Best starter CPU?

[Dustin22]

I am building my first PC, primarily for gaming. I am new into the computer tech realm so I was just wondering what CPU would be best for gaming with a CPU budget of around 120$.

Thanks! 

[Chasem121]

In that budget you are either going to be looking at a dual-core intel or a FX cpu

[minibois]

i3 4170.

[Paytend01]

Fx cpu

[ZetZet]

In that budget you are either going to be looking at a dual-core intel or a FX cpu

 

Fx cpu

no, that would be an i3 since he wants to play games, not unpack archives. 

 

 

FX is done guys, it's over.

[Walker998]

one of the best budget-based cpu's out there is a athlon x4 860k, the only thing is it's not enthusiast grade but there is overclocking, also unless you already have a fm2+ motherboard like me, maybe change to a fm3 or fm3+.

[rafazafar]

I am building my first PC, primarily for gaming. I am new into the computer tech realm so I was just wondering what CPU would be best for gaming with a CPU budget of around 120$.

Thanks! 

a used 4440 atleast i got mine for that price.

[Paytend01]

no, that would be an i3 since he wants to play games, not unpack archives. 

 

 

FX is done guys, it's over.

Its cheap, but an i3 is decent

[Hiebly]

Your best options are an Intel i3-4xxx or an AMD FX-6300. They trade blows depending on games. The i3 performs better in most games, but there are a few big titles these days, such as Witcher 3, where the FX-6300 is outperforming. I personally think the i3 is a better route, not only because you are more likely to get better performance but it also gives a good upgrade path, since you can get an i5 or i7 without changing the motherboard... however if you wanna take a gamble on the FX-6300 it should become an even better performer once games are using DX12, and it will do better than the i3 in video editing and such.

[Dustin22]

one of the best budget-based cpu's out there is a athlon x4 860k, the only thing is it's not enthusiast grade but there is overclocking, also unless you already have a fm2+ motherboard like me, maybe change to a fm3 or fm3+.

would you recommend that over the i3-4170?

[Prysin]

no, that would be an i3 since he wants to play games, not unpack archives. 

 

 

FX is done guys, it's over.

not quite... atm the FX 6300 is cheap enough to be "worth it" over a i3 but it depends what you are going to do.

 

@Dustin22

I would reccomend either the FX 6300 or the i3 4170.

The FX will be great in newer games (made in 2014 or more recent)

while the I3 will be superior in older games and still very good in newer.

 

The FX has an edge in streaming, and it also does have a bit more features on its motherboards in the lower end. It can also be overclocked, while the I3 cannot.

The I3 offers a superior upgrade path, but personally i wouldnt care for that for now, seeing as Skylake is out and Kaby Lake will probably be out around the time you want to upgrade (9-12 months from now)

 

In all honesty, either are good CPUs for the mid-range PC. Both will give you 60+ FPS at 1080p. Both can run Crysis, Both can run Minecraft (so you're golden then )

[ZetZet]

not quite... atm the FX 6300 is cheap enough to be "worth it" over a i3 but it depends what you are going to do.

 

@Dustin22

I would reccomend either the FX 6300 or the i3 4170.

The FX will be great in newer games (made in 2014 or more recent)

while the I3 will be superior in older games and still very good in newer.

fx 6300 is still slower in all current games, so you basically just assume that magically it will become better.

 

 

investing into fx is worthless, they will have no resale value either, I can bet you will be able to sell the i3 in a year for someone's HTPC or server project, where that fx will be in the bin.

[Prysin]

fx 6300 is still slower in all current games, so you basically just assume that magically it will become better.

 

 

investing into fx is worthless, they will have no resale value either, I can bet you will be able to sell the i3 in a year for someone's HTPC or server project, where that fx will be in the bin.

no it is not. In a few titles it IS faster.

 

 

 

yes the FX is OCd in that video, and that OC is far too easy to get .....

Still, yes, it IS OC'D IN THE VID.

Also according to the vid... using a FX will motivate you to run over wild game with a car... which can be fatal IRL

 

ALTHOUGH! it doesnt seem like OC helps the FX that much in every title...

 

A i3 cannot be OCd, so you "get what you get".... The FX can be OCd so there is "free performance to be had"...

Even lower end AM3+ boards can handle a mild OC (atleast 4.4 to 4.5GHz if you use less then 1.45v)

[PlayStation 2]

no it is not. In a few titles it IS faster.

 

 

 

yes the FX is OCd in that video, and that OC is far too easy to get .....

Still, yes, it IS OC'D IN THE VID.

Also according to the vid... using a FX will motivate you to run over wild game with a car... which can be fatal IRL

 

ALTHOUGH! it doesnt seem like OC helps the FX that much in every title...

 

A i3 cannot be OCd, so you "get what you get".... The FX can be OCd so there is "free performance to be had"...

Even lower end AM3+ boards can handle a mild OC (atleast 4.4 to 4.5GHz if you use less then 1.45v)

mild oc = 900+ mhz eh :^)

[Prysin]

mild oc = 900+ mhz eh :^)

That is easy to get with FX.. like REALLY easy.....

 

my own old 8320 did 800 MHz on stock voltage.... according to google the average FX hits around 700-900MHz OC (pure multiplier) with between stock voltage and + 0.0250v

[PlayStation 2]

That is easy to get with FX.. like REALLY easy.....

 

my own old 8320 did 800 MHz on stock voltage.... according to google the average FX hits around 700-900MHz OC (pure multiplier) with between stock voltage and + 0.0250v

damn

didn't even know how easy it is to oc fx cpus

[Prysin]

damn

didn't even know how easy it is to oc fx cpus

they are.... they are ridiculously easy to OC... but once you hit that "wall" the voltage goes up A LOT...

my FX needed 1.45625v to get to 4.52GHz.... it was like 1.4325 to 1.4350 ish (that is where the stock volt for my FX was sitting) to get 4.4GHz

 

i know quite a few FX's CAN be OCd AND undervolted a little... you never know before you try though....

[demrxz]

i3 4130 would be your best choice, comes in about $160 USD. This is your best budget CPU, just keep in mind if you plan on getting/upgrading to a very powerful GPU this will defiantly be a bottle neck. If you do not see yourself upgrading your system then stick with the i3. Whilst if you do see your self upgrading in the future I would buy the i5 4690 off the bat. ALSO!

 

THE FX IS DEAD!!! AMD CPU's are DONE!!!!

[Demonking]

i5 4460 or i3 stay away from FX. 

[ZetZet]

they are.... they are ridiculously easy to OC... but once you hit that "wall" the voltage goes up A LOT...

my FX needed 1.45625v to get to 4.52GHz.... it was like 1.4325 to 1.4350 ish (that is where the stock volt for my FX was sitting) to get 4.4GHz

 

i know quite a few FX's CAN be OCd AND undervolted a little... you never know before you try though....

they also bring ridiculously little performance increase after you oc.

[SteveGrabowski0]

no it is not. In a few titles it IS faster.

 

 

 

yes the FX is OCd in that video, and that OC is far too easy to get .....

Still, yes, it IS OC'D IN THE VID.

Also according to the vid... using a FX will motivate you to run over wild game with a car... which can be fatal IRL

 

ALTHOUGH! it doesnt seem like OC helps the FX that much in every title...

 

A i3 cannot be OCd, so you "get what you get".... The FX can be OCd so there is "free performance to be had"...

Even lower end AM3+ boards can handle a mild OC (atleast 4.4 to 4.5GHz if you use less then 1.45v)

 

That i3 is 300 MHz slower than the one we're recommending though. Also, is 4.5 GHz a reasonable overclock to get on the stock cooler? Or would you need a Hyper 212 EVO to be able to get that kind of clockspeed on an average FX-6300?

[Prysin]

they also bring ridiculously little performance increase after you oc.

well, in some games, yes. totally.

In others and especially in single core ones like MMOs, huge difference...

 

my FX got me 11 FPS difference going from 3.5 to 4.52GHz in GW2... that game can barely use more then 2 cores effectively. Yes it CAN use 8 cores, it just do fuck all with the remaining 6... So yeah... it REALLY depends..

 

but, my argument sort of stands aslong as a i3 4170 + cheapest H87 board or mid range B85 board (to have some decent features and all Sata3 ports....) costs the same or slightly more then a FX 6300/6350 + cheap mobo then the FX 6300/6350 IS worth it.

 

The moment this is no longer true, then NO, FX wont have any place at all.

 

That is the string that the FX clings to. It is only worth it aslong as it costs the same OR LESS. Because in todays titles, and upcoming ones. It performs as good OR BETTER (in witcher 3 it gets close to a i5 4460 even at stock speeds), BUT in old games it can be utter shit...

 

Although.. one argument is simply true...

cheap ass AM3+ boards in general has much more sensible feature sets then cheap ass intel boards.

 

so they got that going for them.

[Prysin]

That i3 is 300 MHz slower than the one we're recommending though. Also, is 4.5 GHz a reasonable overclock to get on the stock cooler? Or would you need a Hyper 212 EVO to be able to get that kind of clockspeed on an average FX-6300?

depends how much you need to jack up the voltage... aslong as you stick to stock voltage, or undervolt slightly, then stock cooler will be loud, but just good enough....

Incidentally, you can look for a FX 8350 stock cooler on ebay... they use the same mounting mechanism, but the FX 8350 one is beefier with 4 copper heatpipes and a slightly larger fan.

 

edit:

like this one, that is the one for the FX 8350 AFAIK... that one is REALLY good (came with my A10 7870k APU) and is better then the one that came with my FX 8320

http://www.amazon.com/AMD-Socket-Copper-Aluminum-Heatpipes/dp/B008DIYL92/ref=sr_1_1?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1445029627&sr=1-1&keywords=AMD+AM3%2B+cooler&refinements=p_89%3AAMD

 

Also, get a CM T4... it is sort of the "basic" Hyper 212, performs like 2-3c worse, but costs 10 bucks less....

Or get a Arctic Cooler Freezer13.... that thing can handle 210w TDP (they do not reccomend over 140w CPUs though) according to their official spec sheet. Also it has like 5 or 6 years warranty, which is damn good for a 92mm 25-30 bucks cooler... no it is not as good as a 212... but it is still good enough....

[Guest trucker2]

Best bet would be an A10 7870k for the following reasons:​

Everything is on the chip, makes the build simpler.

They play every game made quite well at medium settings either 1080 or 720.

You can add a graphics card later and get within 5 fps of an i5 im most games (exeption GTA V)

Tons of reviews and info available including some great youtube vids.

Can get great cpu/mb combos for around 150...My dau's 7870k gigabyte F2A88xm-d3h combo is 139. Thats Motherboard,cpu and gpu for the price of an i3 alone.

Works with any ATX PSU

Comes with a great cpu cooler...save another 13 to 40 bucks

Easy to overclock but doesn't need it.

Drop Dead reliable.....They rarely show up in the troubleshooting forum

 

Believe it or not the 7850k comes with a horrible cpu cooler. Don't know why:)

[Dustin22]

What about the A10-7850K?