I5-4670k vs FX 8320

[sribeast21]

Hey! Which processor is better: Intel core i5-4670k or AMD FX 8320. 
 

 

Uses for computer:

 

1. Learning to edit video

 

2. Gaming + next gen gaming

 

3. programming

 

4. school, web browsing etc

 

 

The main reason I posted this is beacause I wanted to know which cpu should I get for gaming and using a pc for the future, AMD FX 8320 or I5-4670k. I heard games are starting to take advantage of 8 core cpus so I was just wondering.

 

 

thanks,

sribeast21

[Cacao]

Overall I would say the 4670k performs better, it blows the 8320 away in single core performance. However if the software is very well optimized for 4+ cores then the 8320 can have a slight advantage.

[Breakdown]

I would say the 4670k. It's on the 1150 socket which was just released this year. On the other hand the 8320 is on the AM3+ socket, which is over a year old now. Not sure when the successor to that socket will be released though. That's only for future proofing.

 

The 8320 had 8 cores vs the 4 cores in the 4670k, so the 8320 is better for video editing. They provide essentially the same performance in all other aspects.

[helping]

Why not an 8350? Vote would still go for 8320, it suits your needs better.

[Xaring]

8320 is better in video Editing and practically tied up in gaming, so I would go for the AMD build. The AM3+ socket will not last much more, but all the new CPUs would need a better Mobo anyways, so go for AMD (I would get the 8350, its cheaper than the i5-4670)

[sonarctica]

I'd say 8320, the next gen games are optimised for it, and the fact that you edit videos and stuff like that, I'm voting for 8320

[TechFan@ic]

Editing videos will come down to the specific software you're using, if it's GPU optimized a CPU would not affect render speed.
However all video editing software is very multi-core optimized so an FX 8320 will excel at this type of workload if the software relies on the CPU & does not support OpenCL or CUDA.

In gaming you'll be fine with either processor, a 4670K will be slightly faster especially in single-thread reliant games which are slightly older, however the way the FX 8320 is priced means you can translate the CPU savings into a more powerful graphics card which will significantly improve game performance.

Either processor will do just fine with programming & general school work.

[MeltyMoon]

My honest opinion would be to buy an 8350, and OC it to around 4.6Ghz. It would be great for video editing, and if you start writing more complicated code, it would also help in that aspect. You can learn how to code for the future which would be to spread all of the code out on multiple threads . Looking at it gaming aspect wise, an 8350 shouldn't really bottleneck any single GPU set up besides in ridiculously CPU bound games like skyrim, but really you should have so many graphics mods that you can't hit that bottleneck threshold in the first place . Hope my ramble here helped you out a bit! 

 

To answer your games are utilizing more cores question, yes they are.

Crysis 3, and Battlefied 3 are perfect examples of games out right now that can utilize at lest 6 cores or more!

[WoodenMarker]

8320 is the better value and does what you need.

[Mixzzz]

Go for 8320(better value performance) or 8350(a bit better performance), it suits your needs better and games are starting to use more cores so it would suit better next gen games... And about that upgrading thing... Most people dont do it anyway or will need to buy a new mobo

[Dravic]

My honest opinion would be to buy an 8350, and OC it to around 4.6Ghz. It would be great for video editing, and if you start writing more complicated code, it would also help in that aspect. You can learn how to code for the future which would be to spread all of the code out on multiple threads . Looking at it gaming aspect wise, an 8350 shouldn't really bottleneck any single GPU set up besides in ridiculously CPU bound games like skyrim, but really you should have so many graphics mods that you can't hit that bottleneck threshold in the first place . Hope my ramble here helped you out a bit! 

 

To answer your games are utilizing more cores question, yes they are.

Crysis 3, and Battlefied 3 are perfect examples of games out right now that can utilize at lest 6 cores or more!

Except i5 is faster in Battlefield 3 lol.

I'd like to mention that you guys always go like ZOMFG AMD IS CHEAPER. Now that's funny cuz if you don't like to do extreme overclocking you can get a cheaper i5+mobo build. And it still is faster than FX 8 core in most gaming cases.

A good mobo costs 60$ and i5 non-k less than 200$. And you can put the money saved on getting faster CPU towards additional GPU Power.

[Mixzzz]

Except i5 is faster in Battlefield 3 lol.

I'd like to mention that you guys always go like ZOMFG AMD IS CHEAPER. Now that's funny cuz if you don't like to do extreme overclocking you can get a cheaper i5+mobo build. And it still is faster than FX 8 core in most gaming cases.

A good mobo costs 60$ and i5 non-k less than 200$. And you can put the money saved on getting faster CPU towards additional GPU Power.

Hmm, 60$ mobo? Or its just me who cant reach those low prices? , anyway well if hes video editing and programming AMD would be better and you can really easily OC FX 8320 to 8350 speeds or more...

[MetroP]

Except i5 is faster in Battlefield 3 lol.

I'd like to mention that you guys always go like ZOMFG AMD IS CHEAPER. Now that's funny cuz if you don't like to do extreme overclocking you can get a cheaper i5+mobo build. And it still is faster than FX 8 core in most gaming cases.

A good mobo costs 60$ and i5 non-k less than 200$. And you can put the money saved on getting faster CPU towards additional GPU Power.

No you're wrong again, in BF3 the 8350 & the i5 perform the same, it's a GPU bound game.

In newer games the 8350 beats the 3570K because of the new game engines that were developed in anticipation of the new consoles that have 8 AMD cores, and in any serious workloads the 8350 destroys the i5.

 

 

[Dravic]

No you're wrong again, in BF3 the 8350 & the i5 perform the same, it's a GPU bound game.

In newer games the 8350 beats the 3570K because of the new game engines that were developed in anticipation of the new consoles that have 8 AMD cores, and in any serious workloads the 8350 destroys the i5.

 

Try multiplayer in bf3 benchmarks. Bf3 singpeplayer is purely GPU bound, but who actually bought bf3 for singleplayer? Multi is where its all about.

Where did I say all stuff works better on i5? Nowhere so skip the flamewar. I'm here to help.

[MetroP]

Try multiplayer in bf3 benchmarks. Bf3 singpeplayer is purely GPU bound, but who actually bought bf3 for singleplayer? Multi is where its all about.

Where did I say all stuff works better on i5? Nowhere so skip the flamewar. I'm here to help.

You're giving out bad advice and I'm pointing that out, I did not mention any flaming.

[PillowSmoke]

You really aren't here to help... also why haven't you been banned yet for your attack on other members who say AMD is the better option...? He should get the FX-8320 as he is doing more than gaming as the OP clearly states... or did you just read Intel and Gaming then jump to the conclusion than Intel is best and that you know all... YET YOU DON'T!

 

I'm getting that processor

[brob]

My honest opinion would be to buy an 8350, and OC it to around 4.6Ghz. It would be great for video editing, and if you start writing more complicated code, it would also help in that aspect. You can learn how to code for the future which would be to spread all of the code out on multiple threads . Looking at it gaming aspect wise, an 8350 shouldn't really bottleneck any single GPU set up besides in ridiculously CPU bound games like skyrim, but really you should have so many graphics mods that you can't hit that bottleneck threshold in the first place . Hope my ramble here helped you out a bit! 

 

To answer your games are utilizing more cores question, yes they are.

Crysis 3, and Battlefied 3 are perfect examples of games out right now that can utilize at lest 6 cores or more!

 

Why not get an i5-4670K and oc it to 3.9GHz - the equivalent oc? Better yet, 70% of i5-4670K can get get to 4.5GHz, They would gobble up an 8350 and spit it out in little pieces . My point is that suggesting an oc'd cpu would be beat a stock cpu is silly. Silly because the stock cpu can also be overclocked, and contrary to popular opinion, oc'd just as well as its competition.

[MeltyMoon]

Why not get an i5-4670K and oc it to 3.9GHz - the equivalent oc? Better yet, 70% of i5-4670K can get get to 4.5GHz, They would gobble up an 8350 and spit it out in little pieces . My point is that suggesting an oc'd cpu would be beat a stock cpu is silly. Silly because the stock cpu can also be overclocked, and contrary to popular opinion, oc'd just as well as its competition.

well this thread is kinda 2 months old lol. And at this point you can be looking at a ~50 dollar difference between CPUs. And all of my old points still kinda stand

[brob]

1. Learning to video edit: Either cpu will do a decent job. i5 will be better at calculating some effects & transitions because they are single threaded. Likely you'll be doing gpu rendering, so the gpu is going to decide how well that goes.

Gaming: the gpu decides this for most games. When the cpu is important there isn't any real world difference except in particular games.

Programming: i5 is faster for compiling/interpreting because of its superior single thread performance. But what really makes the difference in programming is storage speeds. An SSD makes a big difference.

School work & web browsing: are pretty much the same. Once again, storage speed makes the big difference.