Is the FX-8320 good for gaming?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Solution
4745454b
No real difference between them so get the 8320. I suggest you take another look at the i5 series however. Will be better overall.
Sort by date Sort by votes

Nah, I am a simple gamer.
All I need is a good gaming PC that can run games at a good FPS.
I dont need an I5 or an I7.
I do not have that much money for it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
This doenst directly anwser your question, but in my experience cpu hasn't been the bottle neck in my systems for gaming. If you can save a few buck on the the cpu and throw additioinal cash at the best video card you can get, your gaming experience may be more satisfatory in the long run
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

Great, now I can afford the 7870!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Both the 8320 and 8350 are unlocked. The only difference is the CPU multiplier on the 50 is 1 (or 2) settings higher.

I don't want to turn this into a flame war. Reason why I asked is the 3470 is only $25 more, but provides better frame rates in some titles.

51139.png


Here it's able to do much better then the barely 60FPS that the 8320 can do in Dawn of War 2.

51140.png


Here in WoW it can just barely do 120FPS. Any plans on possible 3D gaming will require 120FPS if you want 60FPS for each eye. It's also much higher percentage wise over the 8320.

51141.png


It's also able to do 60+FPS in Starcraft 2. The 8320 can only do 45.

Nothing wrong with going AMD. Depending on what you mean by "simple gamer" you might be better off going with a smaller dual core. The new 6300 or smaller might be a better idea. Another advantage Intel has is the lower power draw/TDP. Big different in power usage and heat emitted between 125W and 77W.

Edited to fix imgs.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
In the USA using newegg there is a $25 difference between the 8320 and the 3470. Though I admit if you are going to spend $199 on the 3470 you might as well spend the $220 on the 3570K like I did.

I don't know of any BF3 specific 3470 reviews, but it performs so close to the 3570 that they should be nearly the same. Whichever way you choose make sure you look at the combos. I got my Gigabyte UD4H board and my 3570K as a combo and saved $60. Was around $320 I think. If I got the slightly cheaper Asrock 4pro board I could have spent $300. I'm sure there are combos for your 8320 as well. Can save you some change and might get you up to the 7950.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

I barely got this much money, and in my country hardware is 20% more expensive, and the paycheck is not giving me much either, but I think this is a good gaming PC, and I think one of the best in my country.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
That's why I said in the USA and using Newegg. Other countries and currency will change things. I just wanted to make sure you weren't overlooking Intel because you think you need to have the 3570k. Even their lower chips do well against AMDs. Even when the AMDs are OC'd. But don't worry about buying the AMD. 8320 and 7870 will do well at gaming.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


You won't be able to tell the difference in BF3 multiplayer between the 2. It doesn't matter whether you OC them or not...the results there are essentially a wash. Unless all you do is play Skyrim...you'll never be able to tell the difference. Also, you would have to go to the i5-3570k to get equal-ish performance. Plus, the 8320 + HD 7870 > i5-3570k + HD 7790 (figuring same cost for CPU/GPU combo).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I could run the Starcraft 2 Beta at max settings at on a Average of 50FPS with my GTS 450 512mb and a Phenom II x4 840. Lol, I'm currently running Crysis 3 Online at "Very High" settings with a HD 7870 GHz edition card and a Phenom II x4 840 at about 30 FPS. My friends, I think those SC benchmarks are ludicrous. Yes, I do hit spots where I get lots of frame latency, but its not often. I think the money is better spent in a GPU than a CPU. You can pick up a FX 8320 at Microcenter for $150 and a HD 7870GHz edition card for a decent price off newegg.

If you're playing on a 60Hz monitor, you're not going to see the difference between 100FPS and 70FPS, infact, you're probably going to turn on VSYNC. The most feasable option to get your FPS up would be to go with a HD 7870 or 7850 and a FX 8320. BF3 uses 6 cores or more from what I've heard, so a FX 8320 would be your best investment because the GPU is what's really going to get your FPS up! Take it from someone who bought a GPU instead of an i7 for $230 :) I could have bought a i7 and my friend offered me his old mobo. I bought the GPU and haven't looked back since!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Lol, Actually, 8350rocks knows what he's talking about. He's probably just about one of the most educated people I've seen on these forums. Just because he likes his 8350, does that mean he's the impartial one? It's obvious that you're Pro-Intel.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I meant look at what I said in the best answer, to get the 8320. I'm not some Intel loving, AMD hating person. I still personally believe that an I5 will provide better frame rates in games. But as I also said in this thread sometimes you have to buy what you can, and deal with where you live. OP said the parts aren't close in his country. No use crying about it. Buy the 8320 and be happy.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

😀
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
As a citizen of the USA I go with what I know. So unless you say you live in xxx country I'm going to give the advice that makes sense to me. Once people say they live somewhere else, I back off because I don't know what makes sense where they live. Sometimes I can get from user name or how they type that they are somewhere else. But I do know that due to tariffs and currency differences what makes sense here might not there.

I do wish this forum has good members in all countries. So that people can get help no matter where they live.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Because a 6 core CPU should be enough to drive most GPUs. There might be a game here and there where you'd wish you had more but its a good point. Usually the more GPU you have the better. Within reason.

Edit: I don't know if you've ever seen the benchmarks but the low i3s from Intel can usually keep up with the 6300, 8320, etc. Games for the most part only need a few cores to run. Anything more then that isn't used.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

I am not only going to play games.
I will do some other stuff there too.
But does it perform the same in games as the 8320?
P.S. Dam you are fast.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Well I have no life😛

In gaming there should be little to no difference between those chips. You'd need have CPU tasks to see differences. Like Video transcoding.

51118.png


Here the 6300 is about 3FPS slower then the 8320. It that a lot? Depends on how long the video is.

51132.png


Do you use photoshop? Can you wait the extra 3secs to apply the effect? Remember that for a business time is money. So sometimes it makes sense to get your people the best (or better) equipment. If this is for home use, you probably won't notice or care.

51139.png


And finally gaming. I linked this one on purpose because the 6300 is faster then the 8320. I'll include the gaming link so you can see the other games. Overall, most of the AMD CPUs score around the same place. Because when it comes to gaming the CPU isn't quite as important as the GPU. Within reason of course.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/5
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom