CPUs dont matter for gaming, Im the one with the FX-8150 and it runs nowhere near 100% on the majority of games such as metro and bf3, obviously CPU intensive games are a different story because they will push any CPU
AMD Bulldozer CPU comparisons
- Thread starter Enzyme
- Start date
CPUs dont matter for gaming, Im the one with the FX-8150 and it runs nowhere near 100% on the majority of games such as metro and bf3, obviously CPU intensive games are a different story because they will push any CPU
keynes
Multiverse Poster
Some games are more gpu dependant than others, in games like Arma II and Shogun Total war there would be a difference. For image editing and video encoding it seems that the i5 performs better than the FX-8150
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2012/05/01/intel-core-i5-3570k-cpu-review/4
When was the latest BIOS release? Do you have any links on benchmarks or performance?
Last edited:
I have no benchmarks but the latest BIOS (and i forgot about the MS hotfix) do improve performance quite a bit on games that need it
I dont remember struggling at maximum settings on Total War, although the 3840x2180 resolutions didnt do too well on ARMA II but thats GPU not CPU
the bulldozer will not cause any problems at maximum settings for all games that are not over CPU intense (like those mentioned) where even then, i havent noticed a problem
but that is because its £69 more expensive, and thats not including the £20 cashback offered by AMD at the moment
So id much rather have a slightly weaker 8 core (where it doesnt make a difference) with an SSD (I can get a 128gb for the difference in price) than a quad core
So id much rather have a slightly weaker 8 core (where it doesnt make a difference) with an SSD (I can get a 128gb for the difference in price) than a quad core
LewisMoore
Bronze Level Poster
What is an ssd used for? I'm a newb @ computing at this level. What does the bios update do and how would one get such update?
keynes
Multiverse Poster
SSD: http://www.samsung.com/uk/article/top-ten-benefits-of-ssd
You should be able to do a bios update with the drivers from your motherboard however updating bios could sometimes cause problems: http://www.pcspecialist.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?16253-Asus-Bios-update&highlight=gorman+bios
keynes
Multiverse Poster
Enzyme requested advice on CPU performance from a lower frequency eight cores for gaming and everyday use, maybe video editing, photoshop. I think the i5 is a more suitable cpu for him. Some games are more cpu intensive than others. The i5,in my opinion, would be a more all around processor for gaming.
keynes
Multiverse Poster
I agree that the FX-8150 is cheaper but since the budget is up to £1200 he should be able to get the i5 + a 120 SSD. I still think (from benchmarks/articles) that the i5-3570 would perform better than the FX-8150 in video/image editing and if it is within his budget and satisfying his intended use (gaming, image and video editing) an i5 would be a better choice.
Ok so the budget is higher, so that means he/she can get another upgrade for their computer, such as case, graphics card etc, the graphics card upgrade would have a much bigger effect than the CPU upgrade
remember, if worse comes to the worst, you can always upgrade the bulldozer to much higher than the non K i5 meaning you get much better performance, when I asked a while back, PCS support said it would be ok for me to overclock over the phone and that would keep my warranty although you would need the titan cooler to be able to do it
remember, if worse comes to the worst, you can always upgrade the bulldozer to much higher than the non K i5 meaning you get much better performance, when I asked a while back, PCS support said it would be ok for me to overclock over the phone and that would keep my warranty although you would need the titan cooler to be able to do it
Buzz
Master
Ok so just came across this topic and thought id add my 5cent worth.
The CPU of course is important to gaming, just as most other parts of a rig are. Basically the CPU dedicates the GPU slots the bandwidth. The lower the CPU limit the lower the push it can give. Just like Ivy Vs Sandy. If I put in my 690 into my rig with my 2700k sandy it will bottleneck as the pcie3 is not enabled due to sandy cpu speeds. So in that sense the CPU is important as I can NOT use my CPU to the limit of the GPU regardless. This I have tested over and over again. The higher the GPU frequency etc etc the better the GPU performance.
As for actual gaming processing the GPU does the processing mainly but the CPU control's the speed of the GPU lanes.
It is well known that AMD are NOT as superior as Intel right across the board. At least from pretty much every source iv read about. but again if you are a FPS / benchmarking / testing kinda person Vs just slapping on a game then the CPU does matter and makes a difference. If you just slap on a game with any decent AMD or Intel and a good GPU then it wont matter all that much.
Games of course will still work with weaker CPUs and good GPUs as it is the GPU the game uses and will do most of the processing as I said, but at the end of the day, if the CPU is crap then it will bottleneck eventually.
Also in saying all that there are also many programs written so that they will ONLY use a certain amount of cores. Photoshop at least in CS4 does not use more then 4 cores as far as I remember regardless of how many you have so even with a top spec CPU vs a lower one running photoshop on 2 different comps with 2 different cpus will prob show zero increase in processing ability.
Personally .... Intel all the way.
The CPU of course is important to gaming, just as most other parts of a rig are. Basically the CPU dedicates the GPU slots the bandwidth. The lower the CPU limit the lower the push it can give. Just like Ivy Vs Sandy. If I put in my 690 into my rig with my 2700k sandy it will bottleneck as the pcie3 is not enabled due to sandy cpu speeds. So in that sense the CPU is important as I can NOT use my CPU to the limit of the GPU regardless. This I have tested over and over again. The higher the GPU frequency etc etc the better the GPU performance.
As for actual gaming processing the GPU does the processing mainly but the CPU control's the speed of the GPU lanes.
It is well known that AMD are NOT as superior as Intel right across the board. At least from pretty much every source iv read about. but again if you are a FPS / benchmarking / testing kinda person Vs just slapping on a game then the CPU does matter and makes a difference. If you just slap on a game with any decent AMD or Intel and a good GPU then it wont matter all that much.
Games of course will still work with weaker CPUs and good GPUs as it is the GPU the game uses and will do most of the processing as I said, but at the end of the day, if the CPU is crap then it will bottleneck eventually.
Also in saying all that there are also many programs written so that they will ONLY use a certain amount of cores. Photoshop at least in CS4 does not use more then 4 cores as far as I remember regardless of how many you have so even with a top spec CPU vs a lower one running photoshop on 2 different comps with 2 different cpus will prob show zero increase in processing ability.
Personally .... Intel all the way.
Enzyme
Bronze Level Poster
All points are interesting. All I want is a machine that is powerful in the gaming world to have the ability to produce top frame rates at demanding levels. Having said that I will not only be using it for gaming but the odd spot off photoshopping, maybe in the future video editing, music producing, multitasking internet browsing..so on. I think the CPU and GPU are both important so having a strong selection in both parts would be awesome. As long as the GPU can handle the majority of games on ultra and the CPU won't cause any limits then its my cup of tea 
keynes
Multiverse Poster
All points are interesting. All I want is a machine that is powerful in the gaming world to have the ability to produce top frame rates at demanding levels. Having said that I will not only be using it for gaming but the odd spot off photoshopping, maybe in the future video editing, music producing, multitasking internet browsing..so on. I think the CPU and GPU are both important so having a strong selection in both parts would be awesome. As long as the GPU can handle the majority of games on ultra and the CPU won't cause any limits then its my cup of tea
I completely agree with Buzz's post but at the end of the day it is your call
. Since your budget is £120 you could also consider an SSD as your main drive to speed up windows and other applications like photoshop.
keynes
Multiverse Poster
OS, main drivers, photoshop or other applications you use very often. A link with some benefits from SSDs:
http://www.samsung.com/uk/article/top-ten-benefits-of-ssd
keynes
Multiverse Poster
That's a very helpful link thanks for that
Good stuff
if you chose the SSD try to put it as the main drive and the caviar black as the secondary drive so that PCS installs the OS in the SSD.
Enzyme
Bronze Level Poster
Definitely do that As for the motherboard you suggested, as I have NO clue about them, will it bottleneck anything? Only asking as I've heard from posts and such that sometimes the motherboard has been the problem in performance issues. You've probably put a high end one on that order but I don't have a clue!
As for the motherboard you suggested, as I have NO clue about them, will it bottleneck anything? Only asking as I've heard from posts and such that sometimes the motherboard has been the problem in performance issues. You've probably put a high end one on that order but I don't have a clue!