An issue with people bashing the FX CPUs !

[I/O]

I just don't like that FX cpus. The reason is because it's outdated, using 32nm, on a dead socket, dosn't have new features that you get on a Z97 board or something. But the performance is fine for me on my 8320(3.5GHZ) with my R9 270X(1120, 5600).

Ya the FX 8320 is a great value for 60fps gaming. Me personally I am upgrading to an Intel platform as I will be running dual high end cards to try and maintain 60fps minimum at all times in every game I want to play.

[Clyne]

Ya the FX 8320 is a great value for 60fps gaming. Me personally I am upgrading to an Intel platform as I will be running dual high end cards to try and maintain 60fps minimum at all times in every game I want to play.

I don't always get 60FPS in games but in same games i do(CS:GO)

[I/O]

Well the example you gave of Crysis 3 is a GPU bound game anyway that uses the cores.

I don't know but Crysis 3 runs fine on the FX chips and so does BF4 and I know there are many other games that do as well. There are also games that run like ass on the FX chips to and I won't deny that.

[Suika]

I somewhat agree with @Suika though for a midrange/budget option like pairing a 270(X), you could just go with a i3-4130 instead and save on both the cooling and powerusage.

Actually, yea you have a point. Dunno what it is, I just don't like an i3 outside of a mobile platform. It's a weird thought I can't get out of my head.

 

 

Dead Rising is probably heavily single threaded, though.

[harrynowl]

I don't know but Crysis 3 runs fine on the FX chips and so does BF4 and I know there are many other games that do as well. There are also games that run like ass on the FX chips to and I won't deny that.

Well it runs fine as it's GPU bound and threaded, bf4 is also threaded well

 

Most games that run like ass on FX run much better on intel, which makes the i5 the better all round solution for buying a gaming pc, as they work out at a similar cost.

[jnmbhj]

I currently Have the 8350 overclocked but I would no longer recommend it. Its not because its bad its just outdated and the newer intel processors preform much better in gaming. granted the 8350 is cheaper at $150 compared to a 4690k priced at $240(newegg) But in general its not as hot as it used to be and its getting quite old now. Now a days I would recommend a 4690k. And yes I would upgrade to 4690k if given the option to.

 

Edit. and plus the 8350 is a bad chip if you want to get over 80 fps. In high end games

[I/O]

I don't always get 60FPS in games but in same games i do(CS:GO)

Well with the GPU you have it would be the reason why you are not always getting great frame rates in all games. The 280 was decent but it is long in the tooth currently.

[Clyne]

Well with the GPU you have it would be the reason why you are not always getting great frame rates in all games. The 280 was decent but it is long in the tooth currently.

But it's the top factory OC version of the 270X. I haven't even OC it yet so the performance may change.

[Fate]

I currently Have the 8350 overclocked but I would no longer recommend it. Its not because its bad its just outdated and the newer intel processors preform much better in gaming. granted the 8350 is cheaper at $150 compared to a 4690k priced at $240(newegg) But in general its not as hot as it used to be and its getting quite old now. Now a days I would recommend a 4690k. And yes I would upgrade to 4690k if given the option to.

 

Edit. and plus the 8350 is a bad chip if you want to get over 80 fps. In high end games

Or you could get a locked i5 for $168

[I/O]

But it's the top factory OC version of the 270X. I haven't even OC it yet so the performance may change.

Sorry I thought you had a GTX 280 LOL.

[Majestic]

I don't know but Crysis 3 runs fine on the FX chips and so does BF4 and I know there are many other games that do as well. There are also games that run like ass on the FX chips to and I won't deny that.

 

The tests you see, with one GPU, just shows a skewed view. You can't see whether a CPU is 'tippy-toeing' or not doing anything. Therefor, you need to judge with Loadgraphs.

And if you look at this test for example;

http://cdn.overclock.net/7/7d/900x900px-LL-7d31c35c_proz.jpeg

 

And compare this;

http://cdn.overclock.net/b/ba/900x900px-LL-ba153285_proz20intel.jpeg

to this;

http://cdn.overclock.net/d/d3/900x900px-LL-d3796154_proz20amd.jpeg

 

You can see the FX is really tippy-toeing. Two cores fully saturated, any extra GPU (SLI, faster GPU) power will buckle it. It also means the framerate consistency will be bad and will have the occasional sutter where the CPU core edges 100%.

 

Also, when you use Crysis 3 as an argument. I never see you pull multiplayer data;

http://gamegpu.ru/images/stories/Test_GPU/Action/Crysis%203%20MP%20Alpha/test/crysis%203%20proz.png

[Suika]

I currently Have the 8350 overclocked but I would no longer recommend it. Its not because its bad its just outdated and the newer intel processors preform much better in gaming. granted the 8350 is cheaper at $150 compared to a 4690k priced at $240(newegg)

For $20 over the 8350, you can get an i5-4440. It's not that much weaker than the 4690k, either.

[jnmbhj]

Or you could get a locked i5 for $168

Yes but I like overclocking. And I do Not want to pay another $400 for a quality motherboard and 4690k. The difference is not that big when it comes to rendering which I am going to do, quite often.

[Clyne]

Sorry I thought you had a GTX 280 LOL.

So i'm the GTX 280 guy heh?

Well my sig says i have a 270X.....

[I/O]

Edit. and plus the 8350 is a bad chip if you want to get over 80 fps. In high end games

As I stated before I am going Intel because I am going high end dual card setup and want 60fps min in the games I play. If I was going single card the FX chip would fit the bill.

[79wjd]

Yes but I like overclocking. And I do Not want to pay another $400 for a quality motherboard and 4690k. The difference is not that big when it comes to rendering which I am going to do, quite often.

This is really such a flawed argument.... 

 

Just because a cpu can be overclocked does not make it the better (or even the right choice). For rendering an 8350 happens to be better, but buying a cpu based on whether or not the cpu can overclock (which I've seen plenty of people do) is incredibly stupid. 

 

Also, you can easily get a 4690k + z97 board +hyper 212 for $330 (vs. $260 for an 8320+990x board+hyper212).

[Majestic]

This is really such a flawed argument.... 

One that Linus himself made. 

[I/O]

This is really such a flawed argument.... 

 

Just because a cpu can be overclocked does not make it the better (or even the right choice). Also, you can easily get a 4690k + z97 board +hyper 212 for $300 (vs. $260 for an 8320+990x board+hyper212).

Not in Canada. For $300 you can get a 4690K and cheap ass Msi Micro ATX board with no features and only a 4pin CPU power connector. For the price of a 4690k CPU you can get a pretty baller AMD board and FX 8230.

[jnmbhj]

As I stated before I am going Intel because I am going high end dual card setup and want 60fps min in the games I play. If I was going single card the FX chip would fit the bill.

I am going with intel next year once the new skylake is released. As I dont have the patience with wait until early 2016 to get a new line up of amd desktop cpus. 

 

This is really such a flawed argument.... 

 

Just because a cpu can be overclocked does not make it the better (or even the right choice). For rendering an 8350 happens to be better, but basing the decision on whether or not the cpu can overclock (which I've seen plenty of people do) is incredibly stupid. 

 

Also, you can easily get a 4690k + z97 board +hyper 212 for $330 (vs. $260 for an 8320+990x board+hyper212).

I am saying its not worth the upgrade. As I will not notice a big performance increase. And also I have a h100i a great liquid cooler. (kinda waste if your not overclocking)

[Majestic]

For the price of a 4690k CPU you can get a pretty baller AMD board and FX 8230.

 

Not on a cheap cooler you don't. You need atleast an AIO or expensive aircooler to contain the heat of overclocking them. And after spending all that, you still only close a bit of the gap. You don't bridge the gap.

So you end up with a 220W+ energyslurping rig, bound to ATX only that still sucks in single-thread performance.

 

You're not seeing the big picture. You have complete confirmation bias.

 

 

Different sources? Sure.

 

 

 

 

Not even mentioning a system that can run a FX at 4.7ghz will cost way more than a B85 + 4690 does.

source; http://pclab.pl/art57842-8.html

 

Can we please bury this now? Please?

[jnmbhj]

Not on a cheap cooler you don't. You need atleast an AIO or expensive aircooler to contain the heat of overclocking them. And after spending all that, you still only close a bit of the gap. You don't bridge the gap.

So you end up with a 220W+ energyslurping rig, bound to ATX only that still sucks in single-thread performance.

 

You're not seeing the big picture. You have complete confirmation bias.

But if you go with the an expensive air cooler or water cooler you can use that down the line for other CPU's as well. And dont use that "It uses soo much power" excuse. As for single preformance its not as good but someone do rendering as well that can take all the threads.   

[Majestic]

I'd say you two look at the above results.

 

A bit part of discussion and/or arguing is being able to admit you're wrong. You will learn much more by accepting you're wrong, moving on, and have better arguments next time.

What you're doing is actively looking for ways you can find or twist evidence so that it conforms your bias. You will not learn anything, ever.

[jnmbhj]

I'd say you two look at the above results.

I knew from the start that the 4690 will beat the 8350 in games. But I decided to go with an 8350 because I knew I was going to do rendering and gaming. And the newer games will be more optimized for more threads. (so i thought) 

[Majestic]

But I decided to go with an 8350 because I knew I was going to do rendering and gaming. And the newer games will be more optimized for more threads. (so i thought) 

 

So you made a bad judgement call, big deal... We're all human, and nobody on this forum will judge you for having an 8350. Just don't actively persuade others to make your mistake aswell, just so you can feel less bad about your decision (you might do it subconciously). Because that is the point where some people will start to resent you for it..

[Mao_Zedong]

Chances of buying FX before thread, 0%

Chances of buying FX after thread, 0%

 

Chances of trusting I/O before thread, 20%

Chances of trusting I/O after thread, 0.2%

 

 

 

I am actually considering an fx 6300, but that is iffy and only because my budget is so tight.