4.2ghz/Quadcore -or- 3.9ghz/Sixcore? (AMD)

[BenWins39]

In the interest of cutting to the chase, while still giving full detail, I'll boldface the most relevant parts of this post...

[edit: AMD FX 4350 or 6350 Black Edition]

[intro]I haven't had a decent, working computer in over two years. A friend of mine is helping me build one after Christmas, and as a result, I've been looking up a LOT of things over the last few days. This forum has come up as the most useful tool for 90% of my inquiries, so I figured that I might as well ask you guys my question directly!

This friend of mine will be donating a few of the parts, such as a USB3.0 motherboard and a video card, so I'm not going to waste my time figuring out video cards until I upgrade. I plan on getting at least 4gb of ram and installing a 64bit OS. He'll help me figure out which PSU I should go with.

As a result, my main point of interest is the processor. I'm also on a tight budget, and I'd like the highest GHZ available for the lowest price, so I'm going to be going with AMD. I'm not very interested in hearing about the i5, i7, etc, purely due to the price range at the store I will be going to.[/intro]

[What I want to use it for:]
My favorite game is Dwarf Fortress, which only runs on a single thread (meaning that only 1 CPU core will be used at a time), and it runs in ASCII, meaning that my GPU will not matter. This game is a CPU hog, and by late-game it will INEVITABLY use up every shred of processing power that I will possibly be able to throw at it.
Therefore, I've been considering going for the .3ghz bonus in each core which is offered by the 4.2ghz quadcore, while spending $20 less.

I don't do very much in the way of Video Editing or Photoshop, etc, but I DO do a LOT of multitasking (I usually have FireFox[20+ tabs plus youtube], Skype, IRC, a game, Steam [for Chat, regardless of use], uTorrent, MS Word [I'm a bit of a writer], etc etc etc, each being actively swapped through at all times), so, my question is, would the two extra cores be useful enough for my uses to warrant a purchase and an extra $20?

Overheating and Turbo Boost is also an important factor in my purchase decision. The 3.9ghz Sixcore can be Turbo Boosted to 4.2ghz (while the 4.2ghz Quadcore can only be boosted to 4.3ghz), which might help to erase the gap and make Dwarf Fortress run just as quickly, but I burned out a laptop once, and am afraid of overheating anything ever again. I will probably be buying aftermarket cooling at some point, but that won't be for a few months.

Thanks!!
Ben

 

[CTurbo]

The 6350 is better. It can be overclocked just as high if not higher than the quad.

 

[CTurbo]

If you're on a tight budget, look no further than the FX 6300. It is the best value. The 6350 is just a factory overclocked 6300. No need to pay extra for it.

 

[BenWins39]

I'm not quite as interested in overclocking (yet), due to the heating problems that I had with a previous computer, and the fears which that has instilled in me. I might even be shy about Turbo Boost for a while.

BUT...
Factory overclocked, huh? Would the FX 6350 run just about as much hotter out-of-the-box as an FX 6300 would when I overclock it myself, then? If that's the case, I might take your advice, overclock, and (marginally) throw my caution to the wind. ... My budget would enjoy that.

 

[nikoli707]

the 4300's are faster clock per clock than the 6300's so in single threads the 4350 would be better. overclocking is easy as long as you have at least a simple hyper 212 cooler.

 

[CTurbo]

They are in the same family and generation and therefor would have identical single core performance @ the same clock speed.

 

[nikoli707]

They are in the same family and generation and therefor would have identical single core performance @ the same clock speed.

not true... clock for clock the 4300's are about 8% faster per core than the 6300's... just as the 6300's are about 5% faster than the 8300's clock for clock per core. this is very well known and tested.

an fx4350@4.5ghz will be almost 10% faster than an 8350@5.0ghz in single and dual threaded apps... very well tested and undoubtedly confirmed.

 

[CTurbo]

That makes no sense. Could you provide a link or two that backs that up?

 

[nikoli707]

look up passmark benchies yourself... google is easy to use.

 

[CTurbo]

FX 8350's stock single core benchmark average(2352 samples) = 1,514
FX 6350's stock single core benchmark average(116 samples) = 1,497
FX 4350's stock single core benchmark average(29 samples) = 1,531

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

 

[BenWins39]

I think I'm gonna go with a hunch and trust the 'CPUs Authority' on this one. Thanks, CTurbo!

The other important part of my question (though I suppose I didn't stress it as much) was, without considering overclocking etc, do you think that heavy multitasking would actually make having six cores worthwhile? I know that it's more useful for video editing, etc, but I had a 2.5ghz dualcore Intel for a while before that laptop died, and it was alright, but I was usually running it at 100% CPU.

I've Google'd that question extensively, but for the most part everyone on the threads I've seen just keep saying "3d work video editing photoshop blah blah blah AND BTW, INTEL!" - but my question was never really answered.

Either way, I'll probably be going with the 6300 overclocked and some aftermarket cooling.
(I've seen a lot of people talking about things like what Nikoli's saying, "this processor's faster with single threads even though it makes no sense, trust me, benchmarks!", but it's really all just gibberish to me, and my Googling hasn't been able to back it up. Just turned up tons and tons of debates that go nowhere.)

 

[CTurbo]

The 6300 will multitask considerably better than the 4350. The extra 2 cores will come in handy a lot of the time. A couple hundred mhz of clock speed will not be noticeable in daily usage. You probably won't ever even NEED to overclock, but it's there if your want it.

 

[nikoli707]

even so for the $20 extra the 6350 is more than worth is, after you factor in at least a $30 hyper 212 its only an 8% higher price for 2 more cores. get the 6350

 

[BenWins39]

The 6300 will multitask considerably better than the 4350. The extra 2 cores will come in handy a lot of the time. A couple hundred mhz of clock speed will not be noticeable in daily usage. You probably won't ever even NEED to overclock, but it's there if your want it.

I bet I will want to for Dwarf Fortress. With the way I play, it will eventually eat up every shred of single-threaded CPU power that I can give it. But, anyway, thanks a ton!

(I don't know how to give this that [Solved] tag and stuff...but I'd say you answered my question.)

 

[CTurbo]

Well on some motherboards, you can create and save different profiles in BIOS. You can create a profile just for Dwarf Fortress that disables all but one module(two cores) and then overclock the crap out of those 2 cores. You could likely get 5.0ghz pretty easily that way.

 

[CTurbo]

And the FX 6300 and FX 8320 are the two best values.
The 6300 is cheaper than the 4350 and the 8320 is almost the same price as the 6350


FX 4350 - https://www.google.com/shopping/product/4004692046963573686?q=fx%204350&espv=210&es_sm=122&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.58187178,d.eW0,pv.xjs.s.en_US.EeLgqkzqnSg.O&biw=1920&bih=978&tch=1&ech=1&psi=EQK1UpKFKJDPkQeDsIGoCw.1387594153725.3&prds=hsec😱nline,scoring:tp&ei=EwK1Up-NOIKnkQfcqYCwBg&ved=0CIgEENkrMAA

FX 6300 - https://www.google.com/shopping/product/1481067637804829037?espv=210&es_sm=122&biw=1920&bih=978&output=search&q=fx%206300&oq=fx%206300&prds=hsec😱nline,scoring:tp&ei=OQK1UrSPCtCgkQehi4DICQ&ved=0CJkEENkrMAA

FX 6350 - https://www.google.com/shopping/product/9196138435116011094?q=fx%206350&espv=210&es_sm=122&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.58187178,d.eW0,pv.xjs.s.en_US.EeLgqkzqnSg.O&biw=1920&bih=978&tch=1&ech=1&psi=rQK1UqcZybeRB5WegJgN.1387594309020.3&prds=hsec😱nline,scoring:tp&ei=rwK1UtaxK9HekQf9sIDoDw&ved=0CIsEENkrMAA

FX 8320 - https://www.google.com/shopping/product/6307452764491251982?q=fx%208320&espv=210&es_sm=122&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.58187178,d.eW0,pv.xjs.s.en_US.EeLgqkzqnSg.O&biw=1920&bih=978&tch=1&ech=1&psi=5gK1UuSBEtKEkQe6_oCgCQ.1387594366408.3&prds=hsec😱nline,scoring:tp&ei=6wK1Uvx7jLWRB9eFgYAF&ved=0CI0EENkrMAA

 

[BenWins39]

It'll be a Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3 motherboard. I hear they have dual BIOS chips, which I hear can help with exactly what you're talking about? I'm sure I'll figure it out once I start to play around with it. But, naturally, I won't be going for 5.0ghz right off the bat. Like I said, I'm still rather terrified of making anything overheat. I'll buy some extra fans, start low, and then see what I can do from there.

even so for the $20 extra the 6350 is more than worth is, after you factor in at least a $30 hyper 212 its only an 8% higher price for 2 more cores. get the 6350

And thanks to you, too, by the way! That seems to be my plan so far, except for overclocking a 6300 instead. 😀

 

[BenWins39]

Update: I am beyond happy with this new rig. Thanks a ton, CTurbo!

I do plan on buying an aftermarket CPU heatsink/fan at some point down the line, probably before summer comes around, but as it stands, I can run IntelBurnTest and only (what I'm assuming is) my northbridge goes anywhere above 60c! During any other circumstances, even the most strenuous use that I can put it through cannot make a single component go above 60c.
And let's not forget about that Unlocked/Turbo Boost function -- my CPU goes to 3.8 or 4.1 during heavy loads without being "overclocked".

Honestly, the one and only thing that has been able to get this monster to 100% total CPU usage is IntelBurnTest.
And believe me, I've been trying. DF + two plugins managed to get it to about 62%... and that's a personal record.

I ran into a couple of problems along the way, but, tl;dr, my PSU was a D.O.A.... luckily for me, it didn't fry the rest of the rig, and everything has worked like a charm since that was replaced. 😀 Couldn't be happier.