Fx6300 or Pentium G3258 for Budget Gaming?

[Majestic]

Why are you posting graphs like this?

If i look at it, i allready rolling on the floor laughing realy.

 

If you just look at it, you allready see, that they are totaly BS. lol

 

.... explain yourself. Contradiction is by no means an argument. In fact, the only one making stupid statements right now...is you.

Both games have heavy mainthreads, like stated above here. They're not BS, just not what you'd expect since reviewers botch most tests.

[Sintezza]

.... explain yourself. Contradiction is by no means an argument. In fact, the only one making stupid statements right now...is you.

Both games have heavy mainthreads, like stated above here. They're not BS, just not what you'd expect since reviewers botch most tests.

 

lol.

 

okay, the FX4320 which is an OEM cpu, and never sold, only in prebuilds, scores 5 fps better in FC4 then a FX8350 on the same clockspeed.

 

Haha thats hillarious, if you have any knowledge about AMD and how the architecture works, then you allready know, what i am talking about lol

 

Or shall i explain?

Because this is realy hillarious haha

[Majestic]

lol.

 

okay, the FX4320 which is an OEM cpu, and never sold, only in prebuilds, scores 5 fps better in FC4 then a FX8350 on the same clockspeed.

 

Haha thats hillarious, if you have any knowledge about AMD and how the architecture works, then you allready know, what i am talking about lol

 

Or shall i explain?

 

It has to share resources over less cores, that's why it's a few frames higher. It's the same reason the X4-980 beats the FX-8350. The 6-8 core FX CPU's are worse than the previous generation in terms of IPC.

The Intel chips are only a few fps higher because of diminishing returns on a GPU-bottleneck situation, throw in an extra GPU and the difference would be severely higher.

 

Why don't you try having an argument without the snearing and patronizing attitude, and go from there.

[Sintezza]

It has to share resources over less cores, that's why it's a few frames higher. It's the same reason the X4-980 beats the FX-8350. The 6-8 core FX CPU's are worse than the previous generation in terms of IPC.

The Intel chips are only a few fps higher because of diminishing returns on a GPU-bottleneck situation, throw in an extra GPU and the difference would be severely higher.

 

Why are you being such an a-hole about it though. You could've just had an argument without the snearing and prodding and patronizing attitude.

 

Hahahaha you are completely wrong.

 

In fact, let me explain, the FX cpu´s are all exactly the same cpu´s.

the FX8350 is totaly the same chip as the FX4320, the only diffrence is that the FX8350 has all 4 modules activated, and the FX4320 has 2 modules disabled, further both chips have totaly the same ipc.

 

You have clearly no clue about how AMD works.

So i would assume its better to take those numbers with a big grain of salt

[i_build_nanosuits]

okay, the FX4320 which is an OEM cpu, and never sold, only in prebuilds, scores 5 fps better in FC4 then a FX8350 on the same clockspeed.

it's 3FPS, not 5...and this is called margin of error.

as you can see the FX4, FX6 and FX8 all perform the same, or within margin of error from each other, those are honest results.

[Majestic]

You have clearly no clue about how AMD works.

 

You completely skipped the shared resources part. Which makes you, in fact, the clueless one. Disabling two modules on a FX-8350 will get you a better IPC.

 

Furthermore, "hahahahaha" is a sure way to create dissonance among participants. I'm not exactly phased by this, but less seasoned people on forums will be insulted and this quickly will result in a flamewar. Why don't you learn how to communicate first, ok?

[Sintezza]

it's 3FPS, not 5...and this is called margin of error.

as you can see the FX4, FX6 and FX8 all perform the same, or within margin of error from each other, those are honest results.

 

No technically they are not, infact the FX43xx does not perform like a true quadcore.

[i_build_nanosuits]

No technically they are not, infact the FX43xx does not perform like a true quadcore.

well i guess when it comes to playing farcry 4 at 1920x1200 on ULTRA preset with a GTX980, it does.

[Sintezza]

You completely skipped the shared resources part. Which makes you, in fact, the clueless one. Disabling two modules on a FX-8350 will get you a better IPC.

 

Furthermore, "hahahahaha" is a sure way to create dissonance among participants. I'm not exactly phased by this, but less seasoned people on forums will be insulted and this quickly will result in a flamewar. Why don't you learn how to communicate first, ok?

 

Again you are totaly wrong, the cores are still the same lol.

The only way to get better ipc on a FX8 core, is disabling every second core inside the module, and overclock the northbridge.

 

you  simply have no clue about amd.

 

#end

[Majestic]

well i guess when it comes to playing farcry 4 at 1920x1200 on ULTRA preset with a GTX980, it does.

 

No technically they are not, infact the FX43xx does not perform like a true quadcore.

 

Look at the i3 vs i5. Clearly the game isn't scaling past 2/3 threads. Either the mainthread is too heavy or the game isn't coded better.

[i_build_nanosuits]

Look at the i3 vs i5. Clearly the game isn't scaling past 2/3 threads. Either the mainthread is too heavy or the game isn't coded better.

core 3 is pinned on my machine and other cores do work but i'm sure the overall performance is limited to what core 3 can process.

[Sintezza]

Look at the i3 vs i5. Clearly the game isn't scaling past 2/3 threads. Either the mainthread is too heavy or the game isn't coded better.

 

i dont talk about intel

 

But that still does not matter.

The bottom line is the a FX4320 is the same chip as the FX8350 basicly. it does not have better ipc whats so ever.

 

So its just simple, its only 4/5 fps which is in a margin of error. But technicaly these numbers can be taking with big grain of salt.

[Majestic]

i dont talk about intel

 

Clearly.

 

Again you are totaly wrong, the cores are still the same lol.

The only way to get better ipc on a FX8 core, is disabling every second core inside the module, and overclock the northbridge.

 

How can I be "totally wrong" when you're basically agreeing. Just because I chose a different way to write it down. The fact is, the less resource sharing it has to do, the better IPC gets. So it's not that hard to understand how a the 4320 can be higher. It can just aswell be margin of error, because eventhough it has less cores to share it also has half the resources. Which only compounds why those 1080p "real world" benchmarks suck. It can lead to bad conclusions due to the low margin of error. Which is why I link particularly mainthread heavy games, to create more of a difference (like that skyrim one).

 

And you're right, my information regarding AMD is somewhat limited. But it's because they're not interesting at all, and I haven't owned one since Athlon 64. It hasn't really improved much since the X4-980BE. And that was 2010-ish.

Seriously though, what is your argument towards the OP. You're just ranting over nothing and causing the topic to derail, Kira. 

[Sintezza]

Clearly.

 

 

How can I be "totally wrong" when you're basically agreeing. Just because I chose a different way to write it down. The fact is, the less resource sharing it has to do, the better IPC gets. So it's not that hard to understand how a the 4320 can be higher. It can just aswell be margin of error. Which only compounds why those 1080p "real world" benchmarks suck. It can lead to bad conclusions due to the low margin of error.

And you're right, my information regarding AMD is somewhat limited. But it's because they're not interesting at all, and I haven't owned one since Athlon 64. It hasn't really improved much since the X4-980BE. And that was 2010.

 

agreeing?

 

you say something completely diffrent then i said.

You talk about disabling modules, i talk about disabling cores, makes allot of sense

 

Like i said all FX-x3xx cpu´s have all the same ipc.

Which can be improved by disabling cores.

 

That AMD is limited by its own CMT archticture, thats totaly correct.

That games run better on intel, sure

i suppose you did mean it right, but probably wrote it down the wrong way.

 

But yeah i dont wanne mess up the topic indeed, so im sorry

[i_build_nanosuits]

i think what is happening in the farcry4 results is that clearly the AMD CPU's are limited by the speed at which the core 3 can process the instructions...so adding more cores will help off load some stuff from it to other cores but still limited by the poor single-threaded performance (same goes for intel cpu's but the IPC being higher it's just less painful.)

[Sintezza]

i think what is happening in the farcry4 results is that clearly the AMD CPU's are limited by the speed at which the core 3 can process the instructions...so adding more cores will help off load some stuff from it to other cores but still limited by the poor single-threaded performance (same goes for intel cpu's but the IPC being higher it's just less painful.)

 

Na well the thing is just that the per core performance from AMD FX cpu´s simply sucks compaired to haswell.

 

Still if it is my money, and i had to choose between a pentium G and a FX6300, i would personaly still grab the FX6300, because it has more potential, in diffrent type of games.

But yeah again there are also allot of games, in which the pentium G overclocked does a better job. games that are not utilizing more then 2 main threads.

But games that are realy using 4 main threads, like we start to see more frenqualy now, the FX will be better in those, but still not optimal. Because even if the FX6300 is a true 6 core, it still does not perform like now. simply because of its CMT architecture limitation

However, an i5 is still allot better for gaming, then any FX

[i_build_nanosuits]

Na well the thing is just that the per core performance from AMD FX cpu´s simply sucks compaired to haswell.

 

Still if it is my money, and i had to choose between a pentium G and a FX6300, i would personaly still grab the FX6300, because it has more potential, in diffrent type of games.

However, an i5 is still allot better for gaming, then any FX

exactly...a dual core CPU is just not cutting it anymore for modern games regardless of how great of a performer it is, even highly overclocked...

when a game require 4 sets of instructions to be processed at once, a cpu that can queue them and process them one after the other but very fast

is not good enough to keep the framerate stable...stuttering and hitching enter the arena. ...i rather have slightly less FPS overall but have them steadily

disaplayed and not having the games taking small pauses all the time which is very anoying and makes game turn to unplayable very quickly.

 

...and as you can see ubisoft have solved this issue, the pentium is not listed in the CPU benches for Farcry4 and dragon age cause it can't even launch the games...done deal.

[Sintezza]

exactly...a dual core CPU is just not cutting it anymore for modern games regardless of how great of a performer it is, even highly overclocked...

when a game require 4 sets of instructions to be processed at once, a cpu that can queue them and process them one after the other but very fast

is not good enough to keep the framerate stable...stuttering and hitching enter the arena. ...i rather have slightly less FPS overall but have them steadily

disaplayed and not having the games taking small pauses all the time which is very anoying and makes game turn to unplayable very quickly.

 

 

 

yes and thats a bottleneck lol

[i_build_nanosuits]

Well the FX 8320 bundle at Micro Center is 20$ more than the FX 6300

and how much more would a core i3-43XX and a B85 motherboard would cost you?

and how about a locked core i5-44XX and a cheap board?

[Opcode]

The FX-8320 is $119 now so I would go with that.

[Sintezza]

FX8320 you will need a decent mobo with good vreg design to run it. also you need good cooling.

If you all count that into the end costs, i think that an i5 can be compairable in price at the end.

 

For $119,- its offcourse dirt cheap, with a $100,- ish mobo you still are cheap, but yeah.

A locked i5 is arround $190,- you can also pair this with a cheap mobo. then the diffrences wont be big in price.

But performance wise in some cpu bound games, there will be a diffrence. especialy in the minim frames. which are the most important exaly.

[Majestic]

The FX-8320 is $119 now so I would go with that.

 

I wouldn't. Either go budget with the 860K, or get something proper like an i3-43xx or i5-44xx.

[i_build_nanosuits]

FX8320 you will need a decent mobo with good vreg design to run it. also you need good cooling.

If you all count that into the end costs, i think that an i5 can be compairable in price at the end.

 

For $119,- its offcourse dirt cheap, with a $100,- ish mobo you still are cheap, but yeah.

A locked i5 is arround $190,- you can also pair this with a cheap mobo. then the diffrences wont be big in price.

But performance wise in some cpu bound games, there will be a diffrence. especialy in the minim frames. which are the most important exaly.

 

I wouldn't. Either go budget with the 860K, or get something proper like an i3-43xx or i5-44xx.

i agree...the FX 8 core you must consider the price for the entire platform, cause you'll need a beefier motherboard and idealy an aftermarket cpu cooler...and this will end up costing about the same as this kit that stomps an overclocked FX big time in games:

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-4460 3.2GHz Quad-Core Processor  ($169.98 @ SuperBiiz)

Motherboard: ASRock H97M PRO4 Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard  ($61.99 @ Newegg)

Total: $231.97

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-11-26 14:19 EST-0500

[Sintezza]

I wouldn't. Either go budget with the 860K, or get something proper like an i3-43xx or i5-44xx.

 

i agree,  depending on the budget, i would grab a locked i5 over the FX8320 any day of the week for gaming.

Because in terms of pricing, in the end, it does not matter much.

But in cpu bound games, the diffrence in fps somethimes can be huge on the minimum fps, which are the most important.

 

i own an FX8350 my self for 2 years, and i can tell you, if you can afford it.

Just go with an i5 for pure gaming.

[reapersivan]

http://www.microcenter.com/site/products/amd_bundles.aspx

This shows the prices of the bundles. Would an Fx perform well with an Asus M5A97?