5800k or 3220?

[Rickyyy369]

Thanks for all the input, everyone. The general consensus seems to be that the 5800k would be the better setup, and I think thats what im gonna go with.

Really the only benefit I see with going with an 1155 system is that it could be upgraded later on to something more powerful. But considering my dad only upgrades his computer every 4-5 years, I don't think an upgrade path is something to take into consideration.

Four years from now when hes looking to upgrade, a i5 2500 is probably still going to cost $150+ and for that price id be better off getting him a new mobo+CPU combo with all the modern ports and features.

His next addition after this is definitely going to be an SSD, and I think this new FM2/A75/Sata6Gb/s system will be able to utilize an SSD to its fullest potential a lot better than his old LGA 775 setup would have.

 

[escrow4]

i3 easily. I had the same dilemma, and if you don't play games, don't bother with an APU. You still want as much CPU grunt as you can pack in, something APU's still stumble with. This Hardware Secrets review:

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/A10-5800K-vs-Core-i3-3220-CPU-Review/1646/19

came to the same conclusion, for a day to day box with no gaming, get the i3. Match it to an H77 board and you have a decent full featured box that will last a while. The dead end socket thing is irrelevant. In 4-5yrs you'll probably be building something else and right now the i3 is stronger CPU wise, which is what you'd want for a day to day basic system. The HD 2500 is sufficient for everything else in a basic system, and if you do drop in a dedicated GPU down the track, the APU advantage evaporates.

 

[Gigantopithecus]

I've had an A10-5800K system next to an i3-3220 system next to each other in my lab for a couple months now. While I do a lot of additional work on those computers, they are both mostly "mom and dad" boxes that do basic computing.

As for which one makes more sense, IMHO, it's both (or neither). For typical day to day computing, neither is clearly superior to the other. To be blunt, when you say

all he ever really does is surf the internet, watch youtube and netflix, and some HD movies and some word processing

...my response is why are you looking at $100+ APUs/CPUs?

Here's why: assuming your dad is at 1080p (if he's even currently at 1080p), the cheapest dual core AMD APU and cheapest dual core Intel Celeron CPU are sufficient for what you've described today. What makes you think that will change in 4-5 years? He'll still be using Windows 7 64-bit, right? YouTube & Netflix are limited not by desktop computers, but by mobile devices. It will take a few years before those catch up to even the cheapest desktop CPUs now. Do you think your dad will get a 4K display for his computer in the next 4-5 years? And word processing is an application that a single-core Intel Atom CPU can currently handle in Office 2010. That is, I am happy using Sandy Bridge Celerons and FM2 A4 APUs for day to day tasks. But then I typically don't have scores of Flash-heavy websites loaded - and I doubt your dad does, either.

So the most CPU-intensive thing that your dad will likely do is multitasking a 1080p HD video while typing something up, and maybe browsing the web a bit. And that's likely to be the most taxing thing he'll do for the next 4-5 years. I would rather have a dual-core Ivy Bridge Celeron and an SSD than a i3-3220 and mechanical hard drive for day to day tasks like what your dad is doing.

In terms of cost, an A10 APU with an A75 chipset mobo will cost basically the same as an i3 CPU and B75 mobo (I'd go B75 specifically for USB 3.0). So that consideration is a wash.

At this point, IMHO, it doesn't matter which platform you choose. Your dad will be happy with it, especially after you add an SSD. In fact, I'd skimp on the processor and go with an SSD out of the gate - it's easier to drop in a chip upgrade than it is to clone a W7 installation from an HDD to an SSD.

 

[escrow4]

^^^^

Do the Celerons really have that much grunt? When I was setting up my HTPC, the Celeron (G540) frequently hit 80+% during basic web usage and one or two driver downloads. Big spikes. I'd rather get an i3 and SSD to allow for more breathing room.

 

[Dark Shroud]

IE9 & IE10 are also well multi-threaded, specifically IE10.

 

[shady28]

A10-5800k for what you're talking about doing.

It will shine vs the i3 when a video comes up, or if your dad does iTunes or any other type of media encoding. Anything else and they will be pretty much equivalent.

The FX-6300 would be the AMD competitor to the i3 at comparable prices.

 

[SPBHM]

A10-5800k for what you're talking about doing.

It will shine vs the i3 when a video comes up, or if your dad does iTunes or any other type of media encoding. Anything else and they will be pretty much equivalent.

The FX-6300 would be the AMD competitor to the i3 at comparable prices.

6300 is $10 more expensive than both, and has no IGP.
(you can buy some motherboard with the ancient 40sps IGP, but..)

if you are going to use the IGP, perhaps the 5800K makes more sense, as as CPU it looks competitive, although using a discrete card the i3 seems to be faster for gaming, and it uses less power under load.

if we are talking about video resources, you would have to mention quick sync as an advantage for Intel, it seems to deliver better quality and lower time than the AMD solution (but I'm not a fan of these solutions, since I use only the CPU for video conversion, and the A10 looks faster)

but from the use you described the $50 Celeron will do just fine.

 

[Gigantopithecus]

^^^^

Do the Celerons really have that much grunt? When I was setting up my HTPC, the Celeron (G540) frequently hit 80+% during basic web usage and one or two driver downloads. Big spikes. I'd rather get an i3 and SSD to allow for more breathing room.

I can't say that I've ever seen any of the G540 systems I've used do more than very briefly spike to 80%+ during basic web browsing while downloading a few files. I don't doubt that you can bring a G540 to its knees with heavier Flash sites and light multitasking, though.

That said, spikes to 80%+ utilization don't really affect a system's responsiveness/ability to do stuff. Sustained near max/max utilization will, though. However, I'll stand by what I said in that I'd rather have an Ivy Bridge Celeron and an SSD for day to day use than an i3 and a mechanical hard drive.

I picked up a G1610 (Ivy Bridge Celeron at 2.6GHz) yesterday and am putting it through its paces right now. At $50, it's priced the same as the A4-5300, and of those two, I'd definitely choose the G1610 for day to day use. But at the i3-3220/A10-5800K price point, the difference doesn't really matter for day to day use.

 

[Phynaz]

if your dad does iTunes or any other type of media encoding.

iTunes encoders are pretty much single threaded if I recall correctly. Which would make the i3 a better choice.

Which brings up a good point, since iTunes has to be the most widely used media software around, how come Anand doesn't bench with it?

 

[escrow4]

iTunes encoders are pretty much single threaded if I recall correctly. Which would make the i3 a better choice.

Which brings up a good point, since iTunes has to be the most widely used media software around, how come Anand doesn't bench with it?

True, benchmark here:

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/A10-5800K-vs-Core-i3-3220-CPU-Review/1646/10

i3 3220 17% faster.

 

[shady28]

6300 is $10 more expensive than both, and has no IGP.
(you can buy some motherboard with the ancient 40sps IGP, but..)

if you are going to use the IGP, perhaps the 5800K makes more sense, as as CPU it looks competitive, although using a discrete card the i3 seems to be faster for gaming, and it uses less power under load.

if we are talking about video resources, you would have to mention quick sync as an advantage for Intel, it seems to deliver better quality and lower time than the AMD solution (but I'm not a fan of these solutions, since I use only the CPU for video conversion, and the A10 looks faster)

but from the use you described the $50 Celeron will do just fine.

Well, to be blunt, I would say :

1 - Never recommend anyone use intel IGP. Even on a laptop. They will be sorry.

2 - I don't think the Pentium / Celeron CPUs are worthwhile, even with a cheap discrete GPU. You are better off with the A10-5800K.

Various benchmarks on video decoding show the A10 to be significantly better than the i3; it wipes the floor in gaming vs the i3.

My general take is :

General purpose computing with a focus on viewing media / video, iTunes type 'encoding', and light or legacy gaming = A10-5800K.

General purpose computing with a focus on gaming = Core i3+ or FX-6300+ and a discrete GPU.

Heavy duty computing with a focus on media, content creation, or high end gamer = high end Core i5 or better Intel and discrete GPU.

 

[SPBHM]

I have a couple of laptops running with Intel graphics, both seem to work perfectly for what they are used (mostly web browsing), but if you are going to do any gaming, sure, if you can get the AMD graphics (as long as is not the old slow stuff for AM3) it's a better experience,

Itunes seems to be one of the weak spots for the A10,

and if you do video conversions casually it may well be a good thing to use quick sync

again, I never touched it, since I use other softwares with no support, but on paper it looks good.

as for the Celeron, I don't see how it can be so bad, 2 ivy bridge cores at 2.6GHz for $50.

 

[escrow4]

@shady28

Nothing wrong with an Intel GPU for a basic office/day to day, non gaming box. If you don't game or use anything that requires GPU acceleration, why bother with a dedicated GPU?

 

[Gigantopithecus]

True, benchmark here:

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/A10-5800K-vs-Core-i3-3220-CPU-Review/1646/10

i3 3220 17% faster.

17% faster ripping a CD means what? 50 seconds instead of 58 seconds? The average user isn't like us - they're not sitting there with a stop watch. Even if you're ripping ten CDs, then that's 80 seconds longer on an A10. ...So what? That's less than a minute and a half.

Anyone who really cares about audio file conversion isn't using iTunes.

iTunes is one of the most widely used media applications - but people aren't using it to rip CDs or convert audio files from one type/bitrate to another. Hell, the average user doesn't even know there are different audio file formats.

 

[Abwx]

17% faster ripping a CD means what? 50 seconds instead of 58 seconds? The average user isn't like us - they're not sitting there with a stop watch. Even if you're ripping ten CDs, then that's 80 seconds longer on an A10. ...So what? That's less than a minute and a half.

Thoses times are accurate assuming you have no anti virus ,
no firewall or browser running and that you are sitting waiting
doing nothing with the PC while itune is running , if not the case
it s likely that the A10 will be faster.

 

[Vic Vega]

Im working on putting together something new for my dad whose motherboard recently bit the dust and Im stuck on deciding between these two processors.

Im leaning more towards the 5800k because I feel like it would give him a more well-rounded system, with good multi-tasking performance, "good enough" single threaded, and all the video performance he would ever need for years to come.

But the i3 3220 does have woefully better single-threaded performance, and all he ever really does is surf the internet, watch youtube and netflix, and some HD movies and some word processing. So maybe the dual, hyperthreaded cores of the 3220 would do just fine, while also sipping less power?

I've been flip-flopping between these two for the past week so maybe some outside input would help me make a clearer decision. What do you guys think? 5800k or 3220.

I had a similar choice and went with the 5800K. No regret at all, it's a fantastic CPU. I can't believe these aren't more popular. Got mine for $115 shipped.

 

[Vic Vega]

Oh, and I have a notebook for work with an i5 and Intel graphics. It also has a dedicated nVidia GPU. The integrated graphics SUCK. HARD. Two monitors? Forget it. It's completely awful. Got tired of it after a month and disabled it in the bios so it only uses the nVidia dedicated GPU. Problem solved.

 

[escrow4]

17% faster ripping a CD means what? 50 seconds instead of 58 seconds? The average user isn't like us - they're not sitting there with a stop watch. Even if you're ripping ten CDs, then that's 80 seconds longer on an A10. ...So what? That's less than a minute and a half.

Anyone who really cares about audio file conversion isn't using iTunes.

iTunes is one of the most widely used media applications - but people aren't using it to rip CDs or convert audio files from one type/bitrate to another. Hell, the average user doesn't even know there are different audio file formats.

Does all add up though. I'd prefer a faster CPU to an average all rounder.

 

[Maragark]

Even an A4-5300 would be good enough for your dad's needs, will continue to be so for a few years and they're only $55 on newegg. Also, FM2 has a fair bit of life in it yet, allowing for an upgrade to a cheap Kaveri or newer APU in a few years.

 

[Rickyyy369]

I had a similar choice and went with the 5800K. No regret at all, it's a fantastic CPU. I can't believe these aren't more popular. Got mine for $115 shipped.

I appreciate you sharing your personal experience :thumbsup: I just want to give him the best possible experience for years to come, and the more I think about it, the more the 5800k makes sense.

Hes expressed some interest in turning his computer into a sort of HTPC/general use hybrid in the future by running an hdmi cable from his 65 inch main TV to his computer which is situated just a few feet away. So he would be running a dual display setup with a movie playing on the big screen and possibly doing some light work on the other display. And im just a little skeptical that the integrated HD2500 in the 3220 would be able to give him as seamless experience as the 5800 would.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Oh, and I have a notebook for work with an i5 and Intel graphics. It also has a dedicated nVidia GPU. The integrated graphics SUCK. HARD. Two monitors? Forget it. It's completely awful. Got tired of it after a month and disabled it in the bios so it only uses the nVidia dedicated GPU. Problem solved.

I also have an i5 laptop (Edit: provided by my job), and I see no problem with it at all. 2 displays work fine, and I run an e-mail client, YouTube, and a Mass Spectroscopy quantitation program simultaneously with no issues.

 

[Vic Vega]

I also have an i5 laptop (Edit: provided by my job), and I see no problem with it at all. 2 displays work fine, and I run an e-mail client, YouTube, and a Mass Spectroscopy quantitation program simultaneously with no issues.

Well, that's you. Good for you.

For me, it absolutely sucks. I've tried many drivers, settings, etc. Intel should just give up.

I run two 1920x1200 displays (not exactly high resolution) and may typically have Outlook, 4-5 FF Windows, 4-5 RDP sessions, two virtual machines, 5+ Putty SSH sessions, Foxit with 5+ large PDFs open, my soft phone, IM, various other applications like Notepad++, MS Word, Excel, etc.

I actually use my notebook to work 9-10 hours a day. Using the integrated graphics dragging a window is like opening a folding fan. Moving a window from one screen to another is a 10 second affair where the window becomes unresponsive.

Turn the Intel junk off and use the nVidia dedicated GPU and I have zero problems.

Sometimes I squeeze in a Youtube video but probably not as much as you.

 

[USER8000]

The bottleneck tends to be the optical drive used for ripping the CD. Most reviews tend to use a WAV file copied to a SSD or to a RAM disk,to bypass the optical drive.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Well, that's you. Good for you.

For me, it absolutely sucks. I've tried many drivers, settings, etc. Intel should just give up.

I run two 1920x1200 displays (not exactly high resolution) and may typically have Outlook, 4-5 FF Windows, 4-5 RDP sessions, two virtual machines, 5+ Putty SSH sessions, Foxit with 5+ large PDFs open, my soft phone, IM, various other applications like Notepad++, MS Word, Excel, etc.

I actually use my notebook to work 9-10 hours a day. Using the integrated graphics dragging a window is like opening a folding fan. Moving a window from one screen to another is a 10 second affair where the window becomes unresponsive.

Turn the Intel junk off and use the nVidia dedicated GPU and I have zero problems.

Sometimes I squeeze in a Youtube video but probably not as much as you.

No need to get hostile or imply that you're some dedicated worker and I am not. I am telling my experience, which seems different than yours. Point is, it is not valid to condem intel igps in general because of your particular experience. BTW, we got a laptop because the workload of my job is such that it is impossible to finish in a normal workday and I often take it home on evenings and weekends to catch up, so dont be judging my dedication to my job.

 

[Vic Vega]

No need to get hostile or imply that you're some dedicated worker and I am not. I am telling my experience, which seems different than yours. Point is, it is not valid to condem intel igps in general because of your particular experience. BTW, we got a laptop because the workload of my job is such that it is impossible to finish in a normal workday and I often take it home on evenings and weekends to catch up, so dont be judging my dedication to my job.

Hostile? If you interperated my post as that I'm sorry you feel that way.

I was just telling you my experience, which seems different than yours.

Yes, it is valid to condemn Intel's integrated graphics based on my own personal experience. I don't know why you think it wouldn't be. That's how life works.