FX series with Direct X12

[*DeXTeR*]

4 minutes ago, ApolloFury said:

I also have FX-8350 for years. You can't just get any cheap AM3 motherboard for the 8-core FX CPU while with an i3 you can get away with anything.

 

I made a mistake on buying a $100 AUD AM3 motherboard which doesn't have enough VRMs for it to work well and I had to buy another AM3 motherboard of atleast $150 AUD for those VRMs,

 

With an i3 you can just buy any $80 Intel H or B series motherboard and be done with it.

 

Oh and those stock coolers on these FX-8320 / 8350 are so damm loud and had to be set to 100% speed for it to not throttle.

 

No they don't come with the wraith cooler.

newer use stick coolers on any of my CPU-s

[TheRandomness]

-Thread moved to CPUs, Motherboards, and Memory.

[*DeXTeR*]

3 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

-Thread moved to CPUs, Motherboards, and Memory.

Thx and sorry my bad am new here

[SCHISCHKA]

10 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

So I would definitely not say FX is "good" for multithreaded workloads. I would say multithreaded workloads is the only scenario where it is "not-terrible", but it is horrible at everything else.

its from 2011. comparing it to 2017 is a bit much. when it came out you got twice the threads of intel for half the price. thats why i have to repeat myself i would not buy one today unless i was looking at cheap second hand

[PlayModeOn]

7 minutes ago, *DeXTeR* said:

newer use stick coolers on any of my CPU-s

watercooled overclocked fx cpu could barely match an i3 or i5 on a stock cooler on dx12 or vulkan. I don't get why you would spend more money for less performance, especially when you need a decent board for it.

 

Even in some multi-threaded software an i3 would outperform an FX-8320. If it can be beaten by some dual core CPU on a multi-threaded workflow, then how can dx12 or vulkan can fix that when they are designed to make games more multi-threaded in the first place??

[*DeXTeR*]

1 minute ago, PlayModeOn said:

watercooled overclocked fx cpu could barely match an i3 or i5 on a stock cooler on dx12 or vulkan. I don't get why you would spend more money for less performance, especially when you need a decent board for it.

 

Even in some multi-threaded software an i3 would outperform an FX-8320. If it can be beaten by some dual core CPU on a multi-threaded workflow, then how can dx12 or vulkan can fix that when they are designed to make games more multi-threaded in the first place??

How your PC is working for some games I see you have AMD parts :).

[PlayModeOn]

31 minutes ago, *DeXTeR* said:

How your PC is working for some games I see you have AMD parts :).

I haven't been online for a long time and I should update my signature.

I actually have an i5 7500 now.

 

I get 50% (~ish) more FPS and less stuttering. So like for example in BF4 (my first PC game back in 2013 with a FX-8350) I would get like 70FPS with drops below to 50s, now I can easily get 110FPS and no drops below 70, I test both CPU in in singleplayer since its hard to test in multiplayer when no one plays the game anymore.

 

I also played Forza Horizon (demo) on both CPUs and I do get 15FPS more with higher minimums on the i5, so its less stuttery and it is a DX12 game.

 

Doom I pretty much have the same FPS but the i5 does have better minimums (less drops).

 

Doom is like the best example of Vulkan right now and when you have an i5 and i3 beating a FX-8370 and FX-9590 on a game that is supposed to use as much of the hardware as possible then it doesn't look good for the FX.

 

 

An i5 7500 here in Australia is only $265 while the FX-8350 is still $250.

Both are cooled with an Arctic Freezer 13 cooler.

 

And like that guy said if an i3 is already outperforming a FX-8350 in heavy multithreading (the thing the FX series was originally designed to do), then DX12 or Vulkan can't do anymore better.

 

The reason why I bought an i5 7500 because I want to go back and play games I haven't finished such as The Witcher 2 and Bioshock 2, I rarely play recent games because of studies/work. I gave my FX and motherboard to my dad so that the family can have an extra computer.

[Coaxialgamer]

Just don't. Get ryzen 3 when it comes out in a few months. Starts at 129$

[*DeXTeR*]

Well I was thinking for this thing I have option to buy used parts for 160€ 

Mother Board: Asus Sabertooth 990FX

Procesor FX 8320 

Memory 8 GB DDR3 1866Mhz 

I thought is good option for maybe two more years am planing to OC this PC and enjoy in medium settings at most of the games

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, SCHISCHKA said:

its from 2011. comparing it to 2017 is a bit much. when it came out you got twice the threads of intel for half the price. thats why i have to repeat myself i would not buy one today unless i was looking at cheap second hand

Well I guess it depends on how cheap you could get it second hand. It does not sound like OP is shopping around second hand though, so I think it is important to be blunt and get OP to understand that, compared to the competition today, it is not good.

 

Also, you might have gotten "twice the threads for half the price", but each thread was horrible. It's like saying you can buy 4 bicycles for half the price of a car, and you get "twice the wheels for half the price". Who cares about thread count if each thread is shit?

[SCHISCHKA]

Just now, LAwLz said:

Also, you might have gotten "twice the threads for half the price", but each thread was horrible. It's like saying you can buy 4 bicycles for half the price of a car, and you get "twice the wheels for half the price". Who cares about thread count if each thread is shit?

only shit for games i base this on linux compile times and virtual machine performance which is important to me in android development

[LAwLz]

On 3/24/2017 at 11:18 AM, SCHISCHKA said:

only shit for games i base this on linux compile times and virtual machine performance which is important to me in android development

Fairly sure it isn't exactly good at those things either. It's just not "as bad" as it is for gaming and basically any other type of program.

I mean, look at this:

For compiling Firefox it performed like a 2500K. That's terrible considering it has twice the cores, way higher clock speed, and far less overclocking headroom.

That's not what I would consider "good". I would say that's really mediocre or maybe even bad.

 

On 3/24/2017 at 11:12 AM, *DeXTeR* said:

Well I was thinking for this thing I have option to buy used parts for 160€ 

Mother Board: Asus Sabertooth 990FX

Procesor FX 8320 

Memory 8 GB DDR3 1866Mhz 

I thought is good option for maybe two more years am planing to OC this PC and enjoy in medium settings at most of the games

That's 160 euro for the motherboard, processor and RAM together, right?

I don't know where you are buying from but at 160 euro that might be a pretty good price, but you really are buying into a terrible platform.

 

I would just wait for Ryzen 5. Save up a bit more money if you have to. It will be way better for everything but some very niche things (where it will perform the same).

[SCHISCHKA]

41 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Fairly sure it isn't exactly good at those things either. It's just not "as bad" as it is for gaming and basically any other type of program.

I mean, look at this:

For compiling Firefox it performed like a 2500K. That's terrible considering it has twice the cores, way higher clock speed, and far less overclocking headroom.

That's not what I would consider "good". I would say that's really mediocre or maybe even bad.

Your trying to prove something but you have just confirmed what i am saying. This a seven year old argument. For software development and an 8 core processor you got a bargain back in 2011 for an AMD-FX. The gamer hate is lovely because it made it cheap. I wouldnt buy one brand new now because its too old.

this is the last time i am going to tell you this. LOOK AT THE PRICE/PERFORMANCE

[LAwLz]

52 minutes ago, SCHISCHKA said:

Your trying to prove something but you have just confirmed what i am saying. This a seven year old argument. For software development and an 8 core processor you got a bargain back in 2011 for an AMD-FX. The gamer hate is lovely because it made it cheap. I wouldnt buy one brand new now because its too old.

this is the last time i am going to tell you this. LOOK AT THE PRICE/PERFORMANCE

How was it a bargain back in 2011 when it only performed like an 2500K?

8350 - 200 USD

3570K - 212 USD

 

 

For software development, which was one of FX's strongest areas, you actually got worse price:performance than if you went with Intel.

 

By going with the 3570K instead of the 8350 you spent 6% more money, and got 7.7% higher performance for compiling with VS.

And if you want to bring up overclocking or something like that then let me remind you that the i5 overclocked better, so the performance gap after overclocking both was larger.

 

The FX chip was bad the day it was launched. It was horrible at most things, and could just barely keep up both in terms of speed and price:performance in a few select areas. But even for those things it was not a good chip. It was just near on-par with what Intel was offering.

 

 

Now, you might be arguing that you were talking about the 8150, but that's not what OP is talking about (and that could not keep up with the 2500K either, even in stuff like code compilation, and it was more expensive than the 2500K).