bottleneck question!

Joshua Ondangan · October 28, 2014

8320 or whatever the eco version is not so bad. it works. it's not like you would lose 50fps by going amd nor gain 50fps going intel. (This is one of the undeniable facts that many people tend to overlook).

so long are you're getting 60fps on a 60hz monitor or 120/144 fps on 120/144hz monitor you should be good.

although my recommendation would be intel on this one.

besides all other facts out there which are common to a lot of people.

in the long run you will thank us. you will probably not upgrade this and if you do you will be getting a new cpu/motherboard but in the end you will still thank a lot of people if you go intel right now.

unless amd spout out some new processor in 2015 that performs much better than haswell and eats less power then that would be another story although seems kinda bleak right now.

Majestic · October 28, 2014

8320 or whatever the eco version is not so bad. it works. it's not like you would lose 50fps by going amd nor gain 50fps going intel. (This is one of the undeniable facts that many people tend to overlook).

so long are you're getting 60fps on a 60hz monitor or 120/144 fps on 120/144hz monitor you should be good.

This is that subjective stuff i was talking about 2 posts back. It has no context, proof or technical explanations and is ultimately going to cause confusion and perpetuating the endless argument. The fact that in some cases it doesn't matter much (IE shitty console ports with 0 complexity + a midrange GPU), does not imply that it's a good decision in general. IPC > cores given a pricerange and taken as a mean value, is still, and mostly forever will be, the rule of thumb. And by that rule of thumb, an i3/i5 or i7 will always be the better choice for gaming.

http://anandtech.com/bench/product/1197?vs=697

Look at the gaming benchmarks below. The dual-core i3-4330 just beats the 8-core 8350 in a GTX770 SLI setup whilst being cheaper in price. IPC > cores, and AMD isn't cheaper. There, discussion debunked. Praise gaben.

Joshua Ondangan · October 28, 2014

This is that subjective stuff i was talking about 2 posts back. It has no context, proof or technical explanations and is ultimately going to cause confusion and perpetuating the endless argument. The fact that in some cases it doesn't matter much (IE shitty console ports with 0 complexity + a midrange GPU), does not imply that it's a good decision in general. IPC > cores given a pricerange and taken as a mean value, is still, and mostly forever will be, the rule of thumb. And by that rule of thumb, an i3/i5 or i7 will always be the better choice for gaming.

http://anandtech.com/bench/product/1197?vs=697

Look at the gaming benchmarks below. The dual-core i3-4330 just beats the 8-core 8350 in a GTX770 SLI setup whilst being cheaper in price. IPC > cores, and AMD isn't cheaper. There, discussion debunked. Praise gaben.

yep I do agree with you there. (although when I did a video editing with a 8350 @ stock vs a i3 3220 @ stock with sli titan blacks while playing bf4 the i3 3220 just gave up). so things depends on what you plan to do with them.

@OT

just that there are a lot of people going totally nuts about the amd vs intel thing.

so long as you're immersed in what you're doing whether playing or productivity a few fps difference would hardly matter unless the fps dip was huge as in like from 66 to 25's.

although people tend to go with proof and stuff with numbers but everything is not about it too.

with too much numbers out there people tend to forget the feeling we get we are after all human and have feeling. if we didn't notice hardly any difference then there is no point going with a expensive purchace (well depends on the person).

and yes humans tend to love facts with numbers that other people tested. since humans in most cases are afraid to experience failure (sad but true QQ).

well in the end so long as TS is happy with his purchase which matters more than all the facts that are contributed to this thread.

I still advice for TS to take the intel side on this one.

Majestic · October 28, 2014

yep I do agree with you there. (although when I did a video editing with a 8350 @ stock vs a i3 3220 @ stock with sli titan blacks while playing bf4 the i3 3220 just gave up). so things depends on what you plan to do with them.

The i3-4330 is quite a bit better than a i3-3220 though. 1MB Cache extra helps.

Also, that's a load of subjective BS you aimed at the OP.