This video is brought to you by our trusted graphics partner
NVIDIA. Welcome to part two of our 3570K
versus 8350 testing. So, just to
reiterate, we've already done no anti-aliasing on a number of popular
games. Now, what we've decided to do is crank up the details. Now, any of the
games where the maximum presets were already factoring in high anti-aliasing
settings, those ones you're going to discover actually haven't changed.
Whereas everything else, what we're doing is we're taking our GTX 660Ti,
which is the card we're using for our standard test bench, and we are taxing
it. So, we're looking at sort more of
the GPUbound scenario. What happens to
the CPU in this situation? Because a lot
of the hubbhub right now is the 8350,
which is an 8 core processor. So, we're running that on a Crosshair 5 formula.
The 8350 is a very legitimate choice for
a gaming platform if you're running at realistic settings. Now, of course, you
could all day we could run Quake 3 flybys and uh you know, time how long it
takes to run and run at 640x480 and that
would really separate out the singlethreaded CPU performance of every
chip on the market. But it's not realistic. So, that's why we're taking
this this realistic approach where we have two identical test platforms. In
fact, it's this test platform except over there. So, we're running uh the
8350 overclocked to 4.6 GHz. We're
running our 3570K overclocked to 4.4 GHz. The reason we chose those numbers
was that we wanted something that is realistically attainable by you like 99%
of the time. So, almost anyone running these chips can reach those frequencies
with guides that have actually been published in videos that I've done in the past. So, there's really no excuse
for not being able to do that. Um, so that's why we ran at those settings.
We're running 8 gigs of Mushkin uh,
whatever it's called, blackline memory, 1600 MHz CL9. Nothing special about it.
We're running a 128 gig Vertex 4 SSD and
Republic of Gamers motherboards for both platforms. Some in-win power supply that
doesn't really affect performance in any meaningful way. And we're liquid cooling
the CPUs using an H100 from Corsair just
so that we get good stability at those overclock settings. So let's start with
Metro 2033. In Metro 2033, the 3570K
really pulls ahead of the 8350. So this is on the high preset with an isotropic
filtering at 16x and anti-aliasing at 4x. Our next one is dirt 3. And in Dirt
3, we see the same situation where the 3570K pulls ahead by about 10%. So, this
is out actually. Yeah, this is a tangible win, but not something you're
actually going to feel when you're playing the game itself. In Skyrim, we
see another victory for the 3570K.
However, it should be noted that in Skyrim, we're running 18 aftermarket
mods from the Steam Workshop, and we're not sure how those affect any
optimizations that are made on a platform byplatform basis. So, it's
possible that our particular Skyrim setup is inherently runs better on
Intel, and unfortunately, there's not really a whole lot we can do about that.
Up next, we've got Battlefield 3, where the FX8350 actually comes out ahead.
Now, Battlefield 3 was one of the first really multi-threading aware AAA gaming
titles that you started to see a tangible benefit with more cores. So
FX8350 doing well here actually makes a lot of sense because it is clocked a
little bit higher. Did I say 4.4 GHz for the 3570K? Because what I meant was 4.2.
Sorry about that guys. So what we see here is that with its higher frequency
and the fact that it's multi-threading aware, it does really well. So we're
running um four times MSAA
anti-aliasing. Next up we've got Crisis
3. So, this is one of the ones where there's been a lot of discussion about
how Crisis 3 is heavily multi-threading aware and I've seen I've even seen
proclamations that the 8350 just, you know, wrecks the
3570K, but those seem pretty isolated
and uh the most of the data out there seems to support our conclusion, which
is that the 3570K ees out a victory
here. It's not by much. It's only by about 10%. But that for all intents and
purposes, they are very close in performance. And I mean, uh, okay, we're
going to move on to our last benchmark here, which is that's not our last one.
Um, yeah, they're very close in terms of performance. So, we're not really seeing
the whole huge difference in performance um, favoring the 8350. Far Cry 3 is a
different situation with the 8350 winning by 10%. Now, the weird thing is
both of these games are based on Cry Engine 3. So, it looks like whatever
individual optimizations the game developers have put into their their
titles, um, for whatever reason, one of
them favors AMD more than the other one does. So, it tells us a couple of
things. Number one, Crisis 3 doesn't necessarily run better on AMD, but
number two, Cryine 3 can. Starcraft 2,
we're including just kind of for lols, but Intel runs away with this one. And
Starcraft 2 seems to be heavily singlethreaded performance dependent.
And our last title is Crisis 2. So not
Crisis 3, Crisis 2, where we see a very similar story to Crisis 3 with the 3570K
coming out by about out ahead by about 10%. So what does all this mean? Like
what CPU should you actually buy? Because remember guys,
3570K doesn't have hyperthreading. So, when you have a heavily threaded
workload, say for example, you're doing video rendering, 3D rendering, um, heavy
heavy Photoshop use, where you're going to be able to take advantage of those
multiple cores, the 8350 may actually be
a better choice for you because the 3570 is quad core and the 8350 is four
bulldozer modules, each of which is kind of like a core and a half. So, you're
going to have just more horsepower, more
oomph to throw at heavily multi-threaded applications. With that in mind, I don't
know what you're gesturing. We have three minutes left in the video. Oh,
okay. Uh, with that in mind, the 3570K does pull ahead in the
singlethreaded heavy applications and does run cooler and does consume less
power. So, depending on how much power costs in your particular area, that may
be a factor for you. But it should be noted that you're looking at probably a
few dollars a year um in terms of the
actual power difference depending again on how much power costs in your area.
Here in BC, Canada, it's cheap. So, it's not something that we think about nearly
as much as if you lived say for example in California where it can be very
expensive. So, I think that pretty much wraps it up. They're both viable gaming
platforms. At the end of the day, you have to look at the results. Go, okay, this is the average FPS. Am I going to
notice the difference between 5 FPS or 3 FPS or 10 FPS here and there? If you
think you will, go for whichever one comes out on top. And if you think you
won't, then go for whichever one is going to serve you better as an overall
platform. Thanks for checking out this video on Linus Tech Tips. As always,
don't forget to subscribe.