Processor help!

[TacticalGenius]

I'm in the process of planning my next PC, which is mainly for FM (and web browsing/iTunes at the same time). I've narrowed the CPU/GPU choice down to:

Intel i5-3570 & AMD HD-7750 1GB or

AMD FX-8350 & AMD HD-6670 1GB

Which will be better for FM?

Either way I'll be running it with 8GB Kingston DDR3-1600 RAM, 1TB HDD and Windows7 HP 64bit, in a coolermaster case.

[thomit]

It matters very little. But if I were you, I wouldn't plan a new pc now if it does not include Intel's new generation of processors (Haswell), arriving this summer.

[TacticalGenius]

I know the Haswell is coming, but as my PC is on its very last legs, I need to do something in the next couple of weeks at the very latest. I'm leaning towards the i5 and the better GPU, as most people recommend the i5 over the AMD for most applications, but Passmark has the AMD processor as superior. Just wanted a more informed opinion based on FM's needs.

[Piethief100]

Haswell will be on the shop shelves in just a few weeks, as the poster above said. It's slated down for an early June release date. Review sites are embargoed on their benchmarks right now, but rumours suggest it will offer a significant 10-15% performance increase on Ivybridge.

That said, if you still wish to push forward now, Tom's Hardware has a useful CPU comparison chart of the current CPU lineups:

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/cpu-charts-2012/-04-3DMark11,3157.html

[haunted1234]

between the 2 cpu's you listed there wont be any noticable difference to be honest, doesnt matter which one you buy

i would wait for haswell as well.

[TacticalGenius]

I'm currently using a Core2 Q8200 with 4GB DDR2-800 RAM and HD-4850 512mb GPU. I assume I should see a marked improvement in performance? I currently have a lot of 'not responding' during day to day processing on FM, even with priority on high and background processes minimalised.

[Wakers]

If Haswell is 10% better performance wise, then for gaming it makes absolutely zero difference. You should only wait if you're planning on upgrading soon and do media editing. For gaming it's totally pointless as any Sandybridge i5/i7 (let alone Ivy) aren't taxed by any games except those like Planetside 2 which are heavily CPU reliant. Even in those, Haswell will get you a couple of frames.

In this case, to answer OPs question, it depends how many cores FM can use. If it can use more than 4 threads, then the FX8350 will be significantly better for FM. If it can't, the i5 will be significantly better than the AMD.

[Wakers]

I'm currently using a Core2 Q8200 with 4GB DDR2-800 RAM and HD-4850 512mb GPU. I assume I should see a marked improvement in performance? I currently have a lot of 'not responding' during day to day processing on FM, even with priority on high and background processes minimalised.

I have that on my overclocked 2600K - it's a bug in the game, not down to PC performance. It happens anytime there's a fair bunch of fixtures. It will process them all, then get stuck for 5ish seconds.

But yes, you will see a big difference.

[Piethief100]

As I understand, the day to day computation in FM is done almost entirely by the CPU - so your GPU and RAM upgrade is largely irrelevant. Your question can therefore be boiled down to whether the 3570 or 8350 is a significant upgrade to the 8200. To give you some idea what you can expect, PassMark benchmarking places the q8200 at 2,846 whilst the 3570 garners 6,989 - rather a marked increase in performance. The 8350 manages a score of 9,143 in that test - whether that will translate into such a marked performance increase in FM is another question.

If it's the upgrade in general that you're having second thoughts over, I can say that I have a Q6700, roughly comparable to the Q8200, and I intend to upgrade to a Haswell i5-4670k when it's released - an upgrade that I think is long overdue.

If Haswell is 10% better performance wise, then for gaming it makes absolutely zero difference. You should only wait if you're planning on upgrading soon and do media editing. For gaming it's totally pointless as any Sandybridge i5/i7 (let alone Ivy) aren't taxed by any games except those like Planetside 2 which are heavily CPU reliant. Even in those, Haswell will get you a couple of frames.

In this case, to answer OPs question, it depends how many cores FM can use. If it can use more than 4 threads, then the FX8350 will be significantly better for FM. If it can't, the i5 will be significantly better than the AMD.

Careful giving this advice. I completely agree this is the case right now, but the new console generation means that PC gaming is likely to become much more power hungry from Christmas time. It's difficult to assess just how effective the Jaguar implementations will be, but personally I would exercise caution and not base your CPU decision on current game demands.

That's just me though. Whatever you get will likely be much more powerful that whatever ships in the next Xbox or PS4.

[haunted1234]

maybe someone with a 8 thread CPU could tell us if FM is using all threads at 100% while processing? if not the i5 should be a little quicker due to the overall better architecture of the chip

[Guest]

FM will utilises all available cpu cores when processing full detail matches, my i7 920 is regularly pushed to 100% processing loads over match weekends.

[Wakers]

As I understand, the day to day computation in FM is done almost entirely by the CPU - so your GPU and RAM upgrade is largely irrelevant. Your question can therefore be boiled down to whether the 3570 or 8350 is a significant upgrade to the 8200. To give you some idea what you can expect, PassMark benchmarking places the q8200 at 2,846 whilst the 3570 garners 6,989 - rather a marked increase in performance. The 8350 manages a score of 9,143 in that test - whether that will translate into such a marked performance increase in FM is another question.

If it's the upgrade in general that you're having second thoughts over, I can say that I have a Q6700, roughly comparable to the Q8200, and I intend to upgrade to a Haswell i5-4670k when it's released - an upgrade that I think is long overdue.

Careful giving this advice. I completely agree this is the case right now, but the new console generation means that PC gaming is likely to become much more power hungry from Christmas time. It's difficult to assess just how effective the Jaguar implementations will be, but personally I would exercise caution and not base your CPU decision on current game demands.

That's just me though. Whatever you get will likely be much more powerful that whatever ships in the next Xbox or PS4.

I'm not sure. The CPUs in the next consoles won't be anywhere near as powerful as current Intel quad core CPUs, they might just assign load differently to compensate. If that is the case, then developers will simply shift load appropriately for traditional PC instruction so it wouldn't make much difference anyway.

Plus the basic technology in Haswell isn't new, it's just improved. Intels will still be hexacore at the very most with hyperthreading. I don't think next generation games will max out a Sandy i7, for example.

[Wakers]

FM will utilises all available cpu cores when processing full detail matches, my i7 920 is regularly pushed to 100% processing loads over match weekends.

That's only hyperthreading, though. I don't think FM understands hyperthreading properly - If I look in task manager when FM is running it'll only use 4 cores at the most. It will use any of the cores 1-8 available, but never more than 4 at any one time. Whether that's because it can't or because it doesn't need to I'm not sure.

[Guest]

What I've found is that FM isn't great at using multiple core cpu's for anything other than full detail match processing, right now my game is processing through a period with no matches & the overall cpu load is at 15-20% with that work being spread over the 4 physical processors (h/t is only used for full detail match processing) of my i7 & most of the load being carried by just 2 of them.

If it wasn't for the fact that I run every competition in full detail my cpu would spend most of its time twiddling its thumbs & that's on a save that has every league from Europe & the Americas loaded.

Edit: I should add that one thing the OP appears to have overlooked is RAM, for me this is a crucial part of any FM rig as it can quickly become a bottle-neck & for my next build I will be ensuring that I focus on getting the highest quality component that I can afford.

[thomit]

Yes, all 8 threads on up to 100% load at certain times in the game. Depends on how many "active" leagues you're playing. Mostly though, it's on low load on 4 cores or threads. I know this because I have a widget up on my screen that shows me real time usage of all of my 4 physical and 4 logical cores of my Intel Core i7 920 processor, at all times. Your processor power definately have a big influence on the speed of FM's processing, no question about it.

[TacticalGenius]

Edit: I should add that one thing the OP appears to have overlooked is RAM, for me this is a crucial part of any FM rig as it can quickly become a bottle-neck & for my next build I will be ensuring that I focus on getting the highest quality component that I can afford.

8Gb DDR3-1600mhz Kingston Hyper-X Genesis RAM should be sufficient? It is mentioned in the first post. Can upgrade to 16GB in future if needed.

[Guest]

Completely missed that sentence. :o

[MUFC1981]

I have the amd trinity a10- black edition 5800k with 16gb ddr 3 ram (its using the on board radeon chip at the moment till i buy a new graphics card and it still flies through the game. im impressed. and thats on 42 leagues large database.

[TacticalGenius]

A new option is now available to me:

i7-3770 with 16gb DDR3-1333mhz RAM, integrated gfx. (Running Windows8 pro 64bit)

I know the RAM is slower and there is no discrete GPU, but is the additional RAM and better CPU worth it from a FM and multitasking point of view? I don't use 3D view and even if I wanted to, I have a HD4850 GPU available if I really needed it.

[Wakers]

How much is that costing? It's massive overkill.

[TacticalGenius]

All options cost between £580-600. I know it's overkill but I want a very fast system, that can run a good few leagues. I'm leaning towards the i7 option personally as I feel it would give me the best performance for playing FM while also having iTunes and several web tabs open.

[Wakers]

Yes it would, but be sure you don't want to play other games at some point, otherwise you'll need a new GPU, PSU and you'll void warranty when you open the case.

[TacticalGenius]

I've been told by several sources that adding a card will not void the warranty, as long as it isn't the card that causes a failure. But that aside, the i7-3770 with the 16gb of DDR3-1333mhz RAM is a better choice than the i5-3570 with 8gb DDR3-1600 RAM, yes?

[Wakers]

Yes it is - not sure about the warranty thing, check with wherever you buy it from. A lot of places put a warranty seal around where the case joins. PcSpecialist I know allow you to open the case and upgrade / tinker without voiding the warranty.

[TacticalGenius]

The i5 build is from PC Specialist, but the i7 is from Ebuyer.

[TacticalGenius]

Decided to have a play around on PC Specialist, and will be getting an i7-3770 with 8GB DDR3-1600 Kingston RAM, cooler master case and 450w psu, as well as windows 7 rather than windows 8.

I now know why the Ebuyer PC is cheap - it uses generic components for RAM, case, old motherboards and only a 300w psu. And it is made by zoostorm who have the worst customer service in the world bar none, from personal experience with my fiancé's laptop.

I see many good reviews for PC Specialist, so they seem like the best option... Anyone have any experience with them?

[Wakers]

Yea, you'll be fine. Don't get their standard PC Case though, it's awful from a technical standpoint, get the one that's about £10 more.

[TacticalGenius]

I'm going for the cooler master £35 case.

Thanks for your help.

[TacticalGenius]

One last question if anyone will indulge me...

Which hdd would be better for save/load/boot times:

a normal 1TB HDD (32mb cache, 7200rpm)

WD Caviar Black 500GB HDD (64mb cache, 7200rpm) (£8 more than above)

Seagate 500GB hybrid SSHD (64mb cache, 5400rpm) (£1 more than the WD HDD)

[Martvb60]

Hi TacticalGenius I bought my laptop from PCS and I have the Seagate 500 Hybrid and the Caviar Black 500 with the Seagate as the main drive that FM is installed on and I have no complaints at all highly reccommended as are PCS as somewhere to buy from.

Hope it helps

[TacticalGenius]

I'm going for the i5-3570 now, but with a 120gb SSD and p8h77-m motherboard rather than the i7-3770 and p8h61 mb because I feel a SSD and i5 will be better overall package than just an i7.

Just need them to get the motherboard and 500gb secondary HDD in stock then I'll be ordering!

[haunted1234]

might never get in stock anymore though, all stores already switching to haswell

[TacticalGenius]

might never get in stock anymore though, all stores already switching to haswell

Yes I've noticed PC Specialist have the Haswell processors now, so I'm planning on ordering a i5-4570 with 8GB RAM and a 120GB SSD (+1TB storage drive) . Just hope they don't run out of parts before I place my order on Tuesday. Will use the integrated HD4600 graphics while my bank balance recovers, then may add a cheap discrete card, something like a Radeon HD-7750.

[haunted1234]

edit:

nevermind, probably better

[Wakers]

Yes I've noticed PC Specialist have the Haswell processors now, so I'm planning on ordering a i5-4570 with 8GB RAM and a 120GB SSD (+1TB storage drive) . Just hope they don't run out of parts before I place my order on Tuesday. Will use the integrated HD4600 graphics while my bank balance recovers, then may add a cheap discrete card, something like a Radeon HD-7750.

If the Haswells are more than £20 more expensive than the Ivy's, you're paying for nothing. There's very little performance difference unless you do extremely intensive work (video encoding, workstation etc) - and even then the difference is about +10% AND they're apparently much harder to get a stable overclock without a very good motherboard.

[Guest]

I shall be keeping an eye out for any price drops on the IvyBridge range, about time I upgraded from my 4 year old Bloomfield i7 & my timing could be excellent. Anything less than a £50 difference & I'll be going for the Haswell on the basis that the HD 4600 graphics will offset the difference in the short-term.

As you rightly point out, on a pure cup performance perspective there appears to be very little difference which is not entirely surprising.

[TacticalGenius]

Buying through PC Specialist, there seems to be around a £65 price difference between the i5-3570 and the i5-4570, using the cheapest motherboard (P5H61 and Z87M) for each as a guide. The MB for the Haswell does have SATA3 rather than SATA2 though, and generally seems like a better board, so is probably also increasing the price somewhat.

[Wakers]

If they're removing Sata3 boards from anything but Haswell CPU configurations that scandalous

Sata3 has been standard for almost 4 years now!

[TacticalGenius]

Other boards have SATA3, just not the cheapest ivy bridge one.

[haunted1234]

if you gonna go for the haswell, look out for the newest model of power supply, since haswell is all about saving energy the "older" power supplys might not support the very low end of what haswell is using while idle mode, that can cause instability for the computer

[TacticalGenius]

if you gonna go for the haswell, look out for the newest model of power supply, since haswell is all about saving energy the "older" power supplys might not support the very low end of what haswell is using while idle mode, that can cause instability for the computer

Newest model? All I know is that it is a FSP 450w 80PLUS dual-rail with 120mm fan.. I doubt PC Specialist would use substandard parts - all their reviews say they use quality parts.

As far as I'm aware, 80Plus is an energy efficiency rating given to the better PSU's, so I assume that it will fulfil the needs of Haswell?

[haunted1234]

i dont know

maybe check out this

http://www.fsplifestyle.com/news.php?LID=1&SN=111

is your power supply on the list?

[TacticalGenius]

By all accounts, it seems this 'Haswell specific PSU' thing is just scaremongering - practically any decent PSU will be fine. Also:

"Among other improvements of Intels latest Core Processors, power consumption in idle mode has been greatly reduced from around 6W to less than 1W. This might cause some older power supplies to shut the system off when the CPU enters idle mode, or prevent the system from waking up out of sleep mode. To our knowledge all mainboard vendors will disable this advanced power saving mode by default, and no customer upgrading to Haswell should experience any issues whatsoever."

[nine_iron]

Its very tricky to get a pre built system just for FM, they often have many things we don't need or have some money saving components to make it look like a bargain.

I would try and get a barebones system + RAM and then, if its for FM only, buy a second hand graphics card off eBay and stick it in. Just try and get one that has come from a system where it has not been pushed much. Failing that go for one of the fanless cheaper underclocked cards that can be bought cheaply new. As long as your case has decent cooling it should be fine. http://www.scan.co.uk/products/1gb-asus-hd-6450-silent-1200mhz-gddr3-gpu-625mhz-160-stream-processors-d-sub-dvi-d-hdmi

[TacticalGenius]

I've just ordered my PC through PC Specialist:

Intel i5-4670 'Haswell' (3.4GHz, 6MB cache)

ASUS Z78-A motherboard

8GB Kingston HyperX Genesis DDR3-1600 RAM

120GB Sata 3 SSD (for Windows/FM mainly)

1TB Sata 3 HDD (7200RPM) (storage drive)

FSP 450w 80PLUS PSU (estimated system TDW is 228w)

Coolermaster Elite 311 case

Windows 7 HP 64bit

Will run on integrated graphics (Intel HD4600) until I can afford to add a graphics card, unless I decide that the integrated graphics are good enough for what I need.

Thanks to everyone who gave advice.

[Siven]

If youve never had an SSD before, you will be amazed at how quick Windows and all your start apps load compared to your old HDD.

I got my first SSD a month ago and it fantastic. Also the fact you can use the HDD for games, documnets and storage is great for if you ever need to reinstall windows etc as you wont need to install/backup that HDD.

Wont affect games (or FM) that much unless it loads a lot like an MMO or Skyrim.

But yer, nice looking system.

Curious what monitor you have also actually. Playing FM on a 24" widescreen at 1920x1080 res is wonderful with how much info you have onscreen.

[TacticalGenius]

I'm new to the SSD revolution. I'm genuinely excited, from what I've seen from boot tests on youtube! I'll be installing FM on the SSD for fast saving/loading as well as maybe iTunes (though maybe storing the music folder on the HDD if possible). I like to keep a clean PC anyway - my current PC is only using 211GB of the 1TB HDD after 4-5 years of use. I'd have gone for a 500GB second HDD but it was out of stock and I need my new PC asap.

I'm using a 22" 1920x1080 monitor. It's brilliant for FM, which is the main reason I upgraded to it last year.

[nine_iron]

I'll be installing FM on the SSD for fast saving/loading

Ive been using SSDs since 2008 and I would advise against this. I would put everything bar the operating system and any programs that HAVE to go on the same drive as the OS on the SSD. Everything else should go on the HDD including your "My Documents", "My Music", "My Downloads" etc. FM saves can get pretty big and you DO NOT WANT that level of wear on an SSD.

Also turn off hibernation and system recovery, if you do not the above and a few other good practice procedures you will wear out and ruin your expensive SSD, I have killed two because I did not care fore them, don't make the same mistakes!

When installing ANY program make sure you set its install location from C: to the drive for your HDD. Firsly you will save space on your SSD and secondly you will wear the SSD less.

The ONLY programs on my SSD apart from the OS and the mandatory OS drive programs are flight sims and large sandbox games that need the speed to load objects & world from the drives. Every other game (using steams new feature for installing over multiple drives) is on the HDD. Also DON'T install Steam on the SSD as some games HAVE to be on the same drive as Steam and doing so would waste space on the SSD.

Pretty much do everything you can to keep your SSD in good working order and it will reward you handsomly, don't and it will become slow and eventually die. I speak from experience and from the experience of others who have said this all before to me and I did not listen!

[borobadger]

My PC specs are:

AMD Phenom II X6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHz

with 4gb of RAM and a 64-bit OS

To be honest I'm not too sure whether it is any good or not, it runs FM ok but lately I've been having some not responding issues, so if anyone can let me know if it is much use it would be appreciated. Thanks

[nine_iron]

My PC specs are:

AMD Phenom II X6 1055T Processor 2.80 GHz

with 4gb of RAM and a 64-bit OS

To be honest I'm not too sure whether it is any good or not, it runs FM ok but lately I've been having some not responding issues, so if anyone can let me know if it is much use it would be appreciated. Thanks

I would suggest hijacking a thread and starting your own is the best practice but we have so many "will my/this PC play FM" threads already...

I would suggest using a CPU comparison chart to compare to someones you know works, http://www.cpu-world.com/benchmarks/ is an OK example but no the best, maybe try http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php

I compared mine and yours, my i7 920 is overclocked to 3.8 and I run the game beautifully. I never seem to wait for anything (apart from saving and loading which I actually do across a network to a NAS drive) and I am running off an ancient HDD with my OS only on the SSD.