8320 vs 8350 vs 4670k

[pooh00018]

What cpu should I choose for my new rig? I will use my PC for gaming and general work. 

 

In my country, the 8320 is 80 dollars cheaper than the 4670k and 50 dollars cheaper than the 8350. 

 

The 8320 is the sure pick right? However, I have a few questions: 

 

1) Will my gaming performance suffer(especially with CPU-bound games)? 

2) How high of an overclock would most 8320s reach? (First hand experience would be appreciated) 

 

 

[coen113]

ge the 8320, good enough performance, it might OC to 5 ghz, if you are lucky

[WoodenMarker]

Get the 8320

1. Depends on the game. Some games that are just badly optimized like Planetside 2 won't play as well as on a 4670k but would still work fine.

2. The average should be 4.2 ghz. Some have hit 4.5 ghz

[WoodenMarker]

ge the 8320, good enough performance, it might OC to 5 ghz, if you are lucky

Insanely lucky. 

A 8350 is a higher binned 8320 and 5 ghz is still relatively lucky.

[ComputerNoob]

I  think the 8350 is just the binned version of the 8320 right? 

[chikozz]

I  think the 8350 is just the binned version of the 8320 right? 

Yes they are but on the other hand they are much cheaper which in my opinion makes them the better option.

[lachyman]

What is your total budget? It would be best to write into the thread "New builds and planning", make a new topic there and tell us how much are you going to spend on the computer and how will you use it, we will make a complete appropriate build there for the best bang for your buck

[defunkt]

8320.

[TechFan@ic]

I have an FX 8320, have it overclocked to 4.4Ghz @ stock voltage (1.38v) (from 3.5Ghz stock) on a Noctua NH-C14 cooler.
Typically you'd get 200mhz higher clocks out of the 8350 for the same voltage as the 8320,I personally don't think that it's worth the extra $50.
I haven't yet played a game where the 8320 bottle-necked my overclocked 7970, not even in Skyrim which is very single-thread reliant, mind you I have it modded to look beautiful.
Out of all of these options I'd say the FX 8320 is definitely the best choice, spend more on the graphics card.

[Dravic]

What cpu should I choose for my new rig? I will use my PC for gaming and general work. 

 

In my country, the 8320 is 80 dollars cheaper than the 4670k and 50 dollars cheaper than the 8350. 

 

The 8320 is the sure pick right? However, I have a few questions: 

 

1) Will my gaming performance suffer(especially with CPU-bound games)? 

2) How high of an overclock would most 8320s reach? (First hand experience would be appreciated) 

 

Your gaming performance will suffer by approximately 50% in CPU-bound games.

 

Overclocked 8320 might hit anything from 4GHz to 5GHz, depends on how lucky you are. However you will need huge voltage increase.

 

And you will be drawing 3 times the wattage of Intel CPU after OCing, and still will be slower than stock clocked i5. We are talking about 200w and more vs 80w i5.

 

Consider this when picking CPU by price. unless you have energy for free and dont need to pay bills, you might actually save money by going with Intel (in the long run).

 

Also remember to count cost of a mobo for OCing FX processors. And the better PSU (unless you are buying good one anyway). And the cooling.

 

What mobo are you considering? Will you SLI/Crossfire in the future?

[Theo]

Your gaming performance will suffer by around 50% in CPU-bound games.

lol what? the 8350 is around 50% worse than the 4670k in games?

[Hans Christian | Teri]

If money is a problem get the 8320, if not get the 4670k.

[Opsilon]

8350 is the the flagship, and the 8320 is the cut down version, 8320 is a lower binned 8350, and yeah you should get 4.2 easy on an 8320, but higher i am not sure, usually cut down versions of a chip are models that did not work as a full spec, at desired voltages, or were not stable, the price is not that much lower than an 8350, and when you look at the 4670 it's nothing, but you get better all around performance, and in theory the 8350 will overclock better.

Now here is the kicker:

If you want more PCIe lanes and do video rendering the 8350 is a monster, not to mention multi-threading is awesome, on the other hand the i5 is a monster in its own, the 4 cores are amazing, and in games it beats the 8350, quite a bit.

Overclocking:

Since AMD released their FX9000 chips ( high binned 8350 ) they took better overclocking chips and re-branded them, so maybe your 8350 would not OC as well as early ones did, but maybe you get a "Unicorn" chip so you can OC it far.

On the other hand the i5 4670k is a mixed batch, a lot of them don't overclock well, haswell is not the best OC-er, but because of the IPC f the chip itself even small OC like 4.2 can give you a good boost in performance, and you will also need a "Unicorn" chip to go very far, because the heat is terrible, not to mention voltages over 1,25 are kinda a No-No since the heat is brutal at that point

Power: 8350 is power hungry in comparison to the 4670k, but once you overclock them they both can suck a lot of power, but haswell is a very efficient chip

Bottom line:

Decide on what you are willing to sacrifice, and what your need are...

[pooh00018]

8320, the ones I've used have all hit 4.4Ghz on a 970 chipset board and will perform the exact same as a 8350 at the same clocks, more cores then a 4670k.

 

Unless you want pure performance, in which case get a 8350 and a 990fx board and OC it further

What kind of cooling are we talking about here? 

I have an FX 8320, have it overclocked to 4.4Ghz @ stock voltage (1.38v) (from 3.5Ghz stock) on a Noctua NH-C14 cooler.

Typically you'd get 200mhz higher clocks out of the 8350 for the same voltage as the 8320,I personally don't think that it's worth the extra $50.

I haven't yet played a game where the 8320 bottle-necked my overclocked 7970, not even in Skyrim which is very single-thread reliant, mind you I have it modded to look beautiful.

Out of all of these options I'd say the FX 8320 is definitely the best choice, spend more on the graphics card.

 

do you have any motherboard recommendations? originally i was going with the 4670k+ud3h combo but since the 8320 sounds like the best choice, i will have to change my plans

 

 

What is your total budget? It would be best to write into the thread "New builds and planning", make a new topic there and tell us how much are you going to spend on the computer and how will you use it, we will make a complete appropriate build there for the best bang for your buck

 

i think i got the rest covered. It's just the CPU/Mobo part that I am not sure about since the new consoles are coming out(8 core optimization ftw) and the prices of AMD being significantly cheaper

 

 

 

 

About the news that AMD is retiring its AM3 socket: correct me if i am wrong but it's AM3 not AM3+ right? 

 

so if i go with the 8320 i should be fine?

[pooh00018]

Your gaming performance will suffer by approximately 50% in CPU-bound games.

 

Overclocked 8320 might hit anything from 4GHz to 5GHz, depends on how lucky you are. However you will need huge voltage increase.

 

And you will be drawing 3 times the wattage of Intel CPU after OCing, and still will be slower than stock clocked i5. We are talking about 200w and more vs 80w i5.

 

Consider this when picking CPU by price. unless you have energy for free and dont need to pay bills, you might actually save money by going with Intel (in the long run).

 

Also remember to count cost of a mobo for OCing FX processors. And the better PSU (unless you are buying good one anyway). And the cooling.

 

What mobo are you considering? Will you SLI/Crossfire in the future?

 

50 percent? I don't think I have ever seen a benchmark where 4670k is that far ahead? Do you have any sources? If so, please link to it so that I could make a more sensible choice

[Dravic]

 

What kind of cooling are we talking about here? 

 

do you have any motherboard recommendations? originally i was going with the 4670k+ud3h combo but since the 8320 sounds like the best choice, i will have to change my plans

 

 

 

i think i got the rest covered. It's just the CPU/Mobo part that I am not sure about since the new consoles are coming out(8 core optimization ftw) and the prices of AMD being significantly cheaper

 

 

 

 

About the news that AMD is retiring its AM3 socket: correct me if i am wrong but it's AM3 not AM3+ right? 

 

so if i go with the 8320 i should be fine?

 

 

Nobody knows if there will be any more CPUs for AM3+ either.

 

Also 8 core optimisations for gaming will not happen... the games will be optimised for 6 cores (consoles only have 6 cores for gaming, 2 more are only for operating system. ALso consider the fact that those cores are 1.6GHz weak amd cores. Intel i5 clocked at around 2GHz would probably smash those 6 cores in CPU performance.

[JORDANonPC]

50 percent? I don't think I have ever seen a benchmark where 4670k is that far ahead? Do you have any sources? If so, please link to it so that I could make a more sensible choice

@Dravic is probably one of the least reliable sources on this entire forum just ignoring him is your best bet

[Dravic]

Consider checking this:

 

http://www.overclock.net/t/946407/amd-motherboards-vrm-info-database

 

Before picking any AM3+ motherboards for 8 core CPU that tries to draw 125w and much more (after OC-ing).

[Dravic]

@Dravic is probably one of the least reliable sources on this entire forum just ignoring him is your best bet

 

I think that Tek Syndicate video is one of the most reliable sources considering it's a video benchmark with few games tested on totally different platforms (even different RAM used for fx and for intel cpus).

 

//sarcasm

 

You are saying i am least reliable source on this forum because i am saying AMD cpus are bad? go check 'reliable' benchmarks.

[Dravic]

http://hothardware.com/Reviews/AMD-FX-8350-Vishera-8Core-CPU-Review/?page=8

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8350-vishera-review,3328-14.html

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/5

[WoodenMarker]

lol what? the 8350 is around 50% worse than the 4670k in games?

50 percent? I don't think I have ever seen a benchmark where 4670k is that far ahead? Do you have any sources? If so, please link to it so that I could make a more sensible choice

It seems the ilerminaty has been covering this up the whole time.

Also 8 core optimisations for gaming will not happen... the games will be optimised for 6 cores (consoles only have 6 cores for gaming, 2 more are only for operating system. ALso consider the fact that those cores are 1.6GHz weak amd cores. Intel i5 clocked at around 2GHz would probably smash those 6 cores in CPU performance.

Apparently, you can tell the future.

There was a time when people would say you'd never need more than 40MB of ram. Look at us now.

[chikozz]

http://hothardware.com/Reviews/AMD-FX-8350-Vishera-8Core-CPU-Review/?page=8

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8350-vishera-review,3328-14.html

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/5

You are pathetic I am sorry but you need to stop fanboying that much. The 8320 is the best option (if you don't mind the extra cash 8350 is even better). Those benchmarks are at 768 and 1050 resolutions and low settings. Also people mentioned that Skyrim is very single-core dependent and why do you even benchmarks windows 8 or 7.. Pls stop making a fool of yourself.

[Dravic]

You are pathetic I am sorry but you need to stop fanboying that much. The 8320 is the best option (if you don't mind the extra cash 8350 is even better). Those benchmarks are at 768 and 1050 resolutions and low settings. Also people mentioned that Skyrim is very single-core dependent and why do you even benchmarks windows 8 or 7.. Pls stop making a fool of yourself.

 

You need to do your homework mate.

 

Lol. Yes benchmarks at low resolution... because that is how you do CPU benchmarks... lmao guys i understand you may like AMD but if somebody tries to argue me that black is white while being color blind that's just ridiculous.

[JORDANonPC]

You need to do your homework mate.

 

Lol. Yes benchmarks at low resolution... because that is how you do CPU benchmarks... lmao guys i understand you may like AMD but if somebody tries to argue me that black is white while being color blind that's just ridiculous.

We are not arguing because we like amd we are doing it because you are either doing one of two things, 1.troll the forum and try to start flame wars on peoples posts or 2. try to make sure nobody ever buys an amd cpu because for some reason in your mind amd cpu's are far worse than intel when it is simply not true and you are the one that needs to do your homework

[Dravic]

We are not arguing because we like amd we are doing it because you are either doing one of two things, 1.troll the forum and try to start flame wars on peoples posts or 2. try to make sure nobody ever buys an amd cpu because for some reason in your mind amd cpu's are far worse than intel when it is simply not true and you are the one that needs to do your homework

 

aha, so i am throwing benchmarks that are somewhat reliable and show Intel is faster than AMD FX => not true

 

you throw 1 video over and over again (Tek Syndicate that is totally inaccurate video benchmark without even correctly made graphs that shows AMD FX is good => must be true

 

yea. makes sense.

 

I've already said that you are not correct by saying AMD is cheaper. it's not cheaper either.

 

- Motherboards are very expensive

- AMD CPUs draw much more power which leads to far higher bills.

 

I gave you guys already a challenge ones, nobody tried to answer me.

 

Give me a good, well working AMD fx 8320 or 8350 cpu + mobo + cooling pricelist (or you can decide to keep stock box cooler). Use pcpartpicker.com