dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2874
share rss forum feed

me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO

More "real world" 3570k vs 8350 benchmarks from linus.

The i5 is clocked to 4.2ghz and the 8350 4.6ghz.

Gaming with AA:

»www.youtube.com/watch?v=uD6UcsVG56g
and a link to the slide show that has the results : »docs.google.com/file/d/0B1PSGh26···RGs/edit

The two trade blows pretty much with the i5 winning most of the time, including in crysis 3 by 2 fps. AMD wins in farcry 3 by about 4 fps though. I'd like to see what would happen if they were both at the same clock speed though.

Gaming with the 8350 and 3570k on windows 7 vs windows 8:

»www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHnsfIJtZ2o

results:»docs.google.com/file/d/0B2LKAgEk···dmM/edit

Not much boost in average fps for the 3570k, but the 8350 does get a boost on windows 8 most of the time. Because windows 8 handles more cores better, and both of their minimum fps get a boost due to this.


Krisnatharok
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit
kudos:12
I think the explanation for the discrepancy is that those are the clocks that 90% of the overclockers can can achieve, 90% of the time.

Otherwise, why not disable four cores on the 8350 to have a quad-core vs. quad-core match-up?

I'd really like to see a "brink OC" match-up between the 8350 and the 3570K and 3770K. Show the absolute max you can push all three under air, closed loop, and custom water. Then throw the same GPU in each and benchmark this stuff.
--
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.


Gordo74
Premium
join:2003-10-28
Monroeville, PA
reply to me1212

Re: More "real world" 3570k vs 8350 benchmarks from li

I think Intel still is better on this front. Why? Power consumption.

me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
It only amounts to a $ a year though, according to linus.

Regardless intel still wins, imo, since the results are so close were they at the same speed intel would probably win.

I agree with Kris, we need same brink OCs to see what can really be done. Maybe even throw in last gen 2500k and 2600k and 8150 and brink OC them too so we can see how much progress has been made.


Krisnatharok
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit
kudos:12
Also realize this is the top-end AMD processor against a mid-grade Intel processor.

AMD doesn't even have an answer for the top 1155 CPU, let alone anything 2011 can throw its way.
--
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.


MLSCrow

@sbcglobal.net
AMD FX-8350 - $189
Intel i5-3570K - $219
Intel i7-3770K - $329
Intel i7 - 3970X - $1049

The reason why people compare the FX8350 to the i5-3570K is because they are sort of in the same price range (AMD costing a decent amount less actually).

When it comes to gaming, yes, AMD loses to Intel, but not by much. As you can see, when playing games at real-world settings, the FX-8350 really only loses to the similarly priced Intel CPU by roughly 10%. So, you can purchase an FX8350 for 16% less and get 16% less performance or you can purchase an i5-3570K for 16% more and get that much more performance.

Once you add Hyperthreading, the price goes up 74% compared to the FX8350, but only gives you the same performance advantage as the i5-3570K. In some cases the i5-3570K actually outperforms the 3770K, so for all intents and purposes, with regard to gaming, the 3570K really is the best and most cost-realistic gaming CPU from Intel. And obviously the 3970X is just unrealistic those of us who aren't filthy rich.

So, realistically, you can't really say that it's the "top end AMD processor against a mid-grade Intel processor", because in reality, these are both the best cost-realistic gaming CPU's from both companies.


Gordo74
Premium
join:2003-10-28
Monroeville, PA
said by MLSCrow :

So, realistically, you can't really say that it's the "top end AMD processor against a mid-grade Intel processor", because in reality, these are both the best cost-realistic gaming CPU's from both companies.

That's great.... IF AMD was only trying to compete in gaming. However, for video editors, photo editors, office PCs.... Intel wins. AMD has nothing to even shake a stick at for those guys, which is what the vast majority of pro users fall under.