Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: January 2012 (Archive)

Page 34 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.


i'm saving cash this holiday season in anticipation of kaveri. if it hits the rumored performance numbers i'll probably be leaving my 965be behind to jump over to it.

sorta in a waiting pattern though. from playing with fx6300 and 8350 cpus i just can't justify the move to one from my 965be. there just isn't the performance gain to justify it. If steamroller can deliver i'll leap to it. If it can't i might hang on till i can afford an intel i7 extreme edition build, and go with an intel 6 core.
 
Nothing on the AMD roadmap I've seen for new AM3+s. The next big thing for AMD is the FM2+ which comes out next year and which the motherboards are supposed to be backward compatible to the FM2s even thought the pin count is a little different. Unless it's strictly for upgrading an existing AM3+ system, or just a crazy price. It's hard to recommend a FX CPU over Intel Icore models any more. Here's hoping AMD comes out with a great gaming chip in the future. However, I'm afraid they are going to abandon that segment to Intel.
 


not true. it depends on the price window the person is operating in. at 400-600 it's very easy to find a better AMD build option over an intel. from 600-800 there still are options that make an AMD build a better choice. in the 800-1000 dollar range the number of AMD build options that make sense vanish pretty fast. Past 1k it's straight up impossible to suggest an amd in any situation.

realistically speaking as long as going AMD will net you a "better" gpu you'll probably perfer to go AMD... the issue is at a certain point gpu prices spiral out of control, and the savings from amd just aren't enough to make the jump to the next level of gpu performance. with the crash in gpu prices it's gotten harder to suggest amd builds across all price levels... and i've taken to suggesting intel alternatives where before amd was the only chip that made sense.

a fx6300 + gtx650ti BOOST or hd 7850 is still the best use of 240 bucks out there when building a machine.
 
I've got two competent Intel builds right now, but my AMD box holds the distinction of being built from square 1 for longevity in terms of component life and quality if not performance. For example, the mobo is a Sabertooth, selected due to the five year warranty. I originally had my SG-650 in it, a PSU that may very well last longer than I do. I built it before Faildozer appeared, and was really miffed at how badly they sucked. Still, while I could re-use the rest of its parts, the mobo is simply too good to toss. I've contemplated making it into my test system in favor of a Z77 there now, but I've got a RAID1 pair on it and I believe it's got Windows 7 Ultimate.
 


As I said and you just agreed unless its for a upgrade or strictly a price issue it's hard to recommend AMD over Intel. In the case of the FX-6300 you brought up, you could get an i3-3220, or i3-4130 for near the same price and then you could later upgrade to a i5 or even and i7 in the future. With the FX-6300 your upgrade options are very limited. So for this case wouldn't you again recommend the Intel with its richer upgrade options over the AMD and it's limited upgrade options? I think I'd offer the customer both options and I'd wager he'd go Intel unless he's got no plans to ever upgrade his system or he's just an AMD fan boy.
 


That is because you can pick up a 750k/760k and an HD 7750, which would be far superior, for about the same price as an A10-6800k.
 



Maybe wayfarer1, meant cheap laptop i3's and i5's.
 


2 extra cores?

 


Mobile i5s are dual cores with HT, like all i3s (both mobile and desktop). While that fits with the i5, it's still absolutely wrong about the i3s.
 
Desktop i5 CPU's are 4 solid cores with no hyperthreading. All desktop i7 CPU's have hyperthreading. Desktop i3 CPU's are dual core with hyperthreading. And all the laptop i3 and i5 CPU's I have seen and as far as I know, are all just dual cores and no mention of hyperthreading.

That's my story and I'm sticking with it.....
 

Simple, isn't it?

There is similar fudging going on with the mobile i7 too where ultra-low-power models are usually dual-core affairs... so if you want to have a quad-core i7 in your laptop, you need to make sure it is either an XM, QM or QE suffix.
 

It's simple, they use the same brand name for lower-end parts in laptops. Same thing happens with graphics cards.

The laptop Core i5s are all dual cores with HT. The desktop Core i5s are all quad cores without HT.
 
The fx-8350 is faster than the i5-3570k in new games and multithreaded apps.. And in online games, and in some cases it beats the 3770k.. This is the truth . Believe or not.Search, see some videos and search on foruns. I did it.... And as an i5-3570k owner, I have to say that the fx-8350 is a far better choice now.
 
Hi cleeve,

I use Tom's cpu and gpu Hierarchy Charts

in daily life and I'd like to ask you to put Pentium D's

to cpu chart

As reference you can see here:

http://www.ixbt.com/cpu/intel-cpu2006-met50.shtml

sorry it's in russian (maybe google translate will help you)

but it's up-to-date (August 2012)

This is my first comment on Tom's

Thank you (in advance😉

Amber
 


pentium d's are irrelevant. they are unusable for anything modern.
 
yes I know, but if there are Celeron e1200 or Pentium e2160

why Pentium D's not there.

Where I live I repair systems with P4D's

Thank you
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom