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

Upgrade for Gaming. Even worth considering AMD?

Discussion in 'System Builder's Advice' started by Eric_Cartman, Dec 9, 2012.

  1. TheMailMan78

    TheMailMan78 Big Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Messages:
    20,936 (7.91/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,509
    How about TPU?

    http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_7970_CPU_Scaling/16.html

    Intel pretty much crushes any AMD rig.
    Eric_Cartman says thanks.
  2. Ralfies

    Ralfies

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2012
    Messages:
    86 (0.14/day)
    Thanks Received:
    36
    Location:
    Norman, Oklahoma
    With the exception of very CPU demanding games like Starcraft 2, Civ5, and Skyrim the differences between the two aren't that large. Also that review is comparing Bulldozer to Nehalem and Sandy Bridge. Piledriver is better at gaming than Bulldozer, so that will narrow the gap further. Throw in overclocking(which an i5 in the FX-8320's price range can't do) and the difference becomes negligible. I myself would go Intel, but OP stated he'd rather go AMD. In the end it won't be much of a difference.
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2012
    Eric_Cartman says thanks.
  3. Dent1

    Joined:
    May 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,132 (2.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    904
    That is Bulldozer not Piledriver. The OP can only afford an i3 if he goes Intel which I believe he'll get less value for money overall than a Piledriver 8 core.

    At stock speeds, Techspot shows the Piledriver equal to the 3770k in Just Cause 2, the same as the i3-3220 in The Witcher 2, and the same as the 2500k in Crysis 2.

    So in gaming for the same price as an i3 the Piledriver is between the i3 and 3770k depending on the game. That isnt too bad.

    Then when you factor in the encoding, application performance and synthetic benchmarks it's actually between the 2500k and 3770k and sometimes exceeding the 3770k.
    http://www.techspot.com/review/586-amd-fx-8350-fx-6300/page6.html
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2012
    Eric_Cartman and HD64G say thanks.
  4. Mindweaver

    Mindweaver Moderato®™ Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    5,168 (2.63/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,658
    Location:
    Statesville, NC
    Here is what I would get with that budget. Remember AMD CPU's drop in price rather quickly. So, updating your processor to a 8x later down the road may not be so bad. Right now that 6x will do all the game you need as good as the 8x. I've listed everything but the PSU, because I don't know where you are getting a CX600 for $50.. That's a good deal I'd go with that price. It's $70 on the egg. Also, notice I have a 990FX board with free 2x 4gb ram and the 7870 comes with 2 games. :toast:

    [​IMG]

    EDIT: also that 7870 is clocked at 1100mhz with a good aftermarket cooler.
    Eric_Cartman, Aquinus and Dent1 say thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  5. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,189 (6.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,029
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    I think what you really mean to say is AMD CPUs have more leakage. They don't run too hot.

    Check his budget again. The 6300 would give him more money for the GPU and there is nothing that says the 6300 can't play modern games. It also has a 95-watt TDP, not 125-140 like other FX/Phenom CPUs. All in all, AMD fits his budget better and it's not like he is going to lose 40% of his frames because of it. Old games may suffer more than normal because they're not multi-threaded very well (if at all,) but if it's an older game, I bet the CPU is handling it fine anyways.

    The real point here is that if he gets a 8320, 6300, or a 3570k, it will do the same thing for him and considering his budget, he needs to squeeze where ever he can squeeze extra savings from. Intel does not offer this and once again, choosing AMD isn't going to result in incredible performance losses.

    All in all, AMD is the route for a budget build, simple as that. We also know that AM3+ isn't EOL, where 1155 is since we all know Haswell is going to be on skt1150. So at least if he goes AMD he knows he can upgrade the CPU in the future, where an i7 3770k wouldn't be much of a boost over a 3570k and he would have to spend less on everything else if he went this route.

    Pros for AMD:
    - Better cost
    - More physical cores
    - AM3+ enables more upgrades in the future without replacing motherboard.
    - Adequate for most applications.
    - AM3+ boards can usually offer more PCI-E for lesser price than 1155 (lack of PLX chips since they're not needed.)

    Cons for AMD:
    - Uses more power
    - IPC is lower. (High clocks mitigate this con.)
    - Memory controller is lacking compared to Intel.

    Honestly I don't think any of the cons are enough to pull you away from AMD for the cost.
    Eric_Cartman and Dent1 say thanks.
  6. ThE_MaD_ShOt

    ThE_MaD_ShOt

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2011
    Messages:
    4,831 (4.80/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,369
    Location:
    Hi! I'm from the Internet
    I run Amd rigs and never had an issue with gaming. So what if I lose a couple frames per second. If you have a strong enough Gpu you will never notice it. That and the human eye really won't notice the couple frame loss.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  7. Garage1217

    Garage1217

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2012
    Messages:
    168 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    104
    Location:
    Az
    Owned or own / used with a 7970 / All chips overclocked and pushed :)
    - 1100T / never had an issue running any game maxed
    - 8150 / never had an issue running any game maxed
    - 8350 / never had an issue running any game maxed

    - 955BE used with a 6950 - Still played every game I have maxed although around turn 300 of civ v, my other processors had a clear speed advantage and it started to chop up a bit. Mind you this is prior to my 7970 upgrade as well.

    So there you have it from an actual owner :) I also have an older I5 setup that is a darn fine gamer as well. No matter how you choose it, current AMD processors play games MIGHTY FINE and I have been more than pleased with all of mine, even the hated 8150 which was actually pretty good, just did not meet expectations at the time!

    Also I would go with a 7850 to save a little cash. You can pick up a diamond model from frys with sleeping dogs for $149.99 right now. Will help with your budget.

    Another option for now to save you some cash and still game until you can get a better card... go FM2 and an A8 or A10! Quite surprised how good they are for an APU. That way you would be within your budget with an upgrade path later.
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2012
    Eric_Cartman and Dent1 say thanks.
  8. Dent1

    Joined:
    May 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,132 (2.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    904
    *Wonders whether Eric_Cartman will return and say "Thank You"*
    Eric_Cartman says thanks.
  9. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,189 (6.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,029
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    I wouldn't count on it. :(

    Dent1 says thanks.
  10. Eric_Cartman

    Eric_Cartman

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2007
    Messages:
    587 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    44
    Just to update everybody that helped out.

    I did go ahead and get the FX-6300 and GTX660Ti.

    The FX-6300 was a breeze to overclock, it is running at 4.4GHz.

    I've really been enjoying the new computer.

    My little bro got my Farcry3 for x-mas and I've just been addicted to it.

    Thanks for you input.
    Dent1 and cadaveca say thanks.

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

Share This Page