This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

performance difference between intel i5 and amd fx processor

#1Mad_Mike86Posted 11/11/2013 1:51:13 AM
Building a budget oriented pc. I don't know which i5 is the best bang for buck, but spec wise the amd seems better. If I'm running rts and arpgs (skyrim). Which would be better for me long run? Thanks
---
"All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." -Edmund Burke
GT - Mad Mike86
#2Crimson_JesusPosted 11/11/2013 2:13:37 AM
I'd say grab a FX-6300 if you're on a budget build. It's really cheap and has pretty decent performance and it should only get better for future gaming since it's 6 cores.
---
If you believe in Cthulhu and are 100% proud, put this in your sig.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v723/AJSadler/Sigs/CrimsonJesus.jpg
#3DarkZV2BetaPosted 11/11/2013 2:17:52 AM
Definitely i5. RTS games suck bad on AMD processors.
As for best value, probably 3570k on clearance and a good HSF to OC with. Definitely get a K model and overclock, though. It's not much more than a non-K for a pretty significant performance boost.
---
Even people have toenails. Of course PCs have toenails. -claytonbuckley
#4KabtheMentatPosted 11/11/2013 2:22:34 AM
Yeah, I'm going to recommend an i5 over AMD if you wanna play RTS games. I have an AMD, and I meet (and exceed) the recommended requirements for games like Total War, but the last one I played, Shogun 2, runs like absolute ass.

Doesn't help the games are so badly optimized either.
---
Big Money. Big Women. Big Fun.
Skillz Ferguson
#5cosmic_assasinPosted 11/11/2013 2:28:29 AM
the only amd cpu id recommend is the 8350
---
It was fear of myself that made me odd
#6DarkZV2BetaPosted 11/11/2013 2:30:18 AM
cosmic_assasin posted...
the only amd cpu id recommend is the 8350


Why? At that price, you aught to be looking at an i5.
6300, on the other hand, is a great budget CPU for your average gamer.(though it sucks worse than i3 for RTS games)
---
Even people have toenails. Of course PCs have toenails. -claytonbuckley
#7DeanWhipperPosted 11/11/2013 2:33:23 AM
In the cheaper brackets, IE $150 or less, I'd go AMD every day of the week.

The intel chips at those price ranges are garbage.
---
Is this even legal? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Fxhiq93TTg
#8Mad_Mike86(Topic Creator)Posted 11/11/2013 2:36:30 AM
Is the 4670k much better than the 3570k?
---
"All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." -Edmund Burke
GT - Mad Mike86
#9DarkZV2BetaPosted 11/11/2013 2:49:27 AM
Mad_Mike86 posted...
Is the 4670k much better than the 3570k?


Not really. It's better, but very slightly. If it's not much more to get a 4670K, then go with that, but if you can get 3570k for a good bit cheaper($30-50+), it's a better value.
---
Even people have toenails. Of course PCs have toenails. -claytonbuckley
#10_GRIM_FANDANGO_Posted 11/11/2013 2:54:29 AM
As you can see, people differ in opinion on what represents the best value for money. Honestly you are better off just looking at one of the various benchmarks that are available and making up your own mind, maybe look at the performance differences for the specific games you play.

Mad_Mike86 posted...
Is the 4670k much better than the 3570k?


Not too big of a performance difference. Again, check the benchmarks, the difference is not as large as some would expect going from one generation to the next. I was able to find a 3570 (non k sadly) for half retail price, which is another advantage of buying last generation's hardware. When buying them new though, the price difference is minimal so you might as well just go for the 4670.
---
I5 3570 | GTX 760 | FILCO Majestouch 2 tenkeyless | Zowie FK | Asus Xonar DGX | Kingston 120 GB SSD | Sennheiser HD 518 | Samsung S24A350H