FX series CPUs and Gaming in 2015 and beyond

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

cowboy44mag

Guest
Jan 24, 2013
315
0
10,810
I'm posting this and asking the question why do so many "experts" think that FX CPUs can't game?

I have seen many threads of people asking for expert advice and not really getting expert advice so I am posting this to basically ask why. I have seen people who already have a good AMD AM3+ motherboard asking for a good upgrade path and being told to go to i3 Intel. I read that and think what in the world are they thinking??

Lets look at a few facts about PC gaming. Most PC games are developed for console and ported from console to PC as consoles sell vastly more copies of said game than PC does. So for the past 8 years or so games were made for the Xbox 360 and ran on a maximum of 3 cores, however the vast majority of the games made in the last 8 years ran on 2 cores. That made the iCore the legend that it is in the gaming community, as Intel computers have very powerful core per core performance. If Intel has a weakness it is only apparent in heavily multi threaded applications where the i3 and even the i5 struggle a bit.

Now we have wholly new console systems that utilize AMD hardware. The PS4 (most powerful of the consoles) has 8 jaguar cores running at a max of only 2.0Ghz. Developers aren't going to able to just write and code as usual as trying to code for 2 or even 3 cores isn't going to cut it. With the weaker cores at low speeds they are going to have to make highly multi threaded games that spread the workload to as many of the cores as is possible.

In practice we already have a game we can look at that is a true prelude into what video games of the future are going to look like. I am referring to Shadow of Mordor. Minimum requirements Intel i5 quad core or AMD Phenom II 965 quad core Recommended Intel i7 quad core (with 8 threads) or AMD 8320 8 core. Notice that i3 isn't even listed, it can't run the game well enough to be recommended. Yet there are still "experts" recommending people to go to i3 systems for gaming... Really, really bad advice for future gaming.

As games become more and more optimized for the new consoles they are going to be more and more multi threaded. In benchmarks that will test the entire CPU, such as Cinebench R15 the FX series fairs much better than in benchmarks that will only test one or two cores that have dominated the benchmark world for a long time now. In the old standard of benchmarking, where one or two cores are tested even an i3 can out benchmark an FX 8370, but that particular horse has been beat to death for far too long. In Cinebench R15 my FX 8370 @ 4.5Ghz scores 712-725 reported scores of i5 4690k @ 4.5Ghz are in the 690-700 range. So an older socket FX-8370 is outperforming the much newer, more expensive "superior" i5 4690K when more than one or two cores is benchmarked.

Given that games are becoming more and more multi threaded, given that in multi threaded benchmarks the FX 8370 can outperform the i5 4690K, at a better price, why do so many "experts" say that the FX line can't game? Paired with my Sapphire R9 290 there isn't a game out there that my FX 8370 can't play at ultra settings, newer games at really nice FPS. These first round games developed for the new consoles aren't even optimized yet either. Shadow of Mordor never uses more than 6 cores on my FX 8370 and never pushes any core past 60% utilization. Once games can utilize 6-8 cores at 80, 90, 100% utilization things like bottlenecking won't be an issue anymore for the FX line. And how will even the i5 4690K with 4 cores and 4 threads fair in a game optimized for 6, 7, 8 cores and 6-8 threads? I'm sure it will still run the game, but it won't be outperforming a processor with 8 cores 8 threads.

Shadow of Mordor is the writting on wall for future gaming. i3 computers won't game much longer, i5 compters are going to be the minimum required and therefore may not be able to get ultra settings anymore, and i7 computers are going to be the new best gaming system, closely followed by FX 8 core systems (until Broadwell 8+ thread and next gen AMD is released late 2015, 2016).

I think its past time that anyone recommends an i3 as a gaming rig. the much vaunted i5 was the gaming rig of the last generation, this generation its going to be CPUs that can handle 8 threads or more, so your looking at i7 being the very best, for now, with AMD FX 8320+ being the next best choice. Notice I'm not an AMD fanboy, I'm saying that the i7 is going to be the best processor for future games, I'm just pointing out that games are becoming more and more multi threaded and i5s are already being listed as the minimum required. We are going to have at least 6 or 7 more years of game development for the 8 core PS4 before its replaced by the next consoles. In that time we are going to see games utilizing 6+ threads to their full potential.

With that said FX 8370 is a better recommendation than any i3, and will more than likely be a better recommendation than i5. Best budget gamers would have to start with FX 6300.
 
Solution
thing is with AMD fx your buying 4 years in the past today .. how much longer can that keep going on ??? face it its a dead platform unless you never had one then you got to think do I want something that's hanging around for 4+ years or go with something that's more to the day like you get with a intel build ??

well take like Id etqw its a open gl works good in windows works just as well in Linux [native ] dx needs a [crap] emulator like whine.. see Microsoft got them by the balls as I said above its all about there control and money that's all .. Microsoft wants proprietary and got all fooled there best . Microsoft is not your friend [unless you keep paying them ] lets be honest if all games worked on Linux as equal as windows [point click load and go no emulators ] would you keep paying bill 100$ a pop for his software or get free Linux ?? yup, control and revenue

thing is carmack made his games work as well on both and still made plenty of money but see open gl as the guy said is getting crippled in windows use cause its a threat to his Direct x

take valley and heaven run it in open gl in windows and it blows chunks run it in Linux and it runs just fine .. hmmmmm

''Microsoft has good reason to hamper the progress of OpenGL, of course: While DirectX is proprietary and only runs on Windows, Xbox and Windows Phone, OpenGL is completely cross-platform. There are solid OpenGL implementations for Mac, Linux, PlayStation 3, Nintendo Wii, and just about every modern smartphone (OpenGL ES). It obviously in Microsoft’s best interests to ensure that the best gaming experiences are exclusive to its platforms.''

from extremetech
 


I've been thinking about switching to Linux for a while now. I'm not a huge fan of Windows to begin with, it always seems that the operating system isn't "optimized" and I know at times it hampers performance. I remember Windows XP not being too bad, Vista (never upgraded to it) sucked, Windows 7 not too bad, Windows 8, 8.1 hate the app store thing and never seemed to give the promised boost in performance (reverted back to Windows 7). I wish Linux would gain wider support in the mainstream (I know a lot of professionals use Linux, but not too many home users).

I don't know if Windows 10 is going to be the first really good windows in a long time, or if its just being over hyped. I know from test systems running Windows 10 and DX 12 the older FX piledriver processors get a really nice bump in performance and at least Windows 10 has the start menu back. I would be happy if they would release Windows 10 with an option of are you on mobile or do you want desktop. I don't really need or want an app store when I'm on my desktop, I'll save that for my tablet and smartphone.

Saying that Windows is what your stuck with for the mainstream and DX 12 is at least allowing multiple core processors to shine, its not perfect but its the best we've got. If Windows 10 and DX 12 allows the FX 8370 to benchmark in between the i5 and i7 series (in gaming) then i for one will be more than happy.
 
On a side note, I'm not sure why but it says that this thread has been "solved". It was my intent to keep this open at least until we had some games running DX 12 to see what the full capabilities of higher end FX piledriver processors are capable of.
 


Honestly, I don't know, I don't really see a way to unfortunately.
 

 
i am just saying dont have money go amd you have money go intel :) i like both intel and AMD

because i have both running here a intel i3 and amd fx 6350 for my gaming system the both run great 😛
 
I agree, except for the i3 bit. I've never seen anyone recommend an i3 over a FX-6300 or 8320 (EDIT: when the person already has the latter), but I myself, even being AMD sided, recommend the i3s for people building a new computer and who only want to play games. The performance is very good for the price and DX12 brings improvements further still, as it has 4 threads.

The recommendation that should be gone for gaming is the Pentium G3258, as some games won't even boot and it has less improvements with DX12. Only as a emulator machine or a short term solution until you buy a i5 or i7 for cheaper can I see it being a choice.