i5 3570k or new amd trinity

Martini1991 · 1 Oct 2012 at 14:33

Ha, no need to be confused.
For you the i5 3570k would still be the better CPU.

lovelyhead · 1 Oct 2012 at 14:36

eddyr said:
not when you have an equal oc headroom on a higher performance baseline at stock for the i5.

But the AMD will be substantially cheaper.

Martini1991 · 1 Oct 2012 at 14:39

lovelyhead said:
But the AMD will be substantially cheaper.

It isn't at all though.
Definitely not when you have to upgrade it first.

Buy AMD if you think it's best for you, just don't go telling us about the value argument.

With the headroom the i5 Ivy's have, they may even last to a point PCI-E 2.0 is a bottleneck. Not a problem, they've got PCI-E 3.0. AMD owners? Nope.

lovelyhead · 1 Oct 2012 at 14:42

Martini1991 said:
Because I don't want to bottleneck my 7970 with an awful FX CPU and my 3D performance would be abysmal?
Also you'd have like 40% headroom left in the tank in the i5.
So when the AMD user has to blow another load on upgrading their CPU and Motherboard likely, I can continue to use my i5.

Take the i7's launched back in 2008, they're lasting fine (They also OC'ed a massive amount), but the Phenom II's launched in 2009?(They struggled to get 4GHZ stable consistently for a long time, took a silicon revision and it still wasn't consistent) Bottlenecking GPU's left right and centre.

AMD's "value" argument is fallible these days.

You told me though that a stock 2500K won't be a bottleneck paired with a good GPU at 1080p. If the AMD CPU can match the stock i5 then why spend more?

Martini1991 · 1 Oct 2012 at 14:44

lovelyhead said:
You told me though that a stock 2500K won't be a bottleneck paired with a good GPU at 1080p. If the AMD CPU can match the stock i5 then why spend more?

Because the i5 has 40% left in the tank.
I said a Stock i5, I never said anything about AMD, other than their claim is probably due to an OC'ed 5800 matching the i5 in some situations (Possibly some in gaming) But doesn't at all mean it'll mirror i5 performance.

And you've completely ignored all about the X58 against AM2+ Deneb.
Rigs from 2009 on AM2+ with a Phenom II 940 need upgrading now to prevent bottlenecking GPU's (Likely they'll be upgrading to Intel) whereas Intel owners who bought i7 920's etc in 2008 still have perfectly fine performance and don't really need upgrading.

Remind me again how AMD is better value when you have to upgrade first?

lovelyhead · 1 Oct 2012 at 14:46

Martini1991 said:
It isn't at all though.
Definitely not when you have to upgrade it first.

Buy AMD if you think it's best for you, just don't go telling us about the value argument.

With the headroom the i5 Ivy's have, they may even last to a point PCI-E 2.0 is a bottleneck. Not a problem, they've got PCI-E 3.0. AMD owners? Nope.

Starting from my position where I need a new motherboard and CPU whether I go Intel or AMD it will be nearly £100 cheaper to go with the AMD CPU.

I haven't made up my mind yet. I will wait for the reviews but it is looking like the AMD CPU will be good enough a match for a GTX 670. A near £100 saving is not to be sniffed at.

Martini1991 · 1 Oct 2012 at 14:47

It won't be 100 pound cheaper to go AMD at all.
You're literally ignoring everything.

You'll be pushing a 5800k to the balls to not bottleneck a GTX670, come next GPU? Oh wait, you're bottlenecking it.

An i3 3220 at sub 100 quid (Likely mirroing the 5800k price) wouldn't bottleneck a GTX670 while costing the same amount, using less power.

lovelyhead · 1 Oct 2012 at 15:03

Martini1991 said:
It won't be 100 pound cheaper to go AMD at all.
You're literally ignoring everything.

You'll be pushing a 5800k to the balls to not bottleneck a GTX670, come next GPU? Oh wait, you're bottlenecking it.

An i3 3220 at sub 100 quid (Likely mirroing the 5800k price) wouldn't bottleneck a GTX670 while costing the same amount, using less power.

It costs about £250 to go the Intel route versus perhaps around the £150 mark for AMD.

How do you know the AMD CPU will be struggling when there haven't been any reviews (I'm not saying you are wrong).

I don't think that I would have to upgrade a 670 for quite some time as there isn't anything coming that would push a 670 at 1080p.

I am looking at the AMD CPU as is and not with an eye to upgrading.

eddyr · 1 Oct 2012 at 15:11

You need to take into account the longevity of the system also.

The only saving grace to the setup scenario is that games will gain better multithreaded support with time. Unfortunatley the i5 will by default also benefit.

Speculatively, if the A10 5800K is ~ £90-100 (which seems realistic lower bound- unlikely to be cheaper) it will be more than £50-60 for a decent board to reliably push that chip to its limits to comfortably match i5 perfromance.

Anyhow we've yet to see any comprehensive reviews so, this is all a bit pointless untill we've got hard data.

Martini1991 · 1 Oct 2012 at 15:14

lovelyhead said:
It costs about £250 to go the Intel route versus perhaps around the £150 mark for AMD.

What?
It doesn't cost 250 quid for the Intel route at all.
You can get an i3 3220 and board for 135ish.
i5 3330 and board for about 175ish.

Seriously, I give up.

nitram100 · 1 Oct 2012 at 15:15

Martini1991 said:
Also you'd have like 40% headroom left in the tank in the i5.
So when the AMD user has to blow another load on upgrading their CPU and Motherboard likely, I can continue to use my i5.

This is the reason I left AMD and just bought an i5 3570k, it will last me 2 GPU upgrades without bottle necking or not by much. I found with AMD that when I upgraded my graphics card, I ended up having to change processor and motherboard as well. I could never buy a gfx card and be done with it because the AMD CPU was always bottle necking, this has happened in my 2 previous builds involing a Phenom 955 and an Athlon X2 5200+.

Boomstick777 · 1 Oct 2012 at 15:16

For gaming at 1280 x 720 / 1366 x 768 / 1680 x 1050 < an AMD Trinity build would be sufficient without a dedicated GPU. Save a lot of money to..

At 1920 x 1080 and above an Intel build + dedicated GPU would be a better build

Martini1991 · 1 Oct 2012 at 15:19

Boomstick777 said:
For gaming at 1280 x 720 / 1366 x 768 / 1680 x 1050 < an AMD Trinity build would be sufficient without a dedicated GPU. Save a lot of money to..

At 1920 x 1080 and above an Intel build + dedicated GPU would be a better build

You can get a G620 and 7750 with board for likely the same price/ little bit more than you can 5800k and board, in the same way you can get a board, 6670 and G620 for about the same price as a 3870k and board.

The Trinity APU isn't going to best that G620 and 7750 combination.

Was my problem was Llano, they're sufficient, but their price outweights the benefit.

The IGP in Trinity is akin to a GT640 (Well, it's a fair bit less)

lovelyhead · 1 Oct 2012 at 15:21

Martini1991 said:
What?
It doesn't cost 250 quid for the Intel route at all.
You can get an i3 3220 and board for 135ish.
i5 3330 and board for about 175ish.

Seriously, I give up.

I am talking about the 2500K. That would cost around the £250 mark.

That is hopefully what the AMD CPU will compare to when overclocked.

Martini1991 · 1 Oct 2012 at 15:22

lovelyhead said:
I am talking about the 2500K. That would cost around the £250 mark.

That is hopefully what the AMD CPU will compare to.

I'd be spending less than 200 and having an i5 3570 and board, not 250 quid.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 1 Oct 2012 at 15:22

LOL,at this thread. People are debating the performance of a CPU which is being released in the next few days,probably tomorrow. Wait for the reviews. Simples.

I am also interested to see how well the A10 overclocks too. Hopefully,Gibbo and the OcUK store crowd can do a few benchmarks for us!!

Martini1991 · 1 Oct 2012 at 15:23

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
LOL,at this thread. People are debating the performance of CPU which is being released in the next few days,probably tomorrow. Wait for the reviews. Simples.

But you can clearly state without a shadow of a doubt it isn't going to have i5 performance at stock as it stands out of the box, it just isn't going to happen.

Boomstick777 · 1 Oct 2012 at 15:25

lovelyhead said:
I am talking about the 2500K. That would cost around the £250 mark.

That is hopefully what the AMD CPU will compare to when overclocked.

Wishful thinking the A10 5800K comparing to the 2500K

.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 1 Oct 2012 at 15:25

Martini1991 said:
But you can clearly state without a shadow of a doubt it isn't going to have i5 performance at stock as it stands out of the box, it just isn't going to happen.

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
What is the main use of the PC you are going to build??

They are in different price bands so are not really comparable TBH. The Trinity A10-5800K will probably be around £90 to £100 and a Core i5 3570K is around £170 to £180.

The reviews are out this week for the Trinity A10-5800K,so we will soon get to know how well it performs at stock and when overclocked.

If you need a decent IGP and/or a CPU which after some overclocking should be reasonable,the A10-5800K looks a good alterntive in its price band.

However,the Core i5 3570K has a worse IGP but is simply a faster CPU,which is better suited for a high end gaming system.

First post in the thread.

Stop,being so defensive.

Martini1991 · 1 Oct 2012 at 15:27

I'm not being defensive, you said ;
LOL,at this thread. People are debating the performance of CPU which is being released in the next few days,probably tomorrow

I was giving reason for why there's no LOL about it.
Don't be so inconsistent then Cat, herp derp.