Jump to content

8350, 2500k, or 3570k


Recommended Posts

My experience is Intel puts less stress on the motherboard, power supply and performs well.

If you like playing with overclocking in a more involving way the 8350 doess well enough.

It is best to look at the total experience you want.

For many games the GPU is more important than the processor.

What do you intend to ply at what level? How much overclocking?

Basically most people could not tell the difference gaming with any of the three..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Without a question, the i5 3570K is the best for gaming.

 

a certain test shows otherwise :3

 

just go with what you need really,

im a leaned towards the intel side because of emulation.

it needs strong clock for clock speeds and amd cant give me that compared to intel

 

I love those videos where they only show the games optimized for certain Arch's. all those games are AMD optimized. Wheres BF3? Witcher 2, GTA 4, Borderlands 2, Anno, and all the other AAA title modern games? There not shown because that poster was trying to make a defense for Vishera, because Intel destroys AMD in those titles. I know this from first hand experience.

 

 

 

to OP: If all your going to be doing is gaming and internet, then hands down get the 3570k and a good Z77 Mobo thats in your budget.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For many games the GPU is more important than the processor.

 

Exactly, get the best Video cards you can afford on your budget.  all 3 CPUS mentioned in OP will not have a problem with Bottle necking on any cards out atm, up to tri Sli/Crossfire atleast

 

 

If your looking at a GTX 680 and can afford it in your budget. I would recommend actually getting 2 GTX 660s instead and putting them in SLi. Two 660's (not Ti's) in SLi, got 30-45% more performance in all games tested over just 1 GTX 680 for EXACTLY the same price. You'll need a little bit stronger power supply though, 750-850watt will be more then enough

Edited by DnaAngel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how many 2500 do ypu see here? (see #11)

attachicon.gifhow many.PNG

 

This is run at 1680 x 1050 BTW

 

 

Current OCC record holder

http://forums.overclockersclub.com/index.php?showtopic=190818&page=10&do=findComment&comment=2071890

 

 

I'm just sayin :tongue:

Nice graph. The 8350 beat out the 3570k, but also note the Amd chip was sporting 4 top end gfx cards as opposed to the 3570k's 3x gtx 670s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

how many 2500 do ypu see here? (see #11)

attachicon.gifhow many.PNG

 

This is run at 1680 x 1050 BTW

 

 

Current OCC record holder

http://forums.overclockersclub.com/index.php?showtopic=190818&page=10&do=findComment&comment=2071890

 

 

I'm just sayin :tongue:

Nice graph. The 8350 beat out the 3570k, but also note the Amd chip was sporting 4 top end gfx cards as opposed to the 3570k's 3x gtx 670s

 

errr, notice how many quad SLI 680 and 690's with superclocked 3930's/3960's it's on top of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

how many 2500 do ypu see here? (see #11)

attachicon.gifhow many.PNG

 

This is run at 1680 x 1050 BTW

 

 

Current OCC record holder

http://forums.overclockersclub.com/index.php?showtopic=190818&page=10&do=findComment&comment=2071890

 

 

I'm just sayin :tongue:

Nice graph. The 8350 beat out the 3570k, but also note the Amd chip was sporting 4 top end gfx cards as opposed to the 3570k's 3x gtx 670s

 

errr, notice how many quad SLI 680 and 690's with superclocked 3930's/3960's it's on top of.

 

Of course, AMD's cards always scaled better once you got into tri/quad setups. At least in my experience anyway :)

 

But take your graph for example, The difference between a top tier AMD with quadfire as opposed to a top tier Intel with Quad SLi is wait for it....3 FPS

 

But now look what happened when those same Intel chips ran quadfire..well over 200FPS.

 

 

Theres no dispute that Intel is the king and has been since Dual cores went mainstream, The architecture is better, the per core performance and efficiency is better, Power consumption is better as well as the integrated memory controller. Not to say that AMD don't make respectable CPUs esp for the budget conscious, but when you can get i5s and i7s for 200 and 300 respectively that for the most part are superior its hard to ignore them. The average person and high end gamer will not need 6+ cored CPUs by either brand so spending ludicris amounts on a rig for other reasons besides bench-marking is just plain dumb. A good 8350/3570k and 2 decent gfx cards in sli/crossfire will have a gamer gaming very happily for a good while at 70+ FPS with ease.

Edited by DnaAngel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

how many 2500 do ypu see here? (see #11)

attachicon.gifhow many.PNG

 

This is run at 1680 x 1050 BTW

 

 

Current OCC record holder

http://forums.overclockersclub.com/index.php?showtopic=190818&page=10&do=findComment&comment=2071890

 

 

I'm just sayin :tongue:

Nice graph. The 8350 beat out the 3570k, but also note the Amd chip was sporting 4 top end gfx cards as opposed to the 3570k's 3x gtx 670s

 

errr, notice how many quad SLI 680 and 690's with superclocked 3930's/3960's it's on top of.

 

Of course, AMD's cards always scaled better once you got into tri/quad setups. At least in my experience anyway :)

 

uh-huh....get the 2500.

 

I have no idea what point that was ....wait for it...trying to make.

The guys above me, and for that matter below, are all running 1.3-1.4. vrm squealing 1300+Core.(I talk to them) I have not even touched the volatge yet having them stacked on top of each other on air.This will however change after tomorrow. when I get to do the same. You still have not tried to explain the the other link AI put up there beating a 3960 + quad 680's by a healthy sum.

Sorry guy but your canned rehtoric is just overplayed.whenever an AQMD does well , there is always some crafted explanation.

 

 

 

 so spending ludicris amounts on a rig for other reasons besides bench-marking is just plain dumb. A good 8350/3570k and 2 decent gfx cards in sli/crossfire will have a gamer gaming very happily for a good while at 70+ FPS with ease.

 

Wrong again. it comes in very nicely for gaming at 5760 x 1080. You would be surprised how many games take advantage of more than four cores. I have a file full of CPU/GPU use graphs benchmarking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

how many 2500 do ypu see here? (see #11)

attachicon.gifhow many.PNG

 

This is run at 1680 x 1050 BTW

 

 

Current OCC record holder

http://forums.overclockersclub.com/index.php?showtopic=190818&page=10&do=findComment&comment=2071890

 

 

I'm just sayin :tongue:

Nice graph. The 8350 beat out the 3570k, but also note the Amd chip was sporting 4 top end gfx cards as opposed to the 3570k's 3x gtx 670s

 

errr, notice how many quad SLI 680 and 690's with superclocked 3930's/3960's it's on top of.

 

Of course, AMD's cards always scaled better once you got into tri/quad setups. At least in my experience anyway :)

 

uh-huh....get the 2500.

 

I have no idea what point that was ....wait for it...trying to make.

Th eguys above me, and for that matter below, are all running 1.3-1.4. vrm squealing 1300+Core. I have not even touched the volatge yet.

 

ur at 5.2ghz and haven't touched the voltage? o,0 I doubt you'll gain much more on the top end as the gpus are what carrying that FPS rating. Still, would love to see an updated chart once you find your top :)

 

my last post ending wasn't directed at you, it was just a generalized "rant"? for others to read, because there still this misconception that more cores are "Always" better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

ur at 5.2ghz and haven't touched the voltage?

No, I was speaking of the GPU voltage and core frequencies these guys are using. Some of them have burned up cards for those 200+ FPS. I specifically pointed out that the "top 30" is not run at a a huge res. just 1680 x 1050.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

how many 2500 do ypu see here? (see #11)

attachicon.gifhow many.PNG

 

This is run at 1680 x 1050 BTW

 

 

Current OCC record holder

http://forums.overclockersclub.com/index.php?showtopic=190818&page=10&do=findComment&comment=2071890

 

 

I'm just sayin :tongue:

Nice graph. The 8350 beat out the 3570k, but also note the Amd chip was sporting 4 top end gfx cards as opposed to the 3570k's 3x gtx 670s

 

errr, notice how many quad SLI 680 and 690's with superclocked 3930's/3960's it's on top of.

 

Of course, AMD's cards always scaled better once you got into tri/quad setups. At least in my experience anyway :)

 

uh-huh....get the 2500.

 

I have no idea what point that was ....wait for it...trying to make.

The guys above me, and for that matter below, are all running 1.3-1.4. vrm squealing 1300+Core.(I talk to them) I have not even touched the volatge yet having them stacked on top of each other on air.This will however change after tomorrow. when I get to do the same. You still have not tried to explain the the other link AI put up there beating a 3960 + quad 680's by a healthy sum.

Sorry guy but your canned rehtoric is just overplayed.whenever an AQMD does well , there is always some crafted explanation.

 

 

 

 so spending ludicris amounts on a rig for other reasons besides bench-marking is just plain dumb. A good 8350/3570k and 2 decent gfx cards in sli/crossfire will have a gamer gaming very happily for a good while at 70+ FPS with ease.

 

Wrong again. it comes in very nicely for gaming at 5760 x 1080. You would be surprised how many games take advantage of more than four cores. I have a file full of CPU/GPU use graphs benchmarking.

 

i wasn't talking about multi monitor gaming as only Enthusiast gamers/power users run that kind of setup. Most gamers even hardcore gamers still only run 1 screen. Thats what that post was referring to, the "Mainstream"

Yes, I know the benefits and reasons for having a setup like yours to do what you want at ridiculous resolutions. I also know that there are games that take advantage of more then 4 cores. BUT, A 8350/3570k/3770k pair with 2 good gfx cards in sli/crossfire is more then enough for the "mainstream" gamer/pc user to achieve 70+ FPS in all modern games ATM.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...