AMD VS Intel Two Different Builds, What to Pick?

[MeesterJackson]

Ok, so I'm going to let this be the final decider. Which one is better for me/more convenient? 

 

I am making a computer build for gaming, rendering, editing, recording, and livestreaming. (I'd really like to stay under 850 - 875 dollars more so 850)

 

AMD Build:

 

Case: NZXT Phantom 410 $83.98 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B006I2H084/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

CPU: FX 8320 $153.61http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B009O7YU56/ref=ox_sc_act_title_4?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

Motherboard: ASUS M5A99FX PRO R2.0 $134.02 (Has Rebate $114.02) http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B008B6ONXK/ref=ox_sc_act_title_5?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

CPU Cooler: XIGMATEK Dark Knight II $49.14 (Will be OC'ing to 4.5Ghz) http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00275V1PE/ref=ox_sc_act_title_2?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

PSU: Corsair 750w Bronze 80 Plus $83.24 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B008RJZQSW/ref=ox_sc_act_title_3?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

 

Intel Build:

 

Case: N/A (I will probably use the Micro ATX one I have now and later down the line when I want to Dual GPU's I'll have a bigger one)

CPU: E3 Xeon 1240 V3 (i7 4770) $276.00 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116905

Motherboard: The ASUS Z87M-Plus $140.00 (I like ASUS) http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131984 OR the MSI Z87M-G43 $105.00 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130706&Tpk=msi%20z87

CPU Cooler: N/A Extra Money, plus I'm not OC'ing (You can't on a Xeon) I picked the Z87 Boards because I'm not sure if the 1240 V3 is compatible with most or all H87's. 

PSU: Same as the AMD Build, the Corsair 750w Bronze 80 Plus

 

I have not yet decided on a Graphics Card (If you could help me pick one, that would be great I was thinking about the R9 280X since it's 300 dollars and it's a 7970 Ghz Ed). 

 

So which one should I go with? Technically the AMD one is more convenient because of the case, and I'd have a cooler for future newer builds, but Intel is technically faster by a bit, especially in rendering, and saves power. So which one is really the best option? 

 

AMD Build Total = 503.99 (plus tax)

Intel Build Total = (with ASUS board) $500 (with MSI) $465 - Keep in mind the MSI seems to be getting a lot of hate/having on arrival problems compared to the ASUS board. (This also has tax...unless Newegg doesn't do taxes)

[Faroeseviking]

AMD

[MeesterJackson]

AMD

Ok why?

[Faroeseviking]

Ok why?

From what i've heard xeons are crappy for gaming.

[MeesterJackson]

From what i've heard xeons are crappy for gaming.

Not the E3 V2's/V3's They are rip offs of the Ivy and Haswell Intel Core i7's. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZla8Tmtq5Q and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYU0zpqYaAo are people gaming on the Xeons at Max/Ultra settings getting above 40 (On Crysis is what it seems like because he didn't say the FPS) and on Battlefield 3 he's getting over 59 FPS (mainly because of the 660)

[WoodenMarker]

From what i've heard xeons are crappy for gaming.

Not necessarily. The 8320 is great for streaming though due to the 8 cores.

[MeesterJackson]

Not necessarily. The 8320 is great for streaming though due to the 8 cores.

8320 isn't a legit 8 core CPU. 

[Cryptonite]

Ok, so I'm going to let this be the final decider. Which one is better for me/more convenient? 

 

I am making a computer build for gaming, rendering, editing, recording, and livestreaming. (I'd really like to stay under 850 - 875 dollars more so 850)

 

AMD Build:

 

Case: NZXT Phantom 410 $83.98 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B006I2H084/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

CPU: FX 8320 $153.61http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B009O7YU56/ref=ox_sc_act_title_4?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

Motherboard: ASUS M5A99FX PRO R2.0 $134.02 (Has Rebate $114.02) http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B008B6ONXK/ref=ox_sc_act_title_5?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

CPU Cooler: XIGMATEK Dark Knight II $49.14 (Will be OC'ing to 4.5Ghz) http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00275V1PE/ref=ox_sc_act_title_2?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

PSU: Corsair 750w Bronze 80 Plus $83.24 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B008RJZQSW/ref=ox_sc_act_title_3?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

 

Intel Build:

 

Case: N/A (I will probably use the Micro ATX one I have now and later down the line when I want to Dual GPU's I'll have a bigger one)

CPU: E3 Xeon 1240 V3 (i7 4770) $276.00 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116905

Motherboard: The ASUS Z87M-Plus $140.00 (I like ASUS) http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131984 OR the MSI Z87M-G43 $105.00 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130706&Tpk=msi%20z87

CPU Cooler: N/A Extra Money, plus I'm not OC'ing (You can't on a Xeon) I picked the Z87 Boards because I'm not sure if the 1240 V3 is compatible with most or all H87's. 

PSU: Same as the AMD Build, the Corsair 750w Bronze 80 Plus

 

I have not yet decided on a Graphics Card (If you could help me pick one, that would be great I was thinking about the R9 280X since it's 300 dollars and it's a 7970 Ghz Ed). 

 

So which one should I go with? Technically the AMD one is more convenient because of the case, and I'd have a cooler for future newer builds, but Intel is technically faster by a bit, especially in rendering, and saves power. So which one is really the best option? 

 

AMD Build Total = 503.99 (plus tax)

Intel Build Total = (with ASUS board) $500 (with MSI) $465 - Keep in mind the MSI seems to be getting a lot of hate/having on arrival problems compared to the ASUS board. (This also has tax...unless Newegg doesn't do taxes)

The CPUs will perform around the same in modern games and there is a chance that multicore optimization is the next big thing so I'd go with the AMD. plus it's cheaper. You'll also be able to OC the AMD 8 core cpu where as the 3.4 GHz haswell will remain 3.4 GHz. You will find that the AMD cpu already performs better in games like metro LL as it has better multi core support. if you were going for the 4770k I'd consider going intel, but the price doesn't make up for the performance.

 

 

especially since you want to stream, and besides rendering the AMD doesn't fall too far behind.

 

as for power consumption the AMD will take around what? 30 usd more in a year?

 

I wouldn't go with an Asus motherboard though. just saying.

[MeesterJackson]

The CPUs will perform around the same in modern games and there is a chance that multicore optimization is the next big thing so I'd go with the AMD. plus it's cheaper. You'll also be able to OC the AMD 8 core cpu where as the 3.4 GHz haswell will remain 3.4 GHz. You will find that the AMD cpu already performs better in games like metro LL as it has better multi core support. if you were going for the 4770k I'd consider going intel, but the price doesn't make up for the performance.

FYI the 1240 V3 is a i7 4770 (No K) it has a turbo of 3.8Ghz. Also I guess that makes sense. 

[D3MON]

amd with a gigabyte ud7, i beleive its around the $115 mark, has a completely black aesthetic, and a better vrm.
you could game on the xeon but im guessing youll get the urge to give a mild oc later on anyway.

[Cryptonite]

FYI the 1240 V3 is a i7 4770 (No K) it has a turbo of 3.8Ghz. Also I guess that makes sense. 

I know it's a 4770 but it's not the unlocked model and turbo only kicks in at 3.8 GHz when using single threaded applications, the more threads in use the lower the turbo.

[MeesterJackson]

amd with a gigabyte ud7, i beleive its around the $115 mark, has a completely black aesthetic, and a better vrm.

you could game on the xeon but im guessing youll get the urge to give a mild oc later on anyway.

Ehhhh...I'm an ASUS Fanboy, but I could give it a look at. Also actually no, it's turbo is 3.8 I'm happy about that it's not an awkward number like 3.9 like a standard i7k. That annoys the hell out of me. Why couldn't they just make it 4.0Ghz? I mean they always do 3.2 to like 3.4 or 3.4 to 3.8 but the I7 is 3.5 to 3.9....why? Its so annoying/weird. It's like Intel never wants to touch 4Ghz themselves and just leave that up to the buyers. 

[MeesterJackson]

I know it's a 4770 but it's not the unlocked model and turbo only kicks in at 3.8 GHz when using single threaded applications, the more threads in use the lower the turbo.

Ah ok, and nice Naruto pic lol, also you like Biostar MBs? Are they even good?

[JoshM]

Make it an 8350 and get that

[CwGoh]

Ah ok, and nice Naruto pic lol, also you like Biostar MBs? Are they even good?

 

Biostar  motherboards aren't great...

[MeesterJackson]

Make it an 8350 and get that

Ok 1: That goes over my budget, 2: an OC'd 8320 to 4.2Ghz is EXACTLY like an 8350. OC'ing it to 4.5Ghz is going to be even better.

[MeesterJackson]

Biostar  motherboards aren't great...

I kinda figured, but that guy seems to like them, whats so bad about them?

[WoodenMarker]

8320 isn't a legit 8 core CPU. 

It depends how you look at it. It technically is.

[MeesterJackson]

It depends how you look at it. It technically is.

...How is it technically? It's just a really beef'd up Quad core. 

[D3MON]

8320 isn't a legit 8 core CPU. 

its a hardware implementation of hyperthreading, but people say that hyperthreading is a bonus and smack talk the fx series as not being real cores, programs are starting to use the floating point calculations of graphics cards these days so there is less  need for it on a cpu. well threaded games evenly distribute threads across all amd "cores" wheras most dont use intels hyperthreading and just run on the 4 actual cores, this doesnt change performance but it does lead to higher cpu usage on intels which limits the ability to stream content or record with fraps.

that said in poorly threaded games the intel will pull away by anywhere around 12% form every benchmark ive seen, it very much comes down to what games you want to play.

when it was the athlon 64 vs pentium 4 (with hyperthreading) tha amd kicked arse in single threaded apps and even beat the higher clocked intels in multithreaded apps but intel fans still proclaimed "but everythigns getting more multithreaded and soon well see 10ghz" and the netburst bubble..burst.

now intel righted thier wrongs and focus'd on single core performance albeit a little bit late, things are getting multi threaded and we're seeing apps use the inbuild gpu in apus and intels igpu (im guessing it works on intel) because they have more parallel processing power.

This is why the multi integer unit structure of amds architecture is claimed to be forward thinking.

its give and take at the moment it just depends on what you want, in 5 or so years we will see whats changed and what was the right route to take.

[CwGoh]

I kinda figured, but that guy seems to like them, whats so bad about them?

 

Not really reliable and the quality of components are not good. I'd only touch Asus, MSi and Gigabyte IMO.

[paulsterio]

I'd have to say Intel for this one, especially if you have to have it now. Vishera (AMD's current FX series) is an outdated architecture which is pretty power inefficient. It will essentially be beaten heavily by Haswell in almost everything, especially single-threaded tasks. For rendering, if you get an FX 8350, it would be around the same as the Haswell Xeon, better if you overclock, but not significant. 

 

Here's a benchmark for you - http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/697?vs=836

 

It's the 4770K, but they haven't overclocked it, so it should be pretty much the same performance as what you'd get out of your Xeon. 

 

 

From what i've heard xeons are crappy for gaming.

 

People shouldn't be allowed to say these things without actually referencing...this is just such a bad and wrong statement. Xeon E3 series are Haswell based and are basically rebadged i7 4770 with iGPU disabled and other minor differences, they are the same die. 

 

 

Ehhhh...I'm an ASUS Fanboy, but I could give it a look at. Also actually no, it's turbo is 3.8 I'm happy about that it's not an awkward number like 3.9 like a standard i7k. That annoys the hell out of me. Why couldn't they just make it 4.0Ghz? I mean they always do 3.2 to like 3.4 or 3.4 to 3.8 but the I7 is 3.5 to 3.9....why? Its so annoying/weird. It's like Intel never wants to touch 4Ghz themselves and just leave that up to the buyers. 

 

ASUS is a good brand to go with. I've always had good results with ASUS, Gigabyte and ASRock. 

 

Yeah, Intel is definitely trying to avoid the 4.0GHz mark, pretty much the whole "trying to stay away from the GHz war" thing. They've never released a chip, ever, that's exceeded 4.0 GHz. 

[Cryptonite]

Ah ok, and nice Naruto pic lol, also you like Biostar MBs? Are they even good?

lol, thanks. I like them because they are cheap and reliable, I don't care much for fancy bells and whistles, back when I bought the mobo I have atm I would have had to pay an extra 100 - 120 usd (1000 - 1200 zar) to build my rig if I had to choose another brand with the same functionality. and this is my 4th biostar motherboard overall. Had great experience with each, Asus on the other hand can't handle the South African heat and fries as soon as you do a mild OC. 

 

Biostar  motherboards aren't great...

Have you even used Biostar? or are you a sheep following the flock saying whatever others say?

[MeesterJackson]

The CPUs will perform around the same in modern games and there is a chance that multicore optimization is the next big thing so I'd go with the AMD. plus it's cheaper. You'll also be able to OC the AMD 8 core cpu where as the 3.4 GHz haswell will remain 3.4 GHz. You will find that the AMD cpu already performs better in games like metro LL as it has better multi core support. if you were going for the 4770k I'd consider going intel, but the price doesn't make up for the performance.

 

 

especially since you want to stream, and besides rendering the AMD doesn't fall too far behind.

 

as for power consumption the AMD will take around what? 30 usd more in a year?

 

I wouldn't go with an Asus motherboard though. just saying.

Why?...ASUS is like KNOWN for their Motherboards and just their great tech in general. Also I leave my PC on A LOT.

[CwGoh]

...How is it technically? It's just a really beef'd up Quad core. 

 

Not exactly. It consists of 4 modules and has few components shared while others are dedicated to each core. So in some scenarios, each module will perform like a dual core while in others it performs like a 1.5 core. Regarding whether it is actually an 8 core, it also depends what you define as a "core"