Fx-8320 Or I5 2500k

[xKnetic]

i'm building a new pc. Which CPU should i get? The i5 2500k is about 20 dollars more, so is it worth the extra money?

[Nit3Rid3R]

Yes, the i5 is 20 dollars more, but the overall Z77 platform cost more than the AMD platform. It all drops down on what you want to do. General use and gaming, get the 8320 since the platform is cheaper.

EDIT: I just saw that you're looking at the 8320 with the 2500k, not the 3570k.

[killerx525]

If your video editing or gaming then the 8320.

[mvitkun]

I'd say FX 8320.

 

the two are about on par.

[BlueBerrial]

Look at benchmarks and decide for yourself.

[killerx525]

Based on this review, the FX-8320 is generally faster then the i5-2500k which isn't surprising.

[Dave :)]

Would echo what everyone else has said and grab the 8320 as it has great longevity than the 2500k (or 3570k) as it's on a socket that is set to be updated with newer CPU releases; combine that with it's price and performance, it really is a great contender.

[TechFan@ic]

I agree with everyone else, the FX 8320 has a better upgrade path in the future & will probably offer better performance all round in the upcoming years.

[Maverik5124]

My vote also goes to the FX 8320. Also the am3+ socket will be getting new cpus which will enable you to upgrade in the future

[Dexterity]

take the extra $20 and go for the fx 8350 :)

[killerx525]

take the extra $20 and go for the fx 8350 :)

Not a bad suggestion considering the difference is 500mhz.

[samuel]

fx 8350 is a binned chip, so it's better for OC.

[prodigydoo]

if you are doing soemething like streaming games the 8320 is probably better.. 

[caplus12000]

2500K no doubt for gaming cause it has a true quad core design. Also there seems to be many benchmarks where the i5 3570k beats the 8530 overall so get the 2500k ( very similar to 3570k, overclocks better! ) but then again depends on what you're doing. If you edit videos regularly and do intense cpu workloads then the 8350 will perform better cause it has more cores.

[Humbug]

my my. How things have changed within a few short months. Look at all the people recommending AMD CPUs. Good to see

[killerx525]

2500K no doubt for gaming cause it has a true quad core design. Also there seems to be many benchmarks where the i5 3570k beats the 8530 overall so get the 2500k ( very similar to 3570k, overclocks better! ) but then again depends on what you're doing. If you edit videos regularly and do intense cpu workloads then the 8350 will perform better cause it has more cores.

The 2500k may be a true quad core design but most games nowadays are GPU bound meaning, the more GPU horsepower you into it, the more performance you will get. There are multiple reviews out there that show that uses the same GPU but with the different CPUs are in near identical FPS.

[reky76]

my my. How things have changed within a few short months. Look at all the people recommending AMD CPUs. Good to see

I am the proud owner of AMD FX 8350 CPU and I agree entirely with you.

[FrankV]

I am the proud owner of AMD FX 8350 CPU and I agree entirely with you.

 

Also an owner; and happy to see this too. 

 

Honestly, the CPU has performed very well in both video rendering and gaming. No concerns or problems with the CPU. It does a good, fast job.

[TechFan@ic]

AMD just slashed 20$ off the FX 8320, so there is even more reason to grab one.
http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/12280-amd-slashes-cpuapu-prices/

[killerx525]

It's just there is a lot ignorant people out there who refuses to use AMD CPU because they "think" Intel CPU will perform better in games which nowadays are GPU bound, so the performance between the 2 should be quite similar, it's really all about getting the best GPU to get more performance not the CPU.

[winny3141]

Actually, the CPU is responsible for sending the data to the GPU to process and then back again to the CPU, which is why if you have a Pentium 4, for example, with a Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan, you get like 10 FPS. That is why the hUMA is such a revolution in APUs, because it enables both the CPU and the GPU to share the same pool of memory, so that the CPU no longer has to send data to the GPU to get processed and then the GPU has to send it back to the CPU again which then has to read it in the memory. But, we got off topic. If you look at the benchmarks that Linus did, then you would see that the 3570k performs better then that of the 8350 and consumes less power. Does it outperform that of the 8350 by much, not really and the 8350 is more overclockable, but your getting the Intel quality. I mean, Intel must be doing something right if they have 4 cores, with NO Hyper threading (in the case of the 3570k), and it is outperforming that of an 8350, which is an 8 core processor. And DO not get last gen Sandy Bridge quadcores because they have 32 nm lithography while that of ivy bridge has 22 nm lithography which means that the latter will get better temperatures when at full load or when overclocked at full load. So keep that in mind.

[killerx525]

A lot of the time, the FPS difference is minimal and the 8350 is generally slower in single threaded tasks.

[DoctorNick]

I would go with a i5 3570K.. You are not going to utilize 8 cores most of the time anyway.. And Intels memory speed rocks. But it's up to you.. You would be able to hold on to your MB for longer with AMD..  ;)

[mgsstar]

I would get the FX8320 because in the future games and applications will make use of the cores that AMD has.

[OneGun]

The reason no one wants AMD cpus is the piledriver series was horrible.They have done much better with the 83 series cpus.All those complaints of games freezing and cores not working while trying to play a game like Black ops2 was horrible.I go around all forums from BF3 to Black ops to OC.net and the pile driver series was really a PILE...But to answer your question you should get the AMD as the two options you listed the AMD is better IMO..Here is a link for cpu comp 

 

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/288?vs=698