Is fx really that bad?

[mortino]

I have 4 systems and one is an fx-6300 running at 5.1ghz and ram is 2999.97, in games at alll resolutions I only see like a 20% from my 7700k at stock with a 1080,  trying to figure out why people shit on fx chips so bad when they are very viable for gaming. There isn't a game today you can't run on at least high with an fx chip.

[Crunchy Dragon]

FX CPUs also use a lot more power than just about everything short of HEDT chips.

 

Usually, FX chips make the most sense when a 4th Gen i5 cannot be found in my opinion. Out of curiosity, what kind of cooling setup do you have to let your 6300 reach 5.1Ghz?

[orbitalbuzzsaw]

The best it offers is 4 "cores"/8 threads with absurd power consumption and heat output, whereas Ryzen offers up to 8 real cores and 16 threads. What do you think?

[Semper]

9 minutes ago, mortino said:

I have 4 systems and one is an fx-6300 running at 5.1ghz and ram is 2999.97, in games at alll resolutions I only see like a 20% from my 7700k at stock with a 1080,  trying to figure out why people shit on fx chips so bad when they are very viable for gaming. There isn't a game today you can't run on at least high with an fx chip.

They get "shit on" because of what they were when they released; archaic. They released on an outdated model, and AMD pilfered a chance to improve on their brand with something, like Ryzen, worth competing with Intel for.

They may be viable, I actually liked my 8150, and subsequent 8350 that replaced it when my motherboard died and took the 8150 with it. Outright, though, my 4790k at stock speeds outperformed my 8350 overclocked, whilst consuming less power, and being easier to keep ambient temperatures down as a result.

[Jurrunio]

because FX at 5.1GHz and DDR3 at 3000MHz is unreasonably expensive to run. To surpress the heat, you need expensive (if not exotic) cooling, while 3000MHz DDR3 cost more than your CPU and mobo combined.

 

On the other hand, you're comparing to a 7700k at stock, which can easily squeeze out another 10% frequency from it's all core turbo clock through overclocking with a big air cooler costing $60 in US. DDR4 3200MHz CL16 kits also cost much less than your DDR3 3000MHz (no matter the timings).

[Streetguru]

17 minutes ago, mortino said:

I have 4 systems and one is an fx-6300 running at 5.1ghz and ram is 2999.97, in games at alll resolutions I only see like a 20% from my 7700k at stock with a 1080,  trying to figure out why people shit on fx chips so bad when they are very viable for gaming. There isn't a game today you can't run on at least high with an fx chip.

They're fine if they're next to free, but they'll struggle to get much past 60fps in modern games

[Mira Yurizaki]

25 minutes ago, mortino said:

I have 4 systems and one is an fx-6300 running at 5.1ghz and ram is 2999.97, in games at alll resolutions I only see like a 20% from my 7700k at stock with a 1080,  trying to figure out why people shit on fx chips so bad when they are very viable for gaming. There isn't a game today you can't run on at least high with an fx chip.

Average frame rates might be good and all, but what about the minimum frame rates? That's where the performance of a processor tends to really shine these days. In a lot of cases a Core i3 (and sometimes a Pentium class) can provide the same or close to the same average performance as a top-end i7, but when it comes to minimums, the i3 will get stamped all over.

[SoreRaito]

44 minutes ago, mortino said:

I have 4 systems and one is an fx-6300 running at 5.1ghz and ram is 2999.97,

 

41 minutes ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

 Out of curiosity, what kind of cooling setup do you have to let your 6300 reach 5.1Ghz?

 

I want to know that to... how in the world are you able to cool the FX chip ?

[Froody129]

Voltage and timings on RAM? Voltage on CPU?

[Quadriplegic]

Yes.

[Pasi123]

Yes, FX is really that bad. Even Core2 Quads beats AMD FX CPU's in single core performance.

[Phentos]

They are "viable" for 60hz gaming in most titles. 

 

My cousin's girlfriend has an FX-6300 based rig that she plays Fortnite and other light games on, and while they run okay, her GTX 970 is still bottlenecked by the processor fairly significantly. The bottleneck becomes painfully obvious when in heavy scenes such as fighting groups of players in Fortnite.

[mortino]

12 hours ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

FX CPUs also use a lot more power than just about everything short of HEDT chips.

 

Usually, FX chips make the most sense when a 4th Gen i5 cannot be found in my opinion. Out of curiosity, what kind of cooling setup do you have to let your 6300 reach 5.1Ghz?

It's just a zalmon single tower cooler, it's pretty big but but nothing crazy. My voltages for that overclock are actually lower than the default turbo boost voltage by a lot.Idling at 33 degrees right now with the fan as low as it goes and it's 41 degrees outside today so inside is pretty toasty too. Don't know where everyone thinks all this power and heat is coming from, I don't even pull 325 watts running prime95 and furmark at the same time, I don't have a meter on me but at 325 watts my PSU fans turn on.

[Crunchy Dragon]

31 minutes ago, mortino said:

Don't know where everyone thinks all this power and heat is coming from

The 8xxx series, mainly.

[Kc7vwc]

35 minutes ago, mortino said:

It's just a zalmon single tower cooler, it's pretty big but but nothing crazy. My voltages for that overclock are actually lower than the default turbo boost voltage by a lot.Idling at 33 degrees right now with the fan as low as it goes and it's 41 degrees outside today so inside is pretty toasty too. Don't know where everyone thinks all this power and heat is coming from, I don't even pull 325 watts running prime95 and furmark at the same time, I don't have a meter on me but at 325 watts my PSU fans turn on.

I had two 6300's & while I only pushed to 4.2, it would always be in the 60-70c range, even on a 120mm AiO in push/pull. Never tried measuring watts, but I did blow a fuse when I put mine & wife's machine (both the exact same 6300 build) on the same circuit. 

[jonrosalia]

2 hours ago, mortino said:

It's just a zalmon single tower cooler, it's pretty big but but nothing crazy. My voltages for that overclock are actually lower than the default turbo boost voltage by a lot.Idling at 33 degrees right now with the fan as low as it goes and it's 41 degrees outside today so inside is pretty toasty too. Don't know where everyone thinks all this power and heat is coming from, I don't even pull 325 watts running prime95 and furmark at the same time, I don't have a meter on me but at 325 watts my PSU fans turn on.

your system and temps don't make sense to me whats the rest of your system that's got this FX running amazing would like to know im looking into a cheap streaming pc and skipped them because of the tdp and people saying they cant keep them cool let me know please. cooler ,case ,motherboard, psu,gpu fan configuration and anything custom you had to do.    

[aezakmi]

FX is highly inefficient, high TDP, a lot of heat and weak cores, it's not the worst series of CPU but it's bad comparing it against similar CPUs like 2nd gen i5/i7 (2XXX K)

[mortino]

On 8/6/2018 at 2:04 PM, Crunchy Dragon said:

The 8xxx series, mainly.

That I agree with that totally 8k chips were hot but also 30 watt TDP higher so like 30% more power. Also I have to make a correction because apparently I made some changes since last time I looked in the bios, something must of become unstable. The overclock is 5ghz or rather 4980mhz, x20 multiplier, 249 FSB, 1.39v (1.42v is the stock turbo boost voltage), 1.7v on the ram and the ram speed is 2988mhz with wide open timings.

 

On 8/6/2018 at 2:18 PM, Kc7vwc said:

I had two 6300's & while I only pushed to 4.2, it would always be in the 60-70c range, even on a 120mm AiO in push/pull. Never tried measuring watts, but I did blow a fuse when I put mine & wife's machine (both the exact same 6300 build) on the same circuit. 

That's crazy. I run my fx6300 system with a 1050ti and my 7700k system with a 1080 with all the peripherals and monitors(4) and a 14000 btu air conditioner on the same 15 amp fuse 24/7.

On 8/6/2018 at 4:33 PM, jonrosalia said:

your system and temps don't make sense to me whats the rest of your system that's got this FX running amazing would like to know im looking into a cheap streaming pc and skipped them because of the tdp and people saying they cant keep them cool let me know please. cooler ,case ,motherboard, psu,gpu fan configuration and anything custom you had to do.    

There is nothing special, it's a 95 watt TDP chip, it has a big single tower air cooler and a 80+ gold psu. the mobo is a UD4 I think with some glass fibric crap, I did manually replace some capacitors though to better higher quality japanese caps when I accidentally messed some up when my system used to be in a very small case with almost no clearance.

On 8/6/2018 at 4:42 PM, aezakmi said:

FX is highly inefficient, high TDP, a lot of heat and weak cores, it's not the worst series of CPU but it's bad comparing it against similar CPUs like 2nd gen i5/i7 (2XXX K)

95Watt TDP ya the cores are weak but they are old and overclock like crazy, I had a 3700k around the same time I bought this chip and OC'd to 4.8(3700k) they were basically the same(in games) from my experience.

[Stefan Payne]

On 6.8.2018 at 6:51 AM, mortino said:

I have 4 systems and one is an fx-6300 running at 5.1ghz and ram is 2999.97, in games at alll resolutions I only see like a 20% from my 7700k at stock with a 1080,  trying to figure out why people shit on fx chips so bad when they are very viable for gaming. There isn't a game today you can't run on at least high with an fx chip.

Depends on the Game and Optimization.

With good Optimization the FX can be at Haswell level or even beat it.

Without that its a bit worse.

On 6.8.2018 at 6:54 AM, Crunchy Dragon said:

FX CPUs also use a lot more power than just about everything short of HEDT chips.

They are not that far from Sandy-Bridge and Lynnfield, especially since Lynnfield has rediculously low Clockrates (usually something like 2,66GHz or so).

 

FX was just too late, so they had to compete with a 32nm Chip with 22nm Intel Chips...