• 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.

Thinking of switching from Intel to AMD

2500k at 4.6Ghz running an HD 7950 at 1150Mhz

Capture-4.png


FX8320 at 4.5Ghz running an HD 7950 at 1150Mhz

3745d850_FIF9mdD.png


The 2500k has a 3% clock speed advantage but yet managed to deliver a minimum frame rate that was 25% higher then the FX8350 with the average being 23% higher.

Granted the FX8320 can keep up in highly threaded loads but it's still going to take YEARS before every major release becomes highly threaded which by that time both the current Intel and AMD CPU's will be out dated anyway.

Stick with Intel for the next 2-3 years and wait for the software to catch up with the hardware before upgrading.
 
Martini1991 said:
Probably almost impossible to separate the 2.
Click to expand...

Those results were just on the fixed benchmark.... actual in game frame rates in some of the latter levels were UNPLAYABLE on the FX while still being 35fps+ on the 2500k in the most demanding of sections.

AMD just don't have the minerals for games that use 4 threads or less...
 
almighty15 said:
Those results were just on the fixed benchmark.... actual in game frame rates in some of the latter levels were UNPLAYABLE on the FX while still being 35fps+ on the 2500k in the most demanding of sections.

AMD just don't have the minerals for games that use 4 threads or less...
Click to expand...

I'm on about crysis 3.
 
Martini1991 said:
Ha, fair enough.
What exactly are you expecting from the fx83 switch?
Click to expand...

Nothing spectacular to be honest but I felt my current setup was getting a little long in the tooth, out of warranty etc. I expect I'll get pretty much similar performance initially and then as time passes and games become more threaded better performance especially if mantle is as good as they say. So I'm good for the next 2\3yrs I reckon. If I'm honest I probably jumped the gun a little going xfire but with the crazy gpu prices I thought I'd better grab a 7950 while I could, certainly are great performance for the money, I blame Lt.Matt for that he talked me into it. ;)
 
An 8320 at 4.5GHz will be faster than a 2500K in Crysis 3 - it's comparable to an overclocked 3770K.

However, I'd never expect an old game that only uses 2 cores to do as well on an 8320 at 4.5GHz compared to a 2500k at 4.6GHz. That said, people can run Crysis 1 fine on 8320s, so perhaps there are other issues (such as Vista) affecting the results.
 
Martini1991 said:
Colour me sceptical.
Sandy is missing some instruction sets which the fx83 doesn't, allows to eek out more performance per core because of it.
Click to expand...

So where is this more core performance then?

No use in supporting the instructions sets if no ones going to use them...

AVX adoption rate has been very poor despite all the buzz it generated.
 
teppic said:
An 8320 at 4.5GHz will be faster than a 2500K in Crysis 3 - it's comparable to an overclocked 3770K.

However, I'd never expect an old game that only uses 2 cores to do as well on an 8320 at 4.6GHz compared to an 8320 at 4.5GHz. That said, people can run Crysis 1 fine on 8320s, so perhaps there are other issues (such as Vista) affecting the results.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: The benchmark was never run on Vista....

The benchmark tool itself is called 'Crysis VISTA benchmark tool'

And so you can buy an FX CPU and get good performance in literally a handful of games or buy a 2500/2600k and get good performance in pretty much every game.

It's a bit of a no brainier to be honest...
 
almighty15 said:
So where is this more core performance then?

No use in supporting the instructions sets if no ones going to use them...

AVX adoption rate has been very poor despite all the buzz it generated.
Click to expand...

As far as I'm aware, Crysis 3 uses one of the FMA's that AMD has on their chips, AMD optimising.

I would never expect much difference between the two in number 3.
 
almighty15 said:
:rolleyes: The benchmark was never run on Vista....

The benchmark tool itself is called 'Crysis VISTA benchmark tool'

And so you can buy an FX CPU and get good performance in literally a handful of games or buy a 2500/2600k and get good performance in pretty much every game.

It's a bit of a no brainier to be honest...
Click to expand...

"A handful", right...

The Crysis CPU benchmark is hardly representative of games as a whole.

But there's no point in discussing any of this with you, clearly.
 
Martini1991 said:
As far as I'm aware, Crysis 3 uses one of the FMA's that AMD has on their chips, AMD optimising.

I would never expect much difference between the two in number 3.
Click to expand...

Tek Syndicate's benchmarks have with 7970 CF, max settings:

8350 @ 4.6GHz

1080p - Crossfire - Max - 36.04
1440p - Crossfire - Max - 23.52

3770K @ 4.6GHz

1080p - Crossfire - Max - 36.72
1440p - Crossfire - Max - 23.52

It's threaded enough to be GPU bound in both cases, but the 2500K will not keep up here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom