Solved

Switching from AMD to an INTEL processor? Worth the Switch? Should I wait?

Hey guys, thanks in advance for reading.

I'm a big big fan of the game Planetside 2, which is a very CPU intensive game. Recently I've been having a lot of problems running it and getting stable FPS with my FX-8350. I've been told the game runs a lot better on Intel processors.

I already know it's a big investment, I would be willing to spend up to ~400 (usd) on a processor (I'm already accounting for a minimum that I could make from selling my current processor and other parts)

But the real question is, should I wait? Are there going to be better Intel processors in my price range soon? Is Dx12 going to make AMD processors perform better in games?


(other specs: Nvid 770, 16gb RAM, Asrock Extreme4 MOBO, SSD's and HDD's)
31 answers Last reply Best Answer
More about switching amd intel processor worth switch wait
  1. Many people think its mostly the processor , but its mostly the graphics card. Add in a new graphics card and AMD isn't bad at all.
  2. There is NOT going to be a significantly better performing Intel CPU in the very NEAR future. Sometime in August Skylake, which is the tock in Intel's tick tock, meaning an architectural change which generally means a significant performance increase versus the tick, like upcoming Broadwell, which is a die shrink.

    For right now, I think this would be your best choice of performance versus price and gives you the Intel single core performance advantage plus the 8 thread processing architecture of the i7. The E3 Xeons are the same processor as the i7, without any integrated graphics or ability to overclock. Which is fine, since you don't need either one anyhow. They have outstanding gaming performance and run advanced applications like an i7:

    PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

    CPU: Intel Xeon E3-1241 V3 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor ($274.99 @ Amazon)
    Motherboard: ASRock H97 Anniversary ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($74.78 @ Newegg)
    Total: $349.77
    Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
    Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-03-11 20:43 EDT-0400
  3. Mac070 said:
    Many people think its mostly the processor , but its mostly the graphics card. Add in a new graphics card and AMD isn't bad at all.


    That's untrue. The CPU, especially in CPU intensive titles like the one the OP is talking about, show HUGE differences in performance depending on the CPU used. While it's true that an FX chip when used with a high end GPU will allow you to game most any title, for less money, it is NOT going to give you the same maximum results that you'll get using an Intel processor. Again, especially if the title is generously cpu dependent, or in cases where the title hasn't been specifically optimized for threaded processing.
  4. If you were building a new rig, I'd say go Intel for sure. But I really the question the sense of upgrade (side-grading) given that you have a working rig right now. If you want a project and the time/effort isn't an issue for you, then maybe it's a good call. But I think you'll be putting significant money and time into something that'll make a very marginal difference.

    Here's a thread on Planetside 2 performance on a 8350: http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-1958464/amd-fx8350-good-cpu-planetside.html

    Here's some benchmarks on a 4690K vs 8350: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/697?vs=1261

    The gaming benchmarks show a slight win for Intel... but is it worth through that amount of money (and potentially a new copy of Windows) for such small gains?
  5. Mac070 said:
    Many people think its mostly the processor , but its mostly the graphics card. Add in a new graphics card and AMD isn't bad at all.


    When I play planetside 2, I am 100% CPU bound the entire session. I may only be using 60% of my CPU in a worst case scenario, but people have been achieving optimal frame-rates with far lesser cards. I would naturally go to my graphics card first, but there's no real point in upgrading from a 770 to me. It's a great card for everything I do.
  6. Case in point. Also, notice that the FX chip needs to be OC to 4.5Ghz to even come close to the i3, THE i3, much less the model of i5 used here. Plus, the FX chip required 44-50% more power to achieve the performance it WAS able to muster. So it will get the job done, it's just not ever going to be remembered as being near the front of the pack in power consumption or performance.

    http://www.techspot.com/review/943-best-value-desktop-cpu/page6.html
  7. rhysiam said:
    If you were building a new rig, I'd say go Intel for sure. But I really the question the sense of upgrade (side-grading) given that you have a working rig right now. If you want a project and the time/effort isn't an issue for you, then maybe it's a good call. But I think you'll be putting significant money and time into something that'll make a very marginal difference.

    Here's a thread on Planetside 2 performance on a 8350: http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-1958464/amd-fx8350-good-cpu-planetside.html

    Here's some benchmarks on a 4690K vs 8350: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/697?vs=1261

    The gaming benchmarks show a slight win for Intel... but is it worth through that amount of money (and potentially a new copy of Windows) for such small gains?


    Thanks, I agree, if I was building a new rig I would go Intel, in all honesty I don't want to spend any money I think my rig is good already. I don't know what the problem is with Planetside 2 but I've been trying to fix it non-stop for a week now, frames dropping sub 30's in fights and worse when scoping in, didn't happen before and I can't find a solution.
  8. I don't see anything in EITHER of those threads that would definitively lead me to believe, or sway me in any way, against the fact that Intel crushes AMD on gaming titles that ARE CPU resource hogs. For GPU bound titles, sure, not as big of a deal. But I don't see Planetside at all on the Anand benchmarks and I see nothing but conjecture in that Tom's thread.

    That being said, unless the CPU suddenly lost half it's capability, it shouldn't be an issue if it wasn't happening before.
  9. teapole said:
    Thanks, I agree, if I was building a new rig I would go Intel, in all honesty I don't want to spend any money I think my rig is good already. I don't know what the problem is with Planetside 2 but I've been trying to fix it non-stop for a week now, frames dropping sub 30's in fights and worse when scoping in, didn't happen before and I can't find a solution.


    A few on the Planetside 2 thread I linked seemed to suggest that it's a pretty poorly optimised game. It may be that you are CPU bound and the performance tanks, but even if you upgrade to an Intel rig and get maybe 30% extra performance, you're talking 6-9 fps more if you're frames are tanking to 20-30fps... which will help, for sure, but it's not really going to 'fix' the problem.

    You've tried Googling fps drops in planetside 2, threads like this might help you: http://steamcommunity.com/app/218230/discussions/0/864974467694813533/?l=polish

    I think you're better searching for driver or game setting issues, rather than sinking loads of time and money into a pretty small upgrade.
  10. Look, I just want to know if it's worth switching. What I don't understand is how my FPS got worse in Planetside 2.

    The fact of the matter is, I used to get good frames in battle with my setup, now I don't. Nothing adds up. I'm using 49% of the CPU on average, my RAM seems to be just fine, my GPU can handle Planetside 2. I get up to 120 frames just dicking around! Then I get into battle, and the s*** hits the fan.

    Couple things to mention here, I did make a few changes recently.

    I was getting a bad "hitching, random frame drops to 10fps" which I fixed by going into the BIOS and turning off a lot of the enabled power-saving features. This miraculously solved that problem, but then I started to notice lower frame-rates in battle. Is it a coincidence? Pssh I don't know, but I sure as heck don't want to get that hitching again.

    It also solved the same problem in Battlefield 4, but BF4 uses Mantle (I think) which would explain why it's better optimized. (And there's not as much CPU rendering compared to PS2)
  11. rhysiam said:
    teapole said:
    Thanks, I agree, if I was building a new rig I would go Intel, in all honesty I don't want to spend any money I think my rig is good already. I don't know what the problem is with Planetside 2 but I've been trying to fix it non-stop for a week now, frames dropping sub 30's in fights and worse when scoping in, didn't happen before and I can't find a solution.


    A few on the Planetside 2 thread I linked seemed to suggest that it's a pretty poorly optimised game. It may be that you are CPU bound and the performance tanks, but even if you upgrade to an Intel rig and get maybe 30% extra performance, you're talking 6-9 fps more if you're frames are tanking to 20-30fps... which will help, for sure, but it's not really going to 'fix' the problem.

    You've tried Googling fps drops in planetside 2, threads like this might help you: http://steamcommunity.com/app/218230/discussions/0/864974467694813533/?l=polish

    I think you're better searching for driver or game setting issues, rather than sinking loads of time and money into a pretty small upgrade.


    I agree, I've just spent a butt load of time working on in-game settings. I use the latest NVid drivers at any given time. I don't see anyone else complaining about drivers, so I didn't think to look there. I could try re-installing the drivers but I have my doubts as to if that will do anything.

    When I say I've tried a lot of things... Well I tried a lot of things.
  12. rhysiam said:
    teapole said:
    Thanks, I agree, if I was building a new rig I would go Intel, in all honesty I don't want to spend any money I think my rig is good already. I don't know what the problem is with Planetside 2 but I've been trying to fix it non-stop for a week now, frames dropping sub 30's in fights and worse when scoping in, didn't happen before and I can't find a solution.


    A few on the Planetside 2 thread I linked seemed to suggest that it's a pretty poorly optimised game. It may be that you are CPU bound and the performance tanks, but even if you upgrade to an Intel rig and get maybe 30% extra performance, you're talking 6-9 fps more if you're frames are tanking to 20-30fps... which will help, for sure, but it's not really going to 'fix' the problem.

    You've tried Googling fps drops in planetside 2, threads like this might help you: http://steamcommunity.com/app/218230/discussions/0/864974467694813533/?l=polish

    I think you're better searching for driver or game setting issues, rather than sinking loads of time and money into a pretty small upgrade.


    I just read that thread and realized I've already read it, it's kind of a dead end considering he never posts about fixing his problem =(.
  13. It's definitely worth switching if you play a lot of games. If you're mostly switching for gaming then i5 4690K and you're set.
    If you plan on doing video rendering, editing, etc then get i7 4790K.
    Either way i5 4690K is an excellent CPU for gaming and everything else.
    There will always be something new coming out but not very soon and it's not gonna be much faster then what we have today.
  14. darkbreeze said:
    I don't see anything in EITHER of those threads that would definitively lead me to believe, or sway me in any way, against the fact that Intel crushes AMD on gaming titles that ARE CPU resource hogs. For GPU bound titles, sure, not as big of a deal. But I don't see Planetside at all on the Anand benchmarks and I see nothing but conjecture in that Tom's thread.

    That being said, unless the CPU suddenly lost half it's capability, it shouldn't be an issue if it wasn't happening before.


    I completely agree that Intel beats AMD in CPU bound gaming scenarios, no question. My questions arises as to whether it's worth sinking maybe $300-400 (plus a new copy of OS if running Windows 7) on the "upgrade".

    I don't have experience with Planetside 2 myself, so not claiming any particular insight here, but I've seen some poorly optimised games that run pretty well but then tank under certain situations, with frame drops down to 10-15fps. IF that drop is CPU bound, then even if an Intel rig nets you an extra 50% performance, you end up with drops to 15-23fps... which is better but it's still a problem.
    It's often (usually!) better to do some Googling and try to find a workaround, or the particular game setting, or driver issue which is causing the frame rate drop, rather than concluding the system isn't up to the task and spending big dollars on an upgrade.

    That's my advice to OP.

    RE the 8350, my take is that for most games the 8350 is actually good enough... and for productivity type tasks it's actually very capable (certainly more so than an i3 for any multitasking situation). Though there are undoubtedly CPU bound games that benefit from an Intel build, and certainly anyone with a 120/144hz monitor should only be looking at Intel.

    But I agree that on pure gaming performance (or power) metrics, Intel is clearly superior.
  15. Vici0us said:
    It's definitely worth switching if you play a lot of games. If you're mostly switching for gaming then i5 4690K and you're set.
    If you plan on doing video rendering, editing, etc then get i7 4790K.
    Either way i5 4690K is an excellent CPU for gaming and everything else.
    There will always be something new coming out but not very soon and it's not gonna be much faster then what we have today.


    Ok, let's say I wanted to get the i7 4790k, it's decently priced, it's just as powerful, the only difference is 4 cores and a lot of mumbo-jumbo I don't understand. (maybe there's a big difference =P )

    Before someone yells at me about how cores work and why it's completely different etc.. I know that already, it's OK. My understanding is that Intel handles games that are CPU heavy. Both Ps2 and DayZ (games I play reg.) are CPU heavy. Is there someone that can CONFIRM that I would get the steady frames I'm looking for?
  16. teapole said:
    I agree, I've just spent a butt load of time working on in-game settings. I use the latest NVid drivers at any given time. I don't see anyone else complaining about drivers, so I didn't think to look there. I could try re-installing the drivers but I have my doubts as to if that will do anything.

    When I say I've tried a lot of things... Well I tried a lot of things.


    Fair enough... sounds frustrating!

    If it's not pretty easy to find on forums, etc, then chances are the problem is unique to your system. There must be a bunch of people running the games on FX processors. So either it doesn't happen to them, or you're far more sensitive to the problem than most people.

    The only other thing I can think of is a temperature or power issue?
    - You've checked your CPU or GPU aren't getting too hot?
    - What's your power supply make & model... you confident you don't have issues there?

    If you're really committed to solving the issue and you've ruled out power or heat, it might be worth a fresh OS install, reinstall the graphics drivers from scratch and then see if things work better. You'd have to do that with a new build anyway, so that might confirm to you that it really is an AMD limitation

    If it's a genuine CPU bound issue, then OCing your CPU will help. Have you done that already? If you haven't and you're running on the stock cooler, the question then becomes whether it's worth sinking money on a cooler for your AMD rig. As others have posted, OC helps to close the gap to Intel, but in CPU bound games the gap still exists!
  17. And trust me guys, I've been doing the PC thing for a while and I spend a lot of time on eBay. I could make the switch pretty painless and cheap. I'm not going to rush and buy an Intel processor today. I also have a ticket in with Daybreak (or what used to be SoE ((rolls eyes)) explaining the situation. So on top of having 2 forum posts and a Tom's Hardware post I'm awaiting a response from my friends at Daybreak, hoping they have some insight as to why my FPS is so low in battle.
  18. teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    It's definitely worth switching if you play a lot of games. If you're mostly switching for gaming then i5 4690K and you're set.
    If you plan on doing video rendering, editing, etc then get i7 4790K.
    Either way i5 4690K is an excellent CPU for gaming and everything else.
    There will always be something new coming out but not very soon and it's not gonna be much faster then what we have today.


    Ok, let's say I wanted to get the i7 4790k, it's decently priced, it's just as powerful, the only difference is 4 cores and a lot of mumbo-jumbo I don't understand. (maybe there's a big difference =P )

    Before someone yells at me about how cores work and why it's completely different etc.. I know that already, it's OK. My understanding is that Intel handles games that are CPU heavy. Both Ps2 and DayZ (games I play reg.) are CPU heavy. Is there someone that can CONFIRM that I would get the steady frames I'm looking for?
    i7 4790K has 4 more threads, hyper-threading and it's clocked higher.. not much else. If you're strictly going Intel for gaming then get i5 4690K and look no further.
  19. rhysiam said:
    teapole said:
    I agree, I've just spent a butt load of time working on in-game settings. I use the latest NVid drivers at any given time. I don't see anyone else complaining about drivers, so I didn't think to look there. I could try re-installing the drivers but I have my doubts as to if that will do anything.

    When I say I've tried a lot of things... Well I tried a lot of things.


    Fair enough... sounds frustrating!

    If it's not pretty easy to find on forums, etc, then chances are the problem is unique to your system. There must be a bunch of people running the games on FX processors. So either it doesn't happen to them, or you're far more sensitive to the problem than most people.

    The only other thing I can think of is a temperature or power issue?
    - You've checked your CPU or GPU aren't getting too hot?
    - What's your power supply make & model... you confident you don't have issues there?

    If you're really committed to solving the issue and you've ruled out power or heat, it might be worth a fresh OS install, reinstall the graphics drivers from scratch and then see if things work better. You'd have to do that with a new build anyway, so that might confirm to you that it really is an AMD limitation

    If it's a genuine CPU bound issue, then OCing your CPU will help. Have you done that already? If you haven't and you're running on the stock cooler, the question then becomes whether it's worth sinking money on a cooler for your AMD rig. As others have posted, OC helps to close the gap to Intel, but in CPU bound games the gap still exists!


    I'm still using the same power supply that I've had for 7 or 8 years now. An Antec Neo-Eco or some sh**, 620. It's been a reliable tank. Don't think there's any problems with it but I had an episode once where my computer wouldn't start a few months back. Swapped in a friends power supply and then put mine back in and it automagically worked again... No problems since then, but it could be time for an upgrade there.

    Nothing is too hot, I have a cheaper 100$ closed loop water cpu cooler, it's not great but it's quiet and WAY better than stock. My fan vent. is decent, I keep the fans up high just for the heck of it.

    I have slightly overclocked my CPU to 4.1 - 4.2, but I didn't see a difference at all in game, and I didn't want to go too far with the OC.

    And yes, frustrating my friend. Very frustrating. I like to slap tables to release the stress.
  20. Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    It's definitely worth switching if you play a lot of games. If you're mostly switching for gaming then i5 4690K and you're set.
    If you plan on doing video rendering, editing, etc then get i7 4790K.
    Either way i5 4690K is an excellent CPU for gaming and everything else.
    There will always be something new coming out but not very soon and it's not gonna be much faster then what we have today.


    Ok, let's say I wanted to get the i7 4790k, it's decently priced, it's just as powerful, the only difference is 4 cores and a lot of mumbo-jumbo I don't understand. (maybe there's a big difference =P )

    Before someone yells at me about how cores work and why it's completely different etc.. I know that already, it's OK. My understanding is that Intel handles games that are CPU heavy. Both Ps2 and DayZ (games I play reg.) are CPU heavy. Is there someone that can CONFIRM that I would get the steady frames I'm looking for?
    i7 4790K has 4 more threads, hyper-threading and it's clocked higher.. not much else. If you're strictly going Intel for gaming then get i5 4690K and look no further.



    I do a lot of recording, video editing, rendering... Youtube and personal stuff. Photoshop, Sony Vegas. If I was to go Intel I'd rather have the better rendering power.
  21. Best answer
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    It's definitely worth switching if you play a lot of games. If you're mostly switching for gaming then i5 4690K and you're set.
    If you plan on doing video rendering, editing, etc then get i7 4790K.
    Either way i5 4690K is an excellent CPU for gaming and everything else.
    There will always be something new coming out but not very soon and it's not gonna be much faster then what we have today.


    Ok, let's say I wanted to get the i7 4790k, it's decently priced, it's just as powerful, the only difference is 4 cores and a lot of mumbo-jumbo I don't understand. (maybe there's a big difference =P )

    Before someone yells at me about how cores work and why it's completely different etc.. I know that already, it's OK. My understanding is that Intel handles games that are CPU heavy. Both Ps2 and DayZ (games I play reg.) are CPU heavy. Is there someone that can CONFIRM that I would get the steady frames I'm looking for?
    i7 4790K has 4 more threads, hyper-threading and it's clocked higher.. not much else. If you're strictly going Intel for gaming then get i5 4690K and look no further.



    I do a lot of recording, video editing, rendering... Youtube and personal stuff. Photoshop, Sony Vegas. If I was to go Intel I'd rather have the better rendering power.
    Everything you just mentioned screams i7. I've had my i7 4770K for a year and few months now and it's been great. It's basically same as i7 4790K just clocked a little lower. I also use my PC for video editing, rendering, photoshop, youtube, etc and it stumps everything I throw at it.
  22. Whats the difference between the Devil's Canyon and the Hex core versions. I see that the devil's canyon has a higher clock, maybe the hex doesn't have integrated graphics, but the price difference is pretty small.
  23. Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    It's definitely worth switching if you play a lot of games. If you're mostly switching for gaming then i5 4690K and you're set.
    If you plan on doing video rendering, editing, etc then get i7 4790K.
    Either way i5 4690K is an excellent CPU for gaming and everything else.
    There will always be something new coming out but not very soon and it's not gonna be much faster then what we have today.


    Ok, let's say I wanted to get the i7 4790k, it's decently priced, it's just as powerful, the only difference is 4 cores and a lot of mumbo-jumbo I don't understand. (maybe there's a big difference =P )

    Before someone yells at me about how cores work and why it's completely different etc.. I know that already, it's OK. My understanding is that Intel handles games that are CPU heavy. Both Ps2 and DayZ (games I play reg.) are CPU heavy. Is there someone that can CONFIRM that I would get the steady frames I'm looking for?
    i7 4790K has 4 more threads, hyper-threading and it's clocked higher.. not much else. If you're strictly going Intel for gaming then get i5 4690K and look no further.



    I do a lot of recording, video editing, rendering... Youtube and personal stuff. Photoshop, Sony Vegas. If I was to go Intel I'd rather have the better rendering power.
    Everything you just mentioned screams i7. I've had my i7 4770K for a year and few months now and it's been great. It's basically same as i7 4790K just clocked a little lower. I also use my PC for video editing, rendering, photoshop, youtube, etc and it stumps everything I throw at it.



    Ok, what would you go for when looking at MOBO's? I don't need the bells and whistles just one that looks decent, low price, and does what it should.
  24. teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    It's definitely worth switching if you play a lot of games. If you're mostly switching for gaming then i5 4690K and you're set.
    If you plan on doing video rendering, editing, etc then get i7 4790K.
    Either way i5 4690K is an excellent CPU for gaming and everything else.
    There will always be something new coming out but not very soon and it's not gonna be much faster then what we have today.


    Ok, let's say I wanted to get the i7 4790k, it's decently priced, it's just as powerful, the only difference is 4 cores and a lot of mumbo-jumbo I don't understand. (maybe there's a big difference =P )

    Before someone yells at me about how cores work and why it's completely different etc.. I know that already, it's OK. My understanding is that Intel handles games that are CPU heavy. Both Ps2 and DayZ (games I play reg.) are CPU heavy. Is there someone that can CONFIRM that I would get the steady frames I'm looking for?
    i7 4790K has 4 more threads, hyper-threading and it's clocked higher.. not much else. If you're strictly going Intel for gaming then get i5 4690K and look no further.



    I do a lot of recording, video editing, rendering... Youtube and personal stuff. Photoshop, Sony Vegas. If I was to go Intel I'd rather have the better rendering power.
    Everything you just mentioned screams i7. I've had my i7 4770K for a year and few months now and it's been great. It's basically same as i7 4790K just clocked a little lower. I also use my PC for video editing, rendering, photoshop, youtube, etc and it stumps everything I throw at it.



    Ok, what would you go for when looking at MOBO's? I don't need the bells and whistles just one that looks decent, low price, and does what it should.
    Can I get your exact budget on the mobo?
  25. Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    It's definitely worth switching if you play a lot of games. If you're mostly switching for gaming then i5 4690K and you're set.
    If you plan on doing video rendering, editing, etc then get i7 4790K.
    Either way i5 4690K is an excellent CPU for gaming and everything else.
    There will always be something new coming out but not very soon and it's not gonna be much faster then what we have today.


    Ok, let's say I wanted to get the i7 4790k, it's decently priced, it's just as powerful, the only difference is 4 cores and a lot of mumbo-jumbo I don't understand. (maybe there's a big difference =P )

    Before someone yells at me about how cores work and why it's completely different etc.. I know that already, it's OK. My understanding is that Intel handles games that are CPU heavy. Both Ps2 and DayZ (games I play reg.) are CPU heavy. Is there someone that can CONFIRM that I would get the steady frames I'm looking for?
    i7 4790K has 4 more threads, hyper-threading and it's clocked higher.. not much else. If you're strictly going Intel for gaming then get i5 4690K and look no further.



    I do a lot of recording, video editing, rendering... Youtube and personal stuff. Photoshop, Sony Vegas. If I was to go Intel I'd rather have the better rendering power.
    Everything you just mentioned screams i7. I've had my i7 4770K for a year and few months now and it's been great. It's basically same as i7 4790K just clocked a little lower. I also use my PC for video editing, rendering, photoshop, youtube, etc and it stumps everything I throw at it.



    Ok, what would you go for when looking at MOBO's? I don't need the bells and whistles just one that looks decent, low price, and does what it should.
    Can I get your exact budget on the mobo?



    70 to ~150? Maybe that's too low I know the AMD one's are pretty cheap.
  26. teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    It's definitely worth switching if you play a lot of games. If you're mostly switching for gaming then i5 4690K and you're set.
    If you plan on doing video rendering, editing, etc then get i7 4790K.
    Either way i5 4690K is an excellent CPU for gaming and everything else.
    There will always be something new coming out but not very soon and it's not gonna be much faster then what we have today.


    Ok, let's say I wanted to get the i7 4790k, it's decently priced, it's just as powerful, the only difference is 4 cores and a lot of mumbo-jumbo I don't understand. (maybe there's a big difference =P )

    Before someone yells at me about how cores work and why it's completely different etc.. I know that already, it's OK. My understanding is that Intel handles games that are CPU heavy. Both Ps2 and DayZ (games I play reg.) are CPU heavy. Is there someone that can CONFIRM that I would get the steady frames I'm looking for?
    i7 4790K has 4 more threads, hyper-threading and it's clocked higher.. not much else. If you're strictly going Intel for gaming then get i5 4690K and look no further.



    I do a lot of recording, video editing, rendering... Youtube and personal stuff. Photoshop, Sony Vegas. If I was to go Intel I'd rather have the better rendering power.
    Everything you just mentioned screams i7. I've had my i7 4770K for a year and few months now and it's been great. It's basically same as i7 4790K just clocked a little lower. I also use my PC for video editing, rendering, photoshop, youtube, etc and it stumps everything I throw at it.



    Ok, what would you go for when looking at MOBO's? I don't need the bells and whistles just one that looks decent, low price, and does what it should.
    Can I get your exact budget on the mobo?



    70 to ~150? Maybe that's too low I know the AMD one's are pretty cheap.
    In that price range one of these will get every single job done.

    ASUS Z97-Pro Gamer

    ASUS Z97-A

    Gigabyte Z97X-Gaming 5

    Gigabyte G1.Sniper Z97
  27. Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    It's definitely worth switching if you play a lot of games. If you're mostly switching for gaming then i5 4690K and you're set.
    If you plan on doing video rendering, editing, etc then get i7 4790K.
    Either way i5 4690K is an excellent CPU for gaming and everything else.
    There will always be something new coming out but not very soon and it's not gonna be much faster then what we have today.


    Ok, let's say I wanted to get the i7 4790k, it's decently priced, it's just as powerful, the only difference is 4 cores and a lot of mumbo-jumbo I don't understand. (maybe there's a big difference =P )

    Before someone yells at me about how cores work and why it's completely different etc.. I know that already, it's OK. My understanding is that Intel handles games that are CPU heavy. Both Ps2 and DayZ (games I play reg.) are CPU heavy. Is there someone that can CONFIRM that I would get the steady frames I'm looking for?
    i7 4790K has 4 more threads, hyper-threading and it's clocked higher.. not much else. If you're strictly going Intel for gaming then get i5 4690K and look no further.



    I do a lot of recording, video editing, rendering... Youtube and personal stuff. Photoshop, Sony Vegas. If I was to go Intel I'd rather have the better rendering power.
    Everything you just mentioned screams i7. I've had my i7 4770K for a year and few months now and it's been great. It's basically same as i7 4790K just clocked a little lower. I also use my PC for video editing, rendering, photoshop, youtube, etc and it stumps everything I throw at it.



    Ok, what would you go for when looking at MOBO's? I don't need the bells and whistles just one that looks decent, low price, and does what it should.
    Can I get your exact budget on the mobo?



    70 to ~150? Maybe that's too low I know the AMD one's are pretty cheap.
    In that price range one of these will get every single job done.

    ASUS Z97-Pro Gamer

    ASUS Z97-A

    Gigabyte Z97X-Gaming 5

    Gigabyte G1.Sniper Z97


    I think the 'ASUS Z97 A' looks pretty sexy. Thanks for your help, I'll post back when I get more information about PS2 and my FPS problems. Good to know I have some components in mind in case I do decide to upgrade.

    Once again, thank you!
  28. teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    teapole said:
    Vici0us said:
    It's definitely worth switching if you play a lot of games. If you're mostly switching for gaming then i5 4690K and you're set.
    If you plan on doing video rendering, editing, etc then get i7 4790K.
    Either way i5 4690K is an excellent CPU for gaming and everything else.
    There will always be something new coming out but not very soon and it's not gonna be much faster then what we have today.


    Ok, let's say I wanted to get the i7 4790k, it's decently priced, it's just as powerful, the only difference is 4 cores and a lot of mumbo-jumbo I don't understand. (maybe there's a big difference =P )

    Before someone yells at me about how cores work and why it's completely different etc.. I know that already, it's OK. My understanding is that Intel handles games that are CPU heavy. Both Ps2 and DayZ (games I play reg.) are CPU heavy. Is there someone that can CONFIRM that I would get the steady frames I'm looking for?
    i7 4790K has 4 more threads, hyper-threading and it's clocked higher.. not much else. If you're strictly going Intel for gaming then get i5 4690K and look no further.



    I do a lot of recording, video editing, rendering... Youtube and personal stuff. Photoshop, Sony Vegas. If I was to go Intel I'd rather have the better rendering power.
    Everything you just mentioned screams i7. I've had my i7 4770K for a year and few months now and it's been great. It's basically same as i7 4790K just clocked a little lower. I also use my PC for video editing, rendering, photoshop, youtube, etc and it stumps everything I throw at it.



    Ok, what would you go for when looking at MOBO's? I don't need the bells and whistles just one that looks decent, low price, and does what it should.
    Can I get your exact budget on the mobo?



    70 to ~150? Maybe that's too low I know the AMD one's are pretty cheap.
    In that price range one of these will get every single job done.

    ASUS Z97-Pro Gamer

    ASUS Z97-A

    Gigabyte Z97X-Gaming 5

    Gigabyte G1.Sniper Z97


    I think the 'ASUS Z97 A' looks pretty sexy. Thanks for your help, I'll post back when I get more information about PS2 and my FPS problems. Good to know I have some components in mind in case I do decide to upgrade.

    Once again, thank you!
    It's not only sexy, it's a pretty beast of a motherboard and no problem. Do report with your problems or an upgrade :p
  29. The Z97-A is probably the best under 150.00 board for LGA 1150 out there. It actually has a few better features than the Hero or Gigabyte Gaming 3 and 5 boards do. A very solid, well recommended board with a good track record and highly configurable UEFI BIOS.

    That being said, if you have no plans to ever use a dual GPU configuration and/or are ok going with a locked i7 rather than a K series, you can use an H97 board, like the H97-Plus or H97 Anniversary, for nearly half the price, and be just as fine.


    Also, your Antec Neo Eco 620 is the same platform as the Seasonic S12II 620w, so it's a good unit. Unless it has an actual problem, I wouldn't worry about THAT.
  30. darkbreeze said:
    The Z97-A is probably the best under 150.00 board for LGA 1150 out there. It actually has a few better features than the Hero or Gigabyte Gaming 3 and 5 boards do. A very solid, well recommended board with a good track record and highly configurable UEFI BIOS.

    That being said, if you have no plans to ever use a dual GPU configuration and/or are ok going with a locked i7 rather than a K series, you can use an H97 board, like the H97-Plus or H97 Anniversary, for nearly half the price, and be just as fine.


    Also, your Antec Neo Eco 620 is the same platform as the Seasonic S12II 620w, so it's a good unit. Unless it has an actual problem, I wouldn't worry about THAT.


    Good to know, now if I do get Intel, all I really care about is getting one of those Intel Beanie hats. If I can't get one of those it's gunna break the deal =)
  31. Of course it is. Unfortunately, that deal has expired. I'd lobby Intel on the issue if I were you. I'm almost sure they'll listen.
Ask a new question

Read More

Games CPUs Intel Processors