and that, I feel, is where AMD has the edge at the moment.


Edited by EuroFight, 27 January 2013 - 05:24 AM.

Processor AMD FX-6100 Hex-core, 3.3GHz > Intel Core 2 Duo, Dual-core, 1.6GHz

Memory 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600MHz >  Crucial 3GB DDR3 1066MHz

Graphics Radeon HD7770 + Radeon HD5570 > Intel 3000 Integrated Graphics

Motherboard Gigabyte GA-970A-DS3 Socket AM3+ > OEM Latitude XT2 Motherboard Socket P

Storage Seagate Barracuda 2TB SATA 7200.14 > Samsung 64GB SSD SATA 3Gbps

Power Supply Cooler Master Elite ATX 500W > OEM Dell Power Supply 90W

Case Zalman Z11 Plus 4x 120mm fans, 3x 80mm > OEM Dell Latitude XT Case

 

"Sudo make me a sandwich" - BluePanda


#6 Justhavocman

Justhavocman

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 161 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece

Posted 27 January 2013 - 05:34 AM

Okay, looks like I'm gonna start the discussion then :lol:

 

I have an AMD FX-6100 in my gaming computer, and it provides all the performance I need (and extra headroom too), I appreciate it is no i5 3570K, but it provides what I need. The fact is, for someone on a budget, Intel processors are very expensive. Something like an i5 3570K will cost you around £170, whereas FX-6100s can be picked up for about £80, saving you £90, plus the difference in the cost of motherboards which, in my experience, can be very great. Additionally, I have a HD7770, which would bottleneck an i5 anyway, so there is no real benefit in going with the i5 in my case.

 

To sum up, the FX-6100 I have can max out the settings most games I have including Battlefield 3/Bad Company 2, Planetside 2, Metro 2033 etc. For gaming, the FX-6100 is more than ideal in the current generation, so the FX-8350 should suit the next generation in a similar manner.

 

I know some people need more power than the FX-series can provide, and that I believe is where the Intel line come in. These chips provide more performance than the FX line almost unquestionably. For folding, video editing or other work, an Intel processor would definitely be preferable. Also, in low-power non-APU products, Intel processors do appear to have the edge. On a side note, if I wasn't on a budget I would go for an Intel processor aswell.

 

So I'm not saying it is AMD vs Intel, because they are good for different things. Although people may say that AMD can compete with Intel for performance, I personally feel that the current technology is incapable of that. What AMD is capable of competing on, however, is performance for cost, and that, I feel, is where AMD has the edge at the moment.

Very well spoken , i also believe that AMD is the company that provides the best bang for buck out there , if you're on a tight budget , go with amd ( cpu and gpu) but if you have the spending power then i'd say go with intel , it's worth the difference in price in my books ! i'm really interested in hearing other people's opinions on the matter and on the video i posted!



#7 paradoxdream

paradoxdream

    New Member

  • Members
  • 25 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NJ

Posted 27 January 2013 - 06:26 AM

As an AMD owner  I am most interested in that hotfix they were talking about any one have info on this?


Gaming System

AMD FX 6300 @4.5  1.425v
HIS AMD HD 7770 Crossfire
ASrock 990FX Extreme 3
G.SKILL Ripjaws 8GB (2 x 4GB) 1333 7-7-7-21 1.5v
XFX PRO 750 xxx
ThermalTake Water 2.0 Extreme
Mushkin Enhanced Chronos 120GB SATA III 
WD Green 1Tb 5400
WD Blue 640Gb 7200

LG DVD Buurner

Realtek ALC892 Audio
Corsair 600T Case


#8 EuroFight

EuroFight

    I'm not lazy, I'm just energy efficient.

  • News Editor
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1608 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 27 January 2013 - 06:34 AM

As an AMD owner  I am most interested in that hotfix they were talking about any one have info on this?

 

I am an AMD owner too. The hotfixes are available (see this article), but the performance boost is modest at best, with some reports suggesting little or even no performance gains in single or heavily threaded workloads.

 

I personally can't be bothered with the hassle, but it's up to you :thumbsup:


Processor AMD FX-6100 Hex-core, 3.3GHz > Intel Core 2 Duo, Dual-core, 1.6GHz

Memory 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600MHz >  Crucial 3GB DDR3 1066MHz

Graphics Radeon HD7770 + Radeon HD5570 > Intel 3000 Integrated Graphics

Motherboard Gigabyte GA-970A-DS3 Socket AM3+ > OEM Latitude XT2 Motherboard Socket P

Storage Seagate Barracuda 2TB SATA 7200.14 > Samsung 64GB SSD SATA 3Gbps

Power Supply Cooler Master Elite ATX 500W > OEM Dell Power Supply 90W

Case Zalman Z11 Plus 4x 120mm fans, 3x 80mm > OEM Dell Latitude XT Case

 

"Sudo make me a sandwich" - BluePanda


#9 JBags

JBags

    Geek

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 581 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Central NJ

Posted 27 January 2013 - 07:47 AM

I see the misinformed "Intel is better for gaming" argument all the time. Even here the other week someone tried to argue this with red1776, the guy who reviewed the FX-8350 right here at OCC. (OCC Review, referenced thread)

 

The GPU is most important is such scenarios, and as the review shows, there is little to no difference between the FX-8350 and i7 3960x/3770k.

 

 

This is why I'm an AMDer. I use my PC primarily for gaming, so I'll get similiar performance for less $$ compared to Intel.


« Intel Core i7 4770K cooled by Noctua NH-D14 »
« MSI Z97 Gaming 7 | 16GB G.Skill Trident X DDR3-2400 »
« Sapphire Radeon R9 290 Vapor-X »
« Corsair HX850 PSU | CM 690 II Advanced | Samsung 2333SW 23” 1080p »
« Samsung 840 EVO 250GB 
WD Caviar Black 640GB | WD Caviar Green 1TB »

« Windows 8.1 Professional x64 »

 

Join my Minecraft Server: mc.bagcraft.tk // FTB: ftb.bagcraft.tk


#10 ComputerEd

ComputerEd

    Voice of Computing Reason

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1704 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Carbondale, Il

Posted 27 January 2013 - 08:06 AM

I like some of what this guy said, especially this crap of testing the systems at settings that do not in ANY WAY reflect real life. The fact he grabbed a nice mix of games and ran them as a gamer would is the way testing should be done. I have been standing at this pulpit for YEARS, nice to hear a few amens from the congregation.


Get your GEEK on ever week with Computer Ed Radio

http://computeredradio.com  http://facebook.com/computered

 

 


#11 Justhavocman

Justhavocman

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 161 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece

Posted 27 January 2013 - 08:17 AM

I see the misinformed "Intel is better for gaming" argument all the time. Even here the other week someone tried to argue this with red1776, the guy who reviewed the FX-8350 right here at OCC. (OCC Review, referenced thread)

 

The GPU is most important is such scenarios, and as the review shows, there is little to no difference between the FX-8350 and i7 3960x/3770k.

 

 

This is why I'm an AMDer. I use my PC primarily for gaming, so I'll get similiar performance for less $$ compared to Intel.

The argument is not "intel is better for gaming" , it's the fact that most current games do not utilise say all 8 cores from an 8 core processor , they utilise 2 cores ! And intel is well known for having better performance when comparing core-core with AMD! Now , the evolution of gaming is going in such a way that newer games will be utilising more than say just 2 or 4 cores  , and these newer games will perform "better"  with an AMD processor! But for now in my honest opinion Intel takes the lead when it comes down to pure gaming performance.



#12 d6bmg

d6bmg

    BMG FTW!!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4120 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 January 2013 - 08:40 AM

I own neither, but 2 of my friends have each of them. From the benchmark results it is obvious that 8350 > 3570K


boozei.gif