Freaking arma on AMD sucks so what intel should i go with

I have an ok system for everything I would say. I just cannot stand to play arma 3 on my amd fx 8350. It really sucks because I love the game however I only get around 25 fps on it and cant seem to get anything better. I am one of those fools who has to max just about everything to feel good about it. I am looking at 2 different cpus right now. The 4790k seems to be the best per core performance but the 5820k is in my budget and I am alright at overclocking. Plus the 4790 would save me a ton of money to upgrade elsewhere but the 5820 is a little bit more powerful and the new tech. I also find it hard to upgrade to a 4790k because the gain in performance overall doesnt seem to justify the cost but if the 5820 wont gain much in arma 3 then I will do what I must. Just wondering what you guys think about the whole ordeal maybe some benchmarks from someone I can interact with. I see a lot of benchmarks online that I cannot emulate with my current set up so some real regular folks opinions would be nice.

Current specs

AMD 8350 @ 4.6

asrock 990 extreme 3

8 gigs of Gskill ripjaws 1866

EVGA gtx 780 ftw

couple of different hard drives/ssds

 

My 8350 runs ARMA no problem. ~50FPS maxed. With an R9 290. I'm running at 5.1 though. Anyway yes AMD struggles in ARMA because it is poorly optimized and strongly favors single core performance. An upgrade to any Intel CPU should give you a significant boost. 

Personally, I wouldn't go with either of your choices.  If you're just going to be gaming, basic to moderate media creation, web browsing and content consumption and multitasking then I would get the i5--4690k. It is much cheaper than the i7-4790k and the 5820k. In ARMA the i5 will be just as fast as the 1150 i7. They use the same cores. Per core performance is no better on the 4790k. It is the same chip just without HT which doesn't do shit in any game and especially not ARMA. 

TheThe 5820k will be slower than either of the 1150 parts in ARMA. It is a 6 core with HT but that doesn't matter in game as I mentioned. No game can use HT and ARMA will still only use one core. As the 5820 runs much slower than either of the 1150 parts (3.3 base) it will be slower. You could OC it but these parts aren't great OCers and even then in game it will be the same speed. 

Plus it is significantly more expensive. The CPU is more. Motherboards are more. DDR4 is insanely more expensive. Overall it would be a lot more for no gain in performance in game. 

Personally I'd get the i5-4690k. Either i7 (1150/2011-3) for gaming is just silly and a waste of money. 

The only use for an i7 in games on windows would be rendering something while playing with minimal loss of performance. If you try the same thing on an AMD it won't really be playable. Hyperthreading also helps with general windows performance, you can feel the responsiveness difference between a quad with hyperthreading and an i3.

There would be no point in getting an i5 after your FX 8350, I'd recommend you get a good cooler like a noctua nh-d12 and overclock it as much as you can for gaming. An i5 isn't an upgrade, more of a sidegrade.

For gaming look no further than socket 1150, intel extremes are really not worth it for games even if you can afford them, unless the 6 core is actually put to use socket 2011 intel extremes will get lower overclocks than socket 1150 (devil's canyon have fewer cores and OC better).

I guess that I forgot to mention that I will be streaming the entire time as well. If not streaming I will at least be recording and doing some video editing on some long hour+ videos. I also do a ton of virtual machine work as well. so this is a multipurpose machine. I just got focused on the gaming portion of it above and yes I know exactly how much both will cost I just have not played around with the x99 platform.

 

By the way, 5820k may be in your budget but you'd have to spend a lot more just for x99 mobo and ddr4.

4790k will be better in games in the long run just because of higher clockspeeds. DDR4 right now is not worth it.

Trust me I went with ddr3 when I was on Core 2 Duo LGA 775 and it really made no difference to DDR2. Same thing happens again nowadays.

Not to mention I have 2 close friends with intel builds. One has the i7 4790k and the other has the i5 4690k and I have had much better luck with overclocking on the i7. Both are on very similar mobos just one has the asus with wifi and one has the one without. As far as I know thats the only difference. And again yes I know that could be do to the lottery when you buy a chip but it still puts a sour taste in my mouth.

 

PS. 

The only reason I do not take my amd chip to a higher oc is the heat in my small office. It runs stable at 4.9. I keep running out of clothes to take off to cool down.

In general, if you don't have a $2k+ for all parts, don't bother with X99.

If you do want to take apart your current system, then that price tag can come down.

Most definitely it's more luck than anything with Haswell. I have a 4770 non-K that can do 4.25Ghz while others have a 4770k that can't. Very unlucky for them.

For the moderate OC you can do on air or water cooling you don't need a super expensive motherboard. Anything 250$ is just for bragging really, it's not like you have the cooling to push the chip further to justify the price for stability.

I used to play Arma 3 on a 8350 @ 4.6, 16GB RAM, and 290 overclocked, and I got very good performance and never had any problems, and my girlfriend plays on a 9590 , 32gb, 290x.

The money is not the problem at this point. It is more about the all around performance and me being and elitist jerk. I have always gone with the most powerful system until this latest build and I regret it more and more all the time. For like the last year and a half really. Not to mention I am really pissed at nvidia right now because I cannot find another 780 for a price I would be willing to pay. So I am gonna blow some cash elsewhere and save for whenever the next best thing like 980 ti or whatever it may be called.

 

In a 9x10 office it just gets hot pretty fast no matter your cooling. I have a 360 rad lying around in the closet just dont see a point in using it right now highest temp I have seen gaming is 49c. Plus I am too lazy/busy to set up a loop on an amd chip. just doesnt seem worth it.

I am starting to think something is wrong with my performance on this anyways. From what you guys are saying it doesnt seem to bother you on an amd chip. 

 

I guess I should specify further I have been playing wasteland and altis life. It plays fine on single player and coop missions but I get so bored with them.

Well after doing some testing I cannot figure out why on 3d mark I am scoring higher on 2 units 4 cores than 8 cores... this is going to make me mad. I seem to be getting about 8-10 fps better on wasteland like this too.

 

FX8350 On you current mobo, could an potentional issue, Your mobo has only a 4+1 powerphase, and not the best quality vrms and what not. So it could be that your mobo is overheating

Arma is one of those games that will run better on intel so an i5-4690K should be an improvement. ARMA simply does not scale very well over multiple cores.

However 25fps is way to low, Because i get more fps then you with only a 7870Ghz. Thats why i would advice to monitor the temps with open hardware monitor, to see what your mobo temp is doing.

But if you realy want some improvements cpu wise then a 4690K should help a bit.

I also see some people talk about a 5820k, im sorry to say this guys, but arma runs better on an i5 then on an 5820k, Arma 3 is clockspeed depended on less cores.

X99 is a total waste of money for gaming 95% of the time.

see video below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytFskvhTNJo

I concur, I have the 4690K, with 16gb of Vengeance ram and a EVGA GTX 970 SC and I have no trouble with arma 3 at all. 

This thread summed up in one sentence

"Arggh! my machine runs a poorly written game very badly, I am going to throw a lot of money at the problem to make it go away!"

:D

^^ agreed. Not worth upgrading a whole system because 1 game doesn't work well, I think there is something wrong anyways, because all of us seem to have good experiences with Arma 3 and AMD.