| CGI-Quality said: SLI and everything wouldn't apply to a simple build, as you know, so I offer Intel as an option, because even the cheaper procs offer better performance than comparable AMD processors. Gaming rigs under $1K offer good cases for Intel, as well. With $500 just for his CPU, I don't see an issue with Intel, but if he wants to save, then no doubt, go with AMD. Of course everyone doesn't buy top level gear, but I think price vs performance complaints toward Intel are vastly exaggerated. |
That's just not true. i3 will not offer better gaming performance than a FX6300 on modern games and yet they cost the same. Sub 100 dollars its not even close.
Toms hardware has been recommending AMD cpus for budget gaming for months now
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-2.html
Add to that the fact that you can overclock AMD cpus and get 15-20% more performance and he fact that AMD motherboards usually cost less or come with more features and you got yourself a cheaper platform offering more features and better performance.
If Intel wasn't being such a prick and would allow overclocking on their i3s they would make a compelling case due to the fact they use less power. But they don't while most people can overclock a FX6300 to 4.8-5 Ghz to match a stock 3570k in terms of performance.
Also, his budget is $500 for the "whole cpu" which to me means the whole PC. I'd love to be in a competition where you and I can spend 500 bucks on a PC, you on Intel based one and me on an AMD one and see which one has better gaming performance.
