AMD Cpu for gaming

[Andrievski]

What is the best AMD Cpu that can handle gaming very well.

[79wjd]

What is the best AMD Cpu that can handle gaming very well.

FX8350 

[Jack.EXE]

I'd go for the FX6300. Plenty for most games and only $99.

[winningsince1337]

Is there a reason to not have an intel CPU?

[Andrievski]

Is there a reason to not have an intel CPU?

I am interested in what AMD can offer for gaming etc. but intel is still better whit the performance of they're Cpu's

[nokturrduk84]

FX8350, but I suggest to go with Intel, cause 8350 will still bottleneck games on high-end cards.

[FineVisionz]

I have the AMD FX6300.  Its a great CPU if you have a low-mid range GPU.  I want to upgrade to a high end card and some people say that the 6300 will bottleneck with higher end cards.  I am not exactly sure how true this is, so don't take my word for it.

[Jack.EXE]

I have the AMD FX6300.  Its a great CPU if you have a low-mid range GPU.  I want to upgrade to a high end card and some people say that the 6300 will bottleneck with higher end cards.  I am not exactly sure how true this is, so don't take my word for it.

I've heard that the 6300 is enough up to a 280X

[winningsince1337]

I am interested in what AMD can offer for gaming etc. but intel is still better whit the performance of they're Cpu's

 

Ah, while AMD CPUs will work for gaming. I could never ever recommend them over Intel due to: their inferior IPC, Power efficiency, everyday performance, and lackluster feature set.

[Andrievski]

Ah, while AMD CPUs will work for gaming. I could never ever recommend them over Intel due to: their inferior IPC, Power efficiency, everyday performance, and lackluster feature set.

I only trust intel in Cpu's but in Gpu i trust more AMD over Nvidia.

[FineVisionz]

I've heard that the 6300 is enough up to a 280X

Yes, but I was looking into the 290/290X, or GTX 770/780.

[winningsince1337]

Yes, but I was looking into the 290/290X, or GTX 770/780.

 

Intel is the only way to go then to avoid bottlenecking.

 

EDIT: Also, an Intel CPU will give you more headroom to just upgrade a GPU giving you a longer effective lifespan of your motherboard and processor.

[FineVisionz]

Intel is the only way to go then to avoid bottlenecking.

 

EDIT: Also, an Intel CPU will give you more headroom to just upgrade a GPU giving you a longer effective lifespan of your motherboard and processor.

But unfortunately I just upgraded my motherboard.  So going to an Intel CPU is not an option for me.

[harrynowl]

i5 4460 is the CPU to get (if no over clocking) for the GPUs you're looking at.

[D3MON]

What is the best AMD Cpu that can handle gaming very well.

6300 on a budget, 8320 if you're not.

you can get 8320's for £100 which is i3/low end i5 money and can do heavy lifting like some i7's, single thread performance isnt as good as intel but if you want single threaded go pentium-k.

no it wont bottleneck and by the time you need to upgrade you'll be looking for a new board cpu and ram anyway.

http://www.techspot.com/review/734-battlefield-4-benchmarks/page6.html

[D3MON]

I've heard that the 6300 is enough up to a 280X

Doesn't work like that, completely depends on the game, in something like WoW where core 0 is maxed and cores 1, 2, 3, 4, 5....do nothing itll be limiting any card...but itll still be getting 200fps because its wow...

in something like battlefield 3/4, hardline, crysis or any modern real game that isnt coded by a 5 year old you can run a 4300 with an r9-290 and still be gpu limited.

[GloriousPain]

FX 8320 only one I can recommend really other than maybe the 8120 or 6300 or 4300 simply cause any of there fx cpus 8300 and above are all the same the only difference is binning and factory overclocking... And no it will not bottleneck... It may preform worst than some intel cpus but that's because of programming not the cpus fault...feature set wise Pcie gen 2 still doesn't bottle neck a damn Titan Black; Sata 2 oh well only the top end ssds are bottlenecked by that... Power efficiency few things A: if you really care about efficiency enough to mention it you better have a god damn 80+ GOLD at minimum PSU or be saving up for the AX1500i that matters more than anything else efficiency wise

[Sintezza]

FX8350 is still a fine cpu for gaming,

if you pair it with an AMD gpu like a 290, it performs totaly fine in every game.

 

Offcourse the new unlocked haswell cpu´s are better, cause of the better single threaded performance.

And some games still relay on that.

But still it highly depends on which games you play.

 

Crysis3, tombraider, need for speed, grid, bioshock, farcry3, BF4 etc there is not much of a diffrence between intel and amd. 

 

only a few games like wow, lol, dayZ, Skyrim.MMo´s mainaly, intel has an edge in these games.

But still these games are totaly playable on the FX aswell.

 

Also not to mention like i said above if you use an AMD gpu aswell, like a 290, you can also utilize mantle in some games, take takes some of the overhead away from the cpu.

This improves the performance allot. with AMD FX cpu´s in games.

[Sintezza]

Intel is the only way to go then to avoid bottlenecking.

 

EDIT: Also, an Intel CPU will give you more headroom to just upgrade a GPU giving you a longer effective lifespan of your motherboard and processor.

 

i disagree with this, at some points.

 

FX8350 does not realy bottleneck a 290 or 290X especialy if you use it in games that can utilize mantle.

FX8350 could slightly bottleneck a GTX780 (Ti) But this depends allot on the games.

Some people seem to suffer from a FX8350 holding back a 780 in cpu + gpu demending scenario´s.

 

But i do agree if you build a system for pure gaming, something like a 4690K is the better choice for pure gaming at the moment, cause like i said above, the unlocked haswell cpu´s just perform better in a wider spectrum of games.

But people seem to forget that the FX8350 is allready a 2 year old chip, and it still does put up a good showing against current intel equilivants.

[PuNkPoEtS]

To all the people who think a 6300 will bottleneck a r9 290 it all depends on which game if it supports more then one core and it's overclocked then no the max cpu usage I hit on bf4 is 70% while my 290 is at 100% sorry I don't play any mmos to test them

[Faa]

It may preform worst than some intel cpus but that's because of programming not the cpus fault...

No it's AMD's fault that theyre so massively behind Intel in terms of IPC.

 

 

FX 8320 only one I can recommend really other than maybe the 8120 or 6300 or 4300 simply cause any of there fx cpus 8300 and above are all the same the only difference is binning and factory overclocking... And no it will not bottleneck... It may preform worst than some 

You recommended the 8320 so many times and every time it was just some salestalk. The 8320 should be theoretically 33% faster than the 6300, link me atleast 5 benchmarks each from a different game where this difference is present. A 6300 is all you need from AMD's side, anything up you should be looking at the i5's because they do add atleast a noticeable gain and offer a better value for gaming. Locked i5's cost as much as 8320's so don't moan about its fictive price/performance. You shouldn't be recommending a CPU that only performs 3% better with a 50% higher pricetag or else I'll be recommending a 4770k over a i5 and afterwards praise the i7's "amazing price/performance".

 

 

Power efficiency few things 

What things? Jay's "test", actually he just took an average of all results from reviewers is completely flawed. A 4770k consumes like 30-40W more at 4.2GHz which is their average clock than stock, so ask yourself where that 80W bump came from. A 8350 pulling 100W more doesn't make much sense when he says the difference when overclocked will be bigger between Intel & AMD. Most reviews you see are testing it with a ridiculous 1000W PSU orsomething, obviously the psu Intel cpu's would run at a lower AC/DC efficiency than with AMD which is why the gap is smaller. Test both cpu's at the same AC/DC efficiency, the gap will be bigger. 

Also Jay is quite dumb, lets say we have a scenario of something like this here with two 7970's;

What you notice is; a 100% difference in terms of FPS so assuming the gpu loads on AMD were around 50/50% and 99%/99% on Intel. Which system would consume more? The Intel. Why? AMD bottlenecked the GPU's so therefore the GPU's consumed half as much. So that's mainly why power consumption can mean in the end completely nothing. Besides since when does a higher power consumption only affect your bills? You'll need better cooling, a board with better VRM, perhaps a new case with better airflow, it's going to be harder to keep it quiet etc. Don't tell me that Haswell CPU's run warmer, yes they do but they transfer tons of less heat to your cooler which is why you don't need a shitload of cooling capacity for Haswell. 

 

[Totally-A-Hero]

FX8350, but I suggest to go with Intel, cause 8350 will still bottleneck games on high-end cards.

no it wont.....

[Totally-A-Hero]

8320 or 50 for budget but you wont regret getting a i5. There both great cpu's.

[nokturrduk84]

8320 or 50 for budget but you wont regret getting a i5. There both great cpu's.

No they aren't. AMD got inferior CPUs.

[Totally-A-Hero]

No they aren't. AMD got inferior CPUs.

Its the difference beetween a bmw and a ford. The ford is a nice car, meets your needs and gets the job done. The BMW is a AMAZING car. Its perfect in every way and has all the extra features you need. It all comes down to if you can afford the BMW. Of course the BMW is better. BMW=Intel, Ford=AMD