My Impressions - AMD to Intel

[TheCaptain53]

So after buying an i5-4690K for a good price, I got a Z97 board a couple of days later, and installed all of it today. I was using an FX-6300 with a mild overclock.

Holy ****, that made a difference.

I ran the PassMark Performance benchmarking software and got a much higher score of 3737 compared to the 2629 with my AMD.

Then I ran Dying Light. I obviously don't understand PCs enough as I thought your maximum fps would be dictated by your GPU usage. I was seeing 98% usage on my GPU when paired with my AMD and likewise with my Intel, but I was seeing a 10-15 fps increase consistently, and it barely dipped below 60.

I never fully understood why people stood so firmly with Intel over AMD. I now see why, as I'm officially converted.

I still love my AMD chip and it has already been repurposed, but I don't think I could ever go back.

As a side note, what's the performance of the G3258 like? I'd love to see that pitched against an FX-6300.

[Altecice]

Yep, Like everyone on this forum keeps saying. Intel > AMD for gaming... I dont like synthetic benchmark results myself but in game performance is just so much smoother with less dips.

(I moved form an FX-8350 @ 5ghz > I7-4790K @ 4.8Ghz) and Im not gaining much FPS but i defiantly get less dips and juddering.

[Guest Kloaked]

We recommend Intel over AMD because number one, AMD's enthusiast platform is dead as it sits. Then for the second main reason, you get better GPU usage and higher minimum frame rates.

 

So what you experienced is why we do that.

 

The G3258 would outperform the 6300 given that they're both put in a motherboard that can overclock the CPU for it to be fair. This is for gaming applications though, so outside of that I'm not 100% sure.

[TitanGamer]

The g3258 is great, overclocked to 4ghz with an oc genie and I am running smooth, I plan on purchasing a gpu in a few weeks, then I can play more demanding games. But it handles gaming suprisingly well for being a $70 chip.

 

 

Edit: It's only drawback is lack of hyperthreading and/or more processing cores, other than that, it is great. It holds up very well in benchmarks even against much higher end cpu's.

[CoolaxGaming]

Nice! 

Now, just oc that puppy and you will be awesome!

[CoolaxGaming]

 

The G3258 would outperform the 6300 given that they're both put in a motherboard that can overclock the CPU for it to be fair. This is for gaming applications though, so outside of that I'm not 100% sure.

Correct, the g3258 will be faster in gaming because of superior single threaded performance, but in some cases, the FX 6300 can use its multithreaded performance to beat the shit out of it

[TheCaptain53]

Correct, the g3258 will be faster in gaming because of superior single threaded performance, but in some cases, the FX 6300 can use its multithreaded performance to beat the shit out of it

I kind of just want to buy one and try it out, it's only around £55. 

How many games would see the benefit of the many threads of the AMD over the faster, far fewer threads of the G3258?

[Trik'Stari]

I had a similar experience running a gtx 660 on an A-10 5700 AMD APU, then switching to an I5-4690k.

 

Was like going from moped to a Ferrari.

[Aniallation]

As a side note, what's the performance of the G3258 like? I'd love to see that pitched against an FX-6300.

The G3258 would outperform the 6300 given that they're both put in a motherboard that can overclock the CPU for it to be fair. This is for gaming applications though, so outside of that I'm not 100% sure.

Correct, the g3258 will be faster in gaming because of superior single threaded performance, but in some cases, the FX 6300 can use its multithreaded performance to beat the shit out of it

 

Not really.

 

"Gaming" is too unspecific. In AAA titles the FX-6300 will be better then a G3258, even if at lower clock speeds. There have been lots of people including myself who have had issues with stuttering and frame rate dips with the G3258 in AAA titles. Overclocked G3258 was actually a downgrade from my stock Phenom II X6. In those kinds of demanding games a FX6 should be compared with an i3 (in which i3 usually wins), not G3258.

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/353771-amd-phenom-ii-x6-1075t-vs-overclocked-intel-pentium-g3258/

 

However in heavily single-threaded games like MMOs and MOBAs the G3258 is definitely ahead.

[Guest Kloaked]

Not really.

 

"Gaming" is too unspecific. In AAA titles the FX-6300 will be better then a G3258, even if at lower clock speeds. There have been lots of people including myself who have had issues with stuttering and frame rate dips with the G3258 in AAA titles. Overclocked G3258 was actually a downgrade from my stock Phenom II X6. In those kinds of demanding games a FX6 should be compared with an i3 (in which i3 usually wins), not G3258.

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/353771-amd-phenom-ii-x6-1075t-vs-overclocked-intel-pentium-g3258/

 

However in heavily single-threaded games like MMOs and MOBAs the G3258 is definitely ahead.

 

It's also not on a dead platform and has an upgrade path, so if you experience issues like that you can always upgrade it later on.

[TheCaptain53]

Not really.

 

"Gaming" is too unspecific. In AAA titles the FX-6300 will be better then a G3258, even if at lower clock speeds. There have been lots of people including myself who have had issues with stuttering and frame rate dips with the G3258 in AAA titles. Overclocked G3258 was actually a downgrade from my stock Phenom II X6. In those kinds of demanding games a FX6 should be compared with an i3 (in which i3 usually wins), not G3258.

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/353771-amd-phenom-ii-x6-1075t-vs-overclocked-intel-pentium-g3258/

 

However in heavily single-threaded games like MMOs and MOBAs the G3258 is definitely ahead.

That's kind of a shame. A cracking chip would be an unlocked i3, then there really would be no excuse to go AMD over Intel.

[Aniallation]

It's also not on a dead platform and has an upgrade path, so if you experience issues like that you can always upgrade it later on.

I was talking about performance-wise. However for a new build it shouldn't really take that long to save up for an i3.

 

 

That's kind of a shame. A cracking chip would be an unlocked i3, then there really would be no excuse to go AMD over Intel.

There will never be an unlocked i3 for that reason. It would be so great for gaming-only (without streaming, multitasking, or content creation) that barely anybody would buy the unlocked i5's.

[MahtXL]

That's kind of a shame. A cracking chip would be an unlocked i3, then there really would be no excuse to go AMD over Intel.

Except for the fact that ya know it has proven better multi threaded performance. And what do modern games use? oh thats right lots of cores. They both have their benefits and yes amds enthusiast grade stuff cpu wise is lacking. But to make baseless claims about a dual core intel being able to stand up to a 6 core amd. come on. for work loads with 1 or 2 threads sure. modern games? Not a farking chance in heck. No matter how much you "overclock it" i can oc my 8350 to 5ghz and leave it and many other similar grade intels in the dust.

[AFlyingBuffalo]

I'm getting a G3258 tomorrow and I'm coming from an Athlon X4 760K so I can't wait to see how that will turn out!

[TheCaptain53]

Except for the fact that ya know it has proven better multi threaded performance. And what do modern games use? oh thats right lots of cores. They both have their benefits and yes amds enthusiast grade stuff cpu wise is lacking. But to make baseless claims about a dual core intel being able to stand up to a 6 core amd. come on. for work loads with 1 or 2 threads sure. modern games? Not a farking chance in heck. No matter how much you "overclock it" i can oc my 8350 to 5ghz and leave it and many other similar grade intels in the dust.

I have JUST moved from AMD to Intel.

I think my fanboyism is justified.

[Dabombinable]

I was talking about performance-wise. However for a new build it shouldn't really take that long to save up for an i3.

 

 

There will never be an unlocked i3 for that reason. It would be so great for gaming-only (without streaming, multitasking, or content creation) that barely anybody would buy the unlocked i5's.

Dual core with hyperthreading i3, tri core with hyperthreading i5, quad core with hyperthreading  i7.

[Aniallation]

I'm getting a G3258 tomorrow and I'm coming from an Athlon X4 760K so I can't wait to see how that will turn out!

760K > G3258 for AAA gaming, vice versa for single-threaded gaming like MMOs

[TheCaptain53]

I was talking about performance-wise. However for a new build it shouldn't really take that long to save up for an i3.

 

 

There will never be an unlocked i3 for that reason. It would be so great for gaming-only (without streaming, multitasking, or content creation) that barely anybody would buy the unlocked i5's.

A whole lot of people say that, and it reminds me of this LTT video.

Whilst they don't represent actual CPUs and are more of an 'approximation', the testing did show that a dual core with hyperthreading was pretty much (in a lot of cases) between the quad core with no HT and the dual core with no HT.

I could be wrong, and an unlocked i3 could make the i5 nervous, but I think it would be a good chip with an excellent placement in the market.

If someone has read an article that shows some evidence of me being completely wrong, please link. I'd love to read it.

[Aniallation]

Whilst they don't represent actual CPUs and are more of an 'approximation', the testing did show that a dual core with hyperthreading was pretty much (in a lot of cases) between the quad core with no HT and the dual core with no HT.

I could be wrong, and an unlocked i3 could make the i5 nervous, but I think it would be a good chip with an excellent placement in the market.

If someone has read an article that shows some evidence of me being completely wrong, please link. I'd love to read it.

Well there's really no article on a proposed unlocked i3 cause honestly it will most likely never happen. Two cores with HT is already a great balance between G3258 and i5 at stock speeds. If overclocked it makes it a very compelling option for people who play both AAA titles and more single-threaded games like MMOs. As it stands they're basically making it so that people who want to have good performance in AAA titles and demanding single-threaded titles have to buy a 4690K and overclock it, they'd lose money from these people if they made an unlocked i3.

[TheCaptain53]

Well there's really no article on a proposed unlocked i3 cause honestly it will most likely never happen. Two cores with HT is already a great balance between G3258 and i5 at stock speeds. If overclocked it makes it a very compelling option for people who play both AAA titles and more single-threaded games like MMOs. As it stands they're basically making it so that people who want to have good performance in AAA titles and demanding single-threaded titles have to buy a 4690K and overclock it, they'd lose money from these people if they made an unlocked i3.

That's such a shame. An army of newbie builders with an unlocked i3 would be a marvel to see.

They do have awesome single threaded performance, but the £140 price difference between the G3258 and the 4690K with no unlocked processor in between is kind of a piss take. In my opinion, it's pushing people away from Intel in that price range. Below £60 and above £190, there's really no point going for AMD. But they do have a good range of processors in that price bracket.

Also, I haven't overclocked my 4690K (yet). As I'm only runnning a GTX 960, I don't think I would benefit from the overclock. I'd rather just stick with a lower heat output. At least I've got the option of overclocking when I get myself something like a GTX 970/980 in the future.

[SteveGrabowski0]

So after buying an i5-4690K for a good price, I got a Z97 board a couple of days later, and installed all of it today. I was using an FX-6300 with a mild overclock.

Holy ****, that made a difference.

I ran the PassMark Performance benchmarking software and got a much higher score of 3737 compared to the 2629 with my AMD.

Then I ran Dying Light. I obviously don't understand PCs enough as I thought your maximum fps would be dictated by your GPU usage. I was seeing 98% usage on my GPU when paired with my AMD and likewise with my Intel, but I was seeing a 10-15 fps increase consistently, and it barely dipped below 60.

I never fully understood why people stood so firmly with Intel over AMD. I now see why, as I'm officially converted.

I still love my AMD chip and it has already been repurposed, but I don't think I could ever go back.

As a side note, what's the performance of the G3258 like? I'd love to see that pitched against an FX-6300.

 

Dying Light is a pretty lousy port, but such an amazing game. It just chokes on any kind of AMD hardware. Tom's Hardware's benchmark shows the R9 290x performing roughly equal to the GTX 960 in it.

 

As for the G3258, I'd be surprised if it outperformed the FX-6300 in many new games. I have a G3258 and it's not very good for AAA gaming. Night and day difference in every new game after switching to a Xeon E3-1231v3.

[FLUFFYJELLO]

Except for the fact that ya know it has proven better multi threaded performance. And what do modern games use? oh thats right lots of cores. They both have their benefits and yes amds enthusiast grade stuff cpu wise is lacking. But to make baseless claims about a dual core intel being able to stand up to a 6 core amd. come on. for work loads with 1 or 2 threads sure. modern games? Not a farking chance in heck. No matter how much you "overclock it" i can oc my 8350 to 5ghz and leave it and many other similar grade intels in the dust.

It's not baseless claims when you've owned both (like I have) and tested them head to head and watched the Pentium G3258 destroy an FX63(50) in all applications that use 2 cores. But sure, if you want to ignore the other posts where people said the FX wins in multi-threaded applications and get pissy, go ahead.

The problem is, you're wrong. Your 8350 gets destroyed by Intel's similarly priced offerings (an i3 beats it at stock in most games, and an i5 annihilates it even when it is overclocked to 5GHz). And it (the i5) doesn't require aftermarket cooling, a beefy 6+x power phase motherboard that costs $100+ (90£+), and doesn't suffer the awful minimum frame dips that happen due to the FX line's terrible IPC.

You are wrong. You are posing false information, and your misleading people should really just stop. The FX processors should not be considered for gaming at any level unless the price difference of going with Intel in a person's area is extremely skewed.

[Dabombinable]

It's not baseless claims when you've owned both (like I have) and tested them head to head and watched the Pentium G3258 destroy an FX63(50) in all applications that use 2 cores. But sure, if you want to ignore the other posts where people said the FX wins in multi-threaded applications and get pissy, go ahead.

The problem is, you're wrong. Your 8350 gets destroyed by Intel's similarly priced offerings (an i3 beats it at stock in most games, and an i5 annihilates it even when it is overclocked to 5GHz). And it (the i5) doesn't require aftermarket cooling, a beefy 6+x power phase motherboard that costs $100+ (90£+), and doesn't suffer the awful minimum frame dips that happen due to the FX line's terrible IPC.

You are wrong. You are posing false information, and your misleading people should really just stop. The FX processors should not be considered for gaming at any level unless the price difference of going with Intel in a person's area is extremely skewed.

My i5 4440 annihilating FX suicide overclocked CPU:

[FLUFFYJELLO]

My i5 4440 annihilating FX suicide overclocked CPU:

Untitled.png

Beautiful :')

[Guest Kloaked]

Except for the fact that ya know it has proven better multi threaded performance. And what do modern games use? oh thats right lots of cores. They both have their benefits and yes amds enthusiast grade stuff cpu wise is lacking. But to make baseless claims about a dual core intel being able to stand up to a 6 core amd. come on. for work loads with 1 or 2 threads sure. modern games? Not a farking chance in heck. No matter how much you "overclock it" i can oc my 8350 to 5ghz and leave it and many other similar grade intels in the dust.

 

Modern games use lots of cores? Fanboyism? Please. Games are hardly even utilizing cores properly outside of Core 0 from what I've seen, hence DX12 and Mantle/Vulkan getting so much attention, and calling someone a fanboy because they go off of evidence that Intel > AMD for games shows how much of a fanboy you are.

 

G3258 loses to a 6300 sometimes even when overclocked, sure. The other thing I forgot to mention in that first post I made was that along with AMD's enthusiast platform being dead as it sits, Intel's platform has a worthy upgrade path unlike 990FX. That's not fanboyism, that's just fact. It's not a baseless claim to say a G3258 would be the better choice because if you run into performance issues, you can grab an i5 and not have to get a new motherboard and you're all set.

 

Jesus Christ. Stop calling people fanboys because they disagree with you and your preference.