• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Quad Core vs Quad Core with HT?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
Don't hate the player, Zakarro. Hate the game. :p. Seriously though dude... since we're in the Intel forum I feel safe saying that in the midrange, high end, and enthusiast segments, Intel mops the floor with AMD. Out of 1,000,000 things you could do with your computer there are maybe 5,000 where FX 8 core is going to give you a (slightly) better experience than Intel. And most people don't do those things.

Yes it performs better in most scenarios but at a higher price.

For gaming 8350 is still best bang for buck.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8320+Eight-Core

Scroll down to CPU value, only the 8320 and 6300 beat it in value
 
Yes it performs better in most scenarios but at a higher price.

For gaming 8350 is still best bang for buck.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8320+Eight-Core

Scroll down to CPU value, only the 8320 and 6300 beat it in value

I could care less about price to performance ratios when we're looking at anything above low-mid range. I want a CPU that'll get the job done right. That's what matters to me. By your logic everyone should be buying the FX 6300 since it's the best "value" on that site. I just really disagree. And your comment doesn't line up with the evidence you present because you're saying the 8350 is the best bang for the buck when the site says the 6300 is the best bang for the buck.

I just don't know who you're trying to convince and what you're trying to convince them of here. We're in the Intel forums and you keep going "AMD! AMD!" I dun't git it mate.

Merry Festivus and Merry Christmas to you.
 
I'm not interested in overclocking the CPU, because the platform cost shoots up much more when you're paying an extra $20 for the unlocked multiplier, an extra $30-$50 for the Z-series board, and an extra $30 for an aftermarket heatsink. It seems a really inefficient way to spend one's money when on a budget. If budget wasn't a major concern of course I'd go with an unlocked CPU like an i7-5820k, but for a 60FPS target I haven't seen anything that indicates running a 4690k at 4.5GHz will give you much more performance than pinning a 4690 at its 3.9GHz turbo on all cores. Of course I'll overclock the video card a bit since that's usually the limiting factor in AAA games and since good aftermarket cards are pretty much designed to be OC'ed. But overclocking the CPU doesn't seem to be the best way to maximize performance while holding the amount spent fixed. Not when games are designed for much much weaker console APUs. I'd love to be shown wrong here about unlocked CPUs if I am though.
 
I'm not interested in overclocking the CPU, because the platform cost shoots up much more when you're paying an extra $20 for the unlocked multiplier, an extra $30-$50 for the Z-series board, and an extra $30 for an aftermarket heatsink. It seems a really inefficient way to spend one's money when on a budget. If budget wasn't a major concern of course I'd go with an unlocked CPU like an i7-5820k, but for a 60FPS target I haven't seen anything that indicates running a 4690k at 4.5GHz will give you much more performance than pinning a 4690 at its 3.9GHz turbo on all cores. Of course I'll overclock the video card a bit since that's usually the limiting factor in AAA games and since good aftermarket cards are pretty much designed to be OC'ed. But overclocking the CPU doesn't seem to be the best way to maximize performance while holding the amount spent fixed. Not when games are designed for much much weaker console APUs. I'd love to be shown wrong here about unlocked CPUs if I am though.

Nope you're totally right. With AMD you are very wise to OC due to terrible IPC performance (comparatively to Intel). With Intel you don't really need to OC. You won't notice the difference in games.
BTW I'm pretty darn sure that the 3.9Ghz Turbo you refer to is on 1 or 2 cores, not 4. Keep in mind that it is sometimes possible, if you get a decent chip, to pump a couple hundred Mhz extra out of the chip without really screwing with the voltage, allowing a small OC on the stock cooler. Never a bad idea to run an aftermarket cooler though. Even an "el cheapo" like the old Arctic Freezer 7 (got mine for $14 in 2011) is miles better than stock.

You can get "affordable" Z97 boards too. ASRock's Z97 Anniversary, which I have, is a very decent board IMO and usually comes in at or below $100 if you look around.
 
Nope you're totally right. With AMD you are very wise to OC due to terrible IPC performance (comparatively to Intel). With Intel you don't really need to OC. You won't notice the difference in games.
BTW I'm pretty darn sure that the 3.9Ghz Turbo you refer to is on 1 or 2 cores, not 4. Keep in mind that it is sometimes possible, if you get a decent chip, to pump a couple hundred Mhz extra out of the chip without really screwing with the voltage, allowing a small OC on the stock cooler. Never a bad idea to run an aftermarket cooler though. Even an "el cheapo" like the old Arctic Freezer 7 (got mine for $14 in 2011) is miles better than stock.

You can get "affordable" Z97 boards too. ASRock's Z97 Anniversary, which I have, is a very decent board IMO and usually comes in at or below $100 if you look around.

Aren't you able to manually set the multiplier for a locked Intel CPU to its highest turbo multiplier as long as your BIOS allows you to set the multiplier? I thought I read Ivy Bridge would always allow you to go up 4 extra on the multiplier, but that Haswell limited it to the highest turbo multiplier (so you could add 4 to the base multiplier on a 3.3/3.7GHz i5-4590 but only 2 on a 3.1/3.3GHz i5-4440).
 
Last edited:
Aren't you able to manually set the multiplier for a locked Intel CPU to its highest turbo multiplier as long as your BIOS allows you to set the multiplier? I thought I read Ivy Bridge would always allow you to go up 4 extra on the multiplier, but that Haswell limited it to the highest turbo multiplier (so you could add 4 to the base multiplier on a 3.3/3.7GHz i5-4590 but only 2 on a 3.1/3.3GHz i5-4440).

I have not heard this but it may well be true. I've never tried to OC a locked chip.
 
Aren't you able to manually set the multiplier for a locked Intel CPU to its highest turbo multiplier as long as your BIOS allows you to set the multiplier? I thought I read Ivy Bridge would always allow you to go up 4 extra on the multiplier, but that Haswell limited it to the highest turbo multiplier (so you could add 4 to the base multiplier on a 3.3/3.7GHz i5-4590 but only 2 on a 3.1/3.3GHz i5-4440).

Correct. I took my locked i5-2300 to 3.5 Ghz.

Simple set the max turbo multipliers to the highest they can go - 4 "bins" higher than stock turbo.
Example: i5-2300 has a max turbo of 31 (31x100=3.1Ghz) so the highest multiplier I can set was 35 (35x100=3.5Ghz)

You just need a "Z" based motherboard.
 
Correct. I took my locked i5-2300 to 3.5 Ghz.

Simple set the max turbo multipliers to the highest they can go - 4 "bins" higher than stock turbo.
Example: i5-2300 has a max turbo of 31 (31x100=3.1Ghz) so the highest multiplier I can set was 35 (35x100=3.5Ghz)

You just need a "Z" based motherboard.

I can set the multiplier on my H81 board, though I don't have a locked CPU to test it with. Oh well, I'll find out when I get my CPU. Even if I can't pin to the turbo multiplier I'll be going with a locked Intel quad-core.
 
I can set the multiplier on my H81 board, though I don't have a locked CPU to test it with. Oh well, I'll find out when I get my CPU. Even if I can't pin to the turbo multiplier I'll be going with a locked Intel quad-core.

Nope. You can't do sh*t on an H81 board.

I've tried. I actually unlocked the hidden BIOS options on my H81 board but I got nowwhere with it... :(
 
Nope. You can't do sh*t on an H81 board.

I've tried. I actually unlocked the hidden BIOS options on my H81 board but I got nowwhere with it... :(

You can't do anything on an i3, i5, i7, or Xeon? Because I can run my G3258 at 4.4GHz on that board.

9W9p1U3.png
 
I could care less about price to performance ratios when we're looking at anything above low-mid range. I want a CPU that'll get the job done right. That's what matters to me. By your logic everyone should be buying the FX 6300 since it's the best "value" on that site. I just really disagree. And your comment doesn't line up with the evidence you present because you're saying the 8350 is the best bang for the buck when the site says the 6300 is the best bang for the buck.

I just don't know who you're trying to convince and what you're trying to convince them of here. We're in the Intel forums and you keep going "AMD! AMD!" I dun't git it mate.

Merry Festivus and Merry Christmas to you.

My last post towards you, since this is intel part of forum I should stay out since I could care less about this company due to political issues. But judging by your attitude, I can see they already locked your christmas thread and what kind of person you are.
AMDs "terrible" IPC performance means nothing, its not a low end CPU. If we were getting 20 fps in modern games and benches then maybe you would be right. But yet again I posted the chart for a reason, show me one intel CPU that for the price of 8350 that can match it just PM me one please show me it, your talking to a pro A+ tech here man...... and please twisting my link around saying the hexacore is what we should all buy is ludicrous. THe meaning of the word value does not mean hey I just spent 1000$ on a new cpu lookie my benches. As they would say ggmkay thx addingn you to ignore since I can see you in the future being a problem. Btw once I get this thing OCed Ill compare benches vs your 2600k any day of the week :D Good bye. I should know better then to get into an intel amd debate, I just clicked this link not realizing it was the intel forums
 
You can't do anything on an i3, i5, i7, or Xeon? Because I can run my G3258 at 4.4GHz on that board.

9W9p1U3.png

Yeah that's 'cause it's unlocked :p

I was unable to do the Limited Overclock on my old i5 becasue the motherboard was A:)H81 and B:)OEM board.
Some H81's will allow OCing, but it's really up to the manufacture and Intel put a stop to that IIRC.
 
Yeah that's 'cause it's unlocked :p

I was unable to do the Limited Overclock on my old i5 becasue the motherboard was A:)H81 and B:)OEM board.
Some H81's will allow OCing, but it's really up to the manufacture and Intel put a stop to that IIRC.
OEM boards are sometimes decent, they usually rebrand them, I know cause I worked for 2 OEMs in the past. Unless its a Dell you might be able to flash to real bios
 
OEM boards are sometimes decent, they usually rebrand them, I know cause I worked for 2 OEMs in the past. Unless its a Dell you might be able to flash to real bios

It was some Acer board.

I still have it - just need to revive it after mining fried it.
 
Back