Considering a 4570, or an amd 8320

[Aroundthebend]

Hello Anandtech!

For a while i have been reading into buying parts for a build&was asking to see your points, or views First of all apologies if these questions have been raised before, i kept reading many differing opinions on some comparisons/choices. I was looking at an 8320 build, with a M5a97 Evo (6+2 phases i think) 970 build, and oc'ing it to hopefully 4.5ish. After a while i was comparing it to a priced the same-ish intel, which would be a 4570 (about £10 cheaper than the 8320 build, with a 100w less psu/no cpu cooler etc)

I wanted to ask, how would the 4570, compare to an Oc'ed 8320@4.4ish? :hmm: I would be gaming at no more than 1080p, with a single graphics card- using my old gpu until i can upgrade that too (varying games, from bf4 to rts, lots of genres etc ) I was pretty much set on the amd build, but if the 4570 stood the same to an overclocked 8320, or better i was looking at both. Would i notice a lesser perf with the intel if i had things such as skype, music, gaming, browsing (more threads etc?)

Also for longevity of the 8320/4570 (with mantle&such, 8 weaker cores or 4 stronger etc...) And even the 84 or so watts for the intel, compared to the 125w + oc (200ish?) Mainly with being in the uk& lecky prices always rising (maybe insignificant, not 100% sure on actual cost.

I would love to get a 4670k, but it takes the price to well over £50/60 more&i'm pushing my budget as it is. Unless i saw it for £150 or so, i can't really.

So, what are you guys views on the 8320 or 4570. Would the 4570 beat even an 8320(with a nice oc) outright? Or an 8320 using more power but beating that intel, also for longevity too. First ever post here too & apologies if this has been asked a million times before.

 

[OCGuy]

4570 is better for gaming than 8320. The much better efficiency is just a bonus.

 

[nwo]

Welcome to the forums!

An Intel 4570 would outright mop the floor with an 8320 unless you are using it for some multithreaded applications which can run on all 8 cores.

Single threaded performance is significantly better on the 4570, OCed or not, it will beat any AMD CPU.

Here is a very rough comparison of the two:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/697?vs=837

Note: I used 4670k which is basically an unlocked and slightly faster clocked 4570 and an 8350 which is the same as 8320 with the exception of the lower stock clock speed

 

[ShintaiDK]

4570, not even a competition. The FX platform is also 4 years old to make it even worse for the FX if the lack of performance and high power consumption wasnt enough.

 

[Aroundthebend]

4570 is better for gaming than 8320. The much better efficiency is just a bonus.

Hey OCGuy, thanks for the reply! Yea, i was reading heavily into amd for a budget-ish build this year (was originally looking at the fx 6300 - but now that was only £20 dif compared to the 8320) Then started looking into an intel build - but no oc'ing :\ The less wattage was aswell, if i got it to 4.2-4.4ish.

Welcome to the forums!

An Intel 4570 would outright mop the floor with an 8320 unless you are using it for some multithreaded applications which can run on all 8 cores.

Single threaded performance is significantly better on the 4570, OCed or not, it will beat any AMD CPU.

Here is a very rough comparison of the two:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/697?vs=837

Note: I used 4670k which is basically an unlocked and slightly faster clocked 4570 and an 8350 which is the same as 8320 with the exception of the lower stock clock speed

Hey nwo, thanks for the welcome! Probably the most i would be doing is gaming, but also things like Skype running, with music playing, Steam running, alt tabbing/reading(hypothetical) I was mainly asking in overall perf, but also when amd's was unlocked&this intel locked (the k would be nice, it's just the budget keeps going up)

Yea, if i went for any amd it would be the 8320, as its about £40-50 cheaper here in the uk, i was curious to ask in the whole mantle thing/bf4/future games/8 cores over 4 for outlasting (if the 4570 could Oc i probably wouldn't have thought twice) Although ofc the strong single cores vs the 8 weaker ones - and trying to look at what would last longer. I don't upgrade too often so have to really make this count (on lga 775 still, with this replacing it - I hope )

The Overclocking was pushing me towards amd/8320 before (i read so much into 970/990 mobo's i was going insane!) but started to think about the locked i5's

4570, not even a competition. The FX platform is also 4 years old to make it even worse for the FX if the lack of performance and high power consumption wasnt enough.

Hey ShintaiDK, thanks for the reply! I didn't realise the Fx was four years old, tbh i should have tried to upgrade much earlier from my aging system. I was mainly (heavily) considering the amd, due to budget but pricing up a build with a h87 mobo, 100w less psu&no cpu cooler made the 4570 about £10 cheaper (currently)

So that's you guys all pretty much saying the 4570, over the amd oc'ed. But i so despise the stock intel cooler . Hypothetically would the cpu's be equal for say bf4 (just an e.g, as with say watchdogs/space citizens etc.../who knows atm with rec requirements) Ive been really bad i should have bought this months ago as my pc is in a bad (half dead) way. If i went the 4570 route, even though it's locked would you recommend a h87, or a £70/80ish z87 if i were to ever get a k chip? (although,personally i feel i might never do that, but who knows! ) Apologies for going on, i haven't upgraded in a long time&really have to make this count.

Anyway, thanks for the replies, opinions, views so far guys!:awe:

 

[SPBHM]

unfortunately nowadays overclocking can (not always) be more of a money pit than actual benefit in terms of performance per $, because Intel was very competent in locking OC since Sandy Bridge came out, and AMD, the more OC friendly company is so far behind with their architecture that they already sell CPUs with high clock/TDP by default, and in many cases even 1.5GHz over a Intel CPU is not enough to get the same performance, but it's enough to suck way to much power considering how it performs, now you add to that the other costs from OC with cooling, and power delivery... and yes... higher priced CPU + lower priced cooling and MB is probably the best balance for performance per $ at this price range (well, if you go used who knows, random 2500K OC can be faster than the 4570)

I would recommend looking at the H81 and B85 boards, they offer the most important features you need anyway, and you can buy some seriously low price H81 boards.

8350 is not 4 years old, but the rest of the platform is old, chipsets are pretty much the 800 series refreshed, and even the 800 series is limited by other aspects of the platform, considering it's an evolution from socket 754.

 

[nwo]

Nothing wrong with a 4570 and an H81 motherboard. Main difference between H81 and Z87 is overclocking. There are some minor ones too, but nothing too important to note.

4570 and H81 would be a much better gaming combo than any AMD CPU, regardless of OC.

There were some benchmarks I saw yesterday which included disabled cores on the i5 with no fps loss of very minimal fps loss in most games (1080p and higher res). Which proves that games still strongly rely on single threaded performance. Most games do not need more than 2 cores. In which case an i3 Haswell would suffice and an i5 Haswell would not only be better but it is definitely a future proof CPU. By the time games need more than 4 cores, an i5 4570 will be ancient technology. And as already stated, the AMD FX is pretty old as it is.

 

[Vesku]

Does Haswell non-K still allow 4 higher bins of turbo? I recall reading they completely locked down the non-K chips with Haswell.

I just recently replaced my 1090T with a i5-3470 with +4 turbo bins. In Cinebench R15, 3470 stock was ~30% faster ST ~20% slower MT, but with the extra turbo it was ~44% faster ST ~7% slower MT. A 8320 @ mid 4GHz should be a bit (~10%?) faster than my 1090T @ 3.8GHz. Will use quite a bit of power compared to the i5.

If the 4570 doesn't allow turbo bin OC then it is probably close in performance to a max turbo 3470. If I were you I'd check out IB pricing to see if you can save a bit there. Either way, I'd go with an i5 over the 8320 for any gaming system.

 

[BSim500]

Does Haswell non-K still allow 4 higher bins of turbo? I recall reading they completely locked down the non-K chips with Haswell.

No it doesn't. They unfortunately removed that feature with Haswell. Max clock of an i5-3470 is 4.0GHz, but max clock of an i5-4570 is only 3.6GHz. This is one main reason why non-K Ivy -> non-K Haswell isn't an upgrade at all, and can actually run slower. i5's are still worth it over an FX-8320 partly due to the massive power consumption difference, but mainly because many "multi-threaded" games are still typically 80-90% on 2 cores but only 10-40% on cores 3-4 giving Intel's a lot of headroom in future better threaded games, but still up to 50% higher fps in many lesser well-threaded games.

 

[Vesku]

Then OP should definitely check out i5 IB and motherboard in terms of cost and availability versus a Haswell i5. Shouldn't have to change any settings other than max turbo multiplier to get it to run at +4 bins.

 

[Aroundthebend]

Hey guys! From reading for months into an amd/fx build you've all pretty much convinced me to delve into an intel one instead

Spbhm, yea i was mainly focusing on the fx build due to budget&being unlocked, but then after removing the cost of the cooling/more wattage psu& the more expensive mobo for the tdp/throttling on some, the cost was surprisingly close - as you said :thumbsup: I have to ask, are the main changes in a h81/b85 boards the 2 dimm slots (rather than 4) and probably less sata/usb ports? I saw some around £40-70, the gigabyte h87 i saw was either £63/70. Sorry i meant the 6300 or so time (have been out of the loop for a while, but been reading avidly for a good few months recently)

Thats cool nwo, i just remember someone suggesting a oc board incase i replaced it at somepoint (but for the cost i probably wouldn't) Sli isn't important to me at all really - much prefer a single gpu. It's reassuring to know the performance would outdo the fx ( just read so heavily into amd, that im more lost on the intel side - apologies!)

Hey Vesku&Bsim500! hmm, thats good to know/interesting :hmm: i saw the 3570k at about £160ish, the power dif is quite significant in that link, thanks for that! I have no idea what mobo's would be good for IB aswell... if i looked into that what would be a good recommendation? (prob gigabyte - if i could)

Again, thanks for your time, replies&opinions guys! definately looking at I5's of either haswell or ivy (could kick myself though as a month ago i saw the 4670k for £155, oh well! )

 

[Vesku]

Doesn't seem like there are many bad Z77 motherboards out there, will be very few that can't handle overclocks into the mid 4GHz. My Biostar T77XE3 packs a lot of features considering it only cost me ~$110 at the time.

If you are thinking about OCing to the last ounce of stable MHz you should select some preferred motherboards and then do some internet sleuthing on them. One resource I use is to check out overclock.net to see if anything has been posted.

 

[Blue_Max]

Even in the heavily multithreaded apps like Folding@Home (which uses everything you can throw at it!) the modern i5's still perform equal or better!

There's simply no contest.

 

[Aroundthebend]

Doesn't seem like there are many bad Z77 motherboards out there, will be very few that can't handle overclocks into the mid 4GHz. My Biostar T77XE3 packs a lot of features considering it only cost me ~$110 at the time.

If you are thinking about OCing to the last ounce of stable MHz you should select some preferred motherboards and then do some internet sleuthing on them. One resource I use is to check out overclock.net to see if anything has been posted.

Hey Vesku, that's cool. I shall check out the builds/reviews of the Ib&haswell mobo's - reading into the am3+ ones, for the 8core/tdp/thottling (even on some nice looking boards) was a challenge in itself! I think i've about 100+ bookmarks on useful/important info with rev numbers/phases/vrms If i did go ibor even say haswell i wouldnt go too extreme for cost&perf (this would be 1st time oc'ing for me) Or of course haswell. Again thanks for your help guys&how informative you've all been.:thumbsup:

 

[SlowSpyder]

The FX series gets a bad rep that I don't feel is entirely deserved. At ~4.4GHz it is a very solid CPU that can play pretty much anything out there. And the power thing is blown way out of proportion. When you're gaming typically you're not maxing eight cores, so the power use isn't near it's peak potential. On the other hand with an i5 you'll be using a larger percentage of the TDP more often when gaming. Eight cores gives you room to grow as well.

With all that being said, as much as I enjoy my FX system, the platform is old and dated (PCIE 2.0 for your enthusiast platform... really AMD?). I have no doubts it would serve you in the future just fine, but you should keep in mind that it is dated.

 

[nwo]

Hey Vesku&Bsim500! hmm, thats good to know/interesting :hmm: i saw the 3570k at about £160ish, the power dif is quite significant in that link, thanks for that! I have no idea what mobo's would be good for IB aswell... if i looked into that what would be a good recommendation? (prob gigabyte - if i could)

Again, thanks for your time, replies&opinions guys! definately looking at I5's of either haswell or ivy (could kick myself though as a month ago i saw the 4670k for £155, oh well! )

Can't go wrong with a Gigabyte board. Either Z77 or H77. If the 3570k is 160ish, what is the cost of the 4570?

Any chance that the 155 deal for the 4670k would repeat itself? Sounds like a really good price if the 3570k is ~160.

 

[Aroundthebend]

Hey guys, sorry for the slow response - has been really hectic these past couple of days. That's cool Slowspider&thanks for your reply! Yea i was heavily reading into the amd 6300&8320 mainly due to the cores starting to be used more (also with me usually having a few progs open while gaming) I was very close to pulling the trigger on the 83xx but then started to think about what equivalent intel could offer (albeit prob locked i5) Yeah when i was looking at mobo's it was so much more limited esp with the 8 cores, then the fm2+ boards newly coming out left me a little bit gutted, but still there are a few pretty nice boards out (which is why i would of gone for the m5a97 evo, budget, etc-£69 here atm)

To be honest any of these rigs would be a great upgrade for me :thumbsupon a £40 pentium 775) I've been so hesitant/reading constantly as it's my 1st upgrade in 6 years, and was an even worse budget then! Some new mobo's on am3+ would have been really nice!

Hey nwo! Yeah, was a bit gutted... i keep checking everyday for about 2 months The 4670k was £155 around xmas, but has been a constant £170ish since... i was set on an amd/research so didn't really think

Currently the 4570 is £140(ish) 3570k is £162 and the 4670k £172, but then ofc the mobo cost and/or cooler depending on k version (still have to read up more on z77/z87 boards, i devoted all my time mainly to amd with throttling etc!

Its a bit of a pain as i have to get a new os (still on xp ) So thats £70 on win8 (was going to go 7, but changed to 8, same price etc...)

Thanks though guys for all your adivce&opinions on this, highly appreciated:thumbsup:

 

[escrow4]

The FX series gets a bad rep that I don't feel is entirely deserved. At ~4.4GHz it is a very solid CPU that can play pretty much anything out there. And the power thing is blown way out of proportion. When you're gaming typically you're not maxing eight cores, so the power use isn't near it's peak potential. On the other hand with an i5 you'll be using a larger percentage of the TDP more often when gaming. Eight cores gives you room to grow as well.

With all that being said, as much as I enjoy my FX system, the platform is old and dated (PCIE 2.0 for your enthusiast platform... really AMD?). I have no doubts it would serve you in the future just fine, but you should keep in mind that it is dated.

On the contrary, it sucks way way too much power:

http://www.techspot.com/review/679-intel-haswell-core-i7-4770k/page13.html

4770 load: 164w

8350 load: 237w

and it doesn't have 8 cores, it has 8 modules (poorly) sharing resources. If its been 6yrs OP, why are you considering such an outdated platform and bleh CPU? Spring for an i5 minimum, if not i7.

 

[AtenRa]

On the contrary, it sucks way way too much power:

http://www.techspot.com/review/679-intel-haswell-core-i7-4770k/page13.html

4770 load: 164w

8350 load: 237w

What you linked is not Gaming. But yes FX has higher power consumption than Intel Core i5/7

and it doesn't have 8 cores, it has 8 modules (poorly) sharing resources.

It has four Modules and 8 Integer cores.

 

[SlowSpyder]

On the contrary, it sucks way way too much power:

http://www.techspot.com/review/679-intel-haswell-core-i7-4770k/page13.html

4770 load: 164w

8350 load: 237w

and it doesn't have 8 cores, it has 8 modules (poorly) sharing resources. If its been 6yrs OP, why are you considering such an outdated platform and bleh CPU? Spring for an i5 minimum, if not i7.

Most games don't use eight cores much less come close to maxing eight cores. If a game uses four cores we could expect the FX 6xxx/8xxx to not use close to it's max rated TDP, right? Things like Cinemark and torture tests are not representative of gaming loads.

I'm not suggesting the FX is more efficient. But I do think the power use thing is blown out of proportion and the power use difference when gaming probably isn't nearly as great.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Most games don't use eight cores much less come close to maxing eight cores. If a game uses four cores we could expect the FX 6xxx/8xxx to not use close to it's max rated TDP, right? Things like Cinemark and torture tests are not representative of gaming loads.

I'm not suggesting the FX is more efficient. But I do think the power use thing is blown out of proportion and the power use difference when gaming probably isn't nearly as great.

Using less than 8 threads also makes the FX patheticly more slow.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Yea, The FX Is Slower In Lightly Threaded Apps. But The Person BuYing The Cpu Will Have To Consider If It Is Fast Enough For What They Do With their The Real World Apps They Use (Not Just Running Benches All Day). Is That Frame Rate Acceptable?

Sorry About The Random Capitalized Letters, My Phone Is Doing It For Some Reason.

 

[bononos]

......

I wanted to ask, how would the 4570, compare to an Oc'ed 8320@4.4ish? :hmm: I would be gaming at no more than 1080p, with a single graphics card- using my old gpu until i can upgrade that too (varying games, from bf4 to rts, lots of genres etc ) I was pretty much set on the amd build, but if the 4570 stood the same to an overclocked 8320, or better i was looking at both. Would i notice a lesser perf with the intel if i had things such as skype, music, gaming, browsing (more threads etc?)
.......

I think both cpus would be close if the 8320 were overclocked. But the FX is poor value when you consider that its a hot running cpu on an aging platform and doesn't make much sense anymore unless you need specific functionality like full 8 cores or need ecc support.

And theres a problem with AMD FX throttling on certain mb's because it exceeds its specs for power consumption even at stock.

In short the FX makes even less sense after Haswell became available. Mantle might help a little but games are more gpu bound anyway.

 

[Pijoto]

If you live near a Microcenter, they have the 8320 on sale for $99.99 - http://www.microcenter.com/product/401796/FX_8320_Black_Edition_35GHz_AM3_Boxed_Processor

Games are going multi-threaded anyway...

 

[Aroundthebend]

Hey guys, thanks for the replies :thumbsup: Yea, the amd has more pwer usage under load, what surprised me was when idle it was pretty similar (i think?) What concerned me (maybe needlessly?) was if i was at peak gaming with an Oc'ed chip, again though i might be unfounded (& not sure of cost in the uk, but they don't half keep increasing lecky bills & my isp!)

Amd is slower in single threads, though Skyrim is on a pretty old engine, not really optimized for more cores? But, yea intel has the edge over stronger cores (i was often trying to compare with bf4 multiplayer if i could - rome2 seems to drag so many cpu's down )

Yea, i have been looking to order since Oct '13, since my pc went fubar before i'd saved enough, then tried to hold out to see what amd had planned for Fm2+, but also the road map (so i think the choice was mainly am3+ or haswell)

When i considered the cost (+100 psu, cpu cooler&poss mobo) it turned pretty much into the cost of the locked i5... so had to rethink/read things and try to see what was for the best :thumbsup:

Oh, with those costs for the 4570/3570k etc... the 8320 is £108 +cooler (£30) brought it up to the 4570, so really wanted to ask as i've read so many differing opinions.

Anyways, i hope i'm making sense&thanks for the replies guys!