I imagine he'll be graphics-limited more often than not. I'm sure he can pick up some FPS by going Intel, but on the whole I can't see it being that big of a difference in an Eyefinity setup (assuming 1080P or better).
I imagine he'll be graphics-limited more often than not. I'm sure he can pick up some FPS by going Intel, but on the whole I can't see it being that big of a difference in an Eyefinity setup (assuming 1080P or better).
I got into my two 280x cards for not a lot more than you did, I still think it is a heck of a bang for the buck looking at what stuff sells for new. Crossfire is wonky sometimes but what fun would it be if it worked perfectly. 
I'll PM you on the chip.
I'll PM you on the chip.I got into my two 280x cards for not a lot more than you did, I still think it is a heck of a bang for the buck looking at what stuff sells for new. Crossfire is wonky sometimes but what fun would it be if it worked perfectly.
So, can't respond or see the link because I don't have 25 posts yet...
Had to make a new account because my 2000 account I don't know the password and the email was an edu account I no longer have...
Yeah I did hear I would see a huge performance increase with DayZ...but would it be cost effective to leave my current setup? Maybe 80 more might be worth it for a i7 over i5 vs 8350.
Phynaz
Lifer
- Mar 13, 2006
- 10,140
- 819
- 126
You mean something like that ???
Oh please, let's stop with the benchmark cherry picking game. The crusade has gotten really old.
KingFatty
Diamond Member
- Dec 29, 2010
- 3,034
- 1
- 81
Hmm it's almost $300 for the upgrade to Intel. Also, don't upgrade from 6300 to 8350, that's probably not going to change any numbers.
Have you considered overclocking the 6300?
You could probably find benchmarks, but if you overclock the 6300 to the same speed as the 8350, I bet the gaming performance will be about identical, so it's a total waste to upgrade to the AMD chip unless you can do some video editing.
Now is it worth $300 for the upgraded motherboard and Intel CPU? If I were you, I'd find benchmarks for those specific games, and see what is the FPS increase you'd get.
But keep in mind, at triple-screen gaming, you may not reach the full theoretical speed available from the CPU, because the GPU will be holding you back.
Ultimately, if you are going to be held back to lower FPS anyway by the graphics card, you could argue that the faster CPU would simply go to waste.
So, based on all the above, you should overclock your existing CPU, buy a 2nd video card for crossfire, and that will probably get you faster FPS because the Intel chip wouldn't be able to reach its full potential under a single video card trying to run eyefinity.
PS: out of curiosity, is there a specific scenario where you find your CPU is too slow? OR are you just suffering from low FPS while playing eyefinity resolutions now?
Have you considered overclocking the 6300?
You could probably find benchmarks, but if you overclock the 6300 to the same speed as the 8350, I bet the gaming performance will be about identical, so it's a total waste to upgrade to the AMD chip unless you can do some video editing.
Now is it worth $300 for the upgraded motherboard and Intel CPU? If I were you, I'd find benchmarks for those specific games, and see what is the FPS increase you'd get.
But keep in mind, at triple-screen gaming, you may not reach the full theoretical speed available from the CPU, because the GPU will be holding you back.
Ultimately, if you are going to be held back to lower FPS anyway by the graphics card, you could argue that the faster CPU would simply go to waste.
So, based on all the above, you should overclock your existing CPU, buy a 2nd video card for crossfire, and that will probably get you faster FPS because the Intel chip wouldn't be able to reach its full potential under a single video card trying to run eyefinity.
PS: out of curiosity, is there a specific scenario where you find your CPU is too slow? OR are you just suffering from low FPS while playing eyefinity resolutions now?
2nd card is in the mail. No scenario that I have CPU issues that I can see, its more the upgrade bug. Most issues will be fixed by the second card I believe. Hoping I won't bottleneck the 7970 CF with the 6300.
Not on the long run in respect of a 8350.
This was one year ago :
Currently :
And the FX is far from being exhausted, what about in one year.?.
Last edited:
Not on the long run in respect of a 8350.
This was one year ago :
Currently :
And the FX is far from being exhausted, what about in one year.?.
2013/2014 games, 700MHz more than the 8350, i5 with no OC
8350 is not equal to i5 haswell for gaming, specially using AMD graphics cards.
I could have posted worse examples, depending on the game and settings there is a significant difference, if he wants to have a proper upgrade Haswell i5 is a much better choice than the 8350 for gaming, considering he already have the 6300 OC.
Vishera low IPC is not getting better,
For typical use and gaming, going with Intel-Haswell/Ivy makes sense, it runs faster and takes less power.
AMD is a poor buy unless you have specific needs like niche programs which can make full use of AMD's extra cores. And for gaming, I'd be concerned about frame rate latency where the AMD Piledriver doesn't do as well as Intel.
2013/2014 games, 700MHz more than the 8350, i5 with no OC
8350 is not equal to i5 haswell for gaming, specially using AMD graphics cards.
I could have posted worse examples, depending on the game and settings there is a significant difference, if he wants to have a proper upgrade Haswell i5 is a much better choice than the 8350 for gaming, considering he already have the 6300 OC.
Vishera low IPC is not getting better,
I post a few same games with an actual 8350 at 1080p, seems that results are not that homogeneous and that this 8350 does much better than Pclabs (of course, who else) always very surprising and somewhat compressed results, so much for your hypothesis about the 700Mhz....
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/924-17/jeux-3d-watch-dogs-total-war-rome-2.html
Edit : I wonder how Pclabs got thoses scores with the i5 in Arma since in Hfr review the most powerfull CPUs struggle to produce decent framerates, and that is with a 780ti while Pclabs has a 780...
Last edited:
the answer is very simple, different testing scenarios, PClabs is pushing more CPU bound scenes,
if you are doing a CPU test with watch dogs at 60+ for every CPU you are doing it wrong.
but take both in consideration and the answer is obvious, the FX is good in many cases sure, but the haswell i5s are great basically everywhere when it comes to gaming,
from 4.6GHz FX 6300 the only logical upgrade is Haswell when it comes to gaming,
if you are doing a CPU test with watch dogs at 60+ for every CPU you are doing it wrong.
but take both in consideration and the answer is obvious, the FX is good in many cases sure, but the haswell i5s are great basically everywhere when it comes to gaming,
from 4.6GHz FX 6300 the only logical upgrade is Haswell when it comes to gaming,
Making a blanket statement like that is completely false. There are many games where an FX 8350 can outrun an i5 and run with an i7.
It really depends on whether the game supports Mantle or not. It is like history repeating itself all over again from the K6-2 era (when 3D Now! support made or broke the experience, as well). If I were the OP and dropped $300 on switching to Intel -- I'd be probably ticked to find that many modern games will not see a measurable boost by switching to Intel.
PClab's performance index for the FX-8350 is lower than HW.fr's index because the former uses both the 290X and the 780 Ti in the calculations, and it's not a big secret that Haswell ironically scales better on AMD's DX11 and Mantle.
Last edited:
But in arma Hfr get less framerates, this means that the CPU is pushed harder so what is your point..?..Watchdogs.? They say they used the scene that allowed the lower possible framerates and was reliably reproducible, setting is ultra without AA, Watchdog manage to use up to six cores hence the FX good results, i guess that you are stuck mentaly with the scores of old versions wich werent as well threaded.
For a 4770K eventualy but a i5 would be good only timely and a waste on the mid term, the 8350 is more future proof, if he can get a good price of his 6300 and a rebate over a 8350 he better go this route, otherwise he can keep his 6300 as it should be close to a 8350 for some time.
Last edited:
Bummer, hit my user name for posts started by me, I've got one in the FS section.
Lot of good back and forth on this stuff, it's obvious the i5-ish performs better on newer games at the moment, but as you said and as I've noticed myself, there aren't many cases where one of the higher end FX cpu's are stressed. There are some games, sure, but as was also said at eyefinity three screen resolution, you aren't going to get the framerates you see in benchmarks at 1080p anyway, so more CPU might well go to waste. I had a hard time justifying the expense of the board and CPU for Intel a year or so ago when I went from a 955BE to a 1090T briefly, then to this 8350, and I still do. Heck I could have stayed with the 1090t and not been missing out on much as it turns out. This is one of those questions every person has to puzzle out for themselves though and it is personal, benchmarks are important but there's more to it than that as an enthusiast. Personally I find something that struggles a bit more entertaining, I've built a couple computers over the years that were so fast they were boring. I'm glad there are faster chips out there and if someone is really spending tons of hours gaming and needs them, there is the answer. If one is like me and spends a relatively tiny portion of time gaming and a ton with netflix streaming and two browsers with thirty tabs each in em and office apps going and a virtual machine open, the FX ain't so bad. Especially when you can stick an 8350 in it for a buck and a half and be done with it for another year when intel stuff is cheap(er). I've spent $500 on freaking power supplies to find on that suits me in the last month. If there was any real gain to be had personally going with an i5 or i7 or whatever, I'd have one. Different strokes for different folks(workloads).
AtenRa
Lifer
- Feb 2, 2009
- 14,003
- 3,362
- 136
Post a request for assistance in Moderator Discussions and they will track down your account and merge it with your current one (or vice versa and reset your email/password).
Phynaz
Lifer
- Mar 13, 2006
- 10,140
- 819
- 126
Not on the long run in respect of a 8350.
This was one year ago :
Currently :
And the FX is far from being exhausted, what about in one year.?.
Another crusader in the AMD benchmark cherry picking game.
Phynaz
Lifer
- Mar 13, 2006
- 10,140
- 819
- 126
How about for once you provide any slides that support what you saying ??
I not playing the cherry picking game. It's childish and pointless.
AtenRa
Lifer
- Feb 2, 2009
- 14,003
- 3,362
- 136
But you have never provided any links, not even one review to back up what you are saying.
In order for you to say the following, it means you have seen that performance and you have the links to provide us with evidence to back up your claims.
If you cant provide evidence for the above, then we should take your comment as bate and thread crapping.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter