• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

FX 8300 vs Intel

Raduque

Raduque

Lifer
I'm looking to build a new PC solely for visual content creation, and I want to get it as cheap as possible. Is this FX8300 still a viable processor for this? It's about $110, and the closest Intel in price is the i5-4430, which is a 4/4 CPU. It also costs about $90 more.

I know the i5 will be faster, but the 8300 seems to me the better $/perf part. Am I correct in this thinking?
 
Last edited:
At this point it makes no sense to buy into AM3+. It hasn't seen any new tech since 2012 and is just a dead end. If you want to give AMD a shot you'll need to hold off for Zen as it isn't exactly a sure thing that even Bristol Ridge (aka Caveri v2.0) will wind up on AM4 and FM2 tech (Kaveri, ect...) is at a dead end as well. If you need this system today, it would be foolish to look at anything but Intel for your usage type.
 
Both are fairly old at this point, though the FX more so than Haswell. Both sockets aren't going anywhere fast though, unless you make the jump to a Haswell i7, it would probably make more sense to bite the bullet and go Skylake.
 
"Cheap as possible" and Intel don't go together very well. As long as the software you are running is multithreaded, the 8300 is probably going to perform about the same or better so if your choice is limited to these two, I'd go with the 8300. Wait for more expensive stuff when zen hits the market because even if it's not the holy grail AMD needs in performance, at least they'll be on the same page and put some downward pressure on Intel's ridiculous pricing.
 
Raduque said:
I'm looking to build a new PC solely for visual content creation, and I want to get it as cheap as possible. Is this FX8300 still a viable processor for this? It's about $110, and the closest Intel in price is the i5-4430, which is a 4/4 CPU. It also costs about $90 more.

I know the i5 will be faster, but the 8300 seems to me the better $/perf part. Am I correct in this thinking?
Click to expand...

Go with Skylake. Faster, better platform, upgrade path.
 
You should tell us what rig you own at the moment. If you own anything similar to i3\i5\X6 Thuban, then it's not worth upgrading to FX8300 or i5 4430. Not to mention both amd&intel has lot of new product release very soon.
 
PliotronX said:
"Cheap as possible" and Intel don't go together very well. As long as the software you are running is multithreaded, the 8300 is probably going to perform about the same or better so if your choice is limited to these two, I'd go with the 8300. Wait for more expensive stuff when zen hits the market because even if it's not the holy grail AMD needs in performance, at least they'll be on the same page and put some downward pressure on Intel's ridiculous pricing.
Click to expand...

FX8 performing better then an i5 for MT stopped being an accurate statement once Ivy Bridge was released. There might be some fringe apps it can have an edge in like Cinebench (which isn't even an app) and some encoding tasks. Beyond that a Haswell i5 will outperform it, MT or otherwise. Not to mention a FAR more current chipset.
 
jhu said:
Give us a budget and what programs you'll be using.
Click to expand...
~$500. Photoshop, Lightroom and Sony Movie Studio Platinum 13. I've got to find some audio editing software too.

deasd said:
You should tell us what rig you own at the moment. If you own anything similar to i3\i5\X6 Thuban, then it's not worth upgrading to FX8300 or i5 4430. Not to mention both amd&intel has lot of new product release very soon.
Click to expand...
It won't be an upgrade - I have an i7-4720HQ and GTX 970M (mobile chips). It'll be a supplemental rig to free up my laptop for other things while a video is rendering.

Arachnotronic said:
Go with Skylake. Faster, better platform, upgrade path.
Click to expand...

Skylake is too expensive. Comes in at $150 overbudget.

Edit: I also don't really want to consider used unless I can get it well under budget - I'm wary of buying warrantyless parts for a production machine.
 
myocardia said:
Video rendering is really the only thing that any normal person does with a computer that the FXs excel at doing, since no normal person has ever sat around and zipped/unzipped files all day, and zipping/unzipping is the only other activity at which FXs excel. A stock speed FX 8350 is at least as fast as a stock speed i7-4770, if not a bit faster. You'll want to go AMD FX for this build.
Click to expand...

Not quite.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/core-i7-4770k-review,16.html

Though for the price, an 8350 is a good option for encoding.
 
The fx processor not only benchmarks about 10-15% better, but will be much snappier than the i5. It would be a much smarter buy for the price range.

EDIT: Just to be more clear, Even at the same price the FX is a much better buy. Saving $90 is just your reward for making a smarter buy.
 
Last edited:
Pcdoneri said:
The fx processor not only benchmarks about 10-15% better, but will be much snappier than the i5. It would be a much smarter buy for the price range.
Click to expand...

How exactly is it "much snappier"? It's not an SSD drive, it's a processor.
 
lehtv said:
How exactly is it "much snappier"? It's not an SSD drive, it's a processor.
Click to expand...

It's not, it's completely made up. Benchmarks don't show it, real world apps don't show it, they can't even explain it... It's just a "feeling"
 
Raduque said:
I'm looking to build a new PC solely for visual content creation, and I want to get it as cheap as possible. Is this FX8300 still a viable processor for this? It's about $110, and the closest Intel in price is the i5-4430, which is a 4/4 CPU. It also costs about $90 more.

I know the i5 will be faster, but the 8300 seems to me the better $/perf part. Am I correct in this thinking?
Click to expand...

How much more will a Core i5 6500 + cheapest H110 will cost over the FX8300 + cheapest AM3+ 970 motherboard ??

If the price is closer than the $90 of the two CPUs (FX8300 vs 4430) alone then i would go for the new socket + Core i5 6500

Also DDR-4 prices are very low now, so i would try to get a DDR-4 mobo, some H110 allows to OC the RAM.
 
The FX 8300 is such an outdated CPU that I'm surprised that people still think it's a viable choice nowadays. Hell, I don't think most people appreciated the FX 8300 even when it was first released long ago. Even in those small cases where the 8300 has better multi threading capabilities than the i5, the differences aren't great enough to justify the purchase of one.

Also, with Zen coming out sometime later this year, I would rather wait for that plus the new AM4 platform than sticking with AM3. But if you really need your new PC (like right now), then you can't go wrong with a locked, Haswell i5. Just remember that it won't be as powerful as an i7 when it comes to CPU hungry tasks like content creation and such, which I would honestly recommend for your case.
 
At that budget either a used pc with an i7 or a new one from cheap at some store might be a better option. There might be crap psu, gpu, case etc but my dad did exactly that and in under 700$ got a non-k 4gen i7. That will run faster at encoding than any i5 or FX build for the same money.
 
2is said:
FX8 performing better then an i5 for MT stopped being an accurate statement once Ivy Bridge was released. There might be some fringe apps it can have an edge in like Cinebench (which isn't even an app) and some encoding tasks. Beyond that a Haswell i5 will outperform it, MT or otherwise. Not to mention a FAR more current chipset.
Click to expand...
You are forgetting the clock deficit that this particular i5 is at. I am surprised (though not surprised at the same time) that nobody is answering the OPs question. Both are dead platforms and the 4430 is a limpdicked locked i5 and sure as hell does not perform 40% better under single or multi threaded applications yet that is how much more it costs compared to the 8300. Here is one of your fringe apps (http://www.futuremark.com/hardware/cpu/Intel+Core+i5-4430/review):

pLvHgjO.png
 
Last edited:
Pcdoneri said:
The fx processor not only benchmarks about 10-15% better, but will be much snappier than the i5. It would be a much smarter buy for the price range.

EDIT: Just to be more clear, Even at the same price the FX is a much better buy. Saving $90 is just your reward for making a smarter buy.
Click to expand...

Could you provide evidence, preferably from third party testing?
 
PliotronX said:
You are forgetting the clock deficit that this particular i5 is at. I am surprised (though not surprised at the same time) that nobody is answering the OPs question. Both are dead platforms and the 4430 is a limpdicked locked i5 and sure as hell does not perform 60% better under single or multi threaded applications yet that is how much more it costs compared to the 8300. Here is one of your fringe apps (http://www.futuremark.com/hardware/cpu/Intel+Core+i5-4430/review):

pLvHgjO.png
Click to expand...

The FX is very low clocked as well. The OP has not stated if he wishes to overclock. The price difference is 65.00 using new egg prices, only about 13% based on the budget for the entire system. And if the machine is used heavily for encoding, part of that initial price difference will be recovered in power savings.
 
Raduque said:
~$500. Photoshop, Lightroom and Sony Movie Studio Platinum 13.
Click to expand...
I'd consider that 95W TDP FX chip. Is old, but still capable in MT workloads. Certainly, if you want to go cheap and can get other parts for a good price as well (mem/mb). Otherwise, Skylake i7 (not worth wasting time & money on anything lesser, imo).
 
Last edited:
If you want budget power, go on the bay and go to the PC Desktops & All-In-Ones section and type in 2x x5677. For easily less than $400 you can get a complete workstation with 8C/16T 3.46GHz and 24GB of RAM. lol what a beast. If that isnt enough you can type in 2x hex and find 12C/24T for about the same money. But the downside to those is that the clocks are only in the mid 2GHz range. You do want some single thread performance even for rendering. I am honestly completely lost as to why people buy new HEDT hardware...
 
f2bnp said:
Hey there. I too recommend going Skylake, don't spend money on dead platforms. Take a look at these:

i5 6500 : http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117563
Asrock H110M-HDS : http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157685
16GB DDR4: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820144927

How much cheaper are the alternatives you presented?
Click to expand...

The $500 budget is a complete system - save the case, mouse and keyboard. That 6500 is $200, the AMD Octo is $120.

Magic Carpet said:
I'd consider that 95W TDP FX chip. Is old, but still capable in MT workloads. Certainly, if you want to go cheap and can get other parts for a good price as well (mem/mb). Otherwise, Skylake i7 (not worth wasting time & money on anything lesser, imo).
Click to expand...

Yep, my choice is pretty much AMD for cheap, or spend hundreds more for a Skylake, but not get hundreds more with of performance, the way i see it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top