I'm with AMD at the moment, I personally prefer them. Not just because you get the better value for money, but because a lot of games are better supported on AMD.

What? I need sauce on the benchmarks showing it out-performing a 4670k, that sounds wrong.

-Mashiro wrote What? I need sauce on the benchmarks showing it out-performing a 4670k, that sounds wrong.

Sauce? haha i like the sense of humor. Do you mean a video? it was from tek syndicate.

Ubiquitous wrote I'm with AMD at the moment, I personally prefer them. Not just because you get the better value for money, but because a lot of games are better supported on AMD.

yes precisely, some of the games do support amd but not most. Like bf4 does, and honestly i think both cpus have a fair chance, but with mantle, it gives amd an edge.,

darkshadow1299 wrote

Ubiquitous wrote I'm with AMD at the moment, I personally prefer them. Not just because you get the better value for money, but because a lot of games are better supported on AMD.

yes precisely, some of the games do support amd but not most. Like bf4 does, and honestly i think both cpus have a fair chance, but with mantle, it gives amd an edge.,

Battlefield 4 performs better with amd GPU's ... not cpus

Ehh wrote

darkshadow1299 wrote

Ubiquitous wrote I'm with AMD at the moment, I personally prefer them. Not just because you get the better value for money, but because a lot of games are better supported on AMD.

yes precisely, some of the games do support amd but not most. Like bf4 does, and honestly i think both cpus have a fair chance, but with mantle, it gives amd an edge.,

Battlefield 4 performs better with amd GPU's ... not cpus

That's what I was thinking. Maybe he meant GPU? I know the new Kaveri APUs support mantle though, but he referenced an FX series chip in the OP. I don't know what to think.

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

Also, take a look at my Review of the 8320

All depends on your budget, games you will be playing, and if you want upgrade-ability in the future.

Id go with the 4670k or if you dont want to splash out, the i3-4330 then upgrade later

The Tek Syndicate video is widely known as one of the worst and most misleading comparisons. It's one of their (LOGAN'S) videos where they just throw out science completely and show that they really don't know what they're doing. In rare cases of more threads being MUCH more important than per-core performance, the 8320/8350 can pull ahead of the i5. In that case, you wanted the Xeon E3-1230 V3 in the first place for about the same price as the i5. The more-expensive CPU is faster than the cheaper one, not surprising.

Back to Tek Syndicate. For instance, recommending a power supply before properly testing it (which they are not equipped to do): [ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

Turned out that early RM-series units had a few serious issues that REAL reviews uncovered. HardOCP even failed the RM750: [ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

Go with the i5 if you're after game performance or a E3-1230 v3 as root suggested.