3570k vs 8350

[Toxic.]

Using an msi g45 gaming for the i5 and gigabyte 990fxa ud3 for the amd fx.

[Toxic.]

Fir

[Toxic.]

For gaming *

[joelthezombie15]

What is your question?

[xAdam]

What is your question?

and his 3,500th post ensues!

 

Im guessing you want to know whats best? Gaming: 3570k For running multi threaded aplications like adobe ect.. the 8350 will be more suited to you

[virusal19]

*Note* There is an "Edit" button.

 

In benchmarks the 3570K is ever so slight better than the 8350 but the price makes the 8350 a better CPU for gaming in terms of price and performance ratio.  

[TechFan@ic]

If you want future safety (I hate the word future proof) grab an FX 8350.

 

 

In a poll Eurogamer conducted where a number of game developers were asked to choose between the similarly priced AMD 8 core FX 8350 & Intel quad core i5 3570K for gaming purposes, all developers chose the AMD 8 core.

We approached a number of developers on and off the record, asking them whether an Intel or AMD processor offers the best way to future-proof a games PC built in the here and now. Bearing in mind the historical dominance Intel has enjoyed, the results are intriguing - all of them opted for the FX-8350 over the current default enthusiast's choice, the Core i5 3570K

 

Linus Blomberg from Avalanche Studios,

"I'd go for the FX-8350, for two reasons. Firstly, it's the same hardware vendor as PS4 and there are always some compatibility issues that devs will have to work around (particularly in SIMD[/url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simd] coding), potentially leading to an inferior implementation on other systems - not very likely a big problem in practice though," he says.


"Secondly, not every game engine is job-queue based, even though the Avalanche Engine is, some games are designed around an assumption of available hardware threads. The FX-8350 will clearly be much more powerful [than PS4] in raw processing power considering the superior clock speed, but in terms of architecture it can be a benefit to have the same number of cores so that an identical frame layout can be guaranteed."

 

From another game developer who wished to remain anonymous

"This (Sony) approach of more cores, lower clock, but out-of-order execution will alter the game engine design to be more parallel. If games want to get the most from the chips then they have to go 'wide'... they cannot rely on a powerful single-threaded CPU to run the game as first-gen PS3 and Xbox 360 games did. So, I would probably go for the AMD as well, as this might better match a console port of a game... based on what we know so far."

Source : http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-future-proofing-your-pc-for-next-gen

[sonarctica]

I'd go for the 3570k because it performs better in games that are out today. Though I wonder if this will change now that the new consoles are about to arrive and the new games are optimised for AMD hardware.

[virusal19]

I'd go for the 3570k because it performs better in games that are out today. Though I wonder if this will change now that the new consoles are about to arrive and the new games are optimised for AMD hardware.

 

The difference between the two CPU's is about 1-6 FPS.  

[mgsstar]

+1 on the 8350. Offers a better price to performance ratio than the 3570k.

[ALXAndy]

Yeah I have to chime in here and say that I endorse the 8350. As has been pointed out in gaming you wouldn't notice the difference in games that don't support the 8 cores yet, as both are very capable. However when the 8 cores are supported the 8350 is the faster CPU.

 

If you need to confirm this just take a look at media benchmarks that use all 8 cores. The 8350 wins every time, and that will translate into gaming (and already does on Crysis 3).

[OneGun]

I have a 3570k but i would have to say get a 8350..