AMD FX 8350 vs i5 4670k

[TwistedDictator]

You decide by looking at the benchmarks

 

[Deletive]

Hmmm 2011 chipset (refresh of a 2009 chipset) vs 2014 chipset? 

[Faa]

You decide by looking at the benchmarks

After I linked you benchmarks from anandtech.com/vr-zone.com/pclab.pl/hardwarepal.com/sweclockers.com/pcgameshardware.de and plenty of video's incl a review that are complety contradicting your Furmark gpu performance variation test video's, you post it again. Who does this help? Be informative instead of being complety biased. Gaming is all about single core performance, google the single core performance between a 8350 vs nehalems from 2008. You just can't justify a 6 years old CPU over a modern one.

[Bloodkil933]

After I linked you benchmarks from anandtech.com/vr-zone.com/pclab.pl/hardwarepal.com/sweclockers.com/pcgameshardware.de and plenty of video's incl a review that are complety contradicting your Furmark gpu performance variation test video's, you post it again. Who does this help? Be informative instead of being complety biased. Gaming is all about single core performance, google the single core performance between a 8350 vs nehalems from 2008. You just can't justify a 6 years old CPU over a modern one.

Gaming is about single core performance? BWAHAHA

[patrickjp93]

You decide by looking at the benchmarks

 

those are within the margin of error and the 8350 was not at stock speed either.

[patrickjp93]

Gaming is about single core performance? BWAHAHA

For most games, yes, this is still true, because the first core schedules everything for the others.

[Bloodkil933]

For most games, yes, this is still true, because the first core schedules everything for the others.

I kinda agree with that, but recently games are better optimized for more cores. As some benchmarks are showing, like BF4 and Crysis 3.

[Faa]

I kinda agree with that, but recently games are better optimized for more cores. As some benchmarks are showing, like BF4 and Crysis 3.

You should do your research better. You can't multithread everything, some tasks just cannot be multithreaded, you're still having problems that each thread has to wait for another to finish, there's no way a game will ever magically saturate 8 threads making amd somehow as good as the i5. Look at your claims, BF4 optimized for more cores but its getting outperformed by a i5.

O wait, AMD themself even released their own i5 vs 8350 BF4 benchmarks.

Source: http://wccftech.com/amd-mantle-api-performance-preview-radeon-r7-260x-radeon-r9-270x-radeon-r9-280x/

[Bloodkil933]

You should do your research better. You can't multithread everything, some tasks just cannot be multithreaded, you're still having problems that each thread has to wait for another to finish, there's no way a game will ever magically saturate 8 threads making amd somehow as good as the i5. Look at your claims, BF4 optimized for more cores but its getting outperformed by a i5.

O wait, AMD themself even released their own i5 vs 8350 BF4 benchmarks.

Source: http://wccftech.com/amd-mantle-api-performance-preview-radeon-r7-260x-radeon-r9-270x-radeon-r9-280x/

My FX-8350 will max out most games for me with my 290X, and it cost me less than an i5 would, so I'm happy, if the i5/i7 is better for you then I'm happy for you, as a gamer, and soon a streamer, the FX-8350 is better for my budget and has no problems doing what I need.

 

I agree if you're a professional, and Intel CPU is better, but for gaming on the most part you won't notice much, except in poorly threaded games.

 

Now let's keep this friendly, we're all part of the PC Master Race, we all like the same things, be it if you have an AMD/Intel CPU or Nvidia or AMD GPU.

[Solkia]

You should do your research better. You can't multithread everything, some tasks just cannot be multithreaded, you're still having problems that each thread has to wait for another to finish, there's no way a game will ever magically saturate 8 threads making amd somehow as good as the i5. Look at your claims, BF4 optimized for more cores but its getting outperformed by a i5.

O wait, AMD themself even released their own i5 vs 8350 BF4 benchmarks.

Source: http://wccftech.com/amd-mantle-api-performance-preview-radeon-r7-260x-radeon-r9-270x-radeon-r9-280x/

 

I'm confused, this graph shows hardly any difference between the 2 processors, and even says an APU performed better than both of them which is impossible.

 

As for the OP. it depends what you're looking for. If multitasking and price to perfomance is what you're after then the 8350. If single-core performance and low energy consumption are what you're after then go with the i5.

[Faa]

My FX-8350 will max out most games for me with my 290X, and it cost me less than an i5 would, so I'm happy, if the i5/i7 is better for you then I'm happy for you, as a gamer, and soon a streamer, the FX-8350 is better for my budget and has no problems doing what I need.

The i5 comes with Quicksync will offload everything from the cpu to the IGP, so if you're planning to stream the i5 will be the better choice if you use the IGP. OBS supports it though.

You paid like 420$ for it (8350 200 - MB 100$ - Cooler 100$ to cool that power vampire), which costs nearly two times more than a i5 4430/H81. A locked i5 still outperforms a 8350 at 4.8GHz, it doesnt need an aftermarkt cooler and a H81 40$ is plenty. Like I said people think 200$ is cheaper than 200$ because its AMD. It's cheaper with overclocking equipment included too because its AMD. You paid even more than what Originpc/alienware would ask for a 8350/290x.

I'm not telling you to upgrade your CPU, actually I don't care, I'm only giving the OP honest advice and not some information that you know thats wrong which many people here proved you wrong already.

 

 

I'm confused, this graph shows hardly any difference between the 2 processors, and even says an APU performed better than both of them which is impossible.

Ofc AMD won't show a huge difference, that benchmark has been done by AMD. If AMD points out that the i5 is faster, then it says us enough how invalid corecount is for gaming.

[Bloodkil933]

 

The i5 comes with Quicksync will offload everything from the cpu to the IGP, so if you're planning to stream the i5 will be the better choice if you use the IGP. OBS supports it though.

You paid like 420$ for it (8350 200 - MB 100$ - Cooler 100$ to cool that power vampire), which costs nearly two times more than a i5 4430/H81. A locked i5 still outperforms a 8350 at 4.8GHz, it doesnt need an aftermarkt cooler and a H81 40$ is plenty. Like I said people think 200$ is cheaper than 200$ because its AMD. It's cheaper with overclocking equipment included too because its AMD. You paid even more than what Originpc/alienware would ask for a 8350/290x.

I'm not telling you to upgrade your CPU, actually I don't care, I'm only giving the OP honest advice and not some information that you know thats wrong which many people here proved you wrong already.

 

 

Ofc AMD won't show a huge difference, that benchmark has been done by AMD. If AMD points out that the i5 is faster, then it says us enough how invalid corecount is for gaming.

 

But it wouldn't be worth upgrading for gaming and performance increase would be minimal, just couldn't justify it.

[Faa]

But it wouldn't be worth upgrading for gaming and performance increase would be minimal, just couldn't justify it.

If you play BF4 yea I agree.

[patrickjp93]

But it wouldn't be worth upgrading for gaming and performance increase would be minimal, just couldn't justify it.

True, upgrading FROM 8350 even to 4790k would be moronic, although this is mainly due to Z97 chipsets only supporting 16 PCIe lanes (fuck you Intel for feature and price gouging, and screw you AMD for making every performance chip a substitute for a space heater).

[Bloodkil933]

True, upgrading FROM 8350 even to 4790k would be moronic, although this is mainly due to Z97 chipsets only supporting 16 PCIe lanes (fuck you Intel for feature and price gouging, and screw you AMD for making every performance chip a substitute for a space heater).

I suppose you just gotta compromise and get what's best for needs, I chose the 8350 purely because it could deliver what i needed for a good price point

[Bloodkil933]

If you play BF4 yea I agree.

Not really, I'm not spending £300 on an upgrade that would give a minimal increase.

[Faa]

Not really, I'm not spending £300 on an upgrade that would give a minimal increase.

I agreed with you that upgrading from a 8350 to a i5 isn't worth it for BF4. 

[ComradeHX]

Gaming is about single core performance? BWAHAHA

Why do you think cheap 8-core cpu performs worse consistently in most games?

There are still too many games that run on 1 or 2 main threads.

[TwistedDictator]

those are within the margin of error and the 8350 was not at stock speed either.

 

Marign of error? How?

 

Yes it was on stock.

[patrickjp93]

Marign of error? How?

 

Yes it was on stock.

Stats 101. The number of tests run is far too low to be definitive, there are too many environmental variables missing (room temperature, verified clock speeds, coolers used, etc.), and that website has a nasty habit of building up AMD's products beyond real-world performance by secretly overclocking the chips and using those scores. Also, look at the scores themselves. The difference is miniscule. That can show up by the room changing 3 degrees Fahrenheit. There's also the distinct possibility they used the stock cooler of the Intel chip (again a known nasty trick of theirs to deflate Intel's scores).

[TwistedDictator]

Stats 101. The number of tests run is far too low to be definitive, there are too many environmental variables missing (room temperature, verified clock speeds, coolers used, etc.), and that website has a nasty habit of building up AMD's products beyond real-world performance by secretly overclocking the chips and using those scores. Also, look at the scores themselves. The difference is miniscule. That can show up by the room changing 3 degrees Fahrenheit. There's also the distinct possibility they used the stock cooler of the Intel chip (again a known nasty trick of theirs to deflate Intel's scores).

 

This post made me facepalm just for the stupidity. Its youtube, not a website. The website has nothing to do with a user uploading a benchmark video. And the rest is just stupid nonsense, I just dont know what to say lol serious wtf are you trolling? Well apprently you can go on teksydicate (not sure but people said it there) and there is more information. He was using both h100i lol. This is just too stupid to continue replying too because I know you are trolling!

[patrickjp93]

This post made me facepalm just for the stupidity. Its youtube, not a website. The website has nothing to do with a user uploading a benchmark video. And the rest is just stupid nonsense, I just dont know what to say lol serious wtf are you trolling? Well apprently you can go on teksydicate (not sure but people said it there) and there is more information. He was using both h100i lol. This is just too stupid to continue replying too because I know you are trolling!

Wait, which set of benchmarks were you talking about? I didn't mean the ones on youtube.

[Faa]

This post made me facepalm just for the stupidity. Its youtube, not a website. The website has nothing to do with a user uploading a benchmark video. And the rest is just stupid nonsense, I just dont know what to say lol serious wtf are you trolling? Well apprently you can go on teksydicate (not sure but people said it there) and there is more information. He was using both h100i lol. This is just too stupid to continue replying too because I know you are trolling!

The topics i5/i7 vs 8350 died a long time ago except people like you who keep bringing it back up living in their fantasy world that AMD does better.

[thebennyboy]

-snip-

 

No point in arguing with this guy. Just a troll, anyone that proves him wrong is either "talking out of their ass" or is apparently fabricating the results. 

 

Anyone saying that either one is better than the other is wrong. Check: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/837?vs=697 and http://www.game-debate.com/cpu/index.php?pid=1192&pid2=1140&compare=core-i5-4670k-3-4ghz-vs-fx-8350

 

They trade blows, so ye... saying one is better than the other is misleading. Both are good dependant on the tasks being done.

[Casual]

If I were you, I would go for the 4670k. Actually, get the refresh, same price I think?

 

I personally have a 4670k and love It. No point In me getting the refresh, especially considering I don't really have heat Issues. Also comparing my overclocks to others, I'm using super low voltages for 4.4Ghz+ (think I won the silicon lottery )