i5 750 to AMD 8350 worth it?

[ALXAndy]

Andy, i wasn't doing like for like....In none of my posts have i mentioned like for like, my comparison on prices is pretty simple. You need a better board, one with decent VRMs 6+2 kind minimum for a decent potential overclock. Compared with Intel, where you can clock decently using a sub par H87 board, saving you money and bringing the price down inline with AMDs offering, you also have to up the cooling (more money)

You also keep banging on about the same 2 or 3 games, the same games where the i5 is what? margin of error behind or ahead lol, whereas in most games...because there's more than just Crysis 3, Farcry3 and BF4 currently out where they're not so heavily threaded Intel win, a lot.

Even in some heavily threaded games, Intel win....a lot.

What's becoming very clear of late is that 1 x Intel core, no matter how good, does not = two AMD cores. I really can't put it any simpler than that. Every time the cores are put to use the AMD will beat the quad core Intel.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with the board I chose for that CPU to 4.2ghz. At that speed it's more than fast enough.

As for banging on about those games? no, the I5 is not within the margin of error at all and that's what you seem to be struggling with. In Crysis 3, Far Cry 3 and so on it's out ahead by the margin it should be, which is the same margin you get with Cinebench and 3dmark Firestrike physics, given they all use all of the processor.

And then again we come back to price. £10 more than a 4670k CPU for a CPU that when used is most certainly faster for the board AND CPU. That's going to be a £60+ saving which would buy you an SSD, or, take you from a 7870 to a 7970. Yet still you seem to think that it's best to blow most of the budget on a CPU.

Madness.

 

[Martini1991]

Doesn't Moogleys report higher FPS in Crysis 3 with his 4670K over his FX83?

 

[ALXAndy]

wouldnt say that.
depends what you use the computer for.
normally the difference might be gaming and then again your hard pressed to take notice of difference if doing a double blind test.
so in all, equal with benefit of 8 cores. I view that agaisnt a 4930k which cost about 5 times as much.
multi gpu set ups tends to benefit from more cores.

all bets are off with Mantle and bf4 also.
might change the gpu/cpu gaming there
for a normal user, a 8350 is the price/performance value king IMO.
if you wont notice difference in use, why buy more expensive stuff?

Passmark is another benchmark that uses all of a CPU. Check this out for the 8320.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8320+Eight-Core

On stock clocks it sits right behind the I7 2600 but more importantly look at the dollar to performance chart. As of right now the 8320 is the world's best value CPU based on performance per dollar, yet there's god knows how many people trying to convince themselves otherwise.

Intel offer absolutely awful performance per pound, mostly because any of their affordable solutions are locked down tighter than a gnat's chuff.

 

[ALXAndy]

Doesn't Moogleys report higher FPS in Crysis 3 with his 4670K over his FX83?

Moogleys had issues from the get go. His firestrike score was dismal. Something isn't right with his rig, because everybody else in that thread did not have the issues he seems to be having.

 

[MOOGLEYS]

Moogleys had issues from the get go. His firestrike score was dismal. Something isn't right with his rig, because everybody else in that thread did not have the issues he seems to be having.

I'm not having any issues with my 8350 system. My overclocks are stable since plugging in the 4 pin power connector. I did mention this in the AMD overclocking thread.

My Firestrike Physics score on my 4670k @ 4.6Ghz and AMD 8350 @ 4.6Ghz is just about the same give or take a few points.

 

[Tonester0011]

I give up, can't do anything with blind fanboyism.

 

[ALXAndy]

I give up, can't do anything with blind fanboyism.

So when you argue with me and I won't agree with you (because a lot of what YOU have said is totally bias) you call me a fanboy.

I'm quite surprised because you come across as quite an intelligent chap, yet seem to be determined to rubbish the 83x0 cpus.

We talk about them being a good budget CPU. We then price up a budget board and CPU combo and you just price up one of the most expensive boards :S

The 8320 is great at 4.2ghz. I should know, mine ran at that speed for four months. Going to 4.5 doesn't really seem to make the performance any higher. And the same goes for the I5 4670k. 90% of those I've seen in people's rigs are running at a daily clock of 4.2ghz. Heck, most of the I5 3570ks I've seen run at similar clocks.

This thread was about going from a I5 750 to a 8350. Not going from a I5 750 to a quad core Intel. So don't call me a fanboy, given that you are the one displaying all of the traits. Go and recommend some Intel CPUs in a thread where some one is asking about them.

 

[ubersonic]

We talk about them being a good budget CPU. We then price up a budget board and CPU combo and you just price up one of the most expensive boards :S

I think his point there was that the FX-8 chips require a high end board to get decent overclocked whereas current Intel chips do not.

This thread was about going from a I5 750 to a 8350. Not going from a I5 750 to a quad core Intel. So don't call me a fanboy, given that you are the one displaying all of the traits. Go and recommend some Intel CPUs in a thread where some one is asking about them.

I think once it had been determined that going from an i5 750 to a 8350 was a waste it was then fair game for people to suggest alternatives :S

 

[ALXAndy]

I think his point there was that the FX-8 chips require a high end board to get decent overclocked whereas current Intel chips do not.

You don't need a high end board to get a reasonable overclock. Given the 8350 turbos to 4.2ghz on one core and 4ghz on all 8 then the 8320 running at 4.2ghz on eight cores is faster. So you immediately gain back the £30 difference.

Now if you're talking extreme overclocks such as 5ghz+ 24/7 clocks then yes, you would need a good board. However, that 'good board' costs a huge chunk less than the equivalent Intel. For example the best board bar none is the Crosshair V F Z and it costs £160. The best high end board for the 4670k is going to cost you £200+.

How many 4670ks have you seen running extreme clocks such as 5ghz on a daily basis? fact is most will only do 4.2ghz at acceptable temps and so forth so it's hardly any different.

Honestly it's so loaded in favour of Intel it's laughable. Go onto the web and basically price up the most expensive AM3+ parts you can to load pricing in your favour.

It's already been said that you can find an Asus board (the Evo or what not) for £80 that has 8+2 VRMs and will give you the 4.5ghz+ overclock. So that's less than £200 all in.

 

[Tonester0011]

Snip.

I'm unbias and i vote for the best value. The best value chip is the i5s, they perform against the 8320s, 8350s more consistently in a wider range of games.

If the OP stated the only games he plays are: Battlefield 4, Crysis 3 and Farcry 3...then yes, the AMD chips offer better value, only on those games (maybe 1 or 2 more!) Instead he said he uses just for gaming, and gaming in general is a huge swing to the lightly threaded, where your extra cores do not come into play and the single core performance is what counts.

Look at your highly rated CinebenchR15 thread, and look at the single thread performance. That's what counts for gaming, maybe in another couple of years when the new consoles have their feet firmly under the table will we see a huge influx of games being properly threaded to make use of the 8 cores, by that time new CPUs will be out that offer yet more performance...so it makes sense to buy for now and upgrade again in the future.

 

[ALXAndy]

I think once it had been determined that going from an i5 750 to a 8350 was a waste it was then fair game for people to suggest alternatives :S

Who determined that then? the Intel lot? funny that isn't it?

In all recent games (IE all of the games released this year) you've had three scenarios.

1. Indie games that require nothing to run.
2. 8 core supporting AAA titles on which the AMD chips are miles ahead on price to performance.
3. GPU bound titles that don't bother much with the CPU and would rather have SLI/CFX.

In the CPU bound games that need it the 8350 is miles ahead of the 750.

 

[MOOGLEYS]

My Asus Crosshair AM3+ board and Fx 8350 cpu was £312.98 inc Happily runs 4.6Ghz with good temps using Dark Rock pro 2

My MSI G45 Z87 Gaming board and 4670k was £281.97 inc also happily runs 4.6Ghz with good temps using Dark Rock pro 2

My MSI G45 z87 Gaming board and 4770k was £356.80 inc also happily runs 4.6Ghz with good temps using Dark Rock pro 2

Both boards offer pretty similar specs other than PCIe 3.0 on Z87. This makes the Z87 4670k setup £31 cheaper than the AMD. If you went for the 8320 the price would be about the same. Or add another £30 and you can have a 4770k setup.

 

[ALXAndy]

My Asus Crosshair AM3+ board and Fx 8350 cpu was £312.98 inc
My MSI G45 Z87 board and 4670k was £281.97 inc

Both boards offer pretty similar specs other than PCIe 3.0 on Z87. This makes the Z87 setup £31 cheaper than the AMD.

TBH the 8350 is a waste of money with that board. I paid £273 for the 8320 and Crosshair V FZ. Does your G45 support Triple SLI and so on? I doubt it dude.

 

[MOOGLEYS]

TBH the 8350 is a waste of money with that board. I paid £273 for the 8320 and Crosshair V FZ. Does your G45 support Triple SLI and so on? I doubt it dude.

Not intersted in triple sli as I run 7970 Matrix plats, The Z87 will take a pair but very very tight. On the 990fx two will not fit using my case (Fractal Arc Mid) if you want to use the 16x16 slots. The bottom card wedges against the power supply and it bends it upwards.

 

[Martini1991]

If you had tri sli you're looking at an i7 system and a better board.

 

[ALXAndy]

Not intersted in triple sli as I run 7970 Matrix plats, The Z87 will take a pair but very very tight. On the 990fx two will not fit using my case (Fractal Arc Mid) if you want to use the 16x16 slots. The bottom card wedges against the power supply and it bends it upwards.

I know you're not interested in it dude but the CHVFZ supports it, and Quadfire. Getting a Z87 board that supports that will cost you a small fortune. I'm just pointing out that people are really cheating when it comes to speccing up boards. Maybe inexperience with AMD boards? no idea.

 

[Tonester0011]

I know you're not interested in it dude but the CHVFZ supports it, and Quadfire. Getting a Z87 board that supports that will cost you a small fortune. I'm just pointing out that people are really cheating when it comes to speccing up boards. Maybe inexperience with AMD boards? no idea.

You seem to be clutching something in your right hand....some kind of straw.

Mate, if you're running 3 cards, you need a seriously strong CPU otherwise you're bottlenecking the **** out of them. Go as Kaap, he knows a thing or two about multi GPU setups.

 

[alex_123_fra]

You seem to be clutching something in your right hand....some kind of straw.

Mate, if you're running 3 cards, you need a seriously strong CPU otherwise you're bottlenecking the **** out of them. Go as Kaap, he knows a thing or two about multi GPU setups.

Controversial again, but I'd say in titles utilising all cores/threads, an overclocked 8320/8350 will be no more of a bottleneck than a 4770k.

 

[Martini1991]

Running quad gpu on amd isn't going to end well lol.
Hell, an i5 isn't going to have a great time.

 

[ALXAndy]

If you had tri sli you're looking at an i7 system and a better board.

EVGA probably do one tbh.. Z87 FTW = dual SLI.

Z87 classified does. One snag, it's £330 lol.