Originally Posted by KamikazeKazzazi
Hi guys, I will be building a new computer this year, and I was with Intel's i5-3570k the whole way through. AD's new processors are now out and bring an explosive competition. Some claim that the FX - 8350 can overclock to 5 GHz easily, that sounds pretty great! But I have also heard that although AMD claims to have 8 cores, not all cores are ever used or something like that. I have posted a previous thread about the AMD 7870 I'm planning on buying, when people told me that an Intel i5 3570k would be the best processor to receive the full performance of my 7870. Any the main question is:
Which processor do you recommend and why, the AMD FX8350 or the Intel i5 3570k?My components:
Case: Corsair 500r
CPU Cooler: Corsair H60 Closed Loop Water Cooling
Graphics Card: GIGABYTE GV-R787OC-2GD Radeon HD 7870 GHz Edition 2GB 256-bit GDDR5
Power Supply: CORSAIR TX Series 750TX 750W
HDD: OCZ Agility 3 240GB SSD
Monitor: LG 22" IPS LED 1920 x 1080With Intel:
CPU- i5 3570k
MoBo- ASRock Z77 Extreme4 LGA 1155 Intel Z77With AMD:
CPU- AMD FX-8350 Vishera 4.0GHz (4.2GHz Turbo)
MoBo- ASRock Fatal1ty 990FX Professional AM3+ AMD 990FX
Although, this AsRock motherboard for AMD is pretty expensive for my budget. I would also consider the:
GIGABYTE GA-990FXA-UD3 AM3+ AMD 990FX
Which is a full $70 under the price of the AsRock, but I love the Design and Color scheme of the AsRock, and I am also scared of the BIOS on Gigabyte boards. They are not UEFI Bios, while AsRock has one of the best BIOS systems out there. I will be overclocking both my CPU and Video Card, so I might be in and out of the BIOS...Questions:
1. Should I dislike Gigabyte boards because of their BIOS?
2. Is a Corsair H60 cool enough to take my FX 8350 to 4.8 to 5, or my i5 3570k to 4.5? If not, which cooler can? (I have a budget, while on sale, the Corsair H60 can be $40 after rebate, so no more that $60)
3. AMD only has PCI 2.0, should I avoid this?
4. The AMD FX 8350 Boasts 8 cores, does that do anything for me?
5. Which CPU will help me get the best out of my system?
6. What can Intel provide that AMD can't?
7. What can AMD provide, that Intel can't?
Thank You Very Much guys!!!!!!!
My quick response to your query:
In general terms, the AMD FX-8350 will perform very well in most situations compared to the 3570K. It uses somewhat more electricity at full load, but remember that your CPU will be running at full load for a very limited amount of time over the life of the computer. Unless you're using your computer as a rendering farm or gaming on it every day for more than 7 hours per day, you are unlikely to notice any meaningful difference in your electricity bill. The other advantage of the FX-8350 is that, as more and more software is compiled (or re-compiled) to be more multi-core efficient, your AMD CPU will perform better and better, whereas the 3570K is probably already running software about as fast as it's ever going to right now. So you can probably look forward to increased performance over the next couple of years on your AMD platform, but with only 4 threads/cores, not so much on an i3/i5 system.
Now, to answer your numbered questions, if I can:
1) No, the Gigabyte boards are very good, and among the best performing and most reliable boards on the market. The bios does just as good a job as UEFI. Also note that many of the latest revisions of Gigabyte boards now support UEFI.
2) The H60 is somewhat inferior in terms of ability to dissapate heat to the Antec Kuhler 620 I'm using right now. Looking at the overclocks for the 620, I'd say you'd be hard pressed to get over 4.7GHz with it. I would strongly suggest a Corsair H100 if you're buying a closed loop water cooler for the FX-8350 chip, as there are several systems at 5GHz using this cooler. The H100 is about $120, but the extra $50 or $60 should get you that extra 200-300MHz. Make sure before you buy the H100, however, that your case can accomodate it, as the radiator on it is a monster! The best option for water, of course, is a custom water cooler.
3) PCI 2.0 is not currently a real limit on your graphics card. PCI 3.0 will be needed for future high-end cards to connect using their full bandwidth capacity, but I wouldn't let that stop you from buying an AMD 990FX motherboard right now, since the 990FX chipset supports 32 lanes of PCI-E, thus giving you true x16+x16x for crossfire/SLI, whereas the Z77 chipset only supports x8+x8 in a dual-card configuration. This is a more important limitation on bandwidth than PCI 2.0 vs. 3.0 with current graphics cards.
4) CPUs only handle two types of calculation. Period. Integer calculations and floating point calculations. Most of the code in every day application software is performaing integer calculations (think word processors, desktop publishing, web-browsers, etc.) In order to perform floating point calculations, Intel devised the x87 floating point unit. As time has passed, Intel and AMD have devised more and more efficient methods of handling floating point calculations, eg. MMX/3DNow!/SSE/AVX/FMA but software must be written to take advantage of these alternative methods. When programs are ported from one platform to another, this optimization sometimes happens and sometimes doesn't happen. If newer program is released which does not detect the presence of more advanced SIMD circuitry on your CPU, you are in a sense, being ripped off. Software developers will argue unti they're blue in the face that it's hard, or that it's more expensive, to re-compile and optimize code for these more advanced floating point technologies, but the fact is that re-compiling old x87 legacy code into code which accesses the AVX/FMA or even just the SSE circuitry of your CPU is about as easy as running a batch file. True, you may not be guaranteed the very most efficient codestream possible, but you WILL get better, faster floating point performance over the old x87 code stream almost without exception.
The FX-8xxx series chips have 4 modules, each of which contains 2 full integer cores, and a shared x87 floating point unit, but also two 128 FMA/AVX units which can also run in parallel to provide 256 FMA/AVX throughput. What this means is that, running older x87 floating point software, the FX is at a disadvantage compared to the i3/i5/i7 x87 performance, HOWEVER, many newer games and other programs (eg. 7-Zip) are compiled for FMA/AVX instructions. When dealing with integer calculations, however, most code that is optimized to recognize and utilize additional cores (or threads) will run faster if those additonal cores (or threads) are present. So the quick answer to your question (4), is yes, the extra cores on the AMD FX chips WILL benefit most users in a wide variety of tasks, most especially if you are running multiple applications. The per clock cycle superiority of the Intel architecture does not help when you are running more apps at the same time, or if you are running code that is integer heavy and multi-core optimized.
5) The answer to that question is that, depending on which exact program you're running, the answer will change. However, I'm building an FX-8350 system right now because I believe the AMD system will provide me with the best value for the money.
6) Intel is currently providing lower power consumption, higher legacy x87 performance, higher memory bus bandwidth and higher IPCC (instructions per clock cycle).
7) AMD provides lower cost for roughly similar equivalent overall performance. The aggregate benchmark scores demonstrate basic parity between the i5 3570K and the AMD FX-8350 CPUs (although with multi-thread optimized software, the AMD chip sometimes reaches up to i7 3770K or even i7 3970K levels of performance) but the AMD FX-8350 CPU is normally ~$200 vs. the typical price of ~$220 for the i5 3570K. In addition, AMD provides 8 integer cores (or threads) vs. the equivalently priced Intel's 4 (i5). The cheapest Intel CPU that provides 8 threads is the i7 3770K, which is ~$320. AMD's FX-8350 is ~$200. AMD also has historically provided greater platform longevity (the current AM3+ platform has supported 3 generations of AMD cpu, whereas the Intel socket 1155 has supported 2, and will not support the next Intel CPU generation Haswell chip).
Oh, and if you buy the AMD system, you'll be supporting the Rebel Alliance against the evil Galactic Empire. So if you want to give the $100 billion company even MORE money, go ahead and buy the Intel system. However, if you want to support the $1.5 billion company and help its R&D department build a Steamroller CPU (which will likely drop in to that same AM3+ motherboard) that can smash the evil Galactic Empire, then go AMD.
Best of luck in your decision!Edited by anubis44 - 11/21/12 at 11:19am