Hi I've got two gaming PC builds here. I'm looking for input about which one is better. They are both around the same price £1400 ish..They have the same guts, apart from the ROG mother boad one is for AMD and the other is the the new intel IVY bridge. The only other difference is one is AMD CPU and the other is Intel CPU. I'm not sure of which one will be better or worse or if thy are just about that same. I'd love to know which one you guys think is better and why. INTEL BUILD: Processor (CPU) Intel® Core™i5 Quad Core Processor i5-3570K (3.4GHz) 6MB Cache Motherboard ASUS® MAXIMUS V GENE: M-ATX, INTEL Z77 ROG MOTHERBOARD Memory (RAM) 8GB KINGSTON HYPERX GENESIS DUAL-DDR3 1866MHz X.M.P(2 x 4GB KIT) Graphics Card 3GB AMD RADEON™ HD7970 - DVI,HDMI,2 mDP - DX® 11, Eyefinity 4 Capable Memory - 1st Hard Disk 1TB WD CAVIAR BLACK WD1002FAEX, SATA 6 Gb/s, 64MB CACHE (7200rpm) 2nd Hard Disk 120GB KINGSTON HYPERX 3K SSD, SATA 6 Gb/s (upto 555MB/sR | 510MB/sW) 1st DVD/BLU-RAY Drive 24x DUAL LAYER DVD WRITER ±R/±RW/RAM Power Supply CORSAIR 650W ENTHUSIAST SERIES™ TX650 V2-80 PLUS® BRONZE Processor Cooling SPIRE THERMAX ECLIPSE II UNIVERSAL DT EXTREME CPU COOLER Sound Card ONBOARD 6 CHANNEL (5.1) HIGH DEF AUDIO (AS STANDARD) Network Facilities 10/100/1000 GIGABIT LAN PORT - AS STANDARD ON ALL PCs USB Options 6 x USB 2.0 PORTS @ BACK PANEL (MIN 2 FRONT PORTS) AS STANDARD VS AMD Build: Processor (CPU) AMD BULLDOZER EIGHT CORE FX-8150 (3.60GHz/8MB CACHE/AM3+) Motherboard ASUS® CROSSHAIR V FORMULA: AM3+, 3-WAY SLI/CROSSFIREX, ROG Memory (RAM) 8GB KINGSTON HYPERX GENESIS DUAL-DDR3 1866MHz X.M.P(2 x 4GB KIT) Graphics Card 3GB AMD RADEON™ HD7970 - DVI,HDMI,2 mDP - DX® 11, Eyefinity 4 Capable Memory - 1st Hard Disk 1TB WD CAVIAR BLACK WD1002FAEX, SATA 6 Gb/s, 64MB CACHE (7200rpm) 2nd Hard Disk 120GB KINGSTON HYPERX 3K SSD, SATA 6 Gb/s (upto 555MB/sR | 510MB/sW) 1st DVD/BLU-RAY Drive 24x DUAL LAYER DVD WRITER ±R/±RW/RAM Memory Card Reader INTERNAL 52 IN 1 CARD READER (XD, MS, CF, SD, etc) + 1 x USB 2.0 PORT Power Supply 600W Quiet 80 PLUS Quad Rail PSU + 120mm Case Fan Processor Cooling TITAN FENRIR EVO EXTREME HEATPIPE CPU COOLER Sound Card ONBOARD 8 CHANNEL (7.1) HIGH DEF AUDIO (AS STANDARD) Network Facilities 10/100/1000 GIGABIT LAN PORT - AS STANDARD ON ALL PCs USB Options 6 x USB 2.0 PORTS @ BACK PANEL (MIN 2 FRONT PORTS) AS STANDARD Also, the power supply is what was recommended for the wattage of the entire machine. Thanks guys
AMD have always compared to Intel the same way. They are a little bit faster but alot hotter and power hungry.
Intels are apparently more reliable (although I ran an AMD music rig for 8 years with no problems)
I currently run an i7 2600k machine for video editing and the chip is phenomenal, I don't even have a graphics card. (I use the i7 built in graphics, not an option for gaming)
I'd recommend the Intel.
given that you could build your same system with a much cheaper AM3 chip, and upgrade it when the bulldozer becomes more competitive.
quad/hex/8 core CPU are mostly lost on gaming, most applications are not written for multicore.
the SSD should be HDD #1 with your OS
In general, a processor's core count doesn't impact gaming performance, as long as you're talking about current dual-core or higher models. Old single-core processors from 2005 and earlier fall into a completely different category and aren't part of the discussion.
For gaming purposes, Intel processors are better than AMD on a pure performance basis. And for the past 2 years, Intel wins on value (price/performance) as well. Even Intel's $128 Core i3 2120 outperforms all of AMD's processors in most game titles.
Only one game in existence use more than 4 cores (Civilization 5), and over 90% of games are coded to only utilize 2-3 cores. That includes the latest and most demanding games like BF3, Skyrim, Starcraft 2, MW3, Metro 2033, Crysis etc.
So for gaming, 6-core and 8-core processors don't provide any advantage over 4-core processors. What matters is how fast/efficient a processor's cores are, not how many cores it has. Moreover, AMD's new FX processors are optimized more for media editing/encoding tasks- the FX line has weaker gaming performance than the older Phenom II X4/X6 line.
Bruvannorf is incorrect- the FX-8150 is a true 8-core processor, not a hyperthreaded quad-core with 4 physical and 4 virtual cores (that description fits Intel's Core i7, not Core i5).
Anyway, on a clock-for-clock basis Intel CPUs are more powerful. They can perform more work every cycle, so they're effectively much faster than AMD processors clocked at the same speed (Ghz). Here's the comparison in gaming:
Head-to-head vs the Core i5 2500K (gaming benchmarks towards the bottom)
The new Core i5 3570K is about 8-10% faster than the Core i5 2500K, making it the new king of gaming CPUs. While Core i5/i7 have almost identical gaming performance, Core i5 costs $100 less, leaving you with more cash to spend on your graphics card, which is the most important component in any gaming build. The 2-3 fps you'd gain from a Core i7 are dwarfed by the fps you gain from a $100 more expensive graphics card.
Speaking of your graphics card, the Radeon HD 7970 is a powerful card, but it's been surpassed by the GeForce GTX 680 (which is out of stock almost everywhere, because everyone wants one). About the only reason to pick a 7970 is availability. But if you've got the option to get a GTX 680 instead, do it.
*** Update ***
Oh, and I agree... in your build the SSD should be your primary/boot drive where Windows is installed, and your regular HDD should be secondary. The conventional HDD that's where you'll install your games, applications and store large data files.
A 650W Corsair PSU is fine for your build. I'd recommend 750W to give yourself some breathing room and to allow for better operating efficiency. But you don't need to go higher unless you're planning to upgrade via SLI or Crossfire in the future.
AMD processors USED TO offer better value than Intel. While their CPUs weren't as powerful they were close enough, and much less expensive. You could get 85-90 percent of the performance for 60 percent of the price. But that's in the past... the Core 2 Duo/Quad vs Phenom II X3/X4 era and earlier. The release of Core i3/i5/i7 processors in 2008 put Intel far ahead on performance. And since the introduction of Sandy Bridge processors, Intel has better bang/buck, too.