Upgrading from FX 8350

Discussion in 'Intel Processors' started by vividshock, Oct 12, 2017.

  1. vividshock

    vividshock [H]Lite

    Messages:
    112
    Joined:
    May 31, 2014
    I picked up an i5 3570k + mobo so I can lower fan noise and heat from my R9 290x + FX 8320e (4.5ghz) set-up. Was this a wise decision since winter is coming to California and I relied on this set-up as a heater or is the performance jump on a 1080p 144hz freesync monitor (48-144) that much better that I should endure being cold?
     
  2. Araxie

    Araxie [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,657
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    may I ask why you picked that platform specifically? I won't even consider it an upgrade at all over an overclocked FX8XXX chip.. you need the same level of overclocking on the 3570K (4.5ghz+) to still be able to enjoy high amounts of FPS on modern games.. it will be noticeable quieter yes but I think the performance wont be so great to call it an upgrade, on some games it may even perform worse than the FX8320e you had.
     
  3. Dan

    Dan [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,720
    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    I went from a 8350 to a 3570k and I felt it was a much more smooth experience in games.
     
  4. Rashean700

    Rashean700 Gawd

    Messages:
    552
    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Seems more of a side step than upgrade imo....I’m not sure I understand the heat of the pc warming your house but I’ve used a 8320e and it was pretty cool under a wraith cooler in the summer for me.
     
  5. vividshock

    vividshock [H]Lite

    Messages:
    112
    Joined:
    May 31, 2014
    I overclocked mine to 4.5ghz @ 1.45v so I would constantly need my fans to run @ max. Anyways if any of you were in my shoes for 144hz freesync gaming would you stay with an FX 8350 or go with an i5 (both paired with a R9 290x). Obviously I'd go with an i5, but I wonder why anyone would go with the former.
     
  6. sabrewolf732

    sabrewolf732 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,556
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    A 3570k is substantially faster than the fx. People are nuts.
     
  7. Rashean700

    Rashean700 Gawd

    Messages:
    552
    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Yes it is as far ipc and every other way except when you can compare the 2 against each other. Either way it’s a complete side step what he currently has. Which he asked the question was this a smart move? Well no because your not gaining anything except 5-10 watts lower tdp pretty much overall.
     
  8. vividshock

    vividshock [H]Lite

    Messages:
    112
    Joined:
    May 31, 2014
    I don't think relying on synthetic benchmarks is a good way to gauge real-world performance; anyways to put into perspective a G3258 oced to 4.5ghz gave performance almost on par with FX 8350 (almost) and exceeded it greatly in games that only required 1/2 cores.
     
    sabrewolf732 likes this.
  9. sabrewolf732

    sabrewolf732 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,556
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    lolwut?

    I owned an fx. A 3570k will hit 4.2Ghz easily and will wreck the fx, especially in games, and use substantially less power. Fx is really a mediocre processor at best.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2017
    Speedeu4ia likes this.