Need good i7 CPU or good AMD CPU

[You Silly Humans]

I want the most powerful i7 CPU, I have a max of 350 USD to spend. I am looking currently at the http://ark.intel.com/products/77781/Intel-Core-i7-4820K-Processor-10M-Cache-up-to-3_90-GHz?q=48 i7-4820K Processor as the most beast for the price, I would like some input if I am correct or not, thanks.

Also I am willing to go with AMD if there was something AMD could beat an intel i7 with at 350 dollar price range

[Mr Moopsy]

Rove님이 먼저 게시:

Basically that I think. For some sort of simulation sandbox Physx playground or a benchamrk the GPUs do it better but the CPUs do it good-enough.

IDK how that guy loads his 3930K @ 4.5 Ghz to over 70% because I can't load my FX 8150 @ stock 3.6 Ghz / 3.9 Ghz 8-core turbo / 3.9 Ghz 4-core turbo + 4.2 Ghz 4-core turbo over about 30% or so at very maximum doing things & games I commonly do and just leaving everything open in tabs and running (but only 1 game at a time cause otherwise Steam gets annoying). I can load if over about 50% if I open more than 10 modern and demanding games at once and leave them all open and running. Sometimes this does make a game crash though as they may have compatibility issues with the programming.

I typically never get over 10% in most new games. BF4 gets me 30% But, I modify settings and config files to get the most out of what I have in addition to heavy modding on older games. I also stream 1080p. But the 70% is from crysis 3 all maxed.
(also take into consideration number of gpu's number of monitors and resolutions also can affect cpu in varius ways)

Anyways, games are going to utilize 4 and 6cores much better this next gen.

As a side note on the consoles. can some1 quote that they can run physx because i am fairly certain they cant.

[You Silly Humans]

Mr Moopsy님이 먼저 게시:

Rove님이 먼저 게시:

Basically that I think. For some sort of simulation sandbox Physx playground or a benchamrk the GPUs do it better but the CPUs do it good-enough.

IDK how that guy loads his 3930K @ 4.5 Ghz to over 70% because I can't load my FX 8150 @ stock 3.6 Ghz / 3.9 Ghz 8-core turbo / 3.9 Ghz 4-core turbo + 4.2 Ghz 4-core turbo over about 30% or so at very maximum doing things & games I commonly do and just leaving everything open in tabs and running (but only 1 game at a time cause otherwise Steam gets annoying). I can load if over about 50% if I open more than 10 modern and demanding games at once and leave them all open and running. Sometimes this does make a game crash though as they may have compatibility issues with the programming.

I typically never get over 10% in most new games. BF4 gets me 30% But, I modify settings and config files to get the most out of what I have in addition to heavy modding on older games. I also stream 1080p. But the 70% is from crysis 3 all maxed.

Anyways, games are going to utilize 4 and 6cores much better this next gen.

As a side note on the consoles. can some1 quote that they can run physx because i am fairly certain they cant.

NVIDIA Announces PhysX Support for Microsoft Xbox One Game Console

NVIDIA announced its support today for the Microsoft Xbox One game console with its popular NVIDIA® PhysX® and NVIDIA® APEX® software development kits (SDKs).

Together, PhysX and APEX provide solutions for collision detection and simulation of rigid bodies, clothing, fluids, particle systems and more, across a wide range of platforms, including desktop PCs, game consoles, and mobile and handheld devices.

http://nvidianews.nvidia.com/releases/nvidia-announces-physx-support-for-microsoft-xbox-one-game-console-997.aspx

Is this what you're looking for?

[Mr Moopsy]

Yeah it was haha. They are opening arms a bit. But still, the physx acceleration is limmited to cuda and nvidia technology still. They are running the physx off the cpu.

Which like people have said is not terrible, nor incrediblly demanding but in general physix looks and works better off of the gpu.

You will also want at least 8gb ram in your system. 4 should be fine and has proven to work. But I cant exactly predict that 4 is going to be enough for future games.

[Jamebonds1]

I would getting i7-4820K base on your choose. It does require good power supply for LGA 2011

Take your time to watch this youtube to discover which one is better for you on i7 series.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATlYxYh4ApY

_I_님이 먼저 게시:

whats the main use?

if its for rendering and time = money, get the i7 4930 or 4960x

video editing or encoding, the i7 4770k will save alot of cash

for gaming, i5 4670k

FYI. there are almost no rending program that would take 6 core/12 thread. Video editing need rendering process too. It is way overkill for 6 core, unless it is larger file to like devepler for movie or video game. Most rending program are likely to take 4/6 core.

[_I_]

3dsmax and blender will use 6-12 cores

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-3820_7.html#sect0

if you want the work done faster, pay the premium for the high end 2011 cpus

[Jamebonds1]

_I_님이 먼저 게시:

3dsmax and blender will use 6-12 cores

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-3820_7.html#sect0

if you want the work done faster, pay the premium for the high end 2011 cpus

Still, that is overkill if it is not large file to render.

[Mr Moopsy]

Streaming, multitasking, rendering, encoding, games, you name it the x79 and 2011 chipsets more or less can do it all.