Is AMD FX Still Viable For a System Build? Rev. 2.0

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar


Consoles are hardly justifiable when looking at their performance-to-price ratio. Many of the new titles on consoles are still in 900p @ 30 fps with low textures and quality.

http://www.ign.com/wikis/xbox-one/PS4_vs._Xbox_One_Native_Resolutions_and_Framerates

I am lucky enough to live near a MicroCenter, where I purchased the Fx 6300 and Gigabyte 970A-UD3P combination for a $130 and 1TB HDD for $40. From Newegg, I got the r9 290 ref. for $200, 8 Gbs 1866 Ram for $30, Deepcool tesseract case for $30, and Antec HCG-850m for $70.

With the $30 Cryorig H7, I overclocked the 6300 to 4.3. I also got Win 10 Education for free from my university. Thus, my rig only costed ~$500, about the cost of an Xbox One in 2014.

Yet, I get 50-60 fps on ultra presets with AA in Witcher3 and Fallout4 in 1920x1200p. It stays above 60 fps in other titles such as BF4, titanfall, and other less demanding games. Haven't gotten the new Battlefront, but based on benchmarks, the game isn't demanding and should have 60 fps on my rig.

If you're concerned about APU performances in games, then check out this video on the A10-7850k with different RAM speeds. It is quite impressive and can build one with sub $300 budget.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cv57qDXpEPU

 
And frame timings? There's a reason GSync exists... On PC, 45 FPS still doesn't beat 30 on console, I don't understand the point of arguing PC vs console, the answer should be obvious who is the winner. But I've done the math, and consoles wins by a mile, blu ray alone on PC costs $100. If you just want to include the basic specs, then it can't be compared to the consoles either, that would instantly make the comparison invalid. I even see people making comments about used PC parts, I can pick up a used console for less than half it's original price, but I guess that doesn't matter, because it's a console, and it's bad? I mean cmon, PC's beat consoles by a mile, but for the price, they still can't be beat, no matter how you look at it. And what games are 900p and low texture on the new consoles? Resolution is not directly related to textures, you know that right?
 
You can say that, but look at it from this perspective. I've got a PC that I've saved the case from. This case has been with me for the last 2 builds, both builds have gone into it. My last build before now was an Athlon II x4, nvidia GTS 450, some type of ddr2 ram. Cooler master v6 gt. I know that I've actually had a lot more stuff prior to that which I upgraded from, but for the sake of argument.

So about 2 years ago, I did a bigger upgrade, I bought an FX 8120, Got a new Radeon 7850, new board, used gskill ram that was only 50 bucks.

Ok, so between the 8120 and the board for that, there is 200, plus 50 for the ram, then factor in lets simplify, 150 for the 7850. I had a power supply I'd carried over. So at that time I had 400 in the build, plus parts I'd carried over. I now have an SSD I purchased later with Christmas money etc.

Fast forward. When I did the upgrade, I sold my GTS 450 for about 50 dollars. The Athlon I sold for about that also. There is 100 back initially. I later upgraded to a Radeon 7950, found used on ebay for 120. Sold my 7850 for 50 bucks. I also upgraded power supplies, so there is 70 more.

I overclocked the 8120 to 4ghz, life was happy.

This year I've pretty well left the PC alone, except the fact that I needed a new motherboard because I'm building a PC out of parts out of my boneyard of parts that I have. Someone was getting rid of an old HP(had a working Phenom II 840 quad, 8gb ddr3, dvd burner, etc in it. I had other parts like a power supply, etc. So just needed a case and a board. Anyway, I went down the local Microcenter, and bought a combo of an FX 6300 and a board for 106. I decided I wanted to play around with the new FX 6300, so I pulled the 8120 from my system, popped in the 6300, overclocked to 4.3ghz, life is happy. Working on getting my wife's system put together. But keep in mind I bought the combo for 106. It looks like I'll be able to sell my old FX 8120 for about 70-80 on ebay. So I effectively bought a board for about 30 bucks.

Anyway, with all my math, I'm still using the v6 gt cooler on the new chip, same old cooler master storm scout case. But I've got an overclocked FX 6300 that should be giving me at least i3 to lower end i5 gaming performance, plus a Radeon 7950, which if I read benchmarks correctly, should be somewhere between the performance of a GTX 950 and GTX 960, probably toward the upper end of that range. But according to my calculations, I've got between selling parts etc, 440-450 dollars into this system. If you wanted to count the old case and cooler, you could say 550. Keep in mind I've had this system since early 2013. Not only that, all my games are on steam/uplay so I get to carry all those over and not need a separate system to play everything, most of my games are either free to play or I got them on steam winter sales. I've got some I haven't even really played much, like splinter cell blacklist. Got it either free or cheap, haven't hardly played it. Same with Just Cause 2, played a few hours and haven't really gone back to it. But with this 500 dollar system, I know I can save up, wait until Zen comes out, get a new board, new cpu and ram, new case if I wanted, carry over the PSU, video card, etc, sell or repurpose my older equipment, and I'm still rolling along playing things at 1080p, likely at better frame rates than consoles. Plus if something gets to slow, I can upgrade. Try that with a console.
 
Factor in everything the consoles offer, not just the basics like I said. When everything is included, the consoles can't be beat, it's really that simple. Framerates doesn't mean anything, constantly new PC games have terrible performance. And I'm still not saying consoles are better, what I'm saying is that people don't know how to accurately compare the two.

My PC is many times more expensive than either console, I have experience with both. Please don't compare your PC, with specs nothing like the console, and think that it beats a console, such as the PS4. It's wrong, and inaccurate.

Include everything one of the consoles offer, then do the math. The PS4 is $343. Can you build a PC (without used parts) that matches or performs better than a PS4 (all specs included)?


PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD Athlon X4 860K 3.7GHz Quad-Core Processor ($71.98 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-F2A88XM-D3H Micro ATX FM2+ Motherboard ($62.55 @ Newegg)
Memory: G.Skill NS Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($33.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 500GB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($35.95 @ Amazon)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon R7 265 2GB Video Card ($119.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Case: Apex SK-393-C ATX Mid Tower Case ($25.97 @ NCIX US)
Wireless Network Adapter: TP-Link TL-WN725N 802.11b/g/n USB 2.0 Wi-Fi Adapter ($8.75 @ OutletPC)
Total: $346.18
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-01-08 10:44 EST-0500


Ran out of money. It looks like this PC is not complete. I guess this PC beats the PS4, despite it not having any power, or still missing specs that of the PS4, those are:

Power Supply: Corsair Builder 500W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply ($29.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: LG UH12NS30 Blu-Ray Reader, DVD/CD Writer ($39.88 @ OutletPC)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Home OEM (64-bit) ($89.88 @ OutletPC)
Keyboard: Cooler Master CM Storm Devastator Gaming Bundle Wired Gaming Keyboard w/Optical Mouse ($24.99 @ Newegg)
Other: PowerDVD 15 Pro ($80.00)
Total: $264.74

I didn't include the Bluetooth 2.1, HDMI cable, micro USB cable, headset, they're all really cheap anyways.


Please don't make my build a system to match a PS4's performance, if it's bought used or on sale, even more ridiculous.











 
Factor it this way. My system is 2-3 years old. I'm still playing at least as good if not better quality than a console. I had a ps3. So that ps3 was 300-350. Let's say 300 for the sake of argument. Now a ps4 is what 350? 650. My pc over the years has cost me about 500. Ok let's say I got the video card new, so like 550-600. I'm still ahead and if I sell my pc parts later I'm likely to get more. When I traded my ps3, I got like 80 bucks.
 
Let's not forget $60 controllers. So down to $290 to make a PC that beats the PS4. Oh wait, you need Windows. Down to $190.

And that $350 console will play all games made for it for a good 6-7 years, while you'll have to upgrade your $200 PC within two years.
 
Consoles are for games, and a limited amount of media such as music and movies. For just about anything else, you need a pc. The fact that a console like the xbone or ps4 IS a pc has probably escaped most of ya'll, it just has limited upgradability. So that's the real difference in prices, the ability for the homeowner to upgrade/repair a pc vrs taking the xbone to a repair shop.

Motherboard, hdd, cpu, igpu, ram, USB ports, optical drive. Just described either a pc or a ps4, take your pick. They are the same damned thing in a different form factor, so comparing the 2 is kinda lame. It's apples and apples.
 
^There is that too. My 760k build has accompanied me through most of Grad school. I did my research on it, wrote papers on it, gamed on it ( still do sometimes). None of the consoles can do that for the same price.

Upgrade ability is another perk. In many cases, the case, PSU, Ram, cooler, and even HDD can be transferred to new build.

Needing to upgrade within two years? At least I have an option to.
I am running Fx 6300 and r9 290, which came out in 2012 and 2013 respectively. Running 2015 games on Ultra 1920x1200p at 50-60 fps. Even if I have to lower the preset from ultra to high in the coming years, it is still far superior than console graphics.

If you have an Intel Ivy Bridge based system, then you don't even need to look at upgrades for another 2-3 years.

Oh you have a console and you want to game online? Sorry, must pay $60 on Xbox and only ten less on PS4, per year.
Yes, the PS3 and 360 lasted for 6-7 years. However, have you played new games on those systems in 2013-14? Some were barely ran on them because of the stutters and sub par graphics.

You also can't make an argument about the longevity of the 4th consoles base on life span of the last gen consoles. Nothing to stop developers from releasing new consoles in 2018 or any other time.

I have no problem with folks buying and gaming on consoles. I still have a PS3 for blu ray and netflix. I don't like the idea that PC gamers are somehow superior than console gamers. I just can't bring myself to the limitations of the consoles.
 


You can take up that argument with IGN Wiki because that's their article. Again, here is their link and they seem to have half decent citations.

http://www.ign.com/wikis/xbox-one/PS4_vs._Xbox_One_Native_Resolutions_and_Framerates

I know resolutions and textures are separate. I also know that consoles are inferior to the PC in both categories.

Why don't you post some sources to back your claims?

Update: here is one of them.

http://wccftech.com/ps4-1080p-xbox-900p-graphical-leap1080p-console-war/

Furthermore, adding blu ray cost to PC because consoles come with them is adorable. My PC also helped me through grad school, and there is no amount of cash you can drop in a $349.99 PS4 to add that feature.
 


Yeah, that's good. I look forward to better consoles.
 
What do I need to post a source for?

Anyways, I just proved that you can't build a PC for the same price that matches the PS4's performance, it's right there. No amount of life stories about how you can reuse an old computer changes that. I specified that no used parts could be included.


Yes, the consoles are obviously PC's, but they run different code for games, and they run different and modified software. And for those that don't want the best graphics, the Xbox 360 is still a console worth buying, even today. You still get free games, infact, as of a couple months ago, you can download 2 free games on the Xbox 360 for free, every month. You can also save 2 games on the Xbox One, for your future library if you decide to upgrade, late but still worth mentioning.

Why do people always have to compare PC's to either console though, it doesn't make any sense whatsoever. My one and only point I was making is that you can't even build a functioning PC that you can actually turn on, for the same price of a PS4.



PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

Power Supply: Corsair Builder 500W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply ($29.99 @ Newegg)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Home OEM (64-bit) ($89.88 @ OutletPC)
Keyboard: Cooler Master CM Storm Devastator Gaming Bundle Wired Gaming Keyboard w/Optical Mouse ($24.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $144.86
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-01-08 22:21 EST-0500


I removed the Blu Ray drive, and the software required to even display an image on screen after inserting the disc...

That doesn't change anything though. The only factor that changed is price, but that is irrelevant in this context, because we already out of money, which means that you literally can't use this "PC".


And while this is off topic, what does you being able to run specific software required to finish school, have to do with the difference in price between the PS4 and a PC?
 


PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD Athlon X4 860K 3.7GHz Quad-Core Processor ($69.99 @ NCIX US)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-F2A68HM-H Micro ATX FM2+ Motherboard ($36.30 @ Amazon)
Memory: Avexir Budget Series 4GB (1 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($17.98 @ Newegg)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 250GB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($19.90 @ Amazon)
Video Card: PowerColor Radeon R9 380 2GB PCS+ Video Card ($183.98 @ Newegg)
Case: Rosewill FBM-05 MicroATX Mini Tower Case ($24.99 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: EVGA 400W ATX Power Supply ($28.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Keyboard: Rosewill RK-201 Wired Standard Keyboard ($7.89 @ OutletPC)
Mouse: Targus AMU51US Wired Laser Mouse ($3.99 @ Directron)
Total: $394.01
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-01-08 22:34 EST-0500

No, there isn't a optical drive. There is a steam.

No, there isn't an OS. Lets just say there are legal ways to get legitimate copies of Windows for free. I got mine through my University.

However, I am being generous because most families already have access to cases, HDDs, keyboard, mouse, or even PSUs.



To show the ability of PCs to replace a console in game while satisfying the requirements of other critical aspects of the user's life, including academic fields, professional/office use, daily functions, and more.

By contrast, consoles can only arguably replace a PC's gaming functions but not even touch the other utilities offered by the same PC.
 
Everything. You pay more for a pc simply because it CAN do things a ps4 CAN'T.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B014QVM2AY/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1452311244&sr=8-1&pi=SY200_QL40&keywords=asus+m32ad+desktop&dpPl=1&dpID=41sOQB0dbYL&ref=plSrch

The pc version of a ps4. You can get pre-built pc's brand new, for as little as $99 for a core2duo. Throw on a br and a r7 250 and you just beat the ps4 for @$200. Thing is, while end-users paying full retail price can't build a pc for the price of a ps4, buying a pre-built can and does equate. Getting the pc parts at the factory cost goes a long way to negating any advantage the ps4 or Xbox hold over a pc.
 
Right, but your build can't be compared to the PS4, it's just a cheap PC build, that's all it is. My original point was that you can't build a PC with the specs of the PS4, for the same price. The specs you listed don't match at all.

@K how does that equate to the specs of a PS4? It doesn't, perhaps I missed something? Intel HD 4400 = 7850/260? The more you know.
 
Comon dont go by the benchmark. They are made up most of the time only few online sites really do give honest reviews. Eurogamer is one of the honest sites..

Coming back to the point. If u are having good budget AMD CPU's are out of question get a unlocked core i5 skylake with ddr 4 ram or a core i7 skylake or even better a x99 with core i7 5960x.

Should u go out and buy AMD now? No, I would say get a skylake since they can be bclk and is newer tech, so ur money will be safe that way. Get the core i3 plus z170 package as starter, z170 also comes with ddr3 support and u can use ur old ram if its good. Upgrade to a core i5 or core i7 skylake later.

You are already owning an AMD system? Then there is no reason to upgrade for performance, if you own anything equivalent to gtx 970 or r9 390. Infact games are getting more multi threaded so fx can last more than what I said. I have a fx 8320 and at stock speed with gtx 970 and most games run at 60 fps+ and few game like FC4, fallout 4, GTA V dip to low 40's. But when oc'd to 4.6 ghz most of them stay at 60 fps+. My screen is maxed out 1080p@ 60fps so I should upgrade it first before upgrading the cpu.

A high end gpu like gtx 980Ti can really give a cpu bottleneck on amd platform @ 1080p.

4k Gaming: Now if u want to game on 4k u really need a good gpu like gtx 980Ti or fury X and do we need a great cpu? Guess what CPU usage hardly increase with resolution. At 4k gaming a cheap amd fx 8 core when oc'ed can maintain 60 fps and u need atleast 2x980Ti to maintain 60 fps at 4k.

So in all accounts a current 8 core AMD user doesn't needs to sell the cpu if he is happy with 60 fps. But if u are bored out of AMD, u wanna try something new or just wanna upgrade for new tech get skylake. I personally wanna a change and I will probably get the skylake core i5 6400 and oc it to 4.2 ghz.
 


860k paired with r9 380 can't compared to the PS4? Specs don't match?

The performance in fps might says otherwise.
 


Depends on country u are living, I upgarde system from a core i3 to fx 8320 with oc m/b and gtx 970 and it still costed me less than PS4 in my country. It for sure performs better than a PS4.

A PS4 cost close to 750 USD (converting to equivalent amount in $$) in my country.
 
However, we are discussing consoles. That price in somewhere in between PS and Xbox, a fair spot.

Option to replace the 380 with 270 is available at a lower cost.

This brings us to another point being my options in a computer. I can add $20 to my budget to aim for higher gaming, or other, performance as I see fit. Adding $5000 isn't going to bring up 1 fps in the consoles.
 


Agrred! softwares like fraps and riva statistic tuner are an issue. Every body is using it now a days and if fps dip is shown people seems to complain. When factually nothing is wrong with the gameplay.
 
Gameplay? People care about gameplay? Last time I checked, many people haven't cared about gameplay for a long time. They are too concerned over graphics settings and FPS, and developers are, too, so much that actual gameplay has gotten progressively worse over the years.
 
Sadly enough you may have a point. Look how they rush out games. Case in point assassin's creed unity came out last year, what were minimum specs? 2500k or fx 8350 and a 680 or 7970? That game was so unoptimized. I bought it on the steam sale at Christmas, and run it on all high settings on an fx 6300 overclocked to 4.3ghz and a Radeon 7950 at 1080p. I may have AA turned off, but textures etc are still turned up. Seems like many times games are released unfinished basically then they have to make patches to make them work right. Good thing I buy many genes a year behind lol.
 
Titles like ACs and CODs are being pumped out yearly, and they have gotten sloppy over time.

There are some games that are still excellent in general. One that I can think of at this moment is Witcher 3, an excellent all around from story to mechanics. Only complaint is Nvidia Hair works
 


+1 You do have a really good point there. I can remember back to when I built my very first gaming computer in the mid to late '90s. I can't remember the title names anymore but I remember playing some titles where the graphics were just horrible, but he gameplay and story were so good that you just couldn't stop playing it and couldn't wait to get back to playing it. Now the graphics in most games are just incredible, like your actually standing right there, but the gameplay, the story line (in some if not most of them) is just lacking. More than once you get to about 4-5hrs into a seemingly okay game just to find out your at the end, the story ended abruptly and it feels totally incomplete.

If we could only get the gameplay and story lines from past games and the graphics from today's games to come together. I would gladly replay the exact same games from the late 90s through early 2000-2005ish era keeping the same exact story line just with the incredible graphics of today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom