FX8350 vs FX 8320E

Sam-Usher

Commendable
May 15, 2016
3
0
1,510
Im building a computer for gaming but not to sure to get the FX 8350 or the FX 8320E. I will be using a gtx 1070 with it but is there a difference between the 2 by alot?
 
Solution
They are both a bottleneck on current mid-range GPUs. The 8350 can go as high as a R9 290 or a GTX 960 before becoming bottlenecked by the CPU. The R9 290x and above and GTX 970 and above are bottlenecked by both CPUs.


With a proper motherbord the 8320e can be overclocked to the same clocks as the 8350,and probably even higher.

Otherwise I do agree with sinaxknights,getting any FX CPU right now is a bad idea they are old and they do show it.
 


What CPU amd CPU would you recommend then
 




Yep, a skylake i5 if you want current. There are some builds floating around with i3's in them but personally I wouldn't recommend a dual-core (even though it does have hyperthreading) in 2016.

 


I have already brought a motherboard that is only compatible with AMD
 
You know, you can be very happy with a FX... They're not rocks, they are not worthless...
My 8370 can handle anything I throw at it, just like any iX... I have no lags whatsoever, whatever I do. I encode a lot, I play games like the next one, everything set up to the max, no problem.
And it didn't cost me a kidney.
 
An i3 is cheaper than an FX-8, and better for gaming. Sure, an FX isn't worthless, but they're not good choices when compared with what else you can buy right now. @OP, if you can still return the motherboard, that's the route I'd take. Otherwise, it depends on what motherboard you bought, and if you intend to overclock. The 8350 is the faster CPU, but it doesn't overclock as well, and will only run on motherboards that support 125w CPUs. If your motherboard only supports 95w CPUs, OR you intend to overclock, go with the 8320e.

Again, both are slower in games than the cheaper i3 6100, and will require a more expensive motherboard, a bigger power supply, and possibly an aftermarket cooler, making them possibly more expensive even than a MUCH faster Core i5.
 


Got my 8370 for €180. I bought the latest Gigabyte mobo with everything top for €130, USB 3.1, ... and I think most people have a 500+ power supply, so unless I wanted to have a SLI package, things were and are fine. I was able to buy 32GB RAM with what the money I saved. I bought a good cooler indeed, but it can and will be used again if I change my config.

If the OP wants to overclock, then the 95W of the 8320e will not stand, he will need to aim towards a 125W motherboard anyway. Still a good CPU, but I would go with a 8370 anyway.

Just saying, why do people here always always have to "force" the OP to go for Intel when it's a pure AMD thread? I totally understand and agree that Intel's CPUs are faster in many cases, but when someone has already an AMD platform and asks for an advice between 2 AMD CPUs, it gets boring to read the i3s in all the answers... The Graal has never been found yet, and I don't think it has an Intel logo on it :O

 


He didn't say that he already got some hardware,all he said is that he considered between two 4+years old cpus (server cpus none the less) to pair with a gpu that is not even out yet...

Seriously!? How could people NOT tell him to get a more modern CPU?
 


you're right about the hardware, but still, what's the title of the thread?
Like I said, the FX might be "old" but they're still well in the race, and very competitive when you look at their price.
We're not talking about Celerons & Cie, but 8 cores CPUs...
I play games too, but that's only part of my use, and the rest uses quite a bit of those 8 cores, so an i3 wouldn't match my use.

JFYTK, I went from a Q6600@3.2 to the 8370 two months ago (or something like that) and I don't regret my choice at all. I got a big upgrade in everything, and I'm confident I'm ok for sometime again (kept the Q6600 almost 8 yrs)
 
The OP needs to tell us the motherboard so we can see if it will even run, much less overclock, a FX 8350. There are many motherboards that will fit the CPU but have VRMs too weak to run it without throttling in high-performance gaming.

The FX83xx series might be usable for servers, but they are not 'server CPUs' (in the same way that many Xeons are server CPUs)
 
An i5 6500 is €170, and a nice H170 board with M.2, USB 3.1, SLI/CF support is €70, which together are €70 cheaper than your FX combo was. LeKeiser, what are the reasons to buy an FX-8xxx over a cheaper, faster Intel CPU, in your opinion?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Intel-Skylake-Processor-i5-6500-Turbo/dp/B010T6CWI2/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1463831489&sr=8-1&keywords=i5+6500

https://www.amazon.co.uk/ASRock-H170-Pro4-D3-Motherboard/dp/B0151PLIV8/ref=sr_1_3?s=computers&ie=UTF8&qid=1463831559&sr=1-3&keywords=h170+motherboard+asrock
 


While I agree with your thesis, relative pricing and deals make things different in different parts of the world.

The OP says they have a motherboard and that needs to be factored into the cost.
 


[OT]
First, the i5 6500 is €220 where I live, and if I had to buy something it would have been the K version, €250...
I don't like Asrock mobos, so there. When I buy something, I intend to keep it for some time, and my actual mobo is just designed to last. Also, if I'm not mistaken, but the i5 has a 1151 socket, and so I would have had to buy some DDR4 RAM, when I already had DDR3...
What are the reasons I chose the FX over any iXs? I already answered that before...
Really, show me something that I can't do with my FX that I could do with that i5? Something that "WOW!! Nope! Can't do that... It doesn't have what it takes. Too old. This is missing If only I had an iX like Ecky said...."
[/OT] sorry OP for those posts that you might think don't concern you :)