AMD FX-8120

Orcvader · 25 Jul 2012 at 15:17

keithfa26 said:
Im acc intel at heart :L Only ever owed 1 amd cpu? currently typing this on a desktop with an i5 2500k inside sooo

No reason to upgrade from the 2500K, it's one of the best gaming chips on the market at the moment. If you're really serious about video editing then maybe jump to the 3770K, that pretty much crushes the entire FX line. Otherwise, wait for 2-3 years for Skylake/mount (and whatever AMD CPU is out if it can compete with Intel) if you want to see some proper performance gains.

Martini1991 · 25 Jul 2012 at 15:20

keithfa26 said:
Like i said i want to build an amd system also? And ive not once said amd is better than intel they both have there Advantages and disses But just wanting to know the best amd Cpu for gaming/Rendering

But that's illogical.

AMD's best all around CPU is the Phenom II 1100T.
Not their FX6, not their FX8, but their over 2 year old Thuban stuff.

Don't see the disadvantages of Intel personally, consistently high performance.
AMD have consistently less than Intel performance, with the hex thuban performing decently when OC'ed in heavily threaded situations.

passey89 · 25 Jul 2012 at 15:27

i have an amd 1075t and if you want performance and best value for money 2500k / 3500k if you want a lot cheaper then only go for AMD really you can get a full setup for around £150 where as intel is £300.

But if you can afford it go intel seriously you will see the difference

Orcvader · 25 Jul 2012 at 15:40

passey89 said:
i have an amd 1075t and if you want performance and best value for money 2500k / 3500k if you want a lot cheaper then only go for AMD really you can get a full setup for around £150 where as intel is £300.

But if you can afford it go intel seriously you will see the difference

But even then, the i3s/Pentiums outperforms AMD in the same price bracket, since most games only use 2 cores efficiently.

rodrigox · 25 Jul 2012 at 22:14

This bulldozer is stronger than a Intel i5 750?? I mean in single thread means.

Smoogels · 25 Jul 2012 at 22:22

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=109

According to the benchmarks the bulldozer lacks behind most things

JonSmith · 25 Jul 2012 at 22:23

rodrigox said:
This bulldozer is stronger than a Intel i5 750?? I mean in single thread means.

Depends on clock speed, my 955 BE is faster when clocked at 3.7 GHz vs the 750 at stock. Doesn't really mean anything, considering you can clock the i5 to 3.7 GHz as well.

rodrigox · 25 Jul 2012 at 23:02

Smoogels said:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=109

According to the benchmarks the bulldozer lacks behind most things

Even more shame since that bulldozer is the 8 core one. So the FX 4100 should lose by far.

Does the i5 750 is so much slower clock to clock vs 2500k and 3570k?

Martini1991 · 25 Jul 2012 at 23:26

rodrigox said:
This bulldozer is stronger than a Intel i5 750?? I mean in single thread means.

Not by a long shot.

Although people can't read charts, in that review of the FX8 versus the i5 760 the FX8 comes on top more than half the time, obviously there's more factors involved, but mighty facepalm people, L2R "LOW IS BETTER"!

rodrigox · 26 Jul 2012 at 01:29

Martini1991 said:
Not by a long shot.

Although people can't read charts, in that review of the FX8 versus the i5 760 the FX8 comes on top more than half the time, obviously there's more factors involved, but mighty facepalm people, L2R "LOW IS BETTER"!

Actualy its not fair to compare them both, the fair thing would be the 4 Core version of bulldozer which is FX 4100. And that CPU gets hardly owned by i5 750...

Martini1991 · 26 Jul 2012 at 08:39

rodrigox said:
Actualy its not fair to compare them both, the fair thing would be the 4 Core version of bulldozer which is FX 4100. And that CPU gets hardly owned by i5 750...

I'm not sure why that'd be fair to test?
Price wise an FX8120 is around 105 quid with the 20 quid off.

rodrigox · 26 Jul 2012 at 14:03

Martini1991 said:
I'm not sure why that'd be fair to test?
Price wise an FX8120 is around 105 quid with the 20 quid off.

For a 8 Core processor and with higher clock he has obligation to win in every tests vs the i5 750... Even tho the i5 750 can win in some..

Martini1991 · 26 Jul 2012 at 14:05

rodrigox said:
For a 8 Core processor and with higher clock he has obligation to win in every tests vs the i5 750... Even tho the i5 750 can win in some..

The FX has a gender?

That also doesn't make any sense as to how comparing those two CPU's aren't fair, in that comparison the FX comes out on top by quite a distance, obviously there's factors involved and I'd never take an FX over a lynfield.

Orcvader · 26 Jul 2012 at 14:23

You're also forgetting the FX4 and FX8 should be able to overclock to similiar speeds anyway. Compare that with the overclocked i5 and the i5 will still get better framerates in games...

PhoenixUK · 26 Jul 2012 at 15:00

Moved from 3.4gz 955BE to 4.1gz 3770k with whole new setup not long ago and to be honest I don't see much difference in gaming. The good thing now tho is that I can stream full HD, have youtube and 10 other apps open and play at the same time but then if you're not planning on doing that and just want a pc for gaming I don't see any reason to pay even 50quid extra.

I guess it depends how many/which parts are you exactly getting, how much for and what you'll be using them for.

Orcvader · 26 Jul 2012 at 15:07

It depends on the game you're playing though, I moved from a 965BE @ 3.8ghz to a 2600K @ 4.4ghz and noticed smoother framerates on some of the more CPU bound games. GPU bounded ones had no difference until I jumped from a 5770 to a 6850 (and now a 7950).

Marine-RX179 · 26 Jul 2012 at 15:12

PhoenixUK said:
Moved from 3.4gz 955BE to 4.1gz 3770k with whole new setup not long ago and to be honest I don't see much difference in gaming. The good thing now tho is that I can stream full HD, have youtube and 10 other apps open and play at the same time but then if you're not planning on doing that and just want a pc for gaming I don't see any reason to pay even 50quid extra.

I guess it depends how many/which parts are you exactly getting, how much for and what you'll be using them for.

Probably because the game YOU play would use all 4 cores and/or not very CPU demanding, or your graphic card isn't faster enough to benefit from the faster CPU; or you just plain not very good at noticing the difference. You can't claim there's no difference unless you actually got frame rate and GPU usage figures to compare before and after, like someone has done in one of the thread in the CPU forum. If you play games like mmos or Total Wars series or Starcraft II, the difference would be HUGE.

Martini1991 · 26 Jul 2012 at 15:15

Oh God yeah, Rome Total War modded, I'd hate to run that on an AMD

Alkalinepro5 · 26 Jul 2012 at 15:41

PhoenixUK said:
Moved from 3.4gz 955BE to 4.1gz 3770k with whole new setup not long ago and to be honest I don't see much difference in gaming. The good thing now tho is that I can stream full HD, have youtube and 10 other apps open and play at the same time but then if you're not planning on doing that and just want a pc for gaming I don't see any reason to pay even 50quid extra.

I guess it depends how many/which parts are you exactly getting, how much for and what you'll be using them for.

You wouldn't...

Everyone who says you would have seen a big difference is talking BS. No game needs anything more than a Phenom II!

Bacon? · 26 Jul 2012 at 16:06

Alkalinepro5 said:
You wouldn't...

Everyone who says you would have seen a big difference is talking BS. No game needs anything more than a Phenom II!

Most RTS games and some MMO's such as EVE Online require a very good processor. I know my CPU (stock ivy i5) gets pretty damn high on how much CPU is being used on it. Compared to my old Pentium 4 this is a god.