i5 750 to AMD 8350 worth it?

PhoenixUK · 11 Oct 2013 at 13:33

What FPS do you get? Just because the CPU runs at 100% doesn't mean anything. I've played 10+ yr old games which take my 3770k to 100% just because they're badly coded..

elrasho · 11 Oct 2013 at 13:34

At 1080p everything on Ultra and 2 x MSAA with SBAO I get around 65 fps

Martini1991 · 11 Oct 2013 at 13:40

elrasho said:
OK I might try overclocking it more, I just used the Ai tweaker in the BIOS which automatically overclocked to 3.7Ghz.

Just thought what if I got a second hand i7 860?

You should be able to get a second hand i7 860 for near 100 quid to be honest.

Overclock one of them, and you've still got a very capable chip.

Th0nt said:
+1. The 8320 will save you £30 to put toward a cooler but as los says check out the game on release before judging.

The 4770k is £240 alone and should not be directly compared to a £100-150 CPU.

Factor in he's coming from an i5 750, the FX83 simply is not worth jumping to.

PhoenixUK · 11 Oct 2013 at 13:45

Well, anything more than that is pointless as the game becomes totally fluid around 45-50fps. Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see a point spending 250quid to move from 100% smoooth gameplay to 105% smooth gameplay : ). You'll maybe get jump to 75-80fps at best but it won't be noticeable in the game or to the eye unless you look at the fps counter instead of playing.

Just my 2p

elrasho · 11 Oct 2013 at 13:46

I'm gonna hunt for an i7 860, if I can pick one up for £90 ish and sell my i5 for £50 ish I'll be happy

Martini1991 · 11 Oct 2013 at 13:47

PhoenixUK said:
Well, anything more than that is pointless as the game becomes totally fluid around 45-50fps. Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see a point spending 250quid to move from 100% smoooth gameplay to 105% smooth gameplay : ). You'll maybe get jump to 75-80fps at best but it won't be noticeable in the game or to the eye unless you look at the fps counter instead of playing.

Just my 2p

Or have a 120HZ monitor.

PhoenixUK · 11 Oct 2013 at 13:47

and get 3fps extra which you could get by OCing the cpu by 300mhz more, totally worth it right ? ; )

elrasho · 11 Oct 2013 at 14:04

PhoenixUK said:
and get 3fps extra which you could get by OCing the cpu by 300mhz more, totally worth it right ? ; )

I know what you mean but I can't have my fps dip below 60 no matter what's going on screen. With my i5 it does dip sometimes. One thing I've not looked into doing is overclocking my GTX680 but I hear BF4 is a more CPU intensive game hence my focus on CPU.

Martini1991 · 11 Oct 2013 at 14:05

Try overclocking the i5 further, and overclocking the 680.

elrasho · 11 Oct 2013 at 14:20

Martini1991 said:
Try overclocking the i5 further, and overclocking the 680.

Will do, seen this guide will give it a bash tonight

gpuerrilla · 11 Oct 2013 at 17:34

elrasho said:
will give it a bash tonight

elrasho · 11 Oct 2013 at 17:44

Overclocked to 4Ghz just by increasing the BCLK to 200Mhz and CPU Ratio from 19 to AUTO

What stress test should I use to test its stable?

Threepwood · 11 Oct 2013 at 17:46

Simple answer is if you are going to be playing BF4 a lot, then... why not? Go for it.

elrasho · 11 Oct 2013 at 17:51

Threepwood said:
Simple answer is if you are going to be playing BF4 a lot, then... why not? Go for it.

heh heh good answer, played for 15 mins my maximum temperature was 60c on all 4 cores. I don't see the point of overclocking anymore, my RAM is running at 1600Mhz with 9-9-9-24 cycle is that good?

ALXAndy · 11 Oct 2013 at 17:52

Martini1991 said:
For an FX83XX to get the same core for core performance as your 3.7GHZ, you're looking at like 4.5GHZ.

LOL sorry dude but you're seriously having a laugh with that.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1333256

There's an I5 750 running 3.8ghz and look at the Firestrike Physics score ! It sucks monkey balls

The 8350 IMO will offer up double the performance of the 750. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the 8350 had the same or a higher IPC only with double the cores.

gpuerrilla · 11 Oct 2013 at 17:55

elrasho said:
my RAM is running at 1600Mhz with 9-9-9-24 cycle is that good?

Yes they are tight timings.

Martini1991 · 11 Oct 2013 at 18:05

ALXAndy said:
LOL sorry dude but you're seriously having a laugh with that.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/1333256

There's an I5 750 running 3.8ghz and look at the Firestrike Physics score ! It sucks monkey balls

The 8350 IMO will offer up double the performance of the 750. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the 8350 had the same or a higher IPC only with double the cores.

/Facepalm.

Core for core.
Core for core.

Keep reading until you understand what it means.

Ergo, 1 core of an FX83, does not equate the same level of performance as one core of his 3.7GHZ i5, unless you're higher clocked, because, the IPC is lower.
And most games don't use more than 4 cores, so even though you can get the same level performance core for core, you're going to be at pretty much the same end performance, so the upgrade is moot.

If you were encoding all day long, sure, the FX83 is a decent upgrade over the i5 750.

ALXAndy · 11 Oct 2013 at 18:09

Martini1991 said:
/Facepalm.

Core for core.
Core for core.

Keep reading until you understand what it means.

I understand what it means perfectly well dude

The I5 750 when tested comes out about level with my old Xeon @ 3.4ghz. IE around mid 6000s in Firestrike Physics. As such I can safely compare it roughly in Crysis 3* and I can tell you that my FPS doubled at minimums going 8 cores.

* Obviously I'm going to use what I see as a good test of a CPU in gaming. I use Crysis 3 in the same way I would use, say, a stress test like Prime 95. So long as games support the FX into the future then the results will be about the same. The I5 750 IMO is not suitable for next gen high end gaming. Just as my Xeon wasn't.

And you can IPC all you like when a game engine is crying for 8 cores. Then it's about the CPU as a whole package, which is the direction we're going in.

Martini1991 · 11 Oct 2013 at 18:11

So, the OP should sidegrade for 99/100 games, when he's got a CPU that's perfectly capable for them already.

That's cracking advice that is.

And you obviously don't know what it means.
Your Xeon was a locked CPU.

I'll just leave you to it, I haven't got the will in me anymore.

ALXAndy · 11 Oct 2013 at 18:16

Martini1991 said:
So, the OP should sidegrade for 99/100 games, when he's got a CPU that's perfectly capable.

That's cracking advice that is.

Crysis 3 on a CPU that scores 6000 odd in Firestrike Physics.

Crysis 3 on 8320 @ 4.6ghz.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPVhSYYnpgc

83x0 = 3570k clock per clock when both are supported fully. If you want a standard for how they work when supported properly? Cinebench, FS Physics, etc.

However I'm going on the next gen games here. And they'll all support 8 cores and perform around equal with the 4670k. How can you possibly even think that's a side grade?

You can add BF4 to that too. The 8 core AMDs muller the I5 750.