amd or intel for gaming cpu if not overclocking?

Warbie · 25 Sep 2013 at 12:31

As the title says really - is there any reason to go for a more expensive intel cpu/mobo if running everything at stock?

Cheers.

Martini1991 · 25 Sep 2013 at 12:35

The problem is, the AMD needs a more expensive board to even run at stock in the case of the FX83.

It depends on your budget really for what's better for you though.

swiftmetal · 25 Sep 2013 at 12:45

At stock i would personally go for intel just because amd dont start hitting the butter zone untill you over clock them.

Somthing like this

YOUR BASKET
1 x Intel Core i5-4440 3.10GHz (Haswell) Socket LGA1150 Processor - Retail £143.99
Total : £153.59 (includes shipping : £8.00).

Just because the fx83** has more corse does not make it faster clock per clock intel is far better.

Warbie · 25 Sep 2013 at 12:45

Cheers for the reply, martini. It's not for me btw - it's for a friend's son. He won't be overclocking or doing anything fancy. He's been trying to play skyrim with onboard gfx until now and doesn't know this pc is coming - it would be nice to blow his mind with something uber. Any money saved on the cpu/mobo will be put towards getting the best gfx card possible.

swiftmetal said:
At stock i would personally go for intel just because amd dont start hitting the butter zone untill you over clock them.

Somthing like this

YOUR BASKET
1 x Intel Core i5-4440 3.10GHz (Haswell) Socket LGA1150 Processor - Retail £143.99
Total : £153.59 (includes shipping : £8.00).

Just because the fx83** has more corse does not make it faster clock per clock intel is far better.

Cheers for that.

Martini1991 · 25 Sep 2013 at 12:47

Then I'd probably just get a cheap h81 board and whatever i5 you can, it'll come in at under 200 quid.
Which is about the same price for an FX8320 and a 990 board.

Marine-RX179 · 25 Sep 2013 at 13:15

Martini1991 said:
Then I'd probably just get a cheap h81 board and whatever i5 you can, it'll come in at under 200 quid.
Which is about the same price for an FX8320 and a 990 board.

And minus/reduce the performance hit of the "oh no the games are not using all the cores I am not getting the full performance" situation with the FX8

Kobi · 25 Sep 2013 at 13:23

Yup, intel all the way!

Phixsator · 25 Sep 2013 at 15:21

Marine-RX179 said:
And minus/reduce the performance hit of the "oh no the games are not using all the cores I am not getting the full performance" situation with the FX8

Kobi said:
Yup, intel all the way!

Its funny how these types of comments always sneaks their way into these kinda threads.

to the OP, I would say what Martini has suggested is a good choice.

Marine-RX179 · 25 Sep 2013 at 15:47

Phixsator said:
Its funny how these types of comments always sneaks their way into these kinda threads.

You do realise what I said is actually is based on the reality of things, rather than "people blindly recommending Intel" as you try to imply?

It ain't my fault that AMD is splitting the performance of their CPU over 8 cores, and 95%+ of the game uses 4 cores or less. I mean I loved my old Q6600 overclocked to 3.60GHz, but they doesn't mean I should ignore the fact that my 5850 was frequently bottlenecked in games that don't use the 3rd and/or 4th core.

FX8320 is a good CPU if we were to look at it as it is on its own as a piece of hardware, but unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world which all games will automatically use the whatever extra number of cores when available, and the number of threads which a game would use will always be limited by the game engine.

gpuerrilla · 25 Sep 2013 at 20:51

Maybe I get marine and martini confused but that's what I pointed out on another thread.

Anyway, at least Phixsator has an AMD build so some value can be taken for what he says. There seems to be a couple of other chaps with that setup too now so more input can be interesting.

I appreciate the information and highlights you give, my current mode of thought lies with if the FX boards were a chunk cheaper it would be a closer call.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 25 Sep 2013 at 21:13

Skyrim runs fine on a FX6300 running at stock(my mate has one with an HD7870XT and has put 50+ hours into the game),and the Gigabyte GA-970A-DS3P can be had for under £55 from multiple retailers and has VRM cooling.

Edit!!

More importantly has anyone bothered to ask what the specifications of the old PC are??

Kobi · 25 Sep 2013 at 21:32

Phixsator said:
Its funny how these types of comments always sneaks their way into these kinda threads.

Dont get me wrong, i love amd and as i've said before in other threads, i really hope they do well with steamroller, as almost a slight improvement will mean im jumping ship again and goin back to amd...

...but if someone asks whats better for gaming, you'd have to be super slow, or a full retard to say amd is better. Even amd boys will tell you intel is better. But thats not for one second saying amd's cpu's arent capable of playing games well, because they do. Its just intel do it better.

It really is a no-brainer. You're just being silly.

Now if he said "im on a budget of X, whats best?" then thats a different story.

gpuerrilla · 25 Sep 2013 at 22:39

Martini1991 said:
The problem is, the AMD needs a more expensive board to even run at stock in the case of the FX83.

It depends on your budget really for what's better for you though.

Martini asked at the start, the result is based upon the budget and what he already has.

pipson · 26 Sep 2013 at 01:23

I think it depends on your budget and what games you play. I first had a 6300 never OC and loved it. Handled everything just fine but i was on a budget i then went on to 8350 and loved it even more. I chose amd over intel simply cause its cheaper, i like AMD although i have nothing vs Intel, i find it very easy to OC amd cpus. And i like to multitask. Sometimes i would have 3 games open and tons of programs open and my 8350 handles it without a single problem.

Make · 26 Sep 2013 at 08:23

pipson said:
And i like to multitask. Sometimes i would have 3 games open and tons of programs open and my 8350 handles it without a single problem.

And so will any high-end Sandy, Ivy, or Haswell. What's the point?

gpuerrilla · 26 Sep 2013 at 08:31

Make said:
And so will any high-end Sandy, Ivy, or Haswell. What's the point?

He meant that his machine handles this just fine, he never had a dig at intel - get a grip!

Make · 26 Sep 2013 at 08:32

I just detected some "Many cores is better for multi-tasking" agenda there. Maybe I am seeing things.

Jaswan · 26 Sep 2013 at 19:36

I was kind of in the same situation myself (although i do intent to overclock)

if you had asked last week then I had my mind set on a FX990 board and a 8350 Piledriver because it looked a good deal.

but after many reviews and much Goggling I ended up going for a I5 4670k (£175) and an Asus Z87-A (£110) which arrive tomorrow.

Jason.

gpuerrilla · 26 Sep 2013 at 19:41

Ouch that's just shy of £300! (it is a great balance though - not knocking that).

An FX seems to be coming in at 120 for processor and 90 for the OK mobo (sabertooth is better but not for another 30) so thats approx £210.

If you can stretch the extra £90 then hey-ho. I just hope the RAM/PSU/GPU are not sacrificed in any way.

Jaswan · 26 Sep 2013 at 19:53

yea, iv just looked, and considering its for a friends son, i cant see anything wrong with

ASRock 990FX Extreme3 AMD 990FX (Socket AM3+) DDR3 ATX Motherboard

and

AMD Piledriver FX-8 Eight Core 8320 Black Edition 3.50GHz (Socket AM3+) Processor - Retail

£203 for the pair. should be the base of a nice system for him.

Jason.