Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

AMD FX or Intel i7?

46 posts in this topic

Posted

I liked my old X6 (which my son has now) build... next year is the year for a new build for me where I finally retire my 2600K (well, pass it down to my kids ... they get my hand-me-downs and I usually donate the bottom rung machine which in this case is my Q6600 build) and I am waiting to see what the next AMD rev. brings to the table... I am leaning toward the i7 Ivy or whatever comes from now until next Winter/Spring... but I do have a soft spot for AMD and if the performance of the next chip is reasonable all-around I might go for it.

I use my box for gaming (latest and greatest) and for work (coding, software builds are frequent, and running java web servers, stuff like that). The AMD CPUs are more than sufficient for gaming with a decent, discrete video card. My X6 was able to do large builds at a fairly rapid pace. Better than the servers at the office. The latest intel chips are powerful, maybe more than they need to be... I am sure someone out there could tax them but for general everyday use they can be overkill... that being said I love overkill from time to time. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Honestly, I'd just get one of the higher clocked i5 CPUs. An i7 doesn't really give many benefits except for hyperthreading. If you're doing a lot of virtual machines, then maybe the extra threads would give benefits. Otherwise just save the money and get a higher end i5.

I'm pretty sure the i7 also has more L3 cache. Can make a difference in gaming and high end rendering apps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm pretty sure the i7 also has more L3 cache. Can make a difference in gaming and high end rendering apps.

I don't think it would make any difference at all in gaming. Rendering and virtualization take advantage of the extra threads and maybe the extra L3, but games won't. So if this is for a gaming rig, take the extra $100 and put it towards the GPU.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Huh? I was talking about the L3 cache, not hyperthreading :/ and on die cache does make a difference in games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Huh? I was talking about the L3 cache, not hyperthreading :/ and on die cache does make a difference in games.

I mentioned the L3 cache... Have any gaming benchmarks to show that it makes a notable difference?

Keep in mind the CPUs need to be at the same clock in the benchmarks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm pretty sure the i7 also has more L3 cache. Can make a difference in gaming and high end rendering apps.

Not unless you get an extreme version. The normal i7s have 8MB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Not unless you get an extreme version. The normal i7s have 8MB.

i7-2600K

i5-2500K

i7 has 8MB of cache, the i5 has 6MB of cache

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

i7-2600K

i5-2500K

i7 has 8MB of cache, the i5 has 6MB of cache

Oh, I thought you were comparing the i7 and the FX. :rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

let's point out all facts i have FX-8150 about a year and didn't had issue with games and everybody saying only is just daft and wrong .... because most benchmarks are made up also too many are brain dead or washed .... (burn in hell INTEL FANS)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

let's point out all facts i have FX-8150 about a year and didn't had issue with games and everybody saying only is just daft and wrong .... because most benchmarks are made up also too many are brain dead or washed ....

You can't be serious...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

go for flame wars ...

http://www.techspot....7-2600k.182236/

goo to point out from there

The intel is a bit better for gaming, The bulldozer however is no slouch and may outperform the intel in multithreaded applications.

Plus windows 7 is poorly optimised for the bulldozer and there are rumours of a 20 to 25% performance increase using windows 8.

choose wise and many just talks and never checks the facts most important windows 8 does works faster then windows 7 sow it's win win ... you buy cheap gain performance from single os upgrade ...

too many lives on cliches ... time to wake up ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Whats funny is no one was really talking crap on AMD and then you come in making yourself look bad.

I even stated I have an 8150 and has been fine. Always actually been an AMD fan, but Intel has some quality which cant be ignored.

Now times have evolved and I decided to main with an i5 now, still use my AMD; I did notice some differences, not much.. Mainly in application startups and game loading..

And I believe Windows 7 was out before Bulldozer.... So AMD didnt optimize Bulldozer..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'd just grab an i5 3570k and be done with it, but that's just me.

I was going to go Bulldozer with my new CPU, I'd had my heart set on AMD since the 1090T, but by the time I was ready to buy and researched all of the current AMD/Intel ranges? It was i5 for me.

I could have gone i7, and I seriously considered it, but these days I just don't have the time to love and caress my computer as much as I'd like, and I certainly don't have time to do any video editing anymore. So, for the times when I do a little video editing, an i5 will be more than enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Plus windows 7 is poorly optimised for the bulldozer and there are rumours of a 20 to 25% performance increase using windows 8.

Which ended up just being rumors.

Not to mention, releasing a CPU and then saying it doesn't fully work on the world's most popular desktop operating system, and saying "it'll get better, probably" does not instill confidence in most people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Whats funny is no one was really talking crap on AMD and then you come in making yourself look bad.

Pretty much this. I've been a fan of AMD (processors) all my life, never having owned an Intel processor. Still, if money isn't an issue, I'd totally go for an Intel processor, hands down. Hell, money IS an issue for me, but I'm already making plans for my next rig seeing as mine is from 2008.

That said, I saw Aokromes mention waiting for the Haswell lineup, but that may not be due out until June from what I've heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Pretty much this. I've been a fan of AMD (processors) all my life, never having owned an Intel processor. Still, if money isn't an issue, I'd totally go for an Intel processor, hands down. Hell, money IS an issue for me, but I'm already making plans for my next rig seeing as mine is from 2008.

That said, I saw Aokromes mention waiting for the Haswell lineup, but that may not be due out until June from what I've heard.

The Haswell stepping C2 "which fixes the USB bug" won't be out until the end of July. Just wanted to give you a heads up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Get the i7, get the k model, give it an easy overclock to somewhere above 4ghz and it'll leave the fx chip in the dust.

with the speeds and architecture as they are, multi-cores etc.. Is overclocking even important anymore? I remember reading a MaximumPC mag article whereby they said that speeds were irrelevant due to the multi cores.. dunno, that caught my attention after having been on during the single core speed demon express like so many were at that time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Oh, I thought you were comparing the i7 and the FX. :rofl:

Ah I see, sorry if there was any confusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If you're going to be doing mostly gaming, you really aren't going to notice much difference in real world experience. I have two systems I run side by side. The first is running an AMD Phenom II 955BE, the second is running an i7 2600. Both are sporting 8GB RAM, and running comparable video cards. Both can crank up details to to max in games, and you don't notice a lick of difference.

Now when it comes to video encoding and multimedia, the i7 will trounce the Phenom II. But for gaming, the AMD is still quite solid. Go with what your budget will allow. I would say take the AMD route and use the extra cash to buy the next tier up in video cards if it is going to be used primarily for gaming. But if you do video encoding and ripping, pop for the i7.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm just not a gamer anymore. Just want to upgrade my computer because when I'm not at work, using my MacBook pro retina, I want to jump on my desktop at home. Also I don't want my laptop to out performance my desktop. I still have to pay off my laptop which I owe 900 on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Well if money is the issue than the FX-8150, if not get the 3570K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.