1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

i3 3220 vs AMD A10-5800k vs FX 4300

Discussion in 'System Builder's Advice' started by Cringe, Mar 14, 2013.

  1. Cringe New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2013
    Messages:
    4 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Hello everyone.
    I am building this new gaming rig. I wont be playing all games on ultra settings, med/normal-settings would do for me. I won't be doing anyother heavy multitasking either.
    I pretty much have everything else figured out, other than what CPU to use.

    I am stuck between-
    Intel i3 3220
    A10-5800k
    FX 4300.

    For the GPU I will be using-
    1) Gigabyte's HD 7850 OC edition with 975 MHz GPU clock and 2gb GDDR5 256-bit 4800 MHz memory.
    2) OR Nvidia 650ti 2gb GDDR5(if I run out of my $600 budget).

    I can switch to i5 3570 and run it on turbo mode, instead of OCing A10-5800k. But in that case, I will have to further downgrade my GPU to HD 7770 or equivalent.

    So what do you think i should go with?
     
  2. suraswami

    suraswami

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2005
    Messages:
    6,253 (1.76/day)
    Thanks Received:
    837
    Location:
    Republic of Asia (a.k.a Irvine), CA
    i3 3220.
     
  3. Fourstaff

    Fourstaff Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,212 (4.97/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,995
    Location:
    Home
    3220 or 4300, you will hear supporters from both camps extolling the qualities of either chips but I personally think you will not be able to tell the difference in usual day gaming. I personally think you should check the games you will be running and decide from the individual benchmarks, usually the 3220 will win but overclocked it will be fairly even. 7850 gets my vote, I see no reason to get the 650Ti.
     
  4. Frick

    Frick Fishfaced Nincompoop

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    10,915 (3.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,436
    3220 and 7850. Depending a bit on how tight your budget is; amd setups are usually a wee bit cheaper. At least over here. Otherwise the i3.
     
  5. Crap Daddy

    Crap Daddy

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2010
    Messages:
    2,774 (1.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,071
    Crysis 3 loves FX4300 much better than the i3-3220. Other games might take a slight advantage of the 3220. I'd say 4300 and 7850.
     
  6. Delta6326

    Delta6326

    Joined:
    May 21, 2008
    Messages:
    3,843 (1.59/day)
    Thanks Received:
    670
    Location:
    Iowa, USA
  7. suraswami

    suraswami

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2005
    Messages:
    6,253 (1.76/day)
    Thanks Received:
    837
    Location:
    Republic of Asia (a.k.a Irvine), CA
    What resolution are going to play? If 720P 7770/650TI might also work good and can save bit more. Used 6870 might also be an alternate option.

    Overall if you want to save money then go with AMD setup.
     
  8. Super XP

    Super XP

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,784 (0.78/day)
    Thanks Received:
    539
    Location:
    Ancient Greece, Acropolis
    FX 4300. Piledriver is great and a great choice for your setup.
    Though I wouldn't have recommended the 1st gen FX 4100.
     
  9. Cringe New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2013
    Messages:
    4 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Well thanks for the replies everyone.
    i3 3220 was my first choice too...But with the new games favoring quad cores, will i3 be able to handle them?(and that reminds me..anyone got a link to list of games that use quad cores?).

    On the other hand, none of the amd MoBos have a PCIe 3.0 slot. How much will a PCIe 2.0 or PCIe 3.0 affect my GPU's performance?
     
  10. Delta6326

    Delta6326

    Joined:
    May 21, 2008
    Messages:
    3,843 (1.59/day)
    Thanks Received:
    670
    Location:
    Iowa, USA
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2013
  11. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,684 (6.72/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,984
    Location:
    some AF base
    PCI-E 2.0 vs 3.0 makes zero difference whatsoever. I would go with the AMD...can't even overclock the intel setup.
     
    nt300 says thanks.
  12. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,896 (6.47/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,480
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    For what he is looking at doing a 990FX motherboard is overkill. A 970 would be perfectly adequate.
     
  13. Cringe New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2013
    Messages:
    4 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Around 720-1080p resolution is what I will be playing at.

    I am not sure about the games. BF3, skyrim, crysis 3, guild wars 2, league or legends, metro 2033,etc. might even run ps3 emulators on it.
     
  14. suraswami

    suraswami

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2005
    Messages:
    6,253 (1.76/day)
    Thanks Received:
    837
    Location:
    Republic of Asia (a.k.a Irvine), CA
    just get I5 and be done with it.
     
  15. Delta6326

    Delta6326

    Joined:
    May 21, 2008
    Messages:
    3,843 (1.59/day)
    Thanks Received:
    670
    Location:
    Iowa, USA
    Ah yes your right I'm not for sure what I was thinking Will up date my post.

    I'm only showing the AsRock Extreme 3 because they are on both sides. I don't know know if they perform the same, but I would think ASRock would use similar quality parts.
    ASRock 970 EXTREME3 ATX AMD Motherboard - Newegg.c...
     
  16. theoneandonlymrk

    theoneandonlymrk

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,414 (1.95/day)
    Thanks Received:
    573
    Location:
    Manchester uk
    +1
     
    Super XP says thanks.
  17. Cringe New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2013
    Messages:
    4 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    yeah ...thats the best solution. But again, will HD 7770 + i5 (with its integrated graphics, which i guess will be useless) be able to play them games? :S
     
  18. Durvelle27

    Durvelle27

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2012
    Messages:
    2,691 (2.99/day)
    Thanks Received:
    664
    Location:
    Memphis, TN
    with your budget i would get a FX 6300 and be done with it. Best of both worlds and ocs nicely
     
  19. de.das.dude

    de.das.dude Pro Indian Modder

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    7,924 (4.78/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,122
    FX4300. pile driver is great!
    if you were comparing with the bulldozer FX4100, i'd have said i3 3220

    also there isnt any difference in TDP. note that intel and AMD calculate TDP in different ways. for AMD its the max. for intel its some form of average.
     
  20. Ghost

    Ghost

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    273 (0.17/day)
    Thanks Received:
    82
    Location:
    Unknown
    i3 3220 is as fast as FX-8350 in gaming. But if you can stretch to any i5, even something like 3350P, that would be great. Otherwise i3 3220 + HD 7850 is fine too.

    Piledriver is great only compared to BD. Gaming performance still sucks compared to Sandy/Ivy.
    Vice versa. FX-4300 draws 40-60W more than i3 3220. So if it's labeled as 95W CPU, i3 should be labeled as 35-55W. Or FX-4300 should be labeled as 95-125W.
     
  21. Mathragh

    Mathragh

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    Messages:
    1,111 (0.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    311
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    I don't like being this guy, but no, this is simply not true.

    Perhaps if you only play >3 year old console ports the i3 3220 is as fast as a FX-8350 in gaming, but in most modern games, the i3 simply is inadequate compared to modern day quad cores(or 8 cores).

    I'd say if you're only planning on playing old console ports, you should get the i3, otherwise, dont let yourself get fooled by the "i3 is enough". 2 Cores in this day and age is just really low end, and will quickly bottleneck in those newer applications and games.
     
    Super XP and nt300 say thanks.
  22. Ghost

    Ghost

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    273 (0.17/day)
    Thanks Received:
    82
    Location:
    Unknown
    Saying that i3 is not enough is the same as saying FX-8350 is not enough, because they perform the same. i5 is better than both of these, of course. There was already a difference between i3 and i5 when Sandy was released 2 years ago. And perhaps even before that.

    Performance is not measured by cores or clocks. i3 has a much higher per clock performance, which matters most in games. Threads/cores come only after that. In applications 8 core PD is almost as fast as and sometimes faster than 4 core Ivy with HT (i7), but in games it's just as fast as 2 core Ivy with HT (i3).
     
  23. Mathragh

    Mathragh

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    Messages:
    1,111 (0.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    311
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Benchmarks done with modern systems and games say otherwise.

    However, lets stop arguing about this particular point, as we'll otherwise likely hijack the thread :p
     
  24. Lionheart

    Lionheart

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2008
    Messages:
    4,077 (1.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    837
    Location:
    Milky Way Galaxy
    FX 4300 + HD7850 2GB has my vote :toast:
     
    HD64G says thanks.
  25. nt300

    nt300

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2010
    Messages:
    868 (0.48/day)
    Thanks Received:
    159
    Location:
    Toronto, ON. Canada
    This comment made me laugh. It so not true and you are misleading readers. The 8350 runs circles around a i3.
     
    itsakjt, Mindweaver, Lionheart and 5 others say thanks.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page