Intel Core i3/i5 vs AMD FX-8320 Purchase

[geokilla]

I'm doing a new build for a friend see here and I'm wondering if he should go with AMD or Intel Core i3/i5. I was thinking of getting him something based on a AMD build because of the recent price drops, and they're excellent value for the money. However, it seems that the AMD chipsets still don't support TRIM? I'd love to go Intel but Intel is way more expensive and with a limited budget, it'll be hard getting everything in at $800 CAD.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=34974174#post34974174

 

[Cerb]

AMD's SATA controllers supported TRIM just fine, last I knew.

 

[nenforcer]

TRIM is a function of the SSD Drive / Controller itself and the operating system filesystem which can issue the TRIM command to the drive.

It is independent of the actual SATA controller although you do need to typically be in AHCI mode for this to be handled automatically. Otherwise, if you are running Windows XP in IDE/Legacy mode, you have to manually issue the TRIM command to the drive itself using special software provided by the device manufacturer. Intel and Samsung have their own software I believe.

AMD's SATA controller, despite offering more SATA III ports, is slightly slower performing than their Intel counterparts.

 

[geokilla]

So.. TRIM on AMD is fine? Because back then a couple years ago, it definitely wasn't.

And back to the original question, which CPU?

 

[Yuriman]

If your friend isn't overclocking you can save money with a non-K chip and a cheaper chipset than Z77. Or, you could just go with a non-K chip and settle for a max of 4 bins over stock.

 

[geokilla]

If your friend isn't overclocking you can save money with a non-K chip and a cheaper chipset than Z77. Or, you could just go with a non-K chip and settle for a max of 4 bins over stock.

That would be a Core i3 then. If he goes for Core i5, overall cost would be pushed to at least $900.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

If you're worried about a few dollars consider cost of operation as well.

 

[Yuriman]

That would be a Core i3 then. If he goes for Core i5, overall cost would be pushed to at least $900.

I'd take an FX63xx over an i3 any day of the week, but I'd take an i5 over an FX-83xx for most uses.

You can build an i5 system for a similar price to an FX-8320 - you save money on the motherboard.

 

[Cerb]

So.. TRIM on AMD is fine? Because back then a couple years ago, it definitely wasn't.

AFAIK, it has been fully functional since 2009, at least. If you mean using AMD's drivers, the best solution is not to, unless you have a specific problem with MSAHCI, or want semi-HW RAID. Same with IRST, IMO.

And back to the original question, which CPU?

i5-3470 for no-OC and saving a little money, i5-3570K for overclocking, AMD if they are out of reach.

 

[SPBHM]

you can buy an i5 3350P and a b75 mb for around $250 on newegg or amazon.

 

[sequoia464]

Cerb is correct on trim working on the AMD chipsets.

I haven't had any experience with an I3 or an I5 so I won't comment on a cpu selection, but I have a board with a 990FX chipset and I'm using SSD's in my system, trim works for me.

A couple of years ago, I ran AS-SSD and ATTO on the SSD's that I had at the time using AMD's drivers and Microsoft, the AMD drivers always scored higher for me and I have used them successfully for the last couple of years at least.

Just my experience, however most will agree with Cerb on using the MS drivers.

 

[SlickR12345]

Both AMD and Intel are good, AMD for its value, but if your friend likes to play games he will get more out of Intel, because of the better single threaded performance, unless he overclocks in which the AMD counterpart would have still slower, but closer single threaded performance.

Intel are a little more expensive though and going for an I5 will be generally 40-60 dollars more expensive.

I have an I5 3330 and I'm very satisfied, its actually one of the cheaper Intel I5 CPU's and it really is way better in single threaded performance as well as multithreaded, but its a bit more expensive than a FX6300

 

[frozentundra123456]

Both AMD and Intel are good, AMD for its value, but if your friend likes to play games he will get more out of Intel, because of the better single threaded performance, unless he overclocks in which the AMD counterpart would have still slower, but closer single threaded performance.

Intel are a little more expensive though and going for an I5 will be generally 40-60 dollars more expensive.

I have an I5 3330 and I'm very satisfied, its actually one of the cheaper Intel I5 CPU's and it really is way better in single threaded performance as well as multithreaded, but its a bit more expensive than a FX6300

With a lower budget I could see going for fx6300 over i3, but with this much budget, I would try to get an i5. A lower end one is probably only about 50.00 more expensive, and seems worth it if you keep the machine for a few years.

 

[inf64]

I'm on the fence when i5 3330 vs 8320 situation is in question. Each have strong points so it's up to the user I guess.

 

[frozentundra123456]

I'm on the fence when i5 3330 vs 8320 situation is in question. Each have strong points so it's up to the user I guess.

Would depend on the apps, I suppose. The price difference on newegg is only 15.00.

I feel the i5 is more well rounded and efficient, while the 8320 would be better if you were doing a lot of encoding and the other heavy mt apps it is best at, or wanted to overclock at the cost of power consumption.

 

[inf64]

Yep that's it.

 

[SPBHM]

I'm on the fence when i5 3330 vs 8320 situation is in question. Each have strong points so it's up to the user I guess.

for the same money as the 3330 you can buy the 3350P (100MHz more, no IGP)

in my opinion the 3350P is a nicer CPU for most users, it uses less power, it's faster (and more consistent, good in every game) for gaming, sure it's also slower for a few things,
with a P/Z MB it can be overclocked to 3.5-3.7GHz with no effort and still keeping the low power usage, and no need for better cooling I guess,

also cheap 1155 MBs are a lot nicer than the AM3+ options I think.

 

[inf64]

Boards are more or less similar. i5 will draw less power and perform a bit better in games (usually). In some titles it can have a decent lead. 8320, for those who don't care about power draw when OCed, can be pushed to 4.4-4.6Ghz on air and it will be faster in some rendering, encoding and productivity workloads. It's also solid gaming chip but not as good as i5 of course. It's up to each user to weight the pros and cons. Each platform is more or less done for, intel has Haswell's socket now and AMD is done with AM3+ (my opinion, there might be AM3+ SR FX part). So for AMD it's FM2 or FM2+ in the near future.

 

[SPBHM]

Boards are more or less similar.

if you can get at least the 970-990 vs z75/z77 it is comparable,
but the $50-60 boards for 1155 are better, B75 have native sata III and USB 3.0, 760G boards doesn't and since the i5 uses less power you can get away with lower quality VRMs I think... there are plenty of cheap am3+ boards that can barely handle a 95w CPU.

 

[SlickR12345]

for the same money as the 3330 you can buy the 3350P (100MHz more, no IGP)

in my opinion the 3350P is a nicer CPU for most users, it uses less power, it's faster (and more consistent, good in every game) for gaming, sure it's also slower for a few things,
with a P/Z MB it can be overclocked to 3.5-3.7GHz with no effort and still keeping the low power usage, and no need for better cooling I guess,

also cheap 1155 MBs are a lot nicer than the AM3+ options I think.

That is right, but I don't like to O'C with this one as I want as much life from the CPU as possible, since I don't upgrade often, plus I need an IGP right now and its always helpful when your GPU breaks.

Also the new boards all support USB 3.0 and Sata3