What is Best CPU , AMD FX-8??? versus INTEL i5 i7 range. For Gaming. Comparison's

David Bisset · 15 Feb 2015 at 19:36

Martini1991 said:
... Factually an FX can and does go from i5/i7 performance to i3 performance depending on the situation, that's not hyperbolic nonsense, that's just called cutting the crap.). ...

For less than an i3

Personally I'd go for an i5 if possible, but the 8320E certainly has it's place.

Martini1991 · 15 Feb 2015 at 19:39

David Bisset said:
For less than an i3

Personally I'd go for an i5 if possible, but the 8320E certainly has it's place.

For less than an i3? That's a bit of a blanket statement, given the very many different i3's and the very many different FX8 cores

(Pro tip, I hate blanket statements

)

The i3's overpriced, no arguments here.

But technically the FX83 can also perform under an i3 too in some cases

And I certainly do think the FX8320E has its place. There's no Intel CPU at the same price point I'd touch.

humbug · 15 Feb 2015 at 19:40

Martini1991 said:
Unless I'm mistaken, a budget has never been mentioned in this thread.

Also, by your logic, none of us should ever but anything more than an FX8320E ever (Because hey, none of us have infinite budget)

Hell, lets just not get higher end GPU's either for that extra performance.

Lets all sit on 1080p too while we're at it.

You could be correct however for this case, than an FX8320E and better GPU would be the objectively best option to take. But again, from what I see, you've just derped and went "AMD FTW!" despite the topic at hand.

And there it is again, insults and accusations... you just can't help yourself.

Martini1991 · 15 Feb 2015 at 19:42

humbug said:
And there it is again, insults and accusations... you just can't help yourself.

I obviously need some serious therapy sessions.

Okay, everything aside Humbug. Riddle me this.

Is it true, that an FX8320 can both beat an i5, and match an i7, but play second fiddle to an i3?

humbug · 15 Feb 2015 at 19:42

Martini1991 said:
I obviously need some serious therapy sessions.

You said it.

Martini1991 · 15 Feb 2015 at 19:43

Okay, everything aside Humbug. Riddle me this.

Is it true, that an FX8320 can both beat an i5, and match an i7, but play second fiddle to an i3?

humbug · 15 Feb 2015 at 19:45

Martini1991 said:
Okay, everything aside Humbug. Riddle me this.

Is it true, that an FX8320 can both beat an i5, and match an i7, but play second fiddle to an i3? No ifs or buts.

All of the above.

gpuerrilla · 15 Feb 2015 at 21:03

Still waiting for the budget on this thread. Why has the OP not responded, or is it a clever(ish) attempt to ignite a brand war that we are so excited about taking up posts on here?

Samantha1968 · 15 Feb 2015 at 21:53

Th0nt said:
Still waiting for the budget on this thread. Why has the OP not responded, or is it a clever(ish) attempt to ignite a brand war that we are so excited about taking up posts on here?

unfortunately been busy and not had a chance to view thread. It was a honest question of which was a better option of cpu. As intel are more expensive in general but i wanted to know if amd could beat intel cpu in capabilities and also how good it was for overclocking.

So just catching up on reading now.

theMilitant · 15 Feb 2015 at 22:04

This thread has made for an interesting read thus far. I was actually under the impression AMD cpus were not as competitive for gaming as Intel processors, but by the looks of some of these benchmarks they're a lot more competitive than I gave them credit for.

Deus Ex · 15 Feb 2015 at 22:07

i5/i7 all day RITP.

Samantha1968 · 15 Feb 2015 at 22:08

No real budget set at this point it varies from £600 to £900 depending on when i plan to purchase. I have looked at all the benchmark results and taken in comments. I see to pro intel and pro amd users and also see logic in if low budget better gpu and lower cpu. However i will take my time having a good look at benchmarks and comments and will then deside on the road i will choose.

I think we can close this thread here as there is more than enough information for me to work with and it was never intended on being a cpu war.

so thank you all for your responses.

gpuerrilla · 15 Feb 2015 at 22:44

theMilitant said:
This thread has made for an interesting read thus far. I was actually under the impression AMD cpus were not as competitive for gaming as Intel processors, but by the looks of some of these benchmarks they're a lot more competitive than I gave them credit for.

AMD are an option that's all. Cons are they will use more power, be technology from 2012, require good cooling and after a certain price point not be worth considering. If you are on a tight budget they can be used to base a serious PC for gaming and other uses.

Samantha1968 said:
unfortunately been busy and not had a chance to view thread. It was a honest question of which was a better option of cpu. As intel are more expensive in general but i wanted to know if amd could beat intel cpu in capabilities and also how good it was for overclocking.

There are many threads over the years here Samantha which is why you will get contrasting posts as it usually goes way off topic.

AMD are fun to (and) overclock pretty well. However if your budget does stretch to the £1000 area then you could build a great rig based on intel that will last you a good while!

Dave2150 · 15 Feb 2015 at 22:45

Samantha1968 said:
No real budget set at this point it varies from £600 to £900 depending on when i plan to purchase. I have looked at all the benchmark results and taken in comments. I see to pro intel and pro amd users and also see logic in if low budget better gpu and lower cpu. However i will take my time having a good look at benchmarks and comments and will then deside on the road i will choose.

I think we can close this thread here as there is more than enough information for me to work with and it was never intended on being a cpu war.

so thank you all for your responses.

Bear in mind if you go the AMD route - your buying very dated hardware (2-3 year old models). The motherboards lack many modern features. Maybe you won't use all these features straight away, though if you plan to keep your setup for a year or two, then you probably will use them.

Martini1991 · 15 Feb 2015 at 22:47

600 pound's AMD territory.
900's Intel territory.

humbug · 15 Feb 2015 at 23:34

Dave2150 said:
Bear in mind if you go the AMD route - your buying very dated hardware (2-3 year old models). The motherboards lack many modern features. Maybe you won't use all these features straight away, though if you plan to keep your setup for a year or two, then you probably will use them.

Did you look at AMD's Motherboards before you made that statement?

They are not lacking in features nor are they as old as you make out.

People wonder why Intel are expensive and getting more expensive.

Martini1991 · 15 Feb 2015 at 23:36

humbug said:
Did you look at AMD's Motherboards before you made that statement?

They are not lacking in features nor are they as old as you make out.

So, the AM3+ platform isn't almost 4 years old?

humbug · 15 Feb 2015 at 23:39

Martini1991 said:
So, the AM3+ platform isn't almost 4 years old?

So?

Martini1991 · 15 Feb 2015 at 23:41

humbug said:
So?

So his statement is correct.
It's an old platform, there's been no refresh (Like Z77/Z68 being refreshments of 1150). It's stagnated since it launched.

The CPU's for AM3+ are coming up 4 years for the BD's and 3 years for the PD's.

Not that I think the age of the platform is an issue specifically. Rather the actual platform. But you're jumping into AMD defense mode again.

humbug · 15 Feb 2015 at 23:42

Martini1991 said:
So his statement is correct.
It's an old platform, there's been no refresh (Like Z77/Z68 being refreshments of 1150). It's stagnated since it launched.

The CPU's for AM3+ are coming up 4 years for the BD's and 3 years for the PD's.

No its not correct, he said AMD's Motherboards lack features.

The age of the socket has little to do with it, and you know that.

What features do they lack?