Do or Dont?
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
Ok /g/
Someone is willing to buy my FX8350 for 150$, I have little money but so should i go all in and get an i5-4690k + decent Z97 motherboard?
No wait for Zen you stupid kuck
>>51726752
most likely wont even be able to afford just-out zen, and isnt it going to be some APU thing? And what if its a shitty improvement over their existing stuff ie: barely keeping up with intel.
>>51726842
No, it's not
Zen is suppose to be actual good amd processors that will compete against Intel. They will be backwards compatible with fm2 mobos but used for fm3 for ddr4 and such. So no, probably no apus
>>51726583
AMD is the light, don't give into the jewish NSA-Intel conspiracy.
>>51727168
>So no, probably no apus
>fm2
But it will have integrated graphics, right?
>>51727200
Corporations are amoral, friend.
If theres money in it AMD wont hesitate to go jew-nsa.
>>51727250
I will ride everything out on my pre-Jew-NSA hardware until truly open source and free solutions are available. OpenRISC 2027 here we come.
4690k is a decent upgrade from the 8350 unless you're one of those people with a golden chip and extremely good custom water cooling that allows you to clock it to >5.5ghz
>>51727511
actually because i have a 970 motherboard, power consomption alone will crash my computer way before VRM reaches 70c.
Its just sad
>>51727563
Protip: if you have a spare 80mm fan or so and your case as a mobo cutout just cable tie said fan to the rear of the mobo pcb where the vrm sits - will shave off a good 10c if its a good fan.
That is, of course, assuming the vrms are heatsinked themselves. If they aren't you strap the fan over the vrms for the cooling. I did that to a m5a97 LE rev2.0.
>>51727563
i talk about VRMs because those are the hottest things on my motherboard, NB doesnt go above 30c, cpu 60c, how
>>51727606
>assuming the vrms are heatsinked themselves
they are not, m5a97 is what i have. i silicone-glued some 50mm copper wires to some of them, didnt do much.
>>51726752
when Zen coming out?
currently stuck on an e6750 and i wanna get i5-4690k . will zen be good and cheap enough to be worth it?
>>51727668
>they are not, m5a97
Do you use the stock cooler for the 8350? If not its fan is perfect for the job once plugged into the mobo. May want to slap a low noise adapter on it as it has a very aggressive fan curve.
On that mobo I pushed a 8320 to 4.5ghz until I killed the chip via overvolting.
>>51727698
>will zen be good and cheap enough to be worth it?
Well,
According to AMD fanboys: Fuck yeah.
According to Intel fanboys: Fuck no.
Only time will tell.
>>51727742
No i got the gammaxx400. a chinese 212 EVO clone that works amazingly well but sadly the VRMs are literaly always hotter then anything else even when idle.
>>51727698
at the least it's going to improve single thread performance massively, the only real worry is price. if AMD thinks they'll be able to charge intel prices when they have so little market share and reputation they are fucked
>>51727763
>>51727801
is there a release date or something yet though?
>>51727811
Well, we do know that on the third day, it shall be risen. We simply do not know when that day is.
>>51727811
>is there a release date or something yet though?
'
q4 2016, ~6 months before cannonlake is supposed to land
>>51727785
Well if you keep the 8350 you have two options-
1) see how far you can undervolt the chip
and/or
2) bolt a fan over those vrms
Remember: running at 4.4ghz is effectively the performance of a 9370.
>8350 to 4690k
sure the intel will perform better, but are you really in need of a cpu upgrade? it'll cost you like ~$400 total for a new cpu and mobo for maybe 30% more performance
>>51726583
>Someone is willing to buy my FX8350 for 150$
Just bought a brand new one for a friend's budget gaming build for like $128 shipped.
This person must be stupid.
>>51727862
For the most part these days an 8350 is as fast as a 4690k.
>>51727899
Why the weird resolution?
>>51727899
why is the 8320 not in the comparison?
>>51727862
>>51727899
but i want to play arma, dayz and total war and i cant take using 4 cores most of the time, and 6 when playing games. it feels like such a waste.
>>51727914
To eliminate the gpu from the equation.
>>51727954
Probably too drunk on vodka to downclock an 8350.
>>51728030
>To eliminate the gpu from the equation.
but doesn't that defeat the purpose? in most games, the CPU is never the bottleneck, and the difference between a 5 year old 2500k and a brand new 6600k is 10fps
>>51727955
If you want to play arma then an i5 is a total waste of time - that game hits only a single thread so it will cripple any cpu. The only way to make it run well is sheer brute force.
>>51728030
what do you mean downclock an 8350?
8320 is adifferent model than an 8350.
you probably already know that, but why the fuck are you talking with riddles?
>>51728055
>but doesn't that defeat the purpose?
Given the chart is a cpu test, it is the whole point of the chart. It is not a summary of how well a game runs on xyz setup. There are a few games thoug hthat really, really don't care about cpu at all - Tomb Raider is so gpu bound you can probably run it on a fucking core2duo and not notice.
>>51728090
You do realise the only difference between a 8320 and a 9590 is clockspeed right? You can go into your bios and manually set base clocks and turbo clocks (assuming you have a semi-decent mobo). Christ as the cache doesn't change if you have any 8 core fx chip you can recreate the entire fx lineup simply by changing clocks and disabling modules - something you can't do on Intel chips as i7's, i5's and i3's all have different amounts of cache.
guys im looking to upgrade..and im fucking torn
my budget is ~350 euros. but i can wait more and get something better if its really worth it.
im torn between
FX8320 + aftermarket cooler = 180euros
(can spend some money on better cooling later and OC it,but how good will it perform 1-2 years from now? and even now, is it enough to play latest vidya?)
i5-4460 = 200 euros
(good performance, but Locked, which sucks)
and
i5-4690k = 260 euros.
(unlocked, so a bit better for the future, but very expensive)
getting the 4690k will stall my upgrading severely but im thinking it's worth it.
what do you guys think?
>>51728157
http://www.overclock.net/t/1535399/intel-vs-amd-same-budget-shootout-8350-4-5ghz-r290-vs-4670k-4-4-ghz-280x
http://www.overclock.net/t/1534128/vishera-vs-devils-canyon-a-casual-comparison-by-an-average-user
These links might prove to be useful for your research.
>>51728127
I understand that, but even overclocked to a 9590, will it perform as well as an overclocked 4690k ?
And even so, how realistic is it that you can OC an 8320 so much? it would take a good mobo and an amazing cooling system, and even then it would be a gamble. plus, the money wasted on a cooling system could just be paid up front and get the 4690k and skip the hassle, no?
>>51728060
should i get a celeron, then?
>>51728191
even at 5ghz a piledriver chip won't reach the single thread performance of a 4690k
if you need to play single thread reliant games like arma, it's the right way to go.
>>51728191
I've pushed an 8320e to 4.7ghz on air - I can't go any further as my motherboard won't take it.
>>51728196
No. In isolation the best ARMA cpu is the anniversary pentium, but I do not like that chip for a general build as two threads in this day and age is bad news for vidya.
>>51728227
Thanks for the links. actually extremely informative.
Now i'm leaning back on that 8320e. the price gap is absolutely ridiculous, and it seems it performs more than well enough for the games.
>>51728227
can i have the settings for the OC for future reference?
I upgraded from a [email protected] to a i5 4440 and it was totally worth it.
>>51727698
Well they actually making the chips now so im guessing q1 or q2 of 2016. Even if zen isnt what you can afford well likely see something new and competitive from intel to stay ahead.
The end result on all ends will be a likely pruce cut on all the existing chips. Also GPUs will be making a big jump to 14nm and hbm2 etc in early 2016.
Right now all new shit is marginal improvements over the previous gens. Were stagnating. If u can wait i would.
>>51728364
intel pls go
>>51728364
Please, go on.
>>51728340
>Now i'm leaning back on that 8320e. the price gap is absolutely ridiculous,
That is the tradeoff really - the 8320e is considerably cheaper but often only marginally worse than a K i5. Just make sure to get a quality 990fx motherboard if you plan to push towards 5ghz.
Side note: those two 'e' chips AMD make are the cream of the crop - my 8320e doing 4.7ghz on 1.48v is insane given a 9590 (4.7ghz base clock) wants 1.5v out of the box. Generally unless you lose the silicon lottery hard you are limited by your ability to cool the chips rather tha anything else.
>can i have the settings for the OC for future reference?
multiplier 23.5
cpu voltage 1.428
LLC very high
There are a few other settings related to voltage and power, but those are the most important ones.
>>51728390
I went to microcenter one day and they had an i5 4440 with an asus z87 board on sale so I got it because it was really cheap and I was planing to sell both CPU's the 4440 and my old FX8350 keep the Z87 board and buy a 4690K, anyway it has been years since the last time I used an Intel CPU so curiosity got the best of me and installed it in my machine, while desktop was basically the same, games ran better, BF3 won't drop below 60FPS with everything Ultra, before I had to drop Mesh settings to medium which affected vision distance, another game that did show an increase in improvement was the STALKER series and even old as fuck games like Killing Floor, before with the FX8350 it was dropping to 20FPS in some heavy modded server, now while it drops below 60 it never goes as low as 20.
I like it the performance of the 4440 so I keep it and I still use it to this day, I never bother to sold the FX8350 and I have it boxed.
Also I didn't even had to reinstall Windows 7 even though I changed Motherboard and CPU which helped in my disposition to keep the 4440, if I had been forced to reinstall Windows I have might as well have gotten the 4690K.
>>51728466
would an Asus M5A99FX Pro R2.0
or
Asrock Fatal1ty 990FX Killer
be good enough?
>>51728466
>>51728528
Though I was thinking of an 970 msi gaming originally.. it's 40 extra euros for the 990fx ones
>>51728525
>Also I didn't even had to reinstall Windows 7
Did you unpark your cores for the 8350? Windows 7 scheduler is a bit unfriendly to vishera out of the box.
>>51728528
Pick the asus board - off the top of my head the pro is rated to handle a 9590 (more specifically, chips with a TDP of 220w) which is more than enough for the sort of voltage an e chip requires.
Note: i'm getting 4.7ghz out of the 990fx evo (which is rated for 140w) via some additional cooling - its not really meant for that sort of TDP.
>>51728560
Yeah, I had every power saving features disabled.
>>51728556
Don't quote me but iirc the msi 970 board has a rep for blowing vrms. Still you shouldn't use a 970 board for any 8 core fx chip if you want to overclock.
>>51728566
Technically core unparking isn't related to power saving, just windows badly loading up the modules. I know MS did fix it (and win8 onwards has this fix baked in).
>>51728590
In some EUFI BIOS if you disable power saving features it does that.
>>51728590
My msi 970 handles a 8350 at 4.5ghz no problem. I'm using the standard CM 212 evo cooler.
>>51728590
there just seem to be so many GPU slots that will go to waste it almost hurts. isn't there a chipset to balance out OCing capabilities while not wasting money on useless extra slots and stuff?
>>51727168
>backwards compatible with fm2
W E W L A D
E
W
L
A
D
Aight last post before I go to sleep. hopefully someone replies.
it seems to come down to this:
8320e + m5a99fx + 212evo cooler +RAM = 150 + 150 + 30 + 40 = 370
4690k + gigabyte z97x gaming 3 rev1.0 + ram = 250 + 130 + 40 = 420
The above is true only if gigabyte z97x gaming 3 rev1.0 is a good enough mobo to OC the 4690k.
in this case the difference for the 4690k comes down to a mere 50 euros, because of the necessary cooler and higher priced RAm the 8320e needs. if its just +50 euros for an 4690k i'd say it's worth it. and i can upgrade cooler, etc. later.
the question is: is the z97x good enough?
>>51729120
>and higher priced RAm the 8320e needs.
I meant higher priced mobo. sorry, im half asleep.
>>51727168
am4 won't be backwards compatible with fm2, amd is launched excavator based APUs alongside the new chipset. zen is going to come ~6-9 months later and be socket compatible with a bios update like bulldozer and vishera were on am3 mobos
>>51726583
If you're alternative is an i5 I'd say just get the 8350 because you spend $30 on a cooler and overclock it for free performance.
Just make sure you go into BIOS and turn off every CPU setting you don't need, which is probably all of them. It causes slowdown.
>>51726583
4690k will be better in every aspect, but 8350 will probably be more than you'll need in next few years.
>>51727698
It's not a question of whether or not it will be cheap. It's a question of whether the $/performance will be able to compete.
cheapest eight-core Vishera and good mobo based on 970 chipset will cost just like i3+shitmobo
>>51729758
>and be socket compatible with a bios update like bulldozer and vishera were on am3 mobos
W
E
W
L
A
D A L W E W
Personally, a 8350 in my mind is a 4 giant- ore CPU with the capability to unleash like an 8-core at multithreaded tasks.
>>51733606
I wouldn't put a 8xxx on a 970 chipset.
>>51733807
>I wouldn't put a 8xxx on a 970 chipset.
Why ? What is your problem ?
>>51734371
Woah, you're getting a little hostile now. Are you aware of the power delivery requirements for an overclocked 8xxx series?
>>51734371
Most (but not all) 970 boards are not built to take the sort of power draw most of the 8xxx chips have. 1.3-1.4v out of the box depending on chip puts a lot of strain on a board that is only 4+2 or 6+2. It does almost entirely rule out overclocking.
>>51729120
If you're getting another cooler later then remove that from the comparison
>yfw amd cpus are better for 4k
http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/56/amd-fx-8350-powering-gtx-780-sli-vs-gtx-980-sli-at-4k/index.html
http://www.technologyx.com/featured/amd-vs-intel-our-8-core-cpu-gaming-performance-showdown/4/
>>51734705
i cant remove it from the comparison because the 8320e absolutely needs a new cooler from the moment you get it, because the stock one is crap. even more so if youre going to OC
the 4690k can stand on its stock cooler for a while no problem. and it's already powerful so I can OC it a few months later when I decide to buy a cooler.
>>51735554
Correct me if I'm wrong but the intel and amd stock coolers are very similar
I used stock cooler on my fx 4300 for a while, it's not that worthless it's just loud ish.
>>51735578
Well to be honest im not exactly talking from experience when it comes to the AMD coolers.
I read a lot of reviews though, from those who bought the 8320e and *everyone* said the stock cooler is horrible. Loud and underperforming. they all said it should stay in the box it came in.
The 4690k on the other side had no such remarks. also my experience with Intel CPU stock coolers was - okay -. I've been running my e6750 for 7 years on its stock cooler and i've even OCed it. and the temperatures are good.
Same goes for most of my friends.. so i'm just putting 1+1 together
>>51726752
Not op.
I have an x5470 and an offer for i5 4460 for half the regular price. What I'm asking is will the difference be good enough to feed r9 290 (which I have) or should i just wait for zen?
>>51735689
x5470 is at 4ghz
>>51735689
you're gonna need a new mobo for that one as well..
>>51735664
The stock cooler is not going to make your cpu overheat.
>>51735725
I can flip this 775 mobo for similar price of some h81 , ddr2 is on price so I'd actually probably be on null or even profit after flippin mobo and ram
>>51735664
For both AMD and Intel stock coolers are loud but will not let a chip overheat at base clocks - that is why they exist. For overclocking no cpu should use the stock coolers in any shape or form.
What you do want is a cooler rated for 140w or higher as that gives you the thermal headroom. The legendary Noctura D15 is rated for something like 250w TDP which is the sort of TDP a 9590 at 5.3ghz has. Naturally the D15 commands its price as it is the undisputed grand master of air cooling, but there are cheaper coolers that offer similar performance.
>>51735786
well since you're not really spending so much i'd go for it.
you'll be better off waiting for Zen in that rig.
>>51735834
Fair enough, I'll jump to that i5 and drop it few months after zen is out
>>51735824
that shit costs 90 euros here man.
if i have to buy something like that it blows the cost of the 8320e setup to equal the i4590k (non-cooler).
The issue here is that the fx8320e needs the overclocking more than the 4690k does.
I can wait on the OCing of the 4690k and just keep it at stock settings and stock cooler for a while until i can get the money for a proper cooler.
still thinking about it though...
>>51735824
>For overclocking no cpu should use the stock coolers in any shape or form.
Yes and no - My stock cooler can handle overclocking my G3258 (Pentium anniversary) pretty well, surprisingly.
>>51735897
The D15 is just an example - there are plenty of cheaper coolers that will get the job done. Pic related os cheaper than the D15 by a fair bit and nearly as good.
Really and dual tower cooler with some decent fans will handle all but the most extreme overclocks.
>>51735917
That pentium is an outlier anyway as its basically the only dual core chip that can be overclocked in Intel's lineup.
>>51735897
Look at the Phanteks TC14PE, could be a bit cheaper than the NH-D15 and should perform very similarly, comes in different colors too if you want to match it to an overall color.
>>51736123
R1 ultimate and dark rock pro 3 also spring to mind.
>>51736151
Forgot about those.
In reality, any of the big dual tower air coolers would cool an overclocked 8350 just fine, really no need to pay the premium for an NH-D15 unless you want that extra 1-2c difference.
Go fuck yourselves, stupid bitches. Intel is better than amdkek, hahaha
>>51735966
my e6750 is OCed from 2.6 to 3.4 ghz and it runs just fine on its stock cooler as well.
I don't know i really can't decide...what would you guys go for, objecively?
keep in mind latest vidya
>>51736305
See pic.
>>51736313
I prefer the price vs performance ratio of the AMD chip if it means having extra money towards a beefier gpu.
>>51736313
Zena 40% ipc increase means it just now is catching up to sandy bridge.
Amd is pretty dead at this point.
>>51736347
You do realise tha 40% number quoted isn't in relation to the fx chips right? It is from their new apus. 40% uplift puts it in haswell territory without factoring in anything else.
>>51736389
The 40% graph literally use a bulldozer cpu ad a baseline. Fuck off amd shill.
>>51736410
Skylake v2 will be better, cheaper, use less power, and be out before zen seeing as how zen is q4.
>>51736410
>>51727742
How much voltage did it take before it quit?
>>51736499
In a move of sheer stupidity I pushed something like 1.6v through the chip and deep fried it. Probably killed the mobo as well but eh, it was a crap mobo so I just replaced the lot.
>>51736523
oh shit man you're scaring my shit now if i burn my chip overclocking im fucking fucked for life.
how likely is it to happen if i try to push a 8320e to 5ghz ?
>>51736546
put a small fan on vrm/socket for 5ghz+/1.5v+
>>51736546
You don't "just" put 1.6v through a chip - make no mistake I was cranking that to maximum without thinking and paid the price.
An 8320e doesn't even go to 1.6v - the safe upper limit for that chip is around 1.45v with a maximum of 1.5v iirc. Realistically you will be thermally limited when heading towards 5ghz - voltage should not be the main issue.
>>51736546
Get some of those small ass heatsinks for R Pis and stick them on the vrms
If you're just trying to build a gaymen PC the 8350 is fine. You don't need a top of the line CPU or DDR4 to max out current games.
My 8350 + R9 390 rig is still maxing out everything. I have the CPU OC'd to 4.5ghz and I feel like it wasn't even necessary.
>>51736480
And that's just ipc. Hopefully amd doesn't let us down.
>>51736691
You must be crazy friend, every smart consumer on here knows you need at least a hyper threaded quad core i7 and SLI 980 ti's to unlock the full potential of their ultimate gaming experience.
>>51736770
Maybe if you're trying to game at 4k 144hz, but that shit is for richfags
>>51736809
>4k
>cpu mattering
oh /g/~
