CPU Poll

[Nena Trinity]

Wrong and wrong, Steamroller increased performance by around 10-15% over piledriver.

Last time I saw tests the FX-4300 was 5-10% better!

 

Then again even if, the 6 cores is better in newer games...

 

Edit:

CPUBoss and Game Debate says 860K is better than FX-4300 so it may be true about better cores.

 

Userbenchmark says there are preety much same... (also it seems to be hard to find a real test anywhere!)

[Sam Z Man]

Last time I saw tests the FX-4300 was 5-10% better!

 

Then again even if, the 6 cores is better in newer games...

 

Edit:

CPUBoss and Game Debate says 860K is better than FX-4300 so it may be true about better cores.

 

Userbenchmark says there are preety much same... (also it seems to be hard to find a real test anywhere!)

Honestly look at in depth reviews on the microarchitecture, and size when did newer games Benifit from six cores, because they don't.

[Nena Trinity]

Honestly look at in depth reviews on the microarchitecture, and size when did newer games Benifit from six cores, because they don't.

All modern games does like more cores!  

 

Even Unreal Tournament 3(before 2010) has 8 core support!

[Me1z]

-The i3 560 is old as dirt and has terrible single threaded performance, this is the potato option.

 

-The Athlon X4 860K has better single threaded performance than the i3 but it still sucks. 

 

-The Pentium G3258 has nice single threaded performance and can be overclocked up the wazoo, but its still a dual core and has compatibility issues with newer games.

 

-The FX 6300 has single threaded performance in the same range as the Athlon, but at least it has 2 extra cores to compensate. Not ideal, not even close to ideal, but of all the options listed this one makes the most sense.

 

My suggestion? Forget about all of these sucky options and go digging around on ebay for some second hand X58 components. Look for a deal on an X5650, sometimes you can find them as low as $70.

[Sam Z Man]

All modern games does like more cores!  

 

Even Unreal Tournament 3(before 2010) has 8 core support!

How about the games people actually play, what triple a tiles use 6 cores.

[Nena Trinity]

How about the games people actually play, what triple a tiles use 6 cores.

Witcher 3 uses 8 cores! Not to mention all source engine games support multiple-cores. And any Game using Unreal or Frostbite engine... Even Ubisoft games does! (you most have quad to start them lol) So most main stream games support more cores. Indie games does however rarely support it and many older games but they are so old even a Toaster(macbook) can play them...

[Dabombinable]

This is wrong.  Phenom cores are not a lot faster.  They are roughly the same as steamroller cores, clock for clock.

 

Look at this single-threaded performance chart, and compare the Phenom II 980 (3.7GHz) vs. the 860K (3.7GHz, turbo to 4GHz).  The 860K comes out ahead, and as I say, the Steamroller cores can be clocked higher than 4GHz, whereas Phenom's tend to top out around 4GHz.

 

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

 

My unlocked X3 Deneb runs at 3.9GHz, and in this benchmark it tops out at 1400 in single-threaded performance.  A stock 8350 or 860K beats it, and overclocked the gap widens.

 

I personally wouldn't buy or recommend an AMD CPU today, but if I had to I'd go with the 860K since you can pair it with a mobo for ~$130 USD.

The Athlon isn't CMT, CMT based CPU's such as the line of APU's and FX CPU's are the ones with lower single threaded performance. And I've had a friend move from a quote 'AMD quad core to a high end AMD 8 core and I'm regretting the upgrade, because everything seems slower'. And that 8350 consumes more power and has a lower IPC than the Phenom II line. Just like my Xeon-which is around the same age as a Phenom II-clock for clock CPU's from both lines are faster than any CMT based FX CPU/APU.

[Dabombinable]

Witcher 3 uses 8 cores! Not to mention all source engine games support multiple-cores. And any Game using Unreal or Frostbite engine... Even Ubisoft games does! (you most have quad to start them lol) So most main stream games support more cores. Indie games does however rarely support it and many older games but they are so old even a Toaster(macbook) can play them...

Case and point: Not enough games use more than 4 threads to justify an FX 6300 for gaming-even if it didn't bottleneck a graphics card above the 280/280X. And I've actually got Unreal Tournament 3, 2 threads were used on my Xeon X5450, and the other 2 were pretty much idling. It won't make use of an 8 thread CPU if it can't even make use of a quad core.

[Prysin]

Did you see how well new broadwell chips do, they smash amd apu's... 

At that price point, the 15-20% increase is simply not worth it.

 

The difference between the boardwell running purely on intergrated graphics you can easily buy a R9 260X or 270, and thus blow way way past the i5 broadwell

 

If the broadwell chips drops in price, like A LOT, it will certainly be worth it over any AMD APU. But for the moment, intel out-priced themselves, hardcore.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Intel-Broadwell-Core-i5-5675C-BX80658i55675C/dp/B00YAEA1CE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1435011186&sr=8-1&keywords=intel+i5+5675c

So that is 342 USD

 

http://www.amazon.com/AMD-7870K-Processors-Socket-AD787KXDJCBOX/dp/B00Y1AJLS2/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1435011245&sr=8-1&keywords=AMD+A10+7870k

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=AT-927VP2L&c=CJ

And lets add that famous 26 USD Hyper 212 Evo since you cannot run AMD off stock cooler

 

147 USD + 168 USD + 26 USD = 341 USD

 

So... the cheapest broadwell VS A10 7870k with 270X and a cooler. Still cheaper. FM2+ also has cheap motherboards of decent quality (even A88 boards). So all in all, AMD wins this one. Intel is too expensive for too little performance gain. If they drop their boardwell price by 100 USD, then damn, that is an irresistible monster, but at that price, you can even snag a locked lower end i5 + GPU and still beat the broadwell for only 20-30 USD higher price.

[Faceman]

nena, just because a game can use 8 threads, doesn't mean it benefits from it. Even then modern, multithreaded games which can use all 8 threads are still running better on i3s and i5s than FX8s.

[Ketcchup]

Last time I saw tests the FX-4300 was 5-10% better!

Then again even if, the 6 cores is better in newer games...

Edit:

CPUBoss and Game Debate says 860K is better than FX-4300 so it may be true about better cores.

Userbenchmark says there are preety much same... (also it seems to be hard to find a real test anywhere!)

Lack of L3 and slow memory controller holds 860K back.

Clock for clock, it should be 10-15% better if it had L3

Anyway in some benchmarks 860K at 4.4Ghz outperforms fx4300 at 4.9ghz or so

[flipped_bit]

The Athlon isn't CMT, CMT based CPU's such as the line of APU's and FX CPU's are the ones with lower single threaded performance. And I've had a friend move from a quote 'AMD quad core to a high end AMD 8 core and I'm regretting the upgrade, because everything seems slower'. And that 8350 consumes more power and has a lower IPC than the Phenom II line. Just like my Xeon-which is around the same age as a Phenom II-clock for clock CPU's from both lines are faster than any CMT based FX CPU/APU.

 

I should have been clear, my Athlon II X3 is unlocked to a Phenom Deneb CPU with the 6MB of L3 cache.  It is now a Phenom, not an Athlon. 

[Nena Trinity]

Case and point: Not enough games use more than 4 threads to justify an FX 6300 for gaming-even if it didn't bottleneck a graphics card above the 280/280X. And I've actually got Unreal Tournament 3, 2 threads were used on my Xeon X5450, and the other 2 were pretty much idling. It won't make use of an 8 thread CPU if it can't even make use of a quad core.

So is MSI Afterburner lies when it says all cores are used?

 

nena, just because a game can use 8 threads, doesn't mean it benefits from it. Even then modern, multithreaded games which can use all 8 threads are still running better on i3s and i5s than FX8s.

Witcher did not is that not modern?

 

 

Lack of L3 and slow memory controller holds 860K back.

Clock for clock, it should be 10-15% better if it had L3

Anyway in some benchmarks 860K at 4.4Ghz outperforms fx4300 at 4.9ghz or so

 

Sounds about right to me.