Hey guys. So I'm thinking of switching my CPU from an Intel i5-3570k to an AMD FX-8350 Black Edition. I watched a few of Tek Syndicate's videos on it and I've looked at a few others, and based on the results, the 8350 seems like the better CPU. That being said, I'm not sure what motherboard to get to match it.
Here's the specs it'd have to match:
-
CPU - AMD FX-8350 Octa Core 4.0 GHz Black Edition
-
GPU - Sapphire Radeon R9 280X -or- Sapphire Radeon 7950 3GB
-
RAM - G.SKILL Sniper Series 8GB(2x4GB) 2133MHz
-
HDD - Western Digital 1TB WD10EZEX
-
Drive - ASUS 24xDVD-RW Internal OEM
-
Chassis - Cooler Master HAF 912 w/ High Airflow + 2x 120mm fans
-
PSU - Cooler Master eXtreme Power Plus 550W
-
MOBO - ?
Any recommendations? I've been looking at ASRock.
before i reccomend anything i want to ask what you do with this computer, if it's rendering or streaming i really don't think the upgrade is worth the cost, if it's nothing but gaming you won't see any difference
for a motherboard i'd reccomend
- low end: asus m5a97 (NOT LE)
- asus m5a97 evo
- asus m5a99x evo
- asus m5a99fx pro (board i use)
- high end: asus sabertooth
i've havn't had great experiences with asus, but they make the best am3+ boards on the market period
I plan on doing most everything actually. I plan to game a lot, yes, but I'm also a user of Photoshop and I plan to get C4D, Vegas Pro, and illustrator.
if you want an upgrade you should really just get a 3770k, the cost is probably about the same and will outperform the 8350 is cad and vegas
Well, since you already have an intel mobo, like nick said, the 3770k might be worth considering.
If you DO choose to go for the 8350, a good question is: Are you planning to overclock? alot?
Moveing from a i5-3570k to an AMD FX-8350 is not worth it these cpu's trade blows with each outher in differnt areas it will be a waste of money.
If you realy what to upgrade drop in a i7 as overlordnick suggested in to your current rig.
Oops well I goofed a little. I forgot to mention that this is a PC build coming in January so nothing is ordered yet, I apologize.
In terms of the price, the 8350 is only 180$ as opposed to a 3770k 300$ which is out of the budget range.
If I get the 8350, I'm definitely going to follow overclocking a good bit.
The fact that both processors are fighting basically on equal terms is why I'm considering swapping out to add performance in multitasking while keeping my gaming performance.
But you would have to get a new motherboard which is going to cost $100-$150, on top of the $180 for the 8350.
For $300 dollars, your going to see more of an improvement from an i7 than you would an 8350.
ahh, you said it as if you were wanting to upgrade a current i5 build
then refer to my list in the first post, any of the boards will work, a m5a99fx pro gives about everything you could want, a sabertooth is a bit better, but in my oppinion not worth the extra cost
Yeah, oops lol. My fault, should have been clearer to you guys. I'll be sure to look at them all on the list. Only thing I see as weird is that there aren't any 3.0 PCIe ports which is what the R9 280x and the 7950 have. Wouldn't it need those or is my information incorrect? Also, could I get a quick opinion on your standing between the 3570k and the 8350 and why?
PCIe 3.0 is not a big deal right now. Cards out now work fine off of PCIe 2.0, that's all they utilize at this point.
So putting a PCIe 3.0 R9 280X into a PCIe 2.0 MOBO will work just as well?
amd currently only supports pcie 2.0 (2.1?, whatever), pci-e is fully backwards and forwards compatable and no gpus have been able to use up all of 2.0's bandwidth yet (yet many still work a little bit better in 3.0... i have no explanation)
both a 3570k (or 4670k) and 8350 are great choices, if you use it to it's full potential an 8350 can be a decent bit stronger (cad and vegas can do that), though it lacks the single core performance of the i5 it's still no slouch, if you don't mind needing to go full atx and worse performance in programs that only use a few cores i would reccomend the 8350 (keep in mind i use a 8320, so i'm not exactly unbiased)
Well after watching Tek Syndicate's 8350 vs 3570k, I've given serious though to it. Their benchmarks have given me all the reason to question going Intel over AMD. It doesn't make a huge difference in gaming, so I'll probably go AMD for the extra threads. Plus, we can't overlook that both consoles have 8-core CPU's by AMD so games are more than likely going to be coming up with stuff that uses those extra cores in the future making it look like AMD's extra physical cores are going to be extremely useful for future games.
more cores don't have an effect unless you're maxing out the current cores
example: a game supports 8 threads, the quad core runs the game with 50% load on each core, the octa core runs the game with 25% load on each cores, it will run the exact same untill the quad core is maxed out
don't think about it as how many threads do i need, think about it as a single pool of power, and the number of threads supported only tells the percentage of that pool it can use
example: a quad and octa core with identical performance at full load, if you support 8 threads they will have the same performance because you have access to all of the threads on both, and if you support 4 threads the quad core is still performing at full load but the octa core can now only deliver half of it's performance
basically what i'm trying to say is that supporting more 8 threads doesn't make quad cores any less efficiant, it only makes octa cores more efficiant, and if you're not using up all the power it makes no difference (which games don't use up much cpu power)
i'm just been seeing alot of the "games will be optomized for 8 cores, so more cores will be better", so i appologise if i went on a tangent
Based on everything I have heard and read though, games are only set to run a certain amount of cores. I don't know, guess it was just bullshit. But seriously, thanks for the help ^.^