As the title says, I stumbled across the Intel CPU on well known auction site and it finishes in a few hours a can get it for about £100 with postage, and a compatible motherboard would set me back another £100ish. Would said proccesor be a better for gaming than my fx8350? Particularly in battlefield1
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
i7 4820k A better CPU for gaming than fx8350
- Thread starter DONOHUE07
- Start date
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,371
- Location
- Dormanstown.
Yes it would be.
But I'd be skeptical it's going to sell at 100 pound.
But I'd be skeptical it's going to sell at 100 pound.
4820K is around 40-50% faster in BF1 (depending on resolution and how CPU bound you are in any given situation). In general in gaming its a mixed story as some games are more CPU bound than others and depends a bit on resolution and GPU you are using but overall its much quicker for gaming. There are some specific situations like if you do a lot of streaming (twitch type stuff) + voice comms + companion programs as well as the game where you might find the fx8350 a little smoother.
Probably faster in most DX11 games. I would think a lot will come down to clock speed. In DX12 and Vulcan the 8 core FX might be little faster. When you add the price of the motherboard to quad i7 I don't think it would be worthwhile.
Last edited:
where are you finding a reliable source of X79 motherboards for £100??
Decent X79 boards are rare as![/QUOTE]
The IT technician in my work has a few gigabyte boards for sale, can't remember the models I'm afraid.
I'm not bothering now, at this point I'm waiting on intels and amds new cpus and seeing which is best for gaming
Decent X79 boards are rare as![/QUOTE]
The IT technician in my work has a few gigabyte boards for sale, can't remember the models I'm afraid.
I'm not bothering now, at this point I'm waiting on intels and amds new cpus and seeing which is best for gaming
The lower end gigabyte X79 boards are a bit meh 
on other platforms/days gone by the UD3, etc. boards were just feature lite versions of the more expensive boards with the same high quality components, etc. but (probably due to the expense of the X79 platform) on X79 they use cheaper components, less power phases, etc. than the higher end boards and suffer a little because of it in hindsight I'd have gone for a higher end board. Not too big an issue with my 4820K but I'd have to be a bit more careful with a 6+ core, etc.
on other platforms/days gone by the UD3, etc. boards were just feature lite versions of the more expensive boards with the same high quality components, etc. but (probably due to the expense of the X79 platform) on X79 they use cheaper components, less power phases, etc. than the higher end boards and suffer a little because of it in hindsight I'd have gone for a higher end board. Not too big an issue with my 4820K but I'd have to be a bit more careful with a 6+ core, etc.The lower end gigabyte X79 boards are a bit meh
Great post, very informative thank you, I'll pass this on to a friend thinking of picking one up
I wouldn't say it was a massive negative but you do have to be a bit wary - some of them latterly had BIOS updates to limit current, etc. as some of the earlier revision boards the power supply stage would literally go up in smoke if you tried to run one of the more current demanding CPUs on it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 3,212
- Location
- Solihull
The 4820k is a slightly better but more power hungry 3770K.
Still a very capable cpu and well worth the £200 with a board.
You could spend a lot more on more recent hardware with more up to date features but you'll be spending a lot for quite little gain.
I'd spend a bit more on a 3930k or 4930k though personally.
Still a very capable cpu and well worth the £200 with a board.
You could spend a lot more on more recent hardware with more up to date features but you'll be spending a lot for quite little gain.
I'd spend a bit more on a 3930k or 4930k though personally.
Ok my friend ended up buying said CPU for £65 off the bay, and got the motherboard on trial to see if he's happy or not, he didn't have a GPU so I went round and brought my 290 with me, before I did some quick in game benchmarking of my fx8350/290 (both stock), tomb raider, gta5 and Gears of War4. Got to my friends we set it all up 'bread board style'. This old cheap relic blew my fx8350 away! All 3 games saw an increase of 1O+ FPS, gta5 seeing up to 19.. NINETEEN FPS more on one point in the benchmark!
I now people say the fx8350 is a poor gaming CPU and until earlier today I defended it saying 'it's cheaper and there's nothing it won't play' but oh my I have been so wrong. As soon as Intel release there new i7 my AMD is going in the bin...
I now people say the fx8350 is a poor gaming CPU and until earlier today I defended it saying 'it's cheaper and there's nothing it won't play' but oh my I have been so wrong. As soon as Intel release there new i7 my AMD is going in the bin...
That's not really a big jump in performance. Can you throw that 8350 in my direction. I know a kid that would be very great full of the upgrade.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,480
- Location
- Planet Earth
Emm,the Core i7 4820K was $332 at launch and is an IB chip. The FX8350 was $195 at launch.
The Core i7 4820K at launch required far more expensive motherboards and quad channel DDR3 too.
So,a CPU which cost more than an FX8350 and was released nearly six months later is faster??
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Core_i7/Intel-Core i7-4820K.html
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-FX-Series FX-8350.html
For a 50% increase in launch price over the FX8350 plus the more expensive RAM and motherboards,I would be shocked if a IB based Core i7 4820K didn't actually beat an FX8350.
In fact in games like BF1 my Xeon E3 1230 V2 apparently is faster than a Core i5 6600K which is three generations newer.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 10,113
- Location
- Gibraltar
The ddr3 quad weren't that expensive, 16g Sammy greens going for £80 new back then.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 3,212
- Location
- Solihull
It's actually newer that the FX, by about a year.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,480
- Location
- Planet Earth
Still cheaper to buy dual channel and also lets not forget the cost of the X79 motherboards too.
So it was 60% more expensive new,had more expensive motherboards,more expensive RAM and came out after the FX8350. I would be surprised if it wasn't faster.
OTH,£65 for a CPU of that level is good going - now an equivalent Core i7 on either the consumer or HEDT platforms is over £300!!