5800k or 3220?

[Rvenger]

^^^^

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 get a dual core celeron to crawl to nearly a stop on Windows 7, thats why I have never kept my dual core (Non HT) Intel boxes for more than a month. I switched to an A8-3850 and then to the A8-5600k. I really noticed a difference in performance when I switched to the Trinity CPU. Its very snappy compared to Llano for some reason.

 

[CHADBOGA]

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.

Have a read of this review from Hardware Canucks.

Also it probably makes no sense to consider the i3 3220, when the i3 3225 comes with the HD4000 IGP.

What's the deal with how each maker's chipsets, when it comes to things like USB3 Transfer Rates and Sata 3 Transfer Rates?

I'm not sure if I would be prepared to take Intel's video drivers on faith, but I may be being harsh on them here.

 

[Hubb1e]

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.

At work I run a mobile Intel i5 530 dual core at 2.5ghz with Intel HD video and optimus Nvidia 330m. I use two monitors at 1080p and 768p and I notice no difference between the two GPUs in office tasks or youtube video. I couldn't even tell that I had installed a program (Windows Home Server Connector) that forced the Nvidia GPU to run all the time until I noticed the icon in the tray had changed color indicating I was running the 330m. I ran that way for weeks and couldn't tell.

I think you have other issues there. Maybe your IGP doesn't have enough RAM dedicated to it in the bios.

 

[frozentundra123456]

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.

So basically your opinion is the only one that counts?? If you want to condemn it for your use, that is your privilege, but it works fine for me.

 

[grimpr]

Take the Trinity, its a much superior offer compared to the gimped and neglected Core i3.

 

[AtenRa]

The CPU performance difference between the two is very small to even feel it in every day use. On the other hand, the iGPU performance and features of the A10-5800K is superior in every way. More and more applications are using the iGPU acceleration and the A10-5800K will continue to improve its performance in the future.

 

[Bman123]

I would rather get a dual core pentium or celeron and use the cash you save and put it towards a SSD. I used a celeron G530 for almost a year for a basic web browising box like you listed and had no issues what so ever with it

 

[beginner99]

99% of the Trinity reviews never covered the Video features of the APU. I would choose the A8-5600K, it will be the best choice for his needs.

Because they are mostly marketing gimmicks. If your source sucks then you can't magically improve it. And the monitor used will have a huge impact too.

I mean the worst thing on LCD TVs are all those "image enhancement" features. The image look best by turning them off. I recently did that at a friends place and he was amazed how much more "natural" the picture looked.

I gotta recommend the SSD as well. Once a fresh OS install becomes a few months old, the HDD starts to get really bogged down. I personally would much rather use my core 2 E8300 system that I got off ebay for $70 because it has a somewhat decent discrete video card upgrade, and an intel X25M G2. There is nothing under $200 that even comes close to the user experience you get from this machine.

Exactly. with the given usage scenario, get the cheapest current CPU + mobo you find taking into account MircoCenter deals or similar stuff, regardless if it is AMD (A4 APU) or Intel (Pentium). Since the mentioned stuff is single-threaded only I would tend to Intel due to a clear advantage but the difference will be marginal compared to SSD vs HDD.

 

[AtenRa]

Because they are mostly marketing gimmicks. If your source sucks then you can't magically improve it. And the monitor used will have a huge impact too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPsi-xbAVlo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYh2zQcO2wA

Yeap, marketing gimmicks

 

[Vic Vega]

So basically your opinion is the only one that counts?? If you want to condemn it for your use, that is your privilege, but it works fine for me.

For my purposes? Of course. I don't know why you think it would not. That is the entire disconnect we have. You posted your experience and I posted mine. Why would I apply your opinions based on your experience to my situation? That doesn't make any sense. That's called denial. I have come to the conclusion that the Intel graphics suck for me, but for me to take on your opinion of it being fine, when it's not, makes no sense at all. :whiste:

 

[Atreidin]

I'd like to see the Steady Video in action with Battlestar Galactica, maybe it would become watchable. :awe:

 

[frozentundra123456]

For my purposes? Of course. I don't know why you think it would not. That is the entire disconnect we have. You posted your experience and I posted mine. Why would I apply your opinions based on your experience to my situation? That doesn't make any sense. That's called denial. I have come to the conclusion that the Intel graphics suck for me, but for me to take on your opinion of it being fine, when it's not, makes no sense at all. :whiste:

And you are overgeneralizing your experience to myself and pretty much to everyone else. You say the intel integrated graphics "suck hard", not that they are insufficient for your use. That is a blanket generalization that is not true, they work fine for me and apparently a lot of other people, since Intel cpus far outsell AMD APUs or discrete cards.

 

[Vic Vega]

And you are overgeneralizing your experience to myself and pretty much to everyone else. You say the intel integrated graphics "suck hard", not that they are insufficient for your use. That is a blanket generalization that is not true, they work fine for me and apparently a lot of other people, since Intel cpus far outsell AMD APUs or discrete cards.

Well, that's your opinion, one not shared by me based on experience.

I would say a lot of people buy McDonald's hamburgers but that doesn't make them good.

Don't you have some YouTube to watch?

Forgive me if you don't spend any more time arguing with you, it's just isn't all that interesting.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Well, that's your opinion, one not shared by me based on experience.

I would say a lot of people buy McDonald's hamburgers but that doesn't make them good.

Don't you have some YouTube to watch?

Forgive me if you don't spend any more time arguing with you, it's just isn't all that interesting.

You are right, there is no point to argue with you. Obviously you have made up you mind that your experience is the only one that counts, and is the one by which an entire generation of CPUs should be judged, despite the fact that they are adequate for the vast majority of users. Oh the triumph of a mind uncluttered by facts or divergent opinions!

 

[shady28]

If you are really going to spend that kind of money, go to e-bay and search Precision T7400 Xeon Quad 8GB.

You can get 8-core / 16 thread dual xeon boxes in a rock solid platform for ~$400-$600.

Then take the savings and get a 7770, and you're set.

 

[beginner99]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPsi-xbAVlo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYh2zQcO2wA

Yeap, marketing gimmicks

Why would i need that feature, steady video, when watching blu-ray content? I wan't to watch it how it was recorded, the director intended it to be.

Plus AMD marketing videos, yeah sure they are unbiased.

 

[Atreidin]

Why would i need that feature, steady video, when watching blu-ray content? I wan't to watch it how it was recorded, the director intended it to be.

Plus AMD marketing videos, yeah sure they are unbiased.

Those aren't marketing videos. Clearly you didn't watch them.

Besides it isn't meant to watch blurays with. If you watched the videos or read up on it AT ALL, you would know they are marketing it to home video recordings.

(It just so happens that a lot of professionally made content nowadays pretends to be recorded by a drunk idiot.)

Also if you watched the videos, or read up on the feature AT ALL, you would know you can turn it on and off for whatever you are doing.

 

[inf64]

Steady video is not marketing gimmick at all,it actually works. I have Radeon and it works pretty good with shaky videos on youtube. Also I use vlc player which supports it too so it's definitely useful feature.

 

[piesquared]

Steady video works quite well and it's a great feature for things like recorded video on a phone. I've taken quite a few videos that aren't the best quality and steadyvideo smooth's them out very nicely.