Which is better, this or the 3820? I don't plan to overclock and debating which to get.
1490921
LGA2011 is better ONLY if: - you need 64GB RAM - you need triple/quad-SLI/CF - you run extremely memory-bandwidth intensive programs - you run massively threaded programs that can leverage a hex-core/12-thread CPU For 99% of people, LGA2011 is overkill and completely useless since mainstream applications and games have no use for the extra cores, memory or memory bandwidth.
142800
If you don't see any incompatibilities, it should be ok. Just look at the changes they may have made and see if you care about any of them. They usually have better overclocking and support for more memories.
1211500
No there is not a real noticeable difference because the older 970 had 6 cores and the newer 4820 is a beefed up higher frequency 4 core cpu. Dale Poston, A1MC.net, A1 Mobile Computer.
232796
The G3258 has the ability to be overclocked, i.e. run at speeds more than it base speed of 3200MHz. Also its base memory speed is only 1333MHz. If you do not overclock it, it is slightly slower than the G3420 with the faster memory. All the other unlocked (over clocking) CPU's have a "k" suffix, don't know why Intel did not for the inexpensive G3258. The G3420 does not have the ability to be overclocked, runs at it locked speed of 3200Mhz but can work with faster 1600MHz memory. I suggest the G3420, unless you have a motherboard that makes it easy to set up overclocking and are willing to purchase a better fan heat-sink assembly for additional CPU cooling.
621378
I also read the nearly 100% positive reviews on the AMD Phenom II x4 965 AM3, and chose it for that reason. I have learned over the years, newer is NOT always better and sometimes the more expensive, even by the same company, may not be superior. I like this CPU very much so far, but I did purchased a larger cooling fan as the one that comes with it was small, loud and not very good at cooling this high heat producing CPU. Good luck!
1923400
I'd go with the 8350 for sure, it's at a great price right now and is pretty good for gaming and over clocks like crazy, just needs a quality cooler.
157963
The other difference would be that it comes with a factory overclock. I can't remember exactly what the difference is, but this model, because of the stock overclock and the ability to overclock due to the upgraded cooler, performs closer to the GTX Titan than it does to the stock 780. I have mine clocked at 1200 MHz, which is something like 350 MHz faster than the stock 780. IMO, it's worth the price difference. Plus, I've had EVGA cards in the past, and they have all performed really well.
834191
i RETUIRNED THE 4790 because it ran to Hot, I'm very satisfied with the 4770. Just install as much RAM as you can affordHave FunChuck
168675
My last self-built PC was for running that Windows 3.1 so please let me ask this stupid question: for $20 more to get 10+% clock speed does it make any big different? Would this 03G-P4-2883-KR generates more heat (and fan noise) than 03G-P4-2881-KR? I am shopping this for my teen son's xmas surprise first power game PC, so please help. Any recommendations for the ultimate matching motherboad/CPU pair up? Thanks guys!
863582
If you're a gamer go with the 980. If you do scientific double precision computations go with the Titan.
1317421
The biggest improvement is in the TIM (thermal interface material) which will improve temp's, resulting in a better overclock. Many enthusiast replaced the TIM on the 4670K's and lowered their temps by 10-20*C. I haven't seen any benchmarks published but I would be surprised if there's more than 5% improvement on any of the test. Also, there is an improvement on the integrated graphics.
274088
The stock heatsink and fan that comes with the cpu works fine for me and I have it installed in one of those very compact htpc cases (Antec ISK-100) over a year now. This processor is NOT the overclocked version which is usually called the (K) model so I don't see why it would be necessary to have a third party state of the art heatsink and fan. I guess if you purchased the overclocked cpu version of this processor and planned on pushing it to the limits then I would recommend finding a much better heatsink and fan unit over the stock model. I have a really nice and expensive Cool Master heatsink and fan unit on a desktop computer and I don't see any difference in performance or heating issues over the stock heatsink and fan with the exception of more noise that the Cool Master makes because of it's larger and faster fan. I'm sorry to say, I was once bitten by the performance bug when building that ole desktop and should have just saved the money and go stock instead.
182962
It is better, unless you specifically need to overclock. I get the feeling that the added threads are more useful than a couple ghz, but it depends on what you want to do, and how much price matters to you.
937444
I wouldn't suggest overclocking with the stock heatsink I've always read that it is unsafe. You void warranty by overclocking so I personally wouldn't risk it.
816917
Yes, perfectly. Been running the FX-8320 in this mb for morre than 2 years. It does use more powwr than a similar benchmarked Quad i5 (2500K). About 10 watts more on average. So if you plan on using it in a Media Center PC or something running all the time you'll pay a bit more in electricity. However the upfront cost savings on the AMD was $50 less than the i5 at the time. There might be a largr delta in price now, the i5's seem to have gotten more expensive. There is also a FX-8320E which is less expensive and sips a lttile less power because of it's lower base frequency. It turbo boosts to the same peak frequency though, so probably the same performance. Yes, perfectly. Been running the FX-8320 in this mb for morre than 2 years. It does use more powwr than a similar benchmarked Quad i5 (2500K). About 10 watts more on average. So if you plan on using it in a Media Center PC or something running all the time you'll pay a bit more in electricity. However the upfront cost savings on the AMD was $50 less than the i5 at the time. There might be a largr delta in price now, the i5's seem to have gotten more expensive. There is also a FX-8320E which is less expensive and sips a lttile less power because of it's lower base frequency. It turbo boosts... » Read More Yes, perfectly. Been running the FX-8320 in this mb for morre than 2 years. It does use more powwr than a similar benchmarked Quad i5 (2500K). About 10 watts more on average. So if you plan on using it in a Media Center PC or something running all the time you'll pay a bit more in electricity. However the upfront cost savings on the AMD was $50 less than the i5 at the time. There might be a largr delta in price now, the i5's seem to have gotten more expensive. There is also a FX-8320E which is less expensive and sips a lttile less power because of it's lower base frequency. It turbo boosts to the same peak frequency though, so probably the same performance. « Show Less
810859
Only if you are a "hardcore" overclocker. (Or interested in OC'ing now or anywhere down the line) Both cards are really great but both only truly shine when OC'ed.
840208
Yes, it is a great processor. However, I would look at getting the 5820k because its newer and a little bit faster.