Will I need to update bios

[Number 29]

Will I need to update the bios using this cpu and mobo? 

 

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

 

CPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor  ($96.69 @ OutletPC) 

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-970A-DS3P ATX AM3+ Motherboard  ($66.99 @ SuperBiiz) 

Memory: Crucial Ballistix Sport 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory  ($72.99 @ Newegg) 

Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive  ($51.85 @ OutletPC) 

Video Card: MSI Radeon R9 270 2GB TWIN FROZR Video Card  ($144.99 @ Newegg) 

Case: NZXT Source 210 (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case  (Purchased For $0.00) 

Power Supply: EVGA 500W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply  ($24.99 @ Newegg) 

Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8.1 (OEM) (64-bit)  ($89.98 @ OutletPC) 

Total: $548.48

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-12-24 14:49 EST-0500

[IMPERIUS]

I think not. But for that money (or if you could add just a bit kore) you could get an i5. I have a very similar setup

[Faceman]

Here is a much better gaming build:

 

PCPartPicker part list: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/vBhFpg
Price breakdown by merchant: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/vBhFpg/by_merchant/

CPU: Intel Core i3-4130 3.4GHz Dual-Core Processor  ($106.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Motherboard: MSI H81M-P33 Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard  ($43.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Memory: G.Skill Sniper 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory  ($59.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive  ($51.85 @ OutletPC)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon R9 280 3GB Dual-X Video Card  ($164.99 @ Newegg)
Case: NZXT Source 210 (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case  (Purchased For $0.00)
Power Supply: EVGA 600B 600W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply  ($29.99 @ NCIX US)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8.1 (OEM) (64-bit)  ($89.98 @ OutletPC)
Total: $547.78
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-12-24 15:03 EST-0500

 

If you don't believe me, check out these benchmarks:

 

 

Benchmarks:

http://www.hardcorew...-4340-review/2/

http://www.hardwarep...8-games-tested/

http://www.tomshardw...cpu,3929-7.html

http://www.anandtech...w-vishera-95w/3

http://techreport.com/review/23750/amd-fx-8350-processor-reviewed/14

 

 

"To put it nicely, the FX-8370E is a true middle-of-the-road CPU. Using it only makes sense as long as the graphics card you choose comes from a similar performance segment.

Depending on the game in question, AMD’s new processor has the potential to keep you happy around the AMD Radeon R9 270X/285 or Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 or 660 Ti level.

A higher- or even high-end graphics card doesn’t make sense, as pairing it with AMD's FX-8370E simply limits the card's potential."

 

"This is a huge result – it wasn’t until we used a Haswell core CPU that the R9 280X  was able to deliver consistent frame times and a 60 FPS frame rate in Assassin’s Creed IV. All three AMD CPUs we used – even the FX 8350 – and the Ivy Bridge Core i3 would deliver a sub 60 FPS frame rate, with frame spikes throughout the benchmark run.

In this case, the Core i3 4340 allows the R9 280X GPU to run at maximum potential, just like the Core i5 (and Core i7 would)."

 

"Pop over to the gaming scatter, though, and the picture changes dramatically. There, the FX-8350 is the highest-performance AMD desktop processor to date for gaming, finally toppling the venerable Phenom II X4 980. Yet the FX-8350's gaming performance almost exactly matches that of the Core i3-3225, a $134 Ivy Bridge-based processor. Meanwhile, the Core i5-3470 delivers markedly superior gaming performance for less money than the FX-8350. The FX-8350 isn't exactly bad for video games—its performance was generally acceptable in our tests. But it is relatively weak compared to the competition.

This strange divergence between the two performance pictures isn't just confined to gaming, of course. The FX-8350 is also relatively pokey in image processing applications, in SunSpider, and in the less widely multithreaded portions of our video encoding tests. Many of these scenarios rely on one or several threads, and the FX-8350 suffers compared to recent Intel chips in such cases. Still, the contrast between the FX-8350 and the Sandy/Ivy Bridge chips isn't nearly as acute as it was with the older FX processors. Piledriver's IPC gains and that 4GHz base clock have taken the edge off of our objections.

The other major consideration here is power consumption, and really, the FX-8350 isn't even the same class of product as the Ivy Bridge Core i5 processors on this front. There's a 48W gap between the TDP ratings of the Core i5 parts and the FX-8350, but in our tests, the actual difference at the wall socket between two similarly configured systems under load was over 100W. That gap is large enough to force the potential buyer to think deeply about the class of power supply, case, and CPU cooler he needs for his build. One could definitely get away with less expensive components for a Core i5 system."

 

"The FX-8370E stretches its legs a little in terms of minimum frame rates, particularly in SLI, however it is handily beaten by the i3-4330."

 

"Average frametimes did not do AMD’s processors any justice either. As we already said the game was fluid with i7 and i5’s, and somewhat playable with the i3 processor line. When we switched to FX CPUs not only did we have worse framerate but the gameplay was simply put, laggy."

[small2cats]

Don't think so man

[Number 29]

Here is a much better gaming build:

 

PCPartPicker part list: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/vBhFpg

Price breakdown by merchant: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/vBhFpg/by_merchant/

CPU: Intel Core i3-4130 3.4GHz Dual-Core Processor  ($106.99 @ SuperBiiz)

Motherboard: MSI H81M-P33 Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard  ($43.99 @ SuperBiiz)

Memory: G.Skill Sniper 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory  ($59.99 @ Newegg)

Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive  ($51.85 @ OutletPC)

Video Card: Sapphire Radeon R9 280 3GB Dual-X Video Card  ($164.99 @ Newegg)

Case: NZXT Source 210 (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case  (Purchased For $0.00)

Power Supply: EVGA 600B 600W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply  ($29.99 @ NCIX US)

Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8.1 (OEM) (64-bit)  ($89.98 @ OutletPC)

Total: $547.78

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-12-24 15:03 EST-0500

 

If you don't believe me, check out these benchmarks:

 

 

Benchmarks:

http://www.hardcorew...-4340-review/2/

http://www.hardwarep...8-games-tested/

http://www.tomshardw...cpu,3929-7.html

http://www.anandtech...w-vishera-95w/3

http://techreport.com/review/23750/amd-fx-8350-processor-reviewed/14

 

 

"To put it nicely, the FX-8370E is a true middle-of-the-road CPU. Using it only makes sense as long as the graphics card you choose comes from a similar performance segment.

Depending on the game in question, AMD’s new processor has the potential to keep you happy around the AMD Radeon R9 270X/285 or Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 or 660 Ti level.

A higher- or even high-end graphics card doesn’t make sense, as pairing it with AMD's FX-8370E simply limits the card's potential."

 

"This is a huge result – it wasn’t until we used a Haswell core CPU that the R9 280X  was able to deliver consistent frame times and a 60 FPS frame rate in Assassin’s Creed IV. All three AMD CPUs we used – even the FX 8350 – and the Ivy Bridge Core i3 would deliver a sub 60 FPS frame rate, with frame spikes throughout the benchmark run.

In this case, the Core i3 4340 allows the R9 280X GPU to run at maximum potential, just like the Core i5 (and Core i7 would)."

 

"Pop over to the gaming scatter, though, and the picture changes dramatically. There, the FX-8350 is the highest-performance AMD desktop processor to date for gaming, finally toppling the venerable Phenom II X4 980. Yet the FX-8350's gaming performance almost exactly matches that of the Core i3-3225, a $134 Ivy Bridge-based processor. Meanwhile, the Core i5-3470 delivers markedly superior gaming performance for less money than the FX-8350. The FX-8350 isn't exactly bad for video games—its performance was generally acceptable in our tests. But it is relatively weak compared to the competition.

This strange divergence between the two performance pictures isn't just confined to gaming, of course. The FX-8350 is also relatively pokey in image processing applications, in SunSpider, and in the less widely multithreaded portions of our video encoding tests. Many of these scenarios rely on one or several threads, and the FX-8350 suffers compared to recent Intel chips in such cases. Still, the contrast between the FX-8350 and the Sandy/Ivy Bridge chips isn't nearly as acute as it was with the older FX processors. Piledriver's IPC gains and that 4GHz base clock have taken the edge off of our objections.

The other major consideration here is power consumption, and really, the FX-8350 isn't even the same class of product as the Ivy Bridge Core i5 processors on this front. There's a 48W gap between the TDP ratings of the Core i5 parts and the FX-8350, but in our tests, the actual difference at the wall socket between two similarly configured systems under load was over 100W. That gap is large enough to force the potential buyer to think deeply about the class of power supply, case, and CPU cooler he needs for his build. One could definitely get away with less expensive components for a Core i5 system."

 

"The FX-8370E stretches its legs a little in terms of minimum frame rates, particularly in SLI, however it is handily beaten by the i3-4330."

 

"Average frametimes did not do AMD’s processors any justice either. As we already said the game was fluid with i7 and i5’s, and somewhat playable with the i3 processor line. When we switched to FX CPUs not only did we have worse framerate but the gameplay was simply put, laggy."

this build isnt mainly oriented for gaming though thats why i went 6 core amd

[Faceman]

this build isnt mainly oriented for gaming though thats why i went 6 core amd

Ahh ok...

 

What is the build oriented towards? What specific programs will you be using?

[Number 29]

Ahh ok...

 

What is the build oriented towards? What specific programs will you be using?

I aim to do light/moderate video editing with it and livestreaming also which is where the cores will come in handy for a bit better multi-tasking

[Faceman]

I aim to do light/moderate video editing with it and livestreaming also which is where the cores will come in handy for a bit better multi-tasking

Is that your priority, or is it games?  Also which specific games are you looking to play?

 

The i3 is a perfectly capable multi-tasker, and it will execute commands on the desktop faster than an FX6 because of its stronger per core performance.

[Number 29]

Is that your priority, or is it games?  Also which specific games are you looking to play?

 

The i3 is a perfectly capable multi-tasker, and it will execute commands on the desktop faster than an FX6 because of its stronger per core performance.

mainly light games gmod, runescape, lol, hearthstone, wow, starwars nothing too heavy atleast for now.

[Faceman]

mainly light games gmod, runescape, lol, hearthstone, wow, starwars nothing too heavy atleast for now.

All of those games you listed are games that will run much better on Intel.

WoW specifically is a game that will run infinitely better on Intel.

 

I really implore you to go with Intel.  For starters, you will get better performance in all of those specific games you mentioned.  Except Hearthstone, that runs on a lowly tablet.

2nd You can multitask and stream and edit just fine with an i3.  Maybe not as good as an FX6, but definitely good enough.  The benefits in gaming will far outweigh the benefits in those other areas.

3rd Upgrade path.  With Intel, and more specifically the build I laid out for you, you have an upgrade path to an i5,i7,Xeon. With FX, that build will barely run at stock because that is a 4+1 VRM phase motherboard, overclocking an FX6 is doable, but iffy.  Forget about an FX8 even at stock with just 4+1 VRM phases.  If you wanted to upgrade through FX, you would need a whole new motherboard, and then an FX8, which will still have very poor single core performance which is what those games depend upon.

 

You will be much better off now, and in the future if you went with an i3.  Or if you have more money, an i5 or Xeon.

 

EDIT*  I also forgot to mention that high end GPUs will be bottlenecked by the FX processors.  If you wanted to upgrade your GPU in the future to say a 780/R9 290/970 level, it will be held back by an FX.

 

Bottom line, those specific games, and all MMOs run better on Intel than FX.

[Number 29]

All of those games you listed are games that will run much better on Intel.

WoW specifically is a game that will run infinitely better on Intel.

 

I really implore you to go with Intel.  For starters, you will get better performance in all of those specific games you mentioned.  Except Hearthstone, that runs on a lowly tablet.

2nd You can multitask and stream and edit just fine with an i3.  Maybe not as good as an FX6, but definitely good enough.  The benefits in gaming will far outweigh the benefits in those other areas.

3rd Upgrade path.  With Intel, and more specifically the build I laid out for you, you have an upgrade path to an i5,i7,Xeon. With FX, that build will barely run at stock because that is a 4+1 VRM phase motherboard, overclocking an FX6 is doable, but iffy.  Forget about an FX8 even at stock with just 4+1 VRM phases.  If you wanted to upgrade through FX, you would need a whole new motherboard, and then an FX8, which will still have very poor single core performance which is what those games depend upon.

 

You will be much better off now, and in the future if you went with an i3.  Or if you have more money, an i5 or Xeon.

That motherboard though, when I do upgrade with that path would I have to upgrade the mobo as well?

[Faceman]

That motherboard though, when I do upgrade with that path would I have to upgrade the mobo as well?

For Intel or AMD?

 

For Intel you won't need to upgrade the motherboard unless you want an unlocked processor, but even a locked Intel i3/i5/i7 is going to outperform the highest of overclocked FXs in those games.

 

Because the AM3+ platform is so old and power hungry, it demands proper VRM phase design. 4+2 minimum for stock, 8+2 recommended.

[Number 29]

For Intel or AMD?

 

For Intel you won't need to upgrade the motherboard unless you want an unlocked processor, but even a locked Intel i3/i5/i7 is going to outperform the highest of overclocked FXs in those games.

 

Because the AM3+ platform is so old and power hungry, it demands proper VRM phase design. 4+2 minimum for stock, 8+2 recommended.

For Intel, but do you have any other good suggestions for a motherboard for the Intel build, I prefer to get my parts from Amazon/Newegg only and unfortunately that mobo is out of stock on newegg

[Faceman]

For Intel, but do you have any other good suggestions for a motherboard for the Intel level, I prefer to get my parts from Amazon/Newegg only and unfortunately that mobo is out of stock on newegg

Intel is a much newer technology, its on 22nm lithography compared to 32nm of AMD.  It consumes much less power(saving about $8 per year going with an i3 instead of FX6 in the U.S.) and doesn't need as serious VRM phases as FX processors.  Also, these Intel motherboards are more modern, so they have better components.  While the motherboard I selected is considered "low end" it is all that you need to power an Intel processor, i3 through i7.

 

Here is actually a pretty good motherboard that is even less expensive.  It is from a lesser known brand, but it has good stats.  4 DIMMS compared to 2, so you can place more RAM. It also has USB 3.0, and 4 SATA 6GB/s ports. ECS B85H3-M - $32.  Ignore those negative reviews, the people who graded it poorly only have themselves to blame because they didn't check compatibility first.

 

Here is another motherboard from a better known manufacturer, Asus.  Asus H81M-D Plus - $45 

 

Do you live near a Microcenter by chance?

[FuzzyYellow]

That motherboard though, when I do upgrade with that path would I have to upgrade the mobo as well?

nope, i have that exact motherboard, and while is isnt anything too fancy, it gets the job done, and you may even be able to OC an i5 on it later. (i OCed my G3258 on it)

 

I would reccomentd the MSI or Asus h81 boards because of the overclocking capabilities.

[Faceman]

nope, i have that exact motherboard, and while is isnt anything too fancy, it gets the job done, and you may even be able to OC an i5 on it later. (i OCed my G3258 on it)

 

I would reccomentd the MSI or Asus h81 boards because of the overclocking capabilities.

You cannot OC an unlocked processor on those motherboards, unless you're talking BCLK overclocking, which you might squeeze an extra 200-300Mhz if you're lucky.

 

Overclocking a Pentium on those motherboards works just fine, but not the traditional unlocked "k" processors.

[FuzzyYellow]

You cannot OC an unlocked processor on those motherboards, unless you're talking BCLK overclocking, which you might squeeze an extra 200-300Mhz if you're lucky.

then how do i have my G3258 Ocerclocked to 4.4Ghz @1.25v?

[Faceman]

then how do i have my G3258 Ocerclocked to 4.4Ghz @1.25v?

Because that is a Pentium.  Pentium and those motherboards overclock just fine. 

 

You cannot overclock the "k" series processors on those motherboards.

[FuzzyYellow]

Because that is a Pentium.  Pentium and those motherboards overclock just fine. 

 

You cannot overclock the "k" series processors on those motherboards.

but its still an unlocked CPU.

[Faceman]

but its still an unlocked CPU.

Yes.  It is.  But its a Pentium.  The Pentium is overclockable on those motherboards. 

 

Not the i5xxxxk's or i7xxxxk's

[FuzzyYellow]

Yes.  It is.  But its a Pentium.  The Pentium is overclockable on those motherboards. 

 

Not the i5xxxxk's or i7xxxxk's

yup, did a little reasearch, you're right. sorry.  

 

although i still don't see how it would be any different since they are both unlocked versions of a haswell cpu

[Number 29]

Intel is a much newer technology, its on 22nm lithography compared to 32nm of AMD.  It consumes much less power(saving about $8 per year going with an i3 instead of FX6 in the U.S.) and doesn't need as serious VRM phases as FX processors.  Also, these Intel motherboards are more modern, so they have better components.  While the motherboard I selected is considered "low end" it is all that you need to power an Intel processor, i3 through i7.

 

Here is actually a pretty good motherboard that is even less expensive.  It is from a lesser known brand, but it has good stats.  4 DIMMS compared to 2, so you can place more RAM. It also has USB 3.0, and 4 SATA 6GB/s ports. ECS B85H3-M - $32.  Ignore those negative reviews, the people who graded it poorly only have themselves to blame because they didn't check compatibility first.

 

Here is another motherboard from a better known manufacturer, Asus.  Asus H81M-D Plus - $45 

 

Do you live near a Microcenter by chance?

No, I do not I wish I did though.

[Faceman]

yup, did a little reasearch, you're right. sorry.

 

although i still don't see how it would be any different since they are both unlocked versions of a haswell cpu

Well, the Pentiums are on the lower end of their product line, so they wanted to allow Pentium users to be able to OC on "lower end" motherboards.  If they were to allow i5k and i7k users to overclock willy nilly on $30 motherboards, it would completely cannibalize sales of their higher end Z series motherboards which are required to overclock these "k" series chips via multiplier.

 

Now, one thing I did just learn yesterday is that some ASRock H87/97 motherboards have something called a "non-Z OC" feature.  Which basically automatically sets your CPU to 4.0/4.2/4.4/4.6.  Its not as customizable as a manual BIOS overclock, but it gets the job done, and thats what counts.

[Faceman]

No, I do not I wish I did though.

Yea... Microcenter is amazing.  Their in-store prices are incredible.

 

Anyways, I would go with:

 

PCPartPicker part list: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/j6mmRB

Price breakdown by merchant: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/j6mmRB/by_merchant/

CPU: Intel Core i3-4130 3.4GHz Dual-Core Processor  ($106.99 @ SuperBiiz)

Motherboard: ECS B85H3-M(1.0) Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard  ($31.48 @ Newegg)

Memory: G.Skill Sniper 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory  ($59.99 @ Newegg)

Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive  ($51.85 @ OutletPC)

Video Card: Sapphire Radeon R9 280 3GB Dual-X Video Card  ($164.99 @ Newegg)

Case: NZXT Source 210 (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case  (Purchased For $0.00)

Power Supply: EVGA 600B 600W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply  ($29.99 @ NCIX US)

Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8.1 (OEM) (64-bit)  ($89.98 @ OutletPC)

Total: $535.27

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-12-24 16:24 EST-0500

 

Best performance from day one, as well as being upgrade-ready.  If you do have extra money, go ahead and bump up to an i5-4440.

[Number 29]

Yea... Microcenter is amazing.  Their in-store prices are incredible.

 

Anyways, I would go with:

 

PCPartPicker part list: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/j6mmRB

Price breakdown by merchant: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/j6mmRB/by_merchant/

CPU: Intel Core i3-4130 3.4GHz Dual-Core Processor  ($106.99 @ SuperBiiz)

Motherboard: ECS B85H3-M(1.0) Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard  ($31.48 @ Newegg)

Memory: G.Skill Sniper 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory  ($59.99 @ Newegg)

Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive  ($51.85 @ OutletPC)

Video Card: Sapphire Radeon R9 280 3GB Dual-X Video Card  ($164.99 @ Newegg)

Case: NZXT Source 210 (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case  (Purchased For $0.00)

Power Supply: EVGA 600B 600W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply  ($29.99 @ NCIX US)

Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8.1 (OEM) (64-bit)  ($89.98 @ OutletPC)

Total: $535.27

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-12-24 16:24 EST-0500

 

Best performance from day one, as well as being upgrade-ready.  If you do have extra money, go ahead and bump up to an i5-4440.

im just gonna switch that to the asus board, feel a little more comfortable with that board thank you though, at first i was going with intel but switched the amd sides