Amd 6500 or the 8350

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
N

Nickiel12

Reputable
Nov 27, 2015
67
0
4,640
I am replacing an AMD FX-4350 with a budget around $120 and found out that I could buy an eight core for that much and was wondering which is better for playing modded Minecraft while running a server. Is the AMD FX-6300 better than the AMD FX-8350 only because it is $40 cheaper or is there a reason to buy the 6300?
 
Solution
Bo Lee
The 8350 is a lot better than the 6300. On many next gen PC games the 6300 doesn't meet minimum PC requirements. It will run, but not great. The 8350 will meet the requirements and in most cases even meet recommended settings. I can tell you from personal experience because I had a 6300 and I went with a 8350 because I found a used one for 25.00 and now I can play Fallout 4, Mass Effect Andromeda and Witcher 3 at 1080 on ultra settings. With the 6300 it was on low settings.

Yes, a Ryzen would be better, but you would also need a new motherboard, new RAM, etc. So if you are on a budget and wanting something for now, the 8350 is the better option until you can afford to do a larger upgrade.
Sort by date Sort by votes


Bristol Ridge APUs are based on a modified Piledriver/Bulldozer architecture and perform like it. In other words, pretty terrible and almost as poor a performer as what he already has. Zen based APUs won't arrive until sometime in 2018.

For all those who say "His motherboard is known to have issues with 125w processors"... since when? Its not great at overclocking one with its 4+2 phase setup, but it can absolutely handle it at stock. His current CPU is a 125w,
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Where in the world are you pulling these numbers? I'm not sure how you have a percentage of a requirement given that requirements aren't numerical in this manner. Unless you're pulling them from a junk site like game-debate.

The 8300 is only an improvement on the 4350 in highly threaded applications.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


No. Most are going to use 4+ cores these days. Newer PC games that are also available on current consoles will use at least 4 and usually scale up to 8. About the only gaming scenario I can think of where its mostly on two cores with one doing most of the work are MMOs like WoW. Well, that and older single player games.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

OP already has an FX-4350.

Quad-core at 4.2GHz base clock vs octo-core at 3.3GHz base clock, the FX-4350 is likely going to win more gaming benchmarks than the FX-8300.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The 8350 is a lot better than the 6300. On many next gen PC games the 6300 doesn't meet minimum PC requirements. It will run, but not great. The 8350 will meet the requirements and in most cases even meet recommended settings. I can tell you from personal experience because I had a 6300 and I went with a 8350 because I found a used one for 25.00 and now I can play Fallout 4, Mass Effect Andromeda and Witcher 3 at 1080 on ultra settings. With the 6300 it was on low settings.

Yes, a Ryzen would be better, but you would also need a new motherboard, new RAM, etc. So if you are on a budget and wanting something for now, the 8350 is the better option until you can afford to do a larger upgrade.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution


Exactly. That is why next gen games do well with the 8350, because many of them can take advantage of the extra cores. The FX8350 is the recommended AMP chip for Mass Effect Andromeda. The 8300 passes minimum requirements. The 4300 does not. Games are being developed now to take advantage of extra cores and people are still in the habit of thinking of games that do not.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

In terms of proportion of the overall game market, games that make meaningful use of 4+ threads still represent less than 1% of all new games and even in those that do, performance is still heavily influenced by single-core performance for performance-critical threads.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Actually, it is not wrong. The FX8350 is the recommended AMD CPU for Mass Effect Andromeda, which is a pretty system intensive game. Not the minimum requirements, the recommended. Which means the 8350 will play next gen games with no problems whatsoever. I can attest to that fact personally as I play that game, Fallout 4, Witcher 3 and Dragon Age Inquisition all on max settings.

The thing is, these games are not designed to run on single core processors. They are being designed to take advantage of multiple cores now, so all 8 cores are being used now. Which is why next gen games play well with the 8350. Come over to my house, I can show you firsthand.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


I doubt that holds true for any game made for next gen systems. Which is pretty much all new games coming out now.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I used to run an fx 8120 overclocked and later had an fx 6300 also overclocked. But I'm telling you that I'd rather be on a ryzen 1200 system now before even the fx 8350. But I built a few 8350 boxes. Trust me though, try a ryzen system like a ryzen 1600 6 12 threads, and 50% better ipc than the old chips, you don't want to go back.

I now actually own a ryzen 1600, I'm just telling you games that may have been choppy etc before are smoother. It's just a more refined experience.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

You're a game developer attempting to make a cost-effective port from console to PC where PCs have about twice as much throughput per core. You have to choose between attempting to port the program thread-for-thread and hope that works properly under Windows or consolidate some of those threads that are no longer necessary now that each thread has 2-3X as much processing power available to it and eliminate the multi-threaded debugging that goes with them. What do you do? The quickest, lowest effort option is to merge some threads.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
like isaid Before i also belive that fx 8300 and 8350 both is much better than fx4300 and will hold up longer , theres got to be a reason why you can get fx 4300 used for 40 s and fx8300 for 80 or fx new for 100 s and fx 8300 for 150 s. maybe because its better?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/5ui1bd/why_getting_more_than_4_cores_in_a_gaming_cpu_is/

according to this guy alot of games allready use more cores, and fx8300 is about 53 percent faster than fx4300 in battlefield 1
 
Upvote -1 Downvote


Once again, an FX 8300 is not an FX 8350, nor is an FX 4350 an FX 4300.

But since the thread is already solved, there's no further need to belabor the point about the wisdom of investing scarce money on a slight upgrade to a CPU on a 2011 platform.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Dude, you seriously make people's head hurt.

Most games are coded toward intel at this point, which is usually quad core or below. Ashes of the singularity and Battlefield 1 are only 2 examples of where multicore is starting to make a difference, and I agree multicore is the way of the future. But it's not the way of the future with the FX 8350.

The FX 8350 is old technology, and obsolete. By the time games begin to properly use multicore technology, the FX 8350 will be too old and slow to make a difference, it's about there already.

Even in your article from reddit above, the poster even says, if you are on a platform like FX trying to go multithreaded, you would still be better off to get a quad core because FX chips are that bad.

Trust me, I ran them for years myself, so I know that they can do a lot, but by today's standards, they aren't where you want to be.

In the ops case, if he only has 120 dollars and it an upgrade to an 8350 nets a gain in only a small sample of games, he is better served to save his money, and go to a new platform when he is able.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

Where the "many games" are only the handful of titles known to be bigger thread hogs than average. If you only focus on the sub-1% best-case scenarios that emphasize multi-threading, you miss the global 99% of the picture.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom