AMD FX-8150 vs Intel I7-2700k vs Intel i7-3820

9 replies [Last post]
MrGreen
Offline
Joined: 09/26/2009
Posts: 142

I know I haven't been here for like, 2 years, but now I'm back into computers with a serious question.

My father wanted to buy my computer, so in my haste, I purchased an AMD FX-8150 and an ASUS Crosshair Forumla V (along with other parts, but they aren't important) without looking at the 8150's benchmarks or reviews. I figured, "Hey, it's AMD's best, fastest CPU. It's bound to be better than my 2-year old i7 930 for 3d rendering, right?". I was wrong. Afterwards, I looked around at reviews and such and found it to be terrible when compared to the Intel CPU's that were within $100.

So, I have a question for you guys. Should I stick with my AMD FX-8150, for some unknown reason, or should I go with Intel again? And after that's answered, which would be better, the socket 1155 i7-2700k, or the new socket 2011 i7-3820? I've checked the reviews and they're about the same, the real question would be about the motherboard. Socket 2011 motherboards a pretty expensive, about $100 extra for the same features on a 1155 board. So with that in mind, should I get the 2700k or the 3820? A CPU is only as good as the motherboard will let it be.

Thanks a bunch, and your input would be very helpful.

[recap]
-Stick with the AMD (which is already at my house, along with my other parts)?
-Go with Intel i7-2700k or i7 3820?
-Which motherboard for each one? I'd like one with the new UEFI bios, if possible.

eire1274
eire1274's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/12/2003
Posts: 1135

The problem, as usual, isn't with AMD, it's with the software.

And I'm being very general here, so bear with me.

Windows 7 simply does not understand the new architecture. Period. And thus far Microsoft has made ZERO attempt to correct the sloppy multi-core multi-thread way that Windows schedules tasks. Getting into proper multi-threading applications that can actually utilize all 8 cores, and with an OS behind it that can handle it, makes the FX 8-core CPUs make more sense.

The i7 still shares the old style core type on a unified cache architecture, which AMD has abandoned with the release of the Bulldozer design. And there are good reasons to leave the old way, but the market isn't ready for it. Linux, under the latest kernel revisions, can handle the FX, but again only if the application can, as well. Intel's plans for the 2x4 (and potentially 2x6 and 2x8 designs, which AMD seems likely to release first anyway) won't be happening until after Windows 8. And Windows 8 understands the design.

I've already touted the changes in the FX Bulldozer design, and you can creep through the forum and find a bunch of stuff, but the idea is that the new system is simple: 4 X2 CPUs on one chip. Cache is relegated to a PAIR of CPU cores. But if the OS starts sharing tasks between unpaired cores, then the system slows down because the memory has to be copied and rewritten across the cache bus. But why break cache down like this? Simple: multiple cache buses, operating interdependently, can handle multi-task multi-threading more efficiently than one large combined cache.

So, for the time being, my advice would be to a) download Windows 8 Preview, and deal with it's unfinished state, b) run Linux, c) deal with it, or d) buy an i7, and send me your computer and I will deal with it.

Nick McDermott

matacks
matacks's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/16/2011
Posts: 49

I say keep the FX-8150 and just overclock the heck out of it. Put a nice CPU cooler on it of course. You should be pretty happy with the performance. While it's true intel has i7 chips that can get much better gaming performance without being pushed to extreme overclocks, the Bulldozer can hang with them when overclocked very high. It's also very good when it comes to tasks like video encoding. I think if your the type who uploads lots of video to youtube or does a lot of video enocding with Handbrake or similar software the 8150 is a good choice. uhhh, I'm no techie tho so I hope all thats accurate.

spawnkiller
spawnkiller's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/06/2012
Posts: 310

Yeah, AMD cpus are really good in Linux applications (that's support multithreads) but not in windows seven cause windows 7 doesn't realize that some core have the same cache as the other so copy in the cache 2-3-4 times unless it's using the same core... windows 8 will prove that AMD ""buldozer"" are in advance with the multitread cause it'll link the 2 CPU with the same cache to the same task... so no frame buffer and faster data read/write, 2 cpu on the same task but no need to write/read 2 times cause on the same cache... but for now win 7 realize that's 8 core but now from there cache memory so maybe core 1 is pair with 7 on that app however it'll be pair with the second to limit cache access but for now it's only a trial... Win 8 will be aware of that and i expect some major fight with 8 core/paired AMD architecture and 4/6 core unpaired/intel architecture and i know for sure that apps with multithread will benefit from 2 (same cached) CPU cuase it's double the time needed for rendering that ""demand"" when needed to resd 2 times from the cache in place of read it one times...

Gaming PC: MSI Z77A-G45 ::: Intel Core I7 3770k @ 4.83Ghz ::: EVGA GTX680SC Signature ~1300mhz Boost/7122mhz ram ::: 16GB 4*4gb G.Skill 2240mhz CL10 ::: ASUS Xonar DX ::: Crucial M4 128gb (windows) + Intel 330 180gb (Steam games) + 1TB Caviar Black (storage) ::: Cooler Master Silent Pro Gold M1000 ::: Antec P280 ::: Noctua NHU12P SE2 ::: ASUS VE247H ::: Logitech G510 ::: Cooler Master Storm Sentinel II ::: Logitech X530 ::: Steelseries Siberia V-2 Black & gold edition

98% Of people under 25 surround their minds with rap music, if you're part of the 2% that stayed with rock, put this in your signature, ROCK IS BETTER!

eire1274
eire1274's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/12/2003
Posts: 1135

Remember by the way that I don't prefer AMD or Intel. I am a geek of reason. Intel is working with industry development, so their new paired L1 core architecture that follows what the AMD Bulldozer introduced won't launch until after Windows 8. This is where desktop architecture is going, because as the clock rate has slowed, better coupling of nested cores is where we will be seeing the fastest development in speed.

Nick McDermott

Razz0r
Razz0r's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/17/2012
Posts: 28

I hope i'm not wrong but i heard some rumors that Microsoft allied with Intel , so if they did is pretty obvious why they made 0 attempts to fix the problems with the bulldozer architecture.

Manic Mouse
Manic Mouse's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/01/2007
Posts: 124

Or AMD could simply go WinTel's route ;)

Ah well, I'm happy with how my systems work. Some AMD, some Intel. All work just fine for me.

Mark Baker

Asus P9X79 Deluxe, Intel i7 3930K @4.5Ghz, 64gb G.Skill RipjawsZ 10-10-10-30 PC3-12800, Sapphire HD 7950 3GB, OCZ Vertex 4, Vertex 3, Intel 510 & Adata SSDs, wrapped in a CoolerMaster HAF XM case

Manic Mouse
Manic Mouse's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/01/2007
Posts: 124

Or AMD could simply go WinTel's route ;)

Ah well, I'm happy with how my systems work. Some AMD, some Intel. All work just fine for me.

eire1274
eire1274's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/12/2003
Posts: 1135

Razz0r wrote:I hope i'm not wrong but i heard some rumors that Microsoft allied with Intel , so if they did is pretty obvious why they made 0 attempts to fix the problems with the bulldozer architecture.

Old news. Microsoft and Intel have been in alliance since the 80's. However, Microsoft has been reasonably quick to add support for features for Cool'n'Quiet (via patch support with AMD), dynamic overclocking (which Intel now also supports feature-wise), and others. However, dynamic multitasking is unfortunately SUCH A VARIANCE with the kernel that it requires a LOT of programming to accomplish. The decision at MS headquarters was to skip a complete service patch for a small user base, and to embed the feature set into the newest upcoming version.

Nick McDermott

TeeBlack
TeeBlack's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/15/2012
Posts: 109

i would say the 2700k would be better at the moment.

You dont know me but that's the way i like it!