Hey, I know that you want to go with AMD, and I can respect that. However, my friend and I were tinkering with his 8150 on the windows 8 developer preview and there is basically no improvement over the patch that was released for windows 7. Like I said, I can respect your decision to use AMD, but don't kid yourself into thinking that the AMD FX chips will get some magic performance boost on windows 8.
If I were to convince you to switch to intel my argument would be that the reason the FX chips get as much hate as they do is because of the way the chip was designed. The 8 cores are actually broken down into 4 modules. 2 cores equals 4 modules with a certain amount of cache that is shared between the two cores. The issue is that each core is kind of underpowered. This means that the single thread performance of BD chips is very low compared to sandy/ivy bridge chips and even AMD phenom chips. Right now game designers are really just starting to take advantage of 4 cores on a CPU in games. The best example of this would be BF3. So you really have no need for the multi core function of the FX chips (with the exception of workstation type applications). However, you still benefit from having a much higher calculations per clock performance that intel and even phenom (to a certain extent) still offers.
Another aspect to keep in mind is the price between the AMD system and the intel system is a bit misleading. I have personally found that intel is actually cheaper believe it or not. The reason why is that even though the 8120 and even 8150 is cheaper than the i5 2500K, the fx chips throw off a lot more heat and they are a tad more messy to overclock. This means that you need a bigger heatsink to OC your chip than you would need for an i5 2500K or even a i5 3570K. Let me put it this way, with an i5 3570K at a price of 215 US (on sale on newegg) and a hyper 212 evo, you can probably OC your chip up to 4.5-4.6ghz fairly easily. So it would be 215 for the cpu, 30 for the heat sink for a total of 245 USD. The 8120 is 160 and the H70 is 85 which also equals 245 USD. With the H70 you might be able to get your chip up to 4.5ghz. Even when the chips are equal in clock speed, the i5 will still beat in in lightly threaded applications and even some multi threaded applications.
The other key difference is that with the AMD chip you need to get a higher end board so that you have particular options in the BIOS that would allow you to OC to the same levels as the intel chips, while on the opposing side you can get a very cheap board and still hit the max overclocks of the intel chips. This would further reduce the price of an intel build vs an AMD build.
What I have mentioned above is crucial. If you would consider for a moment that the AMD setup that you have right now would cost 465 USD (CPU, Mobo, heatsink) for LESS performance, less features (intel has PCI 3.0 and virtue MVP), and less power effient than an
i5 3570K, a
gigabyte z77 mobo , and a
hyper 212 evo that would only cost you 395 USD.
On top of THAT, you can take the money you saved and upgrade your video card to an Asus direct cuII AMD 7950
Newegg.com - ASUS HD7950-DC2T-3GD5 Radeon HD 7950 3GB 384-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFireX Support Video Card
So if you go with intel over amd as far as I can see you would just be getting a CRAP ton of more bang for your buck.
How is
that for convincing?