Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > CPUs and Overclocking

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-08-2013, 07:50 AM   #1
nks
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 31
Default performance difference in i7 3770k and AMD Fx8350 (3dsmax)

hi,

i am new to this forum. so please forgive me if i am asking a question which have been asked earlier.
i have recently started learning 3dsmax design and so i need to upgrade my computer.
my recent hardware is :
phenom 965 BE oced to 3.8ghz for 24/7 use
mobo - MSI 790fx gd70
16gb gskill ripjaws
noctua nh d-14
corsair 128gb ssd
gtx 480 GPU


i am planing to upgrade the above setup to piledriver fx8350 or i7 3770k.
i have read a lot of reviews and performance of fx8350 in 3dsmax is comparable to corei7 3770k. i know i7 is faster but i would like to know exact how much performance hit i will get if i go for i7.


for example if i render in mental ray and i get my frame in 30minutes on i7 3770k
i think it will take max 35minutes for fx8350 to render the same frame.

if this is the case then i think i should go with 8350 and save some money and can buy a quadro card in near future.

and i will oc FX8350 to 4.8ghz for 24/7 use.
so please enlighten me on this issue.


Thanks
nks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 08:19 AM   #2
inf64
Platinum Member
 
inf64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,062
Default

Here you go:
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/880-...ray-v-ray.html

Stock vs stock.
Mental Ray:
8350- 703s
3770K-700s
Practically the same performance,difference is well within the margin of error(0.05%).

V-ray:
8350- 231s
3770K-248s
231/248=0.93 => FX8350 is around 7% faster than 3770K.

So in these 2 workloads 8350 is actually on par or faster than 3770K,both at stock clocks.
__________________
ShintaiDK:"There will be no APU in PS4 and Xbox720."
ShintaiDK:"No quadchannel either.[in Kaveri]"
CHADBOGA:"Because he[OBR] is a great man."
inf64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 11:40 AM   #3
Geforce man
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,536
Default

Would you be overclocking the i7 as well? Important question. The 8350 @ stock is 4.0Ghz, and barely beats the i7 @ 3.5Ghz. If they were both @ 4.6-4.8Ghz, the i7 would destroy the 8350.

Also is power consumption important to you? At stock the 8350 uses nearly 2x the power of the i7. @ your goal of 4.8Ghz, it would be nearly triple. A heavily OC'd i7 wont even touch a stock 8350 for power usage.
__________________
http://www.heatware.com/eval.php?id=13951 HEAT

http://www.futuremark.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2006

Trusted buyer/seller (geforce_man) ^^

Geforce man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 11:45 AM   #4
Idontcare
Administrator
Elite Member
 
Idontcare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: 台北市
Posts: 20,491
Default

Welcome to the forums nks

Quote:
Originally Posted by nks View Post
hi,

i am new to this forum. so please forgive me if i am asking a question which have been asked earlier.
i have recently started learning 3dsmax design and so i need to upgrade my computer.
my recent hardware is :
phenom 965 BE oced to 3.8ghz for 24/7 use
mobo - MSI 790fx gd70
16gb gskill ripjaws
noctua nh d-14
corsair 128gb ssd
gtx 480 GPU


i am planing to upgrade the above setup to piledriver fx8350 or i7 3770k.
i have read a lot of reviews and performance of fx8350 in 3dsmax is comparable to corei7 3770k. i know i7 is faster but i would like to know exact how much performance hit i will get if i go for i7.


for example if i render in mental ray and i get my frame in 30minutes on i7 3770k
i think it will take max 35minutes for fx8350 to render the same frame.

if this is the case then i think i should go with 8350 and save some money and can buy a quadro card in near future.

and i will oc FX8350 to 4.8ghz for 24/7 use.
so please enlighten me on this issue.


Thanks
I have both, the FX-8350 and the i7-3770K, and would gladly run 3dsmax benches for you (at stock and OC'ed) and report back the performance (including power consumption numbers) if there is a way for me to run such benches.

Looking at this page, it looks like I can download a free 30-day trial version. Do you know if I can run the benches you are looking for with those trial versions?

Walk me through what you need me to do and I'll do it.
Idontcare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 12:00 PM   #5
inf64
Platinum Member
 
inf64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,062
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geforce man View Post
Would you be overclocking the i7 as well? Important question. The 8350 @ stock is 4.0Ghz, and barely beats the i7 @ 3.5Ghz. If they were both @ 4.6-4.8Ghz, the i7 would destroy the 8350.

Also is power consumption important to you? At stock the 8350 uses nearly 2x the power of the i7. @ your goal of 4.8Ghz, it would be nearly triple. A heavily OC'd i7 wont even touch a stock 8350 for power usage.
Are you sure 3770K runs at 3.5Ghz the whole time in mental ray and v-ray? I was under impression that with its advanced turbo and shared TDP budget(with iGPU) it is using up the headroom even with all 4 cores loaded up. I'm not sue how high it can go but I'm pretty sure it's not 3.9Ghz and it's not stock 3.5Ghz . It's probably hovering around 3.6-3.7Ghz which is just ~10% lower than 8350.
__________________
ShintaiDK:"There will be no APU in PS4 and Xbox720."
ShintaiDK:"No quadchannel either.[in Kaveri]"
CHADBOGA:"Because he[OBR] is a great man."
inf64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 12:11 PM   #6
LOL_Wut_Axel
Diamond Member
 
LOL_Wut_Axel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: San Juan, PR
Posts: 4,271
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by inf64 View Post
Are you sure 3770K runs at 3.5Ghz the whole time in mental ray and v-ray? I was under impression that with its advanced turbo and shared TDP budget(with iGPU) it is using up the headroom even with all 4 cores loaded up. I'm not sue how high it can go but I'm pretty sure it's not 3.9Ghz and it's not stock 3.5Ghz . It's probably hovering around 3.6-3.7Ghz which is just ~10% lower than 8350.
When all four cores are loaded on the 3770K it runs at 3.6GHz, and when eight cores are loaded on the 8350 it runs at 4.1GHz IIRC.

So really it doesn't change anything.
__________________
Pentium G3258 @4.3GHz | MSI Z87-G41 PC Mate | OCZ Vertex 3 120GB, Seagate Barracuda 3TB | Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 Boost Dual-X, PNY GeForce GTX 465 | 8GB Kingston HyperX Genesis DDR3-1600 | Corsair RM750 | Corsair Carbide 400R

HP EliteBook 2560p | Core i5-2520M, 6GB Crucial DDR3, A-DATA SP900 128GB, 1TB Toshiba 5400RPM
LOL_Wut_Axel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 12:14 PM   #7
inf64
Platinum Member
 
inf64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,062
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LOL_Wut_Axel View Post
When all four cores are loaded on the 3770K it runs at 3.6GHz, and when eight cores are loaded on the 8350 it runs at 4.1GHz IIRC.

So really it doesn't change anything.
4.1Ghz is achieved rarely IIRC. It's a half core turbo state while 4.2Ghz is single core turbo state. It can hit this with 8 integer cores but workloads we are talking about are SSE heavy so FPU will be taxed to the maximum. Even if it is 4.1Ghz vs 3.6Ghz it's just 13% difference,just about enough for 3770K to eek out in front of FX in V-ray(by ~6%) and have ~13% lead in mental ray. But that is FX @ stock Vs OCed 3770K.
__________________
ShintaiDK:"There will be no APU in PS4 and Xbox720."
ShintaiDK:"No quadchannel either.[in Kaveri]"
CHADBOGA:"Because he[OBR] is a great man."
inf64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 12:14 PM   #8
nks
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Idontcare View Post
Welcome to the forums nks



I have both, the FX-8350 and the i7-3770K, and would gladly run 3dsmax benches for you (at stock and OC'ed) and report back the performance (including power consumption numbers) if there is a way for me to run such benches.

Looking at this page, it looks like I can download a free 30-day trial version. Do you know if I can run the benches you are looking for with those trial versions?

Walk me through what you need me to do and I'll do it.
bro
i am really glad that i met you on this forum.
can you please download a 30 days trial of 3dsmax.
i will give you a link to a file.
just open it and hit render button on both the machines.
oce'd and non oce'd.
and keep a stop clock handy in the mean time.
and please let me know how much time each machine takes.
and i will buy accordingly.
i was going to purchase 8350 tommorow.
but i think i should wait for your result.
thanks a tons for this.
nks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 12:18 PM   #9
LOL_Wut_Axel
Diamond Member
 
LOL_Wut_Axel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: San Juan, PR
Posts: 4,271
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by inf64 View Post
4.1Ghz is achieved rarely IIRC. It's a half core turbo state while 4.2Ghz is single core turbo state. It can hit this with 8 integer cores but workloads we are talking about are SSE heavy so FPU will be taxed to the maximum. Even if it is 4.1Ghz vs 3.6Ghz it's just 13% difference,just about enough for 3770K to eek out in front of FX in V-ray(by ~6%) and have ~13% lead in mental ray. But that is FX @ stock Vs OCed 3770K.
The 8350 uses ~2x more power, though. It is significantly less expensive, though, both have their ups and downs.
__________________
Pentium G3258 @4.3GHz | MSI Z87-G41 PC Mate | OCZ Vertex 3 120GB, Seagate Barracuda 3TB | Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 Boost Dual-X, PNY GeForce GTX 465 | 8GB Kingston HyperX Genesis DDR3-1600 | Corsair RM750 | Corsair Carbide 400R

HP EliteBook 2560p | Core i5-2520M, 6GB Crucial DDR3, A-DATA SP900 128GB, 1TB Toshiba 5400RPM
LOL_Wut_Axel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 12:23 PM   #10
nks
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 31
Default

power usage is not a problem as of now.
and if performance difference between the two is not big then i will go for 8350.
a cpu mobo combo like
8350 and asrock extreme 4 mobo will cost 22k
whereas a similar board with core i7 3770k will cost 35k
so if i am spending that much i want corei7 to eat up fx 8350.
nks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 12:34 PM   #11
Idontcare
Administrator
Elite Member
 
Idontcare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: 台北市
Posts: 20,491
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nks View Post
bro
i am really glad that i met you on this forum.
can you please download a 30 days trial of 3dsmax.
i will give you a link to a file.
just open it and hit render button on both the machines.
oce'd and non oce'd.
and keep a stop clock handy in the mean time.
and please let me know how much time each machine takes.
and i will buy accordingly.
i was going to purchase 8350 tommorow.
but i think i should wait for your result.
thanks a tons for this.
Shoot me that link and I'll run the benches today/this evening. You may make your purchase decision by tomorrow after all

(send the link by pm if you don't want the link publicized across the internet)
Idontcare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 12:42 PM   #12
sm625
Diamond Member
 
sm625's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 4,812
Default

It is unfortunate that your motherboard wont support piledriver, that would make the decision a little easier.
__________________
I am looking for a cheap upgrade to my 3 year old computer.
AT forum member #1: Buy a 4790k

I am looking for a way to get 10 more fps in TF2.
AT forum member #2: Buy a 4790k
sm625 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 12:46 PM   #13
nks
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 31
Default

http://www.freefilehosting.net/benchmark_1
this is a link to a file
just open it in 3dsmax and hit render button.
anybody with 3dsmax installed.
just run it and let us no the time taken to render it.
thanks.
nks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 12:52 PM   #14
Abwx
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,818
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by inf64 View Post
4.1Ghz is achieved rarely IIRC. It's a half core turbo state while 4.2Ghz is single core turbo state. It can hit this with 8 integer cores but workloads we are talking about are SSE heavy so FPU will be taxed to the maximum. Even if it is 4.1Ghz vs 3.6Ghz it's just 13% difference,just about enough for 3770K to eek out in front of FX in V-ray(by ~6%) and have ~13% lead in mental ray. But that is FX @ stock Vs OCed 3770K.
Cinebench is not FP intensive at all otherwise the FX8350 would
be much better in its single threaded test and wouldnt scale 6x
as showed in the MThreaded part of the test.

This soft has been recompiled with ICC anyway , so dont expect it
to be a good indicator of the CPUs respective perfs.

About overclocking the FX scale better so overclocking the 3770K
wont destroy it at all , contrary to bold statements i read here and there,
as much as Multithread thread perfs is the concern.




http://techreport.com/review/23750/a...or-reviewed/13
Abwx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 01:11 PM   #15
Geforce man
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,536
Default

I am curious about the rest of the setup in these tests with the pretty graphs :-). My PC, using an ancient p67 board with my 2700k, at 4600mhz, aka slower than ivy at 4.4 ish, I get 9.04 in cinebench. Mem at 1866 9-9-9-24-1t . I don't know what some other good benches to run would be that could measure it well.
__________________
http://www.heatware.com/eval.php?id=13951 HEAT

http://www.futuremark.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2006

Trusted buyer/seller (geforce_man) ^^

Geforce man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 01:20 PM   #16
nks
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 31
Default

jst run the file to which i have given the link.
benchmarks are done in controlled conditions and real life usage results may be different.
nks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 01:32 PM   #17
Idontcare
Administrator
Elite Member
 
Idontcare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: 台北市
Posts: 20,491
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nks View Post
jst run the file to which i have given the link.
benchmarks are done in controlled conditions and real life usage results may be different.
Downloading now but I have to run some errands so no results until this evening Will post as soon as I have them.
Idontcare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 09:53 PM   #18
guskline
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lebanon, PA
Posts: 3,024
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geforce man View Post
I am curious about the rest of the setup in these tests with the pretty graphs :-). My PC, using an ancient p67 board with my 2700k, at 4600mhz, aka slower than ivy at 4.4 ish, I get 9.04 in cinebench. Mem at 1866 9-9-9-24-1t . I don't know what some other good benches to run would be that could measure it well.
You surely jest good sir! You have one FAST machine
__________________
3930k @ 4.6 -Asus SbTh X79 - Custom WC - MO-RA3 Pro-420 + RX 360+XSPC-Sapphire R9-290 Tri-X-EK blocks/bridge -16G (4x4 quad)DDR3-2133 - Intel 530 SSD - 2560x1440 Achieva Shimian - Win 8.1 - PC P&C 1200W Silencer Mk III
guskline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 10:02 PM   #19
Idontcare
Administrator
Elite Member
 
Idontcare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: 台北市
Posts: 20,491
Default

Results are in. I tested both the FX8350 and the i7-3770K at multiple frequencies so you have the clockspeed scaling data with which you can compute the expected performance at any given OC for either processor.



Both rigs used the same components (configured identically) for all tests excepting for the mobo and cpu.



Basically the i7-3770K takes 0.76x the time to complete the benchmark at the same clockspeed, and the 3770k uses ~100W less than the FX8350 when both are clocked at 4GHz.

For people who are not familiar with this application, it pegs all cores/threads at 100%. I manually disabled turbo-core/boost but it didn't matter because both processors throttle back to base clockspeeds when running this benchmark.

Now lets talk price/performance...the 3770k costs ~$120 more than the FX8350 but it gets the job done (in this app) in only 0.76x the time at the same clockspeed.

If the 3770k computer (entire platform) costs $500 and the FX8350 costs $380 then you are still better off buying the 3770k rig because the price/performance is identical but the $500 rig will burn far less power (and cost less money per year).

If your electricity net costs you $0.115/kWHr then 1W costs you $1 over the course year. A 100W delta is a big delta, compounded by the fact that you get less performance despite all those watts, just not good.

For this application, the guy that can sell you an FX-8350 over an i7-3770K (or i7-3570K) is the guy that can sell ice to Eskimos
Idontcare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 10:24 PM   #20
guskline
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lebanon, PA
Posts: 3,024
Default

nks, having trouble opening link
__________________
3930k @ 4.6 -Asus SbTh X79 - Custom WC - MO-RA3 Pro-420 + RX 360+XSPC-Sapphire R9-290 Tri-X-EK blocks/bridge -16G (4x4 quad)DDR3-2133 - Intel 530 SSD - 2560x1440 Achieva Shimian - Win 8.1 - PC P&C 1200W Silencer Mk III
guskline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 10:46 PM   #21
nks
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 31
Default

Can I post a link of another forum???
It has the link for the benchmark file
And I am not able to private message as I am new on this forum. I can only private message admin.
nks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 10:51 PM   #22
nks
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Idontcare View Post
Results are in. I tested both the FX8350 and the i7-3770K at multiple frequencies so you have the clockspeed scaling data with which you can compute the expected performance at any given OC for either processor.



Both rigs used the same components (configured identically) for all tests excepting for the mobo and cpu.



Basically the i7-3770K takes 0.76x the time to complete the benchmark at the same clockspeed, and the 3770k uses ~100W less than the FX8350 when both are clocked at 4GHz.

For people who are not familiar with this application, it pegs all cores/threads at 100%. I manually disabled turbo-core/boost but it didn't matter because both processors throttle back to base clockspeeds when running this benchmark.

Now lets talk price/performance...the 3770k costs ~$120 more than the FX8350 but it gets the job done (in this app) in only 0.76x the time at the same clockspeed.

If the 3770k computer (entire platform) costs $500 and the FX8350 costs $380 then you are still better off buying the 3770k rig because the price/performance is identical but the $500 rig will burn far less power (and cost less money per year).

If your electricity net costs you $0.115/kWHr then 1W costs you $1 over the course year. A 100W delta is a big delta, compounded by the fact that you get less performance despite all those watts, just not good.

For this application, the guy that can sell you an FX-8350 over an i7-3770K (or i7-3570K) is the guy that can sell ice to Eskimos

Thanks a lot bro
My current setup clocked at 3.7ghz is doing it in 7.3 minutes.
Current setup
Phenom 965 oc'ed to 3.7 and cooled by noctua nh d14
Msi790fx gd70
4gb gskill 1666mhz cl9 ram

So it is not good to buy fx8350 for this application.
Enlighten me on corei5 3570k
If I overclock it to 4.3 for 24/7 then can its performance come between corei7 and fx 8350

A core i5 setup will cost me approx 70$ more compared to fx8350
nks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 10:54 PM   #23
frozentundra123456
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,457
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Idontcare View Post
Results are in. I tested both the FX8350 and the i7-3770K at multiple frequencies so you have the clockspeed scaling data with which you can compute the expected performance at any given OC for either processor.



Both rigs used the same components (configured identically) for all tests excepting for the mobo and cpu.



Basically the i7-3770K takes 0.76x the time to complete the benchmark at the same clockspeed, and the 3770k uses ~100W less than the FX8350 when both are clocked at 4GHz.

For people who are not familiar with this application, it pegs all cores/threads at 100%. I manually disabled turbo-core/boost but it didn't matter because both processors throttle back to base clockspeeds when running this benchmark.

Now lets talk price/performance...the 3770k costs ~$120 more than the FX8350 but it gets the job done (in this app) in only 0.76x the time at the same clockspeed.

If the 3770k computer (entire platform) costs $500 and the FX8350 costs $380 then you are still better off buying the 3770k rig because the price/performance is identical but the $500 rig will burn far less power (and cost less money per year).

If your electricity net costs you $0.115/kWHr then 1W costs you $1 over the course year. A 100W delta is a big delta, compounded by the fact that you get less performance despite all those watts, just not good.

For this application, the guy that can sell you an FX-8350 over an i7-3770K (or i7-3570K) is the guy that can sell ice to Eskimos
Your calculations for extra cost for power must be assuming full load 24 hours a day for the entire year, which is probably not realistic. However even if the computer is used six hour a day that would still be 25.00 per year.
frozentundra123456 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 11:31 PM   #24
SPBHM
Platinum Member
 
SPBHM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,506
Default

do you have any alternative link for this?
http://www.freefilehosting.net/benchmark_1

it's not working for me and I was curious to do some testing.
SPBHM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 11:59 PM   #25
Gikaseixas
Golden Member
 
Gikaseixas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,970
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frozentundra123456 View Post
Your calculations for extra cost for power must be assuming full load 24 hours a day for the entire year, which is probably not realistic. However even if the computer is used six hour a day that would still be 25.00 per year.
...which we could safely say it's not a big difference. People often exaggerate on power consumption estimates and deltas between AMD and Intel. My pick would be a FX 8350 since the $120 price difference is enough to buy a good motherboard.
IDC and Frozentundra123456 thanks for the calculations.
__________________
Intel i7 4770K @ 4.6ghz | MSI Z87 MPOWER |Samsung 840 Pro 512GB| Corsair Vengeance Pro 2400MHz DDR3 | Sapphire Radeon Vapor-X 7970 | Corsair 850W | Corsair H100i
AMD FX 8350 @ 4.6ghz | GIGABYTE 990FXA UD5 |Samsung 840 Pro 256GB| Corsair DDR3-1866 | Gigabyte Radeon HD 7850 OC | Corsair 750W | Zalman CNPS 12X
Laptop: Sager NP9377 | Intel i7 4810HQ 2.8-3.8ghz | 32GB DDR3 | 256 SSD & 1TB Storage | Nvidia GTX880M 8GB @ 1920 x 1080 res

Last edited by Gikaseixas; 01-09-2013 at 12:42 AM.
Gikaseixas is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.