I'm currently looking into a good CPU to replace my current A6-3500. I've been closely looking into the 8350 and Xeon 1230 platform and can't entirely make my mind up. I'm not a heavy gamer, so it doesn't matter to me which is better or that purpose. I like to edit videos, work with virtualization software, disk creation etc. Mostly multimedia related tasks I guess. From what I know if I do go AMD I get double cores, higher clocks, and overclock value. But I see people saying that the 1230 in general is a more efficient platform. So not entirely sure what to go with here. I'm temped to go 8350 so I have lots of breathing space while rendering and doing virtualization as it's said to be the better performer with multiple CPU intensive applications.
In the end I've seen a lot of mixed opinions, so I need some insight to better sum up the differences here and which would probably be the most practical for myself.
@My total budget for CPU and board is roughly $300 I'd say. PSU? I'll have to look into that as I didn't build this machine myself. Don't know all specifications.
Hmmm. The Xeon E3 1230v3 is the lowest I would go for what you want - but that is about $250 on its own. You could get a B85 series board to suit for $50 ish but if you could stretch the budget to around 400 you would be much better off.
If you have to stick to 300 - then id get an FX8350,for 160 ish, a 100 dollar board and the best cooler you can get with whats left.
Teh psu brand isnt a problem - its the wattage. Teh 8350 is power hungry - especially if you overclock it
I'm aware that AMD's typically use up much wattage and heat, so yeah that's raised a bit of a concern. But being that I intend to do some rendering perhaps it is worth the extra power with the FX, Won't be doing anything crazy heavy typically. Hmm.
Yeah that doesn't surprise me, multicore in virtualization generally is better. Now I know that Intel uses multithreading, which in some instances behaves in a similar way to cores. In what instance does this functionality actually kick in though, and how efficient is it? Also is it true that FX is truly a better multitasking platform? It's critical that I have plenty of leftover resources while rendering/editing etc.
To be more specific the chip I've been looking at is an Intel Xeon 1230 Sandy Bridge, which supposedly is almost equivalent to the 2600K minus graphics and OC. On AMDs side I've been looking at the 8350 like I said. The FX would cost about $170, and the Xeon processor cost $150. So either way I'd spend close to the same money on either. Boards appear to go cheap for 1230 being it can take an LGA 1155 according to some people that have used these machines.
What seems like the most logical purchase for the money?
The ASUS M5A97 EVO R2.0 fully supports virtualization with bios 2501 (I'm using it right now), it's pretty cheap and a decent overclocker (MisteryAngel got her CPU to 4.8 GHz).
Go with the 8350 it will be faster at rendering in Sony Vegas and it's better for virtual OSs as well. As for gaming its has all the CPU power you would need.
Well the FX8350 has 4 modules with each 2 cores, this means, if you add 2 cores to your VM you basicly add one module, which means that your cpu still acts like a six core in your main os.
That depends allot on the software, on stock the FX8350 is arround the same as the xeon 1230V3 in rendering, but if you overclock the FX it will be a littlebit faster. But if you are not overclocking they will be arround the same. depending on the rendering software. Still the unlocked haswell 4790K blows the FX8350 out of the water in rendering. cause they boost up to 4Ghz aswell.
You have to do some research on that, which cpu works the best in your rendering software. Both are basicly fine. but a 4790K blow the FX out of the water in rendering.