Gaming PC cpu query

[zappian]

 

Why is the 6350 worse than the 4350? Might as well just ask why the 9590 is 1% better than the 4350 in a "8-core" optimized game. Answer my original question.

 

^

The man has a point.

 

Like i said even in bf4 the i3 is faster.

[WaitForMeImOnDialUp]

Why is the 6350 worse than the 4350? Might as well just ask why the 9590 is 1% better than the 4350 in a "8-core" optimized game. Answer my original question.

 

because they are all within the margin of error,its seriously within 5 fps for 6350 to 8370.  the 4350 has slower single core speed than the 8 core so i doubt its beats it. judging by how the 4330 beat the 4360 in mininum makes me believe that benchmark is full of errors.

 

fps in games always change with patches and driver updates. i was actually getting more fps with 14.4 drivers than i do with 14.12 omega.the latest bf4 patch(back in nov) also changes things as i was getting more fps before that.

 

 also that is without mantle using nvidea gpus,and it doesnt say if its for multiplayer or 64 player maps, in fact it doesnt even mention what map it is. and those are settings for stock cpu's.fx overclocks very well and if overclocked it beats the i3 in that game hands down. the i5 however will beat both with or without mantle.

 

in bf4..the i3 will beat it in single player, in huge maps with 64 people..the fx8 wins.  this is only in bf4 however

[i_build_nanosuits]

Can I get a nice explanation why the 9590 does worse in a game you advertised as a 8-threaded game at 5GHz/350W than a 3GHz/50W dual core?

 

why is the 4360 worse than a 4330?

 

Why is the 6350 worse than the 4350? Might as well just ask why the 9590 is 1% better than the 4350 in a "8-core" optimized game. Answer my original question.

my 2 cents...but i'd say BECAUSE THIS IS UNRELIABLE BENCHMARKING done by idiots that you should not trust perhaps?!?

I owned CPU from both sides and when it comes to BATTLEFIELD 4 both intel and AMD perfom the same at least with a single high end GPU this is what i tested and OH do you really think GTX 770 SLI only gets like 60 to 85FPS in BF4?!

these charts are total BULLSHIT.

[CalumGiff]

I made a small cut in my budget and have managed to squeeze in an i5 4670k and an r9 290 gpu. I done a quick calculation and running that will pull around 500W from my cpu at max load, will a corsair cx600W be a nice enough PSU to run my system?

I do not plan on running more than one graphics card at any time.

[i_build_nanosuits]

I made a small cut in my budget and have managed to squeeze in an i5 4670k and an r9 290 gpu. I done a quick calculation and running that will pull around 500W from my cpu at max load, will a corsair cx600W be a nice enough PSU to run my system?

I do not plan on running more than one graphics card at any time.

yes absolutely 600W does give you enough headroom and BTW your calculation is very generous i highly doubt you'll reach even 400W under max load with this system...

look at the machine in my sig i run this overclocked GPU and CPU and i use a 550W PSU and my kill-a-watt indicated 384W FROM THE WALL when running cinebench and unigine valley at the same time...people always exagerate how much you need in terms of PSU requirement and also how much watts each components are really pulling from the wall in real life.

 

Take a listen at this video:

 

[Faa]

my 2 cents...but i'd say BECAUSE THIS IS UNRELIABLE BENCHMARKING done by idiots that you should not trust perhaps?!?

I owned CPU from both sides and when it comes to BATTLEFIELD 4 both intel and AMD perfom the same at least with a single high end GPU this is what i tested and OH do you really think GTX 770 SLI only gets like 60 to 85FPS in BF4?!

these charts are total BULLSHIT.

They are minimums

[i_build_nanosuits]

They are minimums

Good eye lol i missed that, must have been tired last night!

okay and the guys ran all over the place obviously doing not the same things at all with all the CPU's runs...this looks like amateur benchmarking to me man because the cpu,s are not at all in the order they should be...

[zappian]

 

my 2 cents...but i'd say BECAUSE THIS IS UNRELIABLE BENCHMARKING done by idiots that you should not trust perhaps?!?

I owned CPU from both sides and when it comes to BATTLEFIELD 4 both intel and AMD perfom the same at least with a single high end GPU this is what i tested and OH do you really think GTX 770 SLI only gets like 60 to 85FPS in BF4?!

these charts are total BULLSHIT.

 

Both minimun and avg fps are higher on the intel cpus.

 

okay and the guys ran all over the place obviously doing not the same things at all with all the CPU's runs...this looks like amateur benchmarking to me man because the cpu,s are not at all in the order they should be...

Not really there is another publication that confirms this.

 

http://www.hardcoreware.net/intel-core-i3-4340-review/3/

 

The i5 is the fastest with the i3 close behind.

 

If you think its BS you should take a look at this as well.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_MPb7Rinq0/

 

Can you come up with an argument other than ERMAGERHD THESE BENCHMARKS ARE FAKE?

[i_build_nanosuits]

Both minimun and avg fps are higher on the intel cpus.

 

Not really there is another publication that confirms this.

 

http://www.hardcoreware.net/intel-core-i3-4340-review/3/

 

The i5 is the fastest with the i3 close behind.

 

If you think its BS you should take a look at this as well.

 

 

they confirm what?

that the i3-4360 is much slower than the i3-4330 ?! or that the AMD FX-6350 is slower than the FX-4350?!

come on look at the graph again and tell me it makes sense...this is what i'm talking about here.

[zappian]

they confirm what?

that the i3-4360 is much slower than the i3-4330 ?! or that the AMD FX-6350 is slower than the FX-4350?! come on...this is what i'm talking about here.

 

That  confirm that the both the i3 and the i5 are better than the fx 8320/50 on bf4.

[CalumGiff]

Anyhow thanks for the advice and ill get my i5 and the cx600W psu

[Faa]

they confirm what?

that the i3-4360 is much slower than the i3-4330 ?! or that the AMD FX-6350 is slower than the FX-4350?!

come on look at the graph again and tell me it makes sense...this is what i'm talking about here.

It's called within margin of error, minimums are pretty random if you know what I mean. 

 

Anyhow thanks for the advice and ill get my i5 and the cx600W psu 

There are better PSU's for that price

[CalumGiff]

Would you mind linking me a few

[i_build_nanosuits]

 

It's called within margin of error, minimums are pretty random if you know what I mean. 

 

yes i know man i'm fucking running the integrated benchmark in the options of shadow of mordor right now and i can't even get consistent results with my rig and i won't change anything i'm litteraly running it and running it and running it and the minimum is NEVR the same i have seen 8FPS and i have seen 37FPS has minimum and almost everything in between man.

 

EDIT: 13FPS right there between the i3's is quite a margin of error...these indicates me that the i3 probably has started micro-stuttering a little bit from time to time