AMD FX 8320 is it worth it to upgrade to 4690k?

[Valhalla]

Hello,

I currently have a crap asrock 970 extreme 3 R2.0 Mobo, and it runs at 4x speed when in crossfire. So I have made a conclusion:

The 4x mode is bottlenecking my GPUs performance to 63% usage a pop on 2 7950s.

Question #1

BUT HERES THE CATCH: in an empty map (BF4) I get what I'm supposed to interms of fps so this confuses me as I cant see how the 4x is being the bottleneck... Can someone explain what's going wrong BTW the FX is at 4.6ghz and I have 6GB 1333mhz ram.

Question #2 (on topic)

If the 4x mode is the culprit creating the bottleneck, I would have to upgrade mobos... So I have 2 choices, one keep the FX and get a better mobo, and try to get someone to buy that price of crap asrock one, and two sell the FX and asrock and get a 4690k and a Asus Z79 A or a MSI G55 Mobo for $390CAD, I could sell the FX and asrock for $270CAD. Which option should I choose, I also don't know if anyone will buy the asrock, becuase for the package my friend will get it.

So what do you think, options are greatly valued and I thank anyone who responds.

[Clyne]

I'll think it's not worth it, if you had a dual core that was bottlenecking then i would upgrade to a 4690k but i suggest upgrade the mobo to a 990fx chipset board

well here's a page about the performance 

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Ivy_Bridge_PCI-Express_Scaling/3.html

[JoshM]

I would sell your motherboard and buy a 990fx rog/UD3/5 defending on your budget. As BF4 like the extra cores and has mantle support its a very AMD optimized game. 

[Valhalla]

I would sell your motherboard and buy a 990fx rog/UD3/5 defending on your budget. As BF4 like the extra cores and has mantle support its a very AMD optimized game.

What about in the long run. Because I doubt I will be able to sell the asrock, also can you explain the empty map thing? And if I can't sell it then upgrade price is the same as new Mobo...

I'll think it's not worth it, if you had a dual core that was bottlenecking then i would upgrade to a 4690k but i suggest upgrade the mobo to a 990fx chipset board

well here's a page about the performance

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Ivy_Bridge_PCI-Express_Scaling/3.html

Can you answer part one? also I don't think any one will buy that Mobo on its own... So that will make Mobo upgrade as much as Intel set up...

[airdeano]

@Valhalla

 

weren't these answered in your other threads:

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/206974-amd-vs-intel-and-crossfire-7950s/#entry2808156

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/206134-amd-fx-8320-and-asrock-970-extreme-3-r20-trade-for-intel-set-up/#entry2797889

 

try to keep one thread so the confusion can be minimal if not zero.

[Valhalla]

@Valhalla

weren't these were answered in your other threads:

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/206974-amd-vs-intel-and-crossfire-7950s/#entry2808156

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/206134-amd-fx-8320-and-asrock-970-extreme-3-r20-trade-for-intel-set-up/#entry2797889

try to keep one thread so the confusion can be minimal if not zero.

No they are what lead me to think 4x is the issue... This why I made this one to make the final decision.

[JoshM]

What about in the long run. Because I doubt I will be able to sell the asrock, also can you explain the empty map thing? And if I can't sell it then upgrade price is the same as new Mobo...

Can you answer part one? also I don't think any one will buy that Mobo on its own... So that will make Mobo upgrade as much as Intel set up...

I can't answer it as i don't know why, games are becoming more multi-threaded (larger titles) so your cpu should last a while still (thats the reason i went with AMD and the price) 

[Valhalla]

I can't answer it as i don't know why, games are becoming more multi-threaded (larger titles) so your cpu should last a while still (thats the reason i went with AMD and the price)

So Intel would be downgrade?

[Manny Calavera]

Disable 1 core in each module to get performance boost and raise bottleneck. There are tutorials online and benches proving that.

[Valhalla]

Disable 1 core in each module to get performance boost and raise bottleneck.

?

[JoshM]

So Intel would be downgrade?

No i wouldn't say that as intel make strong cpu's (they make the best consumer grade), just going to a 4690k wouldn't give you a massive gain or loss, they perform fairly similar. It just helps the amd cause that more multithreaded games are being released. 

[Manny Calavera]

?

 

Games dont use more than 4 cores and any given moment, it only processes 4 threads at once. They just switch very fast between cores so it shows load in task manager. 

 

There are 2 integer cores in one module but only 1 FPU. There is also some other stuff shared.

[Valhalla]

No i wouldn't say that as intel make strong cpu's (they make the best consumer grade), just going to a 4690k wouldn't give you a massive gain or loss, they perform fairly similar. It just helps the amd cause that more multithreaded games are being released.

So there is no point of going Intel I should just get a better amd Mobo?

Games dont use more than 4 cores and any given moment, it only processes 4 threads at once. They just switch very fast between cores so it shows load in task manager.

There are 2 integer cores in one module but only 1 FPU. There is also some other stuff shared.

Okay won't that make it a 4100?

[JoshM]

So there is no point of going Intel I should just get a better amd Mobo?

That is correct, my board is solid (UD3) if you have more money look at a UD5 or Sabertooth from Asus, if you want the best on the AM3+ platform go a ROG board.

Games dont use more than 4 cores and any given moment, it only processes 4 threads at once. They just switch very fast between cores so it shows load in task manager.

There are 2 integer cores in one module but only 1 FPU. There is also some other stuff shared.

BF4 utilizes all 8 cores lol.

Okay won't that make it a 4100?

Don't do what he is saying to do

[Valhalla]

That is correct, my board is solid (UD3) if you have more money look at a UD5 or Sabertooth from Asus, if you want the best on the AM3+ platform go a ROG board.

Oh, so you are 100% sure that Intel won't make my bottleneck dissapire and that going with the better amd board will make me have no bottleneck? Is this correct?

Also how much do you think I could sell my asrock for?

[Manny Calavera]

Okay won't that make it a 4100?

no, 4100 has only 2 modules ( 2 fpus, 4 integer )

 

4300 at 6 gigaherz cooled by liquid nitrogen is worse than 5ghz 8320 with 1 core disabled in each module

 

wait i paste some benchmakrs

[JoshM]

Oh, so you are 100% sure that Intel won't make my bottleneck dissapire and that going with the better amd board will make me have no bottleneck? Is this correct?

There will always be a slight bottleneck (happens with all systems) but upgrading to a 4690k wont change that, your slow lanes in your mobo is slowing your cards down. 

[Valhalla]

There will always be a slight bottleneck (happens with all systems) but upgrading to a 4690k wont change that, your slow lanes in your mobo is slowing your cards down.

Okay well problem is how I sell asrock board lol, I can post it on eBay, but I don't know if it will sell... And if it does I'm guessing $50-70... And good amd board is 160.. Making the amd upgrade $100 and the 4690k and Mobo upgrade $110 is it worth the 10 or 20 bucks for the Intel?

no, 4100 has only 2 modules ( 2 fpus, 4 integer )

4300 at 6 gigaherz cooled by liquid nitrogen is worse than 5ghz 8320 with 1 core disabled in each module

wait i paste some benchmakrs

Okay

[JoshM]

Okay well problem is how I sell asrock board lol, I can post it on eBay, but I don't know if it will sell... And if it does I'm guessing $50-70... And good amd board is 160.. Making the amd upgrade $100 and the 4690k and Mobo upgrade $110 is it worth the 10 or 20 bucks for the Intel?

Okay

Well when it is put in perspective like that, 4690k and Z97 boards are newer and you are guaranteed a sale on your AMD cpu/mobo. Intel will have a few more features. 

You may as well go intel, what Z97 board would you go? 

[Valhalla]

Well when it is put in perspective like that, 4690k and Z97 boards are newer and you are guaranteed a sale on your AMD cpu/mobo. Intel will have a few more features.

You may as well go intel, what Z97 board would you go?

MSI g55 or Asus Z97 A I'm looking at AMD ATM it comes to (for the same price) sabertooth amd or crosair formula V on the aMD side or Intel the two I listed is the 4690k better now and for the future? Also the main reason idk about amd is because of the hard to sell Mobo. I will try, of you think that its a better option...

[Manny Calavera]

BEnchmarks:

 

http://hwbot.org/submission/2519218_shrimpbrime_cinebench_r11.5_fx_4300_5.2_points

 

http://hwbot.org/submission/2561676_harrynowl_cinebench_r11.5_fx_8320_5.23_points

 

Does x4 lane bottleneck? I have no idea. What i do know is that 8350 is bottlenecking crossfire or even single high end GPU in most games ( 3 games currently use more than 4 cores) so 4690k is definitly better.

 

THis is just copy paste from other thread.

 

If you want Professional help for disabling cores and stuff ask @harrynowl he is experienced and he can tell you whats up

 

Before I explain your errors;




Open prime95, you see in resource monitor the UI takes 4 threads and they barely use anything of the cpu, give 4 workers in for example like I did above, so in total 8 threads since the ui threads barely take anything just forget about them and we have 4 threads to deal with. 4 threads meaning that they only can be executed on 4 cores at the same time nothing more but taskmanager showed loads on every core there because threads are switching rapidly from cores and Windows logs this. It's tricking you that's all.

Another point; taskmanager calculates the cpu usage complety differently as you can see 50% load when I only stressed 4 cores of the 12 available but as you notice the process is only taking 33% of the CPU. Have a look at the maximum frequency which is 137% so 50/137% -> 33% cpu load which equals what prime95 actually uses since its the only process that actually used something of the CPU.



Doing now with all 12 threads, total cpu usage 137%? Got the point?
 

 

 

Nope, 4. Made the CPU hit its limit here;

Showing us some core loads means nothing if the engine is on 4 threads that was switched through all of your cores, and the trashthreads you could chunk them all to one core and it wouldn't cause any performance loss. Testing should have done like I've done for BF3, no offensive but not like this lol 

Another flaw I found, in Crysis 3 you made the GPU hitting its limit making the CPU wait on the GPU thats why the loads have been very low. If you'd look at this video, his 3770K was running at 84% and the gpu's around 50/50/50% load he used some program which made the CPU hit 100% and the gpu's were moved from 50 to 70% each giving a 30 fps gain.

Don't forget this, even if the game takes advantage (meaning more performance) of more than 4 cores, there's no lineair scaling going on for example I found in WD that 4 cores gave 60 fps and with all cores just a silly 15% gain (pure cpu bound scenario avoiding gpu cap). Here's the video; youtube.com/watch?v=A-ipzwdtGyE

Parallelism will be always crap in games, it's about how well it is multithreaded not just only about how much, games will never magically saturate 8 threads to make AMD somehow equal to Intel i5's/i7's. 

 

 

Haven't you read my post? Threads are switching rapidly between cores, been a thing since the 90's and tskmngr is showing us that behavior. You're not interested in how many cores and how much has been used, you're interested in how many cores and how much theyve been used at the same time, not over an hour.

 

Multi means two+. Multithreading is about having for each task a thread, parallel coding is a total different story which is a massive keyfactor to performance and it's much harder to do especially for games. A 10 years old game like WoW has 40-50 threads meaning it can use 40-50 cores. Ofc the engine itself is on 2 threads and the other threads (manabar, combatlog, energybar, chat etc) have almost as good as no impact on your performance meaning it doesnt need anything more than a dualcore. Sure BF4 has more bigger threads but I'm not interested in seeing the engine on 5 threads and the physics engine on 1 thread taking a 8350 max to 75% load, you're obviously interested in having the engine on 6 threads and physics offloaded to the GPU and the max load would have been 75% as well with much better performance. It's about how well it is multithreaded and the level of parallelism. Threads are waiting too much on each other to finish, theyre not running complety indepedently of each other.

The BF4 example isn't correct, it's kinda unknown how its written. 

 

 

Seems like your salesman didn't bother to sell you that 2 cores are reserved for the OS and remaining ones are for the game. Straight up from Sony: "The CPU performance analysis tool is pictured here, strongly suggesting that six of the eight AMD CPU cores are available to developers."

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-ps3-system-software-memory

Look at any BF4/WD benchmarks, the 8350 only does a tiny bit better than the 6300 mainly because how the architecture works (you'd be better off giving two threads to two modules instead of to one module, the single threaded performance is higher that way). There's no reason for any dev to make it "8core optimized" like you're claiming here if only 6 cores are available for them.
 

 

Less cores + lower clock speed + a shitload more IPC is better than more cores + higher clock speed aka the 8350. Single core performance is always going to be the factor that makes a CPU better for gaming, regardless of the console gimmicks. Unless every game is on the level of Cinebench's mt'ing/parallelism the 8350 would have been better than the i5.

 

 

O really?


 

 

 

I could help you with that. You really should aim for a pure cpu bound scenario like I did with my BF3 video. For example Crysis 3 you were GPU limited and the cpu loads were quite low if you disable 4-6 cores the chance that you'd be still gpu bound is quite high, you preferably want 4 gtx 780's in SLI get CPU bound with all cores and start disabling cores. So you can drop results like 1 core 10 fps - 2 cores 20 fps - 3 cores 30 fps - 4 cores 40 fps - 5 cores 50 fps - 6 cores 60 fps - 7 cores 70 fps - 8 cores 80 fps (not that its going to scale like this but whatever) and enable a 9th core that might add no performance while still being cpu bound. That would make more sense than if you'd drop; 1 core 10 fps - 2 cores 20 fps - 3 cores 30 fps - [being gpu bound now] 4 cores 40 fps - 5 cores 40fps - 6 cores 40 fps - 250 core - 40 fps 

Just avoid doing it with the 8350 imo.

[JoshM]

MSI g55 or Asus Z97 A I'm looking at AMD ATM it comes to (for the same price) sabertooth amd or crosair formula V on the aMD side or Intel the two I listed is the 4690k better now and for the future? Also the main reason idk about amd is because of the hard to sell Mobo. I will try, of you think that its a better option...

I would probably go intel on this one, it going to be easier for you in general. And you won't loose performance, you will gain some with a majority of titles as most are single threaded (like 1-5fps). But as this isn't much more expensive you might as well get the new stuff. I mean 2500k's are still kicking hard so i don't see why a 4690k shouldn't do the same in the future. 

[Valhalla]

I would probably go intel on this one, it going to be easier for you in general. And you won't loose performance, you will gain some with a majority of titles as most are single threaded (like 1-5fps). But as this isn't much more expensive you might as well get the new stuff. I mean 2500k's are still kicking hard so i don't see why a 4690k shouldn't do the same in the future.

Okay what z97 board, I don't want gigabyte nor asrock. Also 1 last time of I go amd I get $20 cheaper plus sabertooth Mobo, amd if I go Intel I get the two I listed and 4690k... Just keep that in mind. So please tell me which option would you take? $20 more Intel CPU little worse Mobo or $20 less sabertooth mobo... And if you say Intel what board?

[JoshM]

Okay what z97 board, I don't want gigabyte nor asrock. Also 1 last time of I go amd I get $20 cheaper plus sabertooth Mobo, amd if I go Intel I get the two I listed and 4690k... Just keep that in mind. So please tell me which option would you take? $20 more Intel CPU little worse Mobo or $20 less sabertooth mobo... And if you say Intel what board?

I suggested a build for a mate earlier and to be honest I would go with haswell refresh. I am very satisfied with the performance of AMD but as haswell refresh its the latest, and will have support for longer it is the best option (AM3+ as a socket is technically dead). The performance difference isn't much for better or worse. it is a solid platform and everyone on this forum will agree with that. The Z97 board I would look at is this:

http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=138_1491&products_id=27523 

Thats Austrian prices so it should be cheaper in America. 

[Manny Calavera]

-snip-snap-

You should at least try to check what results you get by disabling cores. Do a benchmark. And read my previous post if you didnt yet.

 

Since in empty map you dont have bottleneck its safe to assume you WILL get performance increase.