Simple CPU Question .... I Think :(

[Idontcare]

That's because none of the "reputable" reviewers tried benchmarking games while streaming with XSplit. When you do that, the extra cores of the AMD 8-core CPUs allow them to shine.

And the usage model for XSplit makes it relevant to what demographic of end-users?

Finding one-off niche apps that results in an 8-core processor having higher performance is not hard, the niche apps really do exist.

Finding an end-user that significantly benefits from the minor improvement provided by said niche application is the challenge.

KillerNIC had a larger target audience than XSplit.

 

[Phynaz]

That's because none of the "reputable" reviewers tried benchmarking games while streaming with XSplit. When you do that, the extra cores of the AMD 8-core CPUs allow them to shine.

Which isn't one of his use cases, therefore not relevant.

Edit: IDC beat me to it.

 

[2is]

lol @ KillerNIC. I always chuckled when I saw that listed in someones signature.

 

[bononos]

.......
So the basics are, I'm looking at AMD FX-8350, 8320, or 8120. I shouldn't even include the last one, since it ranks quite a bit lower than the first 2 on about every benchmark/comparison I've been able to find, at only $25'ish cheaper. These are all 8-core. Now, for Intel, I've picked i5-2450P, 3470, or 2500K. I've read remarkable stories about the last one, even though several benchmarks place it a bit lower than the 1st two. HOWEVER, I'm a good OC'er & seems like that "K" signifies a chip which works well with that art, so it could probably be convinced to operate at near the performance of the 1st two. And it also already has a higher clock speed than either, but significantly lower than the 1st two AMDs. I'm plenty computer-savvy to know that doesn't mean a whole lot in modern chips, but I'll be the first to admit that it's my major CPU-weakness .... I LUV seeing those monstrous clocks, like the 4.0GHZ of the biggest AMD above.
.....
That's the main question & the only one I need a definite answer to. However, as hinted at above, there are 3 more CPUs I'm eyeing as curiosities. The A10-5800K, A10-5700, & A8-5600K APUs, with integrated graphics. Now right off the bat I KNOW these don't ompute as well as ANY of the 6 above, but they aren't dramatically too far back. My new build WILL have a great graphics card in it, so I'm not saying I'll rely on the onboard video. But the plan is to buy SLI/Crossfire capable stuff, but only 1 card for now. I'm not even sure I'll like a dual graphic set-up, but doing it this way allows me to add that second card later, if I so choose.
.......
But will these chips with onboard Radeon graphics work together with a dedicated Radeon card, much like a Crossfire setup?
......

The newer i3/5 Intel K cpus are the only ones that can overclock, those without the K can only overclock by a tiny bit (locked multipliers)
As another poster has said above, the AMD cores do less work per clock (lower ips) and are not comparable to Intel cores. There are apps which do well to maximise the advantage of the more numerous AMD cores like encoding x264 (~33% better performance for a 4 core 3570 vs top of the line 8350). You might want to investigate whether your photo editing app performs similarly.

I'm leaning towards Intel builds in general because they perform better, consume less power, give out less heat which just puts less stress on other components. The newer AMD cpus were found (search for a thread by Idontcare) to consume more power than their rated specs which could cause problems on some mbs, not the sort of thing I would want on a good solid build without alot of research and overspecing on supporting components like psu/mb. This and performance issues forced AMD to slash prices which is why their prices are so low.

As far as xfire+A10/A8 in general, its not a big plus for gamers in general because they can only xfire with 6670 cards and below so the advantage of having a 'free' xfire is small.

 

[Abwx]

An i3 make sense compared to an A10 if one assume that games
and usual softs wont be better multithreaded in a year or two ,
otherwise the A10 is more futur proof.

 

[Puppies04]

The newer i3/5 Intel K cpus are the only ones that can overclock

There are no unlocked i3's (since the 'k' label came into play) if you want to OC an Intel 1155 chip you can either pick up an i5/i7 non 'k' model (basically any chip with turbo enabled) and oc 4 bins from stock or you pick up a 2500k 2600k 2700k (sb) or a 3570k 3770k (ib) and oc with a fully unlocked multiplier. You can gain a few % by overclocking the bclck but this really isn't advised.

 

[sobe88]

As mentioned Haswell is right around the corner, may best off wait for that to either see prices drop on Sandy/Ivy or hop on the new Haswell.

Was mentioned as "game changing" though, from what I was previously reading it will bring in only a small improvement over Ivy, of course I could be wrong and it could turn out to be another Sandy coming from Nehalem.

 

[Idontcare]

Welcome to the forums sobe88 :thumbsup:

 

[Denithor]

There are no unlocked i3's (since the 'k' label came into play) if you want to OC an Intel 1155 chip you can either pick up an i5/i7 non 'k' model (basically any chip with turbo enabled) and oc 4 bins from stock or you pick up a 2500k 2600k 2700k (sb) or a 3570k 3770k (ib) and oc with a fully unlocked multiplier. You can gain a few % by overclocking the bclck but this really isn't advised.

Actually the non-K i5/i7 series chips can be overclocked to 4 speed bins (0.4GHz) above their maximum turbo speed. For example, in the case of my i7 3770, the stock speed is 34*100MHz = 3.4GHz. Max turbo is 39*100MHz so 3.9GHz. Since I am on a Z77 motherboard I can increase this multiplier to 39+4 = 43*100MHz = 4.3GHz.

And because most of these IB chips top out around 4.4-4.5 without extreme measures (see IDontCare's post about de-lidding his chip for a fun & informative read) I'm not losing much not having the K model chip. (Plus I got a heck of a deal on mine at $200 from the For Sale forum.)

 

[Phynaz]

An i3 make sense compared to an A10 if one assume that games
and usual softs wont be better multithreaded in a year or two ,
otherwise the A10 is more futur proof.

Nobody is recommending an i3. Everybody is recommending an i5, which destroys the A10 in the ops usage scenario.

 

[SocketF]

Was mentioned as "game changing" though, from what I was previously reading it will bring in only a small improvement over Ivy, of course I could be wrong and it could turn out to be another Sandy coming from Nehalem.

I don't expect big improvements either, but it is a nice package to have with AVX2 and FMA. Sandy & Ivy are only half-way there so to say

I would wait, too.

 

[Magic Carpet]

I don't expect big improvements either, but it is a nice package to have with AVX2 and FMA. Sandy & Ivy are only half-way there so to say

I would wait, too.

Will the 2014 games use the new tech, you reckon?

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Will the 2014 games use the new tech, you reckon?

I bought my Q6600 in '08.

If they haven't started doing more multithreading by 2013, they won't be doing it in 2014.

If the next-gen consoles rely more heavily on multithreading to get their best performance, you might see some of that effort splash over onto the PC side. But I doubt it will be commonplace by 2014. ('15, '16, maybe.)

Of course, they'll still have to write games that are playable on all the i3/i5 rigs out there too.

 

[Hubb1e]

As everyone else said, only the K model Intel chips are worthwhile for enthusiasts. All other chips like AMDs and i3s are only valid if on an extreme budget or for someone who does not require the best performance. Your use case demands the best performance.

Basically get an i5 3470k and overclock it to 4.2-4.5ghz ish and you'll be good to go for a very long time. These CPUs are fast at those clocks. Then you will want at least a 7770 graphics card. I'd recomend the 7870 for you but the price may exceed your budget. The 7770 does quite well in Civ5 with some reduced detail that doesn't really affect the look of the game that much so you may be happy with that for now.

 

[Abwx]

Nobody is recommending an i3. Everybody is recommending an i5, which destroys the A10 in the ops usage scenario.

An HThreaded i3 is more relevant in respect of an A10
than a 4 cores without HT in respect of a FX8350.....

Average in applications (including lowly threade ones)
and games , wich are still not very well Mthreaded.

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/880-17/moyennes.html

 

[Phynaz]

You're the only one talking about an i3. Nobody else is.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Not all cores/threads are created equal. *shrug*

A 30GHz Athlon XP would be pwnage.

 

[SocketF]

Will the 2014 games use the new tech, you reckon?

No, definitely not. First, using new instructions takes time (currently we are at SSE2) and second games are not the the main beneficiary of AVX. For games I think Haswell's 2nd branch pipeline will be more beneficial.

Anyhow Haswell well be kind of a milestione in CPU design, everything else after it will be only small improvements, like e.g. SSE3. The next big thing from Intel is far away. Thus Haswell will be a long-lasting investment.

 

[AtenRa]

I bought my Q6600 in '08.

If they haven't started doing more multithreading by 2013, they won't be doing it in 2014.

The majority of new DX-11 games can use 6 to 8 or more threads. New DX-11 releases will continue to support more than 4 threads.

 

[Puppies04]

Actually the non-K i5/i7 series chips can be overclocked to 4 speed bins (0.4GHz) above their maximum turbo speed.

Yes, now is that turbo speed attainable at stock..... yes, so what I said stands.

 

[frozentundra123456]

The majority of new DX-11 games can use 6 to 8 or more threads. New DX-11 releases will continue to support more than 4 threads.

My advice would be to pick the cpu that gives the best current performance, rather than base my choice on conjecture of what might happen. That choice is the 3570K with a mb that allows overclocking. Even if games become more multithreaded, that is not to say it will use all 8 cores of FX optimally or that it will be faster than intel. And there is also a good chance that there will be some popular games, whether amd supporters want to admit it or not, that will not use many cores. The 3570k is just a much better all around processor for gaming, while using less power.

 

[Liquid_Static]

4 Threads is certainly the "norm" now, more is the true enthusiast class.

 

[sobe88]

Welcome to the forums sobe88 :thumbsup:

Thank you thank you, I've been more a lurker here with being more activity on Overclockers.com


We'll see what Haswell holds, we have all this new tech coming around, the GTX 780 from nVidia, then nVidia's release of the GTX Titan, soooo much niceness coming!

 

[AstroDav]

This was pretty much solved. Thanks for replies & I welcome same in question #2, which stays over here:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2307827

 

[Headfoot]

AsztroDav, a A10-5700/5800 is OK enough.

No.

Given that you play city simulator games (High CPU requirements), along with photo-editing (High CPU requirements, threaded but not hugely threaded except certain plugins) and other photo-intensive applications, you have a classic case where you benefit from the fastest CPU you can get at a reasonable price. That CPU is an overclocked 3570k or 3770k if money isn't an issue.

z77 + 3570k with a decent cooler and get to a mild but stable overclock (if you are still comfortable with overclocking on a computer you use for work). Cooler wise you shouldn't need more than a Coolermaster Hyper 212+ or EVO in any decent case.

Normally I would suggest waiting for Haswell, but an Athlon x2 4800+ is so feeble at this point in time it will hardly run new games, so I'm sure it's getting pretty horrible as is