Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Unlmproved]

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/UI1V

Way better CPU, 1GB more VRAM and a 7950.

the fuck

no. why would you use a i5 instead of a 8350 for rendering? change that shit to a 8350.


and yeah listen to ikuto, a ssd + hdd is like, orgasmic ok

No, the difference between an i5 and AMD is very small, and the i5 has way better single core performance.

An SSD can always be added, but a Caviar Black won't kill you either.

700 is his budget. You went over it with the i5 and you had to remove the SSD, optical drive and RAM. But you did get a 7950 in there so yeah, your build is pretty good.

I'd take the 8350 over the i5 though.

Yeah, but I went with a fast HDD instead...I'm still someone who prefers space over a bit of speed. 8GB is more than enough, and who the fuck uses optical drives nowadays?

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-3570K-vs-AMD-FX-8350
Single core is what you're going to be using most.

[mat852]

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/UI1V

Way better CPU, 1GB more VRAM and a 7950.

the fuck

no. why would you use a i5 instead of a 8350 for rendering? change that shit to a 8350.


and yeah listen to ikuto, a ssd + hdd is like, orgasmic ok

No, the difference between an i5 and AMD is very small, and the i5 has way better single core performance.

An SSD can always be added, but a Caviar Black won't kill you either.

700 is his budget. You went over it with the i5 and you had to remove the SSD, optical drive and RAM. But you did get a 7950 in there so yeah, your build is pretty good.

I'd take the 8350 over the i5 though.

the 8350 basically matches up with a i7, maybe a bit slower on most applications, but for $130 less thats fucking awesome. and its HELLA over clockable.

[Unlmproved]

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/UI1V

Way better CPU, 1GB more VRAM and a 7950.

the fuck

no. why would you use a i5 instead of a 8350 for rendering? change that shit to a 8350.


and yeah listen to ikuto, a ssd + hdd is like, orgasmic ok

No, the difference between an i5 and AMD is very small, and the i5 has way better single core performance.

An SSD can always be added, but a Caviar Black won't kill you either.

700 is his budget. You went over it with the i5 and you had to remove the SSD, optical drive and RAM. But you did get a 7950 in there so yeah, your build is pretty good.

I'd take the 8350 over the i5 though.

the 8350 basically matches up with a i7, maybe a bit slower on most applications, but for $130 less thats fucking awesome. and its HELLA over clockable.

Not really (*sigh*, once again) http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-3570K-vs-AMD-FX-8350

It's a 30$ difference, way less power and heat, and faster in most applications (only a few support all 8 cores, i5 does the same with 4).

And the i5, even to Ivy, can still reach 5GHz on air cooling.

[ikutoisahobo]

I'd have to admit that the i5 is faster, those 8 cores of the FX could come in use in modeling software.

The rest is Core's choice. Whether he wants the SSD and optical drive and a 7950.


I find the FX still better than the i5. But yeah, numbers say otherwise.
 

[Unlmproved]

I'd have to admit that the i5 is faster, those 8 cores of the FX could come in use in modeling software.

The rest is Core's choice. Whether he wants the SSD and optical drive and a 7950.


I find the FX still better than the i5. But yeah, numbers say otherwise.

No, this is using all cores (8 vs 4)

   

PERFORMANCE
Overall performance using all cores
Core i5 3570K
 8.4
FX 8350
 8.3
Ingredients:Cinebench R10 32-bit and GeekBench

[mat852]

pls

http://teksyndicate.com/videos/amd-fx-8350-vs-intel-3570k-vs-3770k-vs-3820-gaming-and-xsplit-streaming-benchmarks

[ikutoisahobo]

I'd have to admit that the i5 is faster, those 8 cores of the FX could come in use in modeling software.

The rest is Core's choice. Whether he wants the SSD and optical drive and a 7950.


I find the FX still better than the i5. But yeah, numbers say otherwise.

No, this is using all cores (8 vs 4)

   

PERFORMANCE
Overall performance using all cores
Core i5 3570K
 8.4
FX 8350
 8.3
Ingredients:Cinebench R10 32-bit and GeekBench

Intel puts a lot of work into a single core, while AMD sticks with the classic and less complex architecture.

Intel is faster. I'm not denying that.

The AMD has more cores and will run under far less load even though its performance is not on par with the i5. If somebody makes a game that can be optimized to the 8 core processor then it'll blow Intel away.


I have a feeling AMD next gen of processors are gonna take Intel's place in terms of performance. Intel stopped dead in their tracks after SB and instead took the energy saving approach with Ivy and Haswell, while AMD's trend is to improve on performance rather than energy consumption.
 

[Unlmproved]

I'd have to admit that the i5 is faster, those 8 cores of the FX could come in use in modeling software.

The rest is Core's choice. Whether he wants the SSD and optical drive and a 7950.


I find the FX still better than the i5. But yeah, numbers say otherwise.

No, this is using all cores (8 vs 4)

   

PERFORMANCE
Overall performance using all cores
Core i5 3570K
 8.4
FX 8350
 8.3
Ingredients:Cinebench R10 32-bit and GeekBench

Intel puts a lot of work into a single core, while AMD sticks with the classic and less complex architecture.

Intel is faster. I'm not denying that.

The AMD has more cores and will run under far less load even though its performance is not on par with the i5. If somebody makes a game that can be optimized to the 8 core processor then it'll blow Intel away.


I have a feeling AMD next gen of processors are gonna take Intel's place in terms of performance. Intel stopped dead in their tracks after SB and instead took the energy saving approach with Ivy and Haswell, while AMD's trend is to improve on performance rather than energy consumption.

No, AMD is going in the direction of unified CPU GPU address space.

[ikutoisahobo]

I'd have to admit that the i5 is faster, those 8 cores of the FX could come in use in modeling software.

The rest is Core's choice. Whether he wants the SSD and optical drive and a 7950.


I find the FX still better than the i5. But yeah, numbers say otherwise.

No, this is using all cores (8 vs 4)

   

PERFORMANCE
Overall performance using all cores
Core i5 3570K
 8.4
FX 8350
 8.3
Ingredients:Cinebench R10 32-bit and GeekBench

Intel puts a lot of work into a single core, while AMD sticks with the classic and less complex architecture.

Intel is faster. I'm not denying that.

The AMD has more cores and will run under far less load even though its performance is not on par with the i5. If somebody makes a game that can be optimized to the 8 core processor then it'll blow Intel away.


I have a feeling AMD next gen of processors are gonna take Intel's place in terms of performance. Intel stopped dead in their tracks after SB and instead took the energy saving approach with Ivy and Haswell, while AMD's trend is to improve on performance rather than energy consumption.

No, AMD is going in the direction of unified CPU GPU address space.

That's with the APU's. Most of their R&D is into that but they're still improving on the CPU's.


Steamroller processors are coming out sometime maybe late this year or next year.

[mat852]

I'd have to admit that the i5 is faster, those 8 cores of the FX could come in use in modeling software.

The rest is Core's choice. Whether he wants the SSD and optical drive and a 7950.


I find the FX still better than the i5. But yeah, numbers say otherwise.

No, this is using all cores (8 vs 4)

   

PERFORMANCE
Overall performance using all cores
Core i5 3570K
 8.4
FX 8350
 8.3
Ingredients:Cinebench R10 32-bit and GeekBench

Intel puts a lot of work into a single core, while AMD sticks with the classic and less complex architecture.

Intel is faster. I'm not denying that.

The AMD has more cores and will run under far less load even though its performance is not on par with the i5. If somebody makes a game that can be optimized to the 8 core processor then it'll blow Intel away.


I have a feeling AMD next gen of processors are gonna take Intel's place in terms of performance. Intel stopped dead in their tracks after SB and instead took the energy saving approach with Ivy and Haswell, while AMD's trend is to improve on performance rather than energy consumption.

No, AMD is going in the direction of unified CPU GPU address space.

That's with the APU's. Most of their R&D is into that but they're still improving on the CPU's.


Steamroller processors are coming out sometime maybe late this year or next year.

shit man, i can't wait for those.

[jamjam195]

I'd have to admit that the i5 is faster, those 8 cores of the FX could come in use in modeling software.

The rest is Core's choice. Whether he wants the SSD and optical drive and a 7950.


I find the FX still better than the i5. But yeah, numbers say otherwise.

No, this is using all cores (8 vs 4)

   

PERFORMANCE
Overall performance using all cores
Core i5 3570K
 8.4
FX 8350
 8.3
Ingredients:Cinebench R10 32-bit and GeekBench

Intel puts a lot of work into a single core, while AMD sticks with the classic and less complex architecture.

Intel is faster. I'm not denying that.

The AMD has more cores and will run under far less load even though its performance is not on par with the i5. If somebody makes a game that can be optimized to the 8 core processor then it'll blow Intel away.


I have a feeling AMD next gen of processors are gonna take Intel's place in terms of performance. Intel stopped dead in their tracks after SB and instead took the energy saving approach with Ivy and Haswell, while AMD's trend is to improve on performance rather than energy consumption.

No, AMD is going in the direction of unified CPU GPU address space.

That's with the APU's. Most of their R&D is into that but they're still improving on the CPU's.


Steamroller processors are coming out sometime maybe late this year or next year.

we gon need bigger cases if this thing has to fit in...

[ikutoisahobo]

Lol, yes, they're based on a 9001 inch transistor architecture.

[mihaiul]

...

The 3570k has 4 threads. 1 virtual core per every physical core. There is no reason why an AMD cpu should outperform an intel cpu. For gaming, budget or not, intel wins hands down. He said he wants simple animation and modeling, and that wouldn't be a concern on a P4. Steamroller is going to be the same dissapointment the bulldozer was. Do you see everyone using bulldozers because of 8 cores? No. They spent years convincing that clock speed matters omg they have more speed then they move on to cores. WE HAVE 16 CORES OMG. No. Go with intel for now. You won't be dissapointed. Would you rather pay 20 dollars less for something that will dissapoint you much sooner? You won't get the performance you expected. An i5 is all you will need for gaming for the next few years.

[mat852]

rant

intel fanboy pls?

[mihaiul]

rant

intel fanboy pls?

I'm not even going to bother to explain it anymore to you, as you obviously don't know anything about hardware and processors? Are you calling me a fanboy and completely disregarding my post just because you like AMD or don't know anything about them? How many times do I have to tell you that Intel > AMD in terms of gaming processors, yet you continue to be ignorant and go with your own made up perfect world where you can get a good processor for 90 dollars or what?