Paralysed with indecision: i7-4770 or FX-8350.

[murah]

4770K in my opinion would last longer, yes you pay for the premium but its worth it in the long run. Any OC on the 4770K will hands down beat the 8350 clock per clock or anything for anything!

OP was asking between the 4770K and the 8350 for a long term build, they want something capable that will last a long time (4+ years?) and handle VM ware

In my opinion in that case the 4770K is the only one he should be considering, the CPU comes with more than enough power at stock to handle VM ware, Any 4GHZ+ oc will be amazing, The CPU has longevity built into it (How many people are Still running the original i7's? Lots!) and when compared to the 8350 it just makes more sense.

Of course there are other variants but it comes down to the AMD vs Intel cpu age old argument and I'm sorry the AMD chips might be really good, but Intel is just better.

 

[ALXAndy]

Of course there are other variants but it comes down to the AMD vs Intel cpu age old argument and I'm sorry the AMD chips might be really good, but Intel is just better.

Yet more expensive for the performance. IE - if you ran say, Cinebench and offset the score with the cost AMD would beat them every time.

No one's disputing that Intel are faster when you compare across the entire range of their high end processors but you pay for it in droves. That, IMO does not make them better as you claim, as better would mean, literally, better in all areas. And they're not.

I find threads like these quite typical. Guy comes on wanting to spend say, £200, before you know it people are spending a grand for him. Guy asks about AMD, gets told to buy a X79 rig. Yet people seem to forget budget when making claims such as yours.

It's like me starting a thread "What GTX 760" and a load of snobs turning up telling me to get a Titan.

 

[gpuerrilla]

Which exactly will be determined by a series of tense financial negotiations with my wife.

This made me guffaw. Exactly what I had to do before ordering!

 

[Zeed]

4820K gets my+1
It is what i would buy myself at the moment.

 

[BurntProc]

4770K in my opinion would last longer, yes you pay for the premium but its worth it in the long run. Any OC on the 4770K will hands down beat the 8350 clock per clock or anything for anything!

OP was asking between the 4770K and the 8350 for a long term build, they want something capable that will last a long time (4+ years?) and handle VM ware

In my opinion in that case the 4770K is the only one he should be considering, the CPU comes with more than enough power at stock to handle VM ware, Any 4GHZ+ oc will be amazing, The CPU has longevity built into it (How many people are Still running the original i7's? Lots!) and when compared to the 8350 it just makes more sense.

Of course there are other variants but it comes down to the AMD vs Intel cpu age old argument and I'm sorry the AMD chips might be really good, but Intel is just better.

He cannot use a 4770k as it does not allow virtualisation. The fx83x0 should be on parr with or better than a 4770 for his tasks in terms of performance. Then it's a case of power consumption versus price?

 

[mmj_uk]

Yet more expensive for the performance. IE - if you ran say, Cinebench and offset the score with the cost AMD would beat them every time.

Cinebench isn't representative of day to day performance though, it simulates how a processor performs when fully maxed out which is a relatively rare situation.

I find threads like these quite typical. Guy comes on wanting to spend say, £200, before you know it people are spending a grand for him. Guy asks about AMD, gets told to buy a X79 rig. Yet people seem to forget budget when making claims such as yours.

He never quoted a price, he stated that he wanted a computer to last 6-7yrs and wasn't interested in overclocking.

It's like me starting a thread "What GTX 760" and a load of snobs turning up telling me to get a Titan.

That is no worse than someone asking for a CPU that will last 6-7yrs with no overclocking and being recommended to buy a FX8320 (which is nothing special at stock even by today's standards) just to a prove a point to everyone that they're the cheapest.

-----

I would say go with 4820K and a P9X79 (unless you really need the extra Deluxe features) and only upgrade to 4930K later if you find that you need it.

 

[Glanza]

4770k gets my vote, I was in your position between the two and I went with the 4770k after reading up on reviews and what seems to be the better chip for lasting the 4 years I need this rig too minimum

 

[ALXAndy]

Cinebench isn't representative of day to day performance though, it simulates how a processor performs when fully maxed out which is a relatively rare situation.

Computer parts are solely based on what they cost and how they perform. So to find out you would use something that will max them out.

He never quoted a price, he stated that he wanted a computer to last 6-7yrs and wasn't interested in overclocking.

And by the same pedantic means I can say - he never asked for a 4820k, if that's how you want it. What he did ask was I7-4770 or FX 8350. Yet there have been numerous recommendations for hardware other than what he asked for, most of which are far more expensive.

That is no worse than someone asking for a CPU that will last 6-7yrs with no overclocking and being recommended to buy a FX8320 (which is nothing special at stock even by today's standards) just to a prove a point to everyone that they're the cheapest.

What are you talking about? Seriously that makes no sense whatsoever. My analogy was - guy asks about hardware. He has two CPUs in mind. Then, completely ignoring that people go on to advise him to spend way more, much like you, down there.

-----

I would say go with 4820K and a P9X79 (unless you really need the extra Deluxe features) and only upgrade to 4930K later if you find that you need it.

I rest my case. Come to OCUK, where unless you want to buy the most expensive CPU, motherboard and GPU we won't bother to give you advice or answer your questions.

I'd love to see how long some one like you would last in sales.

 

[gpuerrilla]

In a nutshell:

Instead of a 8350, drop that down to an 8320. Clock similar but will save you
£30 (put toward better cooler or your GPU).

The 8320 is £120.
The non K 4770 is £240.

The motherboard going AMD will probably be more expensive (thank a budget intel), albeit good quality and excellent features should you want to overclock later.

The money spent on the better cooler and decent board will push you nearer to the price of an intel variety. I still think you would save some cash going AMD but it's down to your choice.

Both will do the job, if I was being honest in 4 yrs time everyone would snigger at what you bought anyway as you would be talking two generations of improvement in that time.

 

[Jono8]

It is pretty simple. Want best performance? Go 4770.
Want cheapest option? Go 8350.

make your choice

 

[Avenged7Fold]

4770K in my opinion would last longer, yes you pay for the premium but its worth it in the long run. Any OC on the 4770K will hands down beat the 8350 clock per clock or anything for anything!

OP was asking between the 4770K and the 8350 for a long term build, they want something capable that will last a long time (4+ years?) and handle VM ware

In my opinion in that case the 4770K is the only one he should be considering, the CPU comes with more than enough power at stock to handle VM ware, Any 4GHZ+ oc will be amazing, The CPU has longevity built into it (How many people are Still running the original i7's? Lots!) and when compared to the 8350 it just makes more sense.

Of course there are other variants but it comes down to the AMD vs Intel cpu age old argument and I'm sorry the AMD chips might be really good, but Intel is just better.

/Facepalm

He cant OC a 4770k because he cant get a 4770K

- K version has had VT-d disabled so non-K only.

The OP CAN overclock, just not using a 4770k. So many people recommending something he specifically said he cant get. If this is between an OC 8320 and a stock 4770, i would choose the 8320 for price reasons.

 

[gpuerrilla]

The OP CAN overclock, just not using a 4770k. So many people recommending something he specifically said he cant get. If this is between an OC 8320 and a stock 4770, i would choose the 8320 for price reasons.

\0/


Sometimes you just have to accept people are blinded by brand. This must be the second or third one of these flawed discussions has cropt up in a week.

 

[ALXAndy]

It is pretty simple. Want best performance? Go 4770.
Want cheapest option? Go 8350.

make your choice

An overclocked 8350 will give the 4770 (which is locked) a run for its money.

 

[Chrisoldinho]

Having owned both an 8350 and a 4670k (ok so not HT), I can safely say I prefer the Intel, this in part is due to my interests (gaming), but also everything does feel faster and I don't believe it's subliminal. Couple this with motherboards which have significantly more features and for me I would spend the extra on a 4770k.

The other option would be to wait a month or two and get an FM2 based Richland if cost is a concern, the iGPU should be very very good on this; however the iGPU in the 4770K is sufficient for short term usage and will handle older games no problem.

Chris.

 

[nikki5974]

he doesnt want a K intel chip /sigh

 

[gpuerrilla]

 

[Bart_Hunt]

I used to have a 3570k and 2 gtx 600ti in sli and played some games with older engine, like WoW etc with 60 fps. Now I have 4770k and just intgrated gpu, fps in WoW goes up to 110 on low/med.
Other than that, I noticed 4770k likes to trigger its boost a lot. Eager to get oc'ed probably
I'm glad I spent that 70£ more.

Oh, I just read about not wanting a K chip.
4770 then anyway.
With hyperthreading, it seems a better choice anyway.
Just grab some other version of the cpu.

 

[alex_123_fra]

I used to have a 3570k and 2 gtx 600ti in sli and played some games with older engine, like WoW etc with 60 fps. Now I have 4770k and just intgrated gpu, fps in WoW goes up to 110 on low/med.
Other than that, I noticed 4770k likes to trigger its boost a lot. Eager to get oc'ed probably
I'm glad I spent that 70£ more.

Oh, I just read about not wanting a K chip.
4770 then anyway.
With hyperthreading, it seems a better choice anyway.
Just grab some other version of the cpu.

Off topic but I can absolutely guarantee you that changing from a 3570k to a 4770k did not nearly double your Wow fps. The only slight difference you'll notice between those 2 CPUs in WoW is the higher IPC performance of the Haswell. That may bag you about 5 fps in really intensive environments (e.g. outdoor 40-man bosses).

There is no mainstream/enthusiast CPU on the planet that can run Wow on ultra settings at 1440p or above in outdoor 40-man boss fights at more than 60 fps. In fact anything more than 30 fps is stellar.

 

[opethdisciple]

If the OP is going to run Win 8/8.1 then either cpu will be adequate, as Win 8 pulls the AMD FX processors up in performance (games).

If Win7 then the Intel cpu will be faster.

 

[gpuerrilla]

as Win 8 pulls the AMD FX processors up in performance (games).

Oh really? Any info on this?