New CPU - Help please!

[Marcus Geezer]

Hiya,

Thanks to previous great help from this forum I thought I would post up to see if you can help me with a decison regarding a CPU selection.

Recently I completed a rebuild of my PC and replaced a lot but kept my original processor which for a while has seemed fast enough. I'm now at the point with running some new software (CS6) that I'd like to get the most out of my MOBO.

My current spec is as follows

Case: Coolermaster Elite 334u
MOBO: Asus M5a99x EVO 990x (allows max of 32Gb)
CPU: AMD Athlon II x3 440 3.0Ghz
Graphics Card: Asus HD 540 1Gb
RAM: 16Gb (2x8Gb) DDR3 1600
PSU: Coolermaster Elite 500W
500Gb drive Win 7 plus photoshop etc.
2Tb drive with all files on.
Two monitors.

I'm looking to max out the processor for the board (AM3+) but a little bit of research means that my biggest CPU requirement is CS6 when I'm compositing huge multi-layered images and that it's not about upgrading the amount of cores but the processor speed? CS6 doesn't utilise all the cores? Am I correct in this?

All being well I've therefore homed in on one of the following CPU's being...

AMD FX-4 4170 Black Edition 4 Core 4.2GHz Socket AM3+ 8MB L3 Cache

or

AMD FX-4300 4 core 3.8GHz Socket AM3+ 8MB Cache

The 4170 is faster and seems to perform faster but have seen reviews stating the 4300 is 'better' (?). Both are nearly the same price and keep getting drawn to the 4.2Ghz purely as it has a faster speed?

Can anyone shed any light?

 

[arad85]

I'm looking to max out the processor for the board (AM3+) but a little bit of research means that my biggest CPU requirement is CS6 when I'm compositing huge multi-layered images and that it's not about upgrading the amount of cores but the processor speed? CS6 doesn't utilise all the cores? Am I correct in this?

Where have you seen this? Does your current CPU max out all 3 cores when compositing? I would expect CS6 to use all cores when compositing as it tiles the image and hands out the tiles to as many processors as it has. I would expect an 8 core to be faster again....

The two you have mentioned are roughly the same performance wise - the black edition can be overclocked (if I understand AMDs naming convention).

 

[Marcus Geezer]

Where have you seen this? Does your current CPU max out all 3 cores when compositing? I would expect CS6 to use all cores when compositing as it tiles the image and hands out the tiles to as many processors as it has. I would expect an 8 core to be faster again....

The two you have mentioned are roughly the same performance wise - the black edition can be overclocked (if I understand AMDs naming convention).

Hi Andy,

I can't quote where I've seen this but remember having seen a few random internet pages which say having lots of cores is good but only if your application uses them. I don't know enough technically to know myself.

So in theory would an 8 core 3.5Ghz outperform a 4 core 4.2Ghz? If all the cores are used I can understand it would but would my machine be able to utilise all the cores?

And yes I think Black means overclock. I'm lead to believe I can overclock the 4.2 up to 4.7 using a utility in my ASUS motherboard software.

 

[arad85]

I can't quote where I've seen this but remember having seen a few random internet pages which say having lots of cores is good but only if your application uses them. I don't know enough technically to know myself.

PS can use all cores... 8 core will be faster than 4 (not 2x as fast mind...)

Take a look here: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/4 The graphs show the 8 core is 50% quicker on their Retouch Artists benchmark.

The question is how much CPU do you actually use flat out? If you only use all cores for 1 second every minute, then it's not going to matter how many you have, you won't get much quicker.

Take a representative image flow and see what the CPUs are doing when you are processing via task manager. Do you have all CPUs going flat out for a while? If so, lots more cores will help....

 

[Marcus Geezer]

PS can use all cores... 8 core will be faster than 4 (not 2x as fast mind...)

Take a look here: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/4 The graphs show the 8 core is 50% quicker on their Retouch Artists benchmark.

The question is how much CPU do you actually use flat out? If you only use all cores for 1 second every minute, then it's not going to matter how many you have, you won't get much quicker.

Take a representative image flow and see what the CPUs are doing when you are processing via task manager. Do you have all CPUs going flat out for a while? If so, lots more cores will help....

Thanks Andy I'll have a look when on PC tomorrow. Cores vs Speed is the challenge!

 

[Marcus Geezer]

Opened up a few big heavy multi layer CS6 composites files and completing CPU heavy tasks such as resizing, rendering, the CPU hits 100% on all three cores for the time it takes, the longest being about 1 minute 30 seconds. It's not desperately slow considering the workload it's been asked to do but deffo want a new CPU.

The quandary is do I buy a 4 core at 4.2Ghz or an 8 core at 3.5Ghz being in a similar price bracket?

 

[arad85]

The quandary is do I buy a 4 core at 4.2Ghz or an 8 core at 3.5Ghz being in a similar price bracket?

OK.

Have a look here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulldozer_(microarchitecture)#Desktop

Firstly, it doesn't list a 3.5GHz processor, so I assuem you mean the 8150 3.6GHz one. Look at the Normal Freq, Full load Turbo and half load turbo. These refer to what you'd expect - full and half load speeds. When the 8 core is running flat out, it is running at 3.9GHz (no, I don't know why it's not termed a 3.9GHzprocessor). The 4.2GHz will run at 4.2GHz, so the difference is 4 cores at 4.2GHz or 8 at 3.9GHz.

Also note the half load turbo mode is 4.2GHz on the 3.5GHz processor. You'd only be giving up 100MHz on the 4.2GHz 4 core.

I'd buy the 8 core.

 

[Marcus Geezer]

OK.

Have a look here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulldozer_(microarchitecture)#Desktop

Firstly, it doesn't list a 3.5GHz processor, so I assuem you mean the 8150 3.6GHz one. Look at the Normal Freq, Full load Turbo and half load turbo. These refer to what you'd expect - full and half load speeds. When the 8 core is running flat out, it is running at 3.9GHz (no, I don't know why it's not termed a 3.9GHzprocessor). The 4.2GHz will run at 4.2GHz, so the difference is 4 cores at 4.2GHz or 8 at 3.9GHz.

Also note the half load turbo mode is 4.2GHz on the 3.5GHz processor. You'd only be giving up 100MHz on the 4.2GHz 4 core.

I'd buy the 8 core.

Andy,

Thank you. I appreciate the response.