Hey, I'm wondering which CPU would be best for running multiple (4+) simba RS color scripts and doing some work at the same time (Chrome, Word, CS6....). I was looking especially at these: AMD FX-6100 (six core, 95W TDP) AMD A10-5700k (quad core, 65W TDP) AMD A10-5800k (quad core, 100W TDP) Power consumption is quite a bit important for me, so I wonder if it would be better to pick the A10-5700k with the lowest TDP or pick one of the others and play with it a bit (undervolt, underclock..). Do you guys have any experience with these? Thanks for your answers
Assuming you have a AMD mobo and you're upgrading? If that's the case go for the 6100, though for same/similar price get the 6300 as it's newer and slightly improved. See 6300 vs 5800k comparison here - http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/699?vs=675
Well, I don't have an AMD mobo. I've realised that Intel CPUs just beat AMDs at most factors. AMD also tricks customers by their policy as their quad cores has worse performance than Intel's dual cores... So I've decided to buy Ivy Bridge i5 3470S as it's performance is one of the bests related to its cost and power consumption.
Depends which quad core, obviously an old q8200 may be outmatched by a AMD bulldozer quad core, but something like a 3570k will destroy equivalent AMD 4 core.^_^
Yeah I mean Ivy and Sandy bridge ones where the power consumption was improved. Basicly I'd say that AMD only rocks at graphics. You'll pay the price it's cheaper for electricity at same performance.
I'm not 100% on AMDs newest offering, but from a few months ago AMD graphics on the A8/10s is only better than equivalent intel such as g620. As soon as a graphics card is added intel is once again ahead.
Just get a i5 3570K. AMD's CPU's drain so much power and the processing power is bad. To run RS clients you need RAM more than processing power so get like 6-8GB so it's stable and you can run CS6. I got the 3570K over the six and eight core processors since I realised it would just be a big waste of money to spend extra and get minimal gains.
If the guy is using cs6, multiple bots, and shit, the processing power becomes really important. He will be utilizing every core. (Not to say that RAM isn't important in this setup)
AMD's advertised 6 cores are not in theory 6 cores at all. The 6 core AMD processor actually turns out to be a tri-core processor and the split stuff inside, all that tech savy crap and it manages out to become 6 cores. That same principle is applied to the 8core. If you look at benchmarks for CPUs the 3570K exceeds the 6 core processor that AMD has. If you want 'power' you can upgrade to an 2600K. Before you think I'm an intel fan, I'm not. Wheni built my computer I was looking to achieve performance and quality, after researching and getting opinions from many different sources I went with the 3570K over the fx-6100.
I have an AMD 8 core processor and it is the bomb. Intel isn't as optimized for graphics as AMD. AMD FX octo-core is the way to go.
Yeah but power consumption of these is nearly two times higher than Intel Ivy Bridge series. I'd probably go fot that if I didn't care about consumption.
MHz for MHz, Intels tend to be more capable when dealing with heavy processing applications such as number crunching, encoding, or editing. here's where it gets interesting though. If you have a half-ass graphics card which supports OpenCL and CUDA(in some circumstances this is used), then often times you will NEVER EVER EVER notice the difference between these two processors when doing such tasks. Why? because in programs like photoshop..it will automatically utilize your GPU for these processes. Since the GPU is FAR more capable of completing these tasks quickly, they get used primarily instead of your CPU for these things nowadays....and you don't even realize it. thus, you will have miniscule, if any at all, differences between an a10 or an i7 when running such programs if the GPU is being utilized instead. Now, one thing in which AMD's DO tend to perform far better than the intels do... is multi-tasking. having 8 physical cores instead of 4 w/hyperthreading is a large part of the reason for its excellence with multitasking, it's also a large part of the reason behind its power consumption. AMD's tend to show better performance than Intel's do when running HUGE amounts of programs at once, so long as neither setup runs out of physical memory.
