Go Back   Steam Users' Forums > Steam Discussions > Hardware and Operating Systems

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-16-2012, 08:12 AM   #16
trek554
 
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2005
Reputation: 636
Posts: 8,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ocean! View Post
Well of what i saw, Intel Processors are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay expensive. Too much, though. Should it be fine the AMD 8120? (Also motherboards are less expensive for AMD processors)
what are you talking about? a 2500k build is hardly anymore than an 8120 build. the 2500k is faster, uses less power and has no compatibility issues. if you overclock then the 2500k is an even better deal because it extends its lead while using hardly any more power. the 8120 on the other hand uses way way more power once the clocks go up and will still be slower. hell my 2500k at 4.4 uses less power than a stock 8120 and will blow it away clock for clock in gaming. you would be a fool to go with the FX over the i5 if building a gaming pc from scratch.
trek554 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2012, 09:41 AM   #17
grimreeferx09
 
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Reputation: 76
Posts: 674
i would actually say the 8120 is inbetween the sandybride i5 2500k and i7 2600k, and the 3790x is like in a totally different class of awesomeness.

for reference, you can check out this graph of cpu performance:
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph5091/42333.png

Last edited by grimreeferx09: 02-16-2012 at 09:44 AM.
grimreeferx09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2012, 09:48 AM   #18
trek554
 
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2005
Reputation: 636
Posts: 8,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by grimreeferx09 View Post
i would actually say the 8120 is inbetween the sandybride i5 2500k and i7 2600k, and the 3790x is like in a totally different class of awesomeness.

for reference, you can check out this graph of cpu performance:
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph5091/42333.png
are you kidding? he is wanting a gaming pc not to sit around and run Cinebench benchmarks. the 2500k is the cpu to get for a typical single gpu gaming build. the super expensive 3960x would be no faster for that use.


AMD FX processors are definitely not cut for gaming. They not only get completely destroyed by Intel’s Core i5 and Core i3, but also yield even to their own predecessors from the Phenom II family.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...0_6.html#sect0


With the sub-$100 Pentiums performing so well, Intel's $125 Core i3-2100 easily beats more expensive Phenom II and FX models. And the $190 Core i5-2400 dominates the sub-$200 landscape without challenge, really. As such, we're almost-shockingly left without an AMD CPU to recommend at any price point.

For $190, a stock Core i5-2400 gets you more gaming prowess than any AMD CPU can hope to deliver right now, even overclocked.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...k,3120-10.html

Last edited by trek554: 02-16-2012 at 09:54 AM.
trek554 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2012, 10:21 AM   #19
aquielisunari
 
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Reputation: 23
Posts: 92
GrimReefer?

We are talking about gaming performance.Let's take a look at the 8150 vs the 2500K. http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=288 shows the 8150 gets smoked and embarrassed by a CPU with only 4 cores where GAMING is concerned. Ow wow the 8150 has the highest clock ever. Um yeah that is with some ELITE overclocking knowledge and a gallon of liquid nitrogen at the ready. Most people don't have that. This does not equate to the natural performance of each processor. The 8120 can in no way shape or form be between the 2500 and 2600 where gaming is key. Take a look at the 8120 here. Again this is with GAMING in mind https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...hl=en_US#gid=0 .

Realistically speaking GAMES do NOT use over 4 cores so the extra cores are wasted on gaming. the 2500K and the 2600K are better than the 8120 for gamers. I can go to Micro-Center http://www.microcenter.com/single_pr...uct_id=0354589 and pick up a $179.99 2500K. With the aforementioned links and other research that I have done I would most certainly NOT buy an 8120 or 8150 for more money and get less in the way of gaming performance.

Remember we are in a STEAM forum which is for GAMING. PS, rendering, encoding, transcoding, CAD and other tasks that benefit from the Multi-threaded side of those chips are down the hall, out the door and to your left. Intel's HT tech has something for those innefficient FX processors anyways.

Last edited by aquielisunari: 02-16-2012 at 10:25 AM.
aquielisunari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2012, 07:36 AM   #20
Ocean!
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Reputation: 5
Posts: 481
Okay, so i've decided. i5 or i7. Then still the videocard...


Inb4 in 2013 wanting DirectX 12. >:
Ocean! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2012, 08:15 AM   #21
aquielisunari
 
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Reputation: 23
Posts: 92
Video Card

Wait for the 670 or 680. A couple of the rumored flavors of the Keplar series. You will also need to wait for PCI 3.0. Actually I just answered a similar question over @ Yahoo Answers . http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...2103325AAW30EK speaks to waiting for the hardware that is just about to come over the horizon from Intel and Nvidia. There is always the 7970 but still have to wait on Ivy.
aquielisunari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2012, 10:19 AM   #22
venomblade89
 
 
 
Join Date: May 2010
Reputation: 332
Posts: 1,093
You don't need a LGA 2011 CPU for gaming. The 2500k($220) and 3960x($1,000) would perform very very very close in gaming. Save yourself tons of money and get a CPU actually meant for solely gaming. Also, if you can wait I'd see what Kepler has to offer in around April. Or even wait for the Ivy Bridge 3570k($220). Not sure when that's coming out exactly, I think around the same time as kepler.

Last edited by venomblade89: 02-23-2012 at 10:21 AM.
venomblade89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2012, 11:05 AM   #23
madpistol
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Reputation: 923
Posts: 4,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ocean! View Post
Well of what i saw, Intel Processors are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay expensive. Too much, though. Should it be fine the AMD 8120? (Also motherboards are less expensive for AMD processors)
No. Don't go that route if you have that much money to spend. Get a good lga 1155 motherboard and an i7 2600k. You will still save something like $300-400 and you should get the exact same performance in games. On certain games, the fx 8120 and 8150 could be slower. I dont recommend those CPU's for gaming.
madpistol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2012, 11:33 AM   #24
solo1911
 
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Reputation: 19
Posts: 148
i had a i7 2600k before i upgraded to the i7 3900X series CPU its worth it...tho i havnt overclocked it at all...it runs very stable and smoothly does its work. get a good air cooler or watercooler if ur spending money once and for all...i have cpu block over mine.

Last edited by solo1911: 02-23-2012 at 11:35 AM.
solo1911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2012, 02:43 PM   #25
Jokerman_
 
 
 
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2010
Reputation: 249
Posts: 732
wait and SLI the gtx 670ti!
Should be out in march/april
3960x looks good No bulldozer if you have the money to buy this!
Jokerman_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2012, 02:48 PM   #26
Ocean!
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Reputation: 5
Posts: 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by venomblade89 View Post
You don't need a LGA 2011 CPU for gaming. The 2500k($220) and 3960x($1,000) would perform very very very close in gaming. Save yourself tons of money and get a CPU actually meant for solely gaming. Also, if you can wait I'd see what Kepler has to offer in around April. Or even wait for the Ivy Bridge 3570k($220). Not sure when that's coming out exactly, I think around the same time as kepler.
I wont be buying it until April. :P

Still, i don't understand about the video card. :sonooby:
Ocean! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2012, 04:48 PM   #27
dosbox
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Reputation: 2803
Posts: 8,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ocean! View Post
I wont be buying it until April. :P

Still, i don't understand about the video card. :sonooby:
Come back in April when reviews are out.
dosbox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 01:10 AM   #28
borg_7_of_9
 
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Reputation: 2869
Posts: 13,509
Quote:
Originally Posted by aquielisunari View Post
Wait for the 670 or 680. A couple of the rumored flavors of the Keplar series. You will also need to wait for PCI 3.0. Actually I just answered a similar question over @ Yahoo Answers . http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...2103325AAW30EK speaks to waiting for the hardware that is just about to come over the horizon from Intel and Nvidia. There is always the 7970 but still have to wait on Ivy.
PCI-E V3 is a waste on time, waiting for it when we ain't even using all the PCI-E V2 bandwidth? In fact where barely using 3/4 of the bandwidth available now PCI-E v3 really has no advantage yet unless u plan on running a really fast PCI-E SSD drive n I mean really fast..
borg_7_of_9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 03:45 AM   #29
DeathRay2K
 
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Reputation: 94
Posts: 667
Quote:
Originally Posted by borg_7_of_9 View Post
PCI-E V3 is a waste on time, waiting for it when we ain't even using all the PCI-E V2 bandwidth? In fact where barely using 3/4 of the bandwidth available now PCI-E v3 really has no advantage yet unless u plan on running a really fast PCI-E SSD drive n I mean really fast..
Or for Crossfire/SLI with 2 x8 slots, a much better reason to wait for PCI-E 3.0.
DeathRay2K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2012, 03:57 AM   #30
borg_7_of_9
 
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Reputation: 2869
Posts: 13,509
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathRay2K View Post
Or for Crossfire/SLI with 2 x8 slots, a much better reason to wait for PCI-E 3.0.
You can get 2 PCI-Ev2 x 16 slots now with the right board..

While PCI-E V3 should support 2 pci-e v2 x16 @ full bandwidth in cfx/sli you still don't need that bandwidth although 2 x16 slots are a little better than x16 x8 or x8 x8 but the difference is not huge, iirc 5% loss in x8 x8 over x16 x16, 1~3% in x16 x8..

Last edited by borg_7_of_9: 02-24-2012 at 04:03 AM.
borg_7_of_9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   Steam Users' Forums > Steam Discussions > Hardware and Operating Systems


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site Content Copyright Valve Corporation 1998-2014, All Rights Reserved.