The Fx Series the BEST bang for the $$$ in Gaming pcs

[Usacomputer]

Aight trolls, communists and Intel fanboys

I want to explain something that needs to be debunked because there are countless people who don't know the true power of the fx series cpus

First I want to say I side with no company because the both make outstand products, AMD and Intel both hit is right with the products they make

But unfortunately AMD is always overlooked because of its rep as being a bad Cpu company

Here's a little history lesson

back in 2012 we got something that you could say gave AMD fans and budget builders hope, a rise from the disappointing bulldozer architecture which left us crawling back to the outdated Athlon CPUs (which are still good for the money even now) we got the piledriver update, the x300/ x350 chips and so forth, and it was great, 2013 was a great year for AMD as Intel just released their ivy bridge architecture, and boy did AMD destroy the specs and the market at one point as the performance was almost similar for a fraction of the cost

1 and a half year later, Intel unleashes Haswell, and well you could say the 22nm process architecture destroys the 32nm piledriver architecture, the fx series may be more minimal

Well where does that leave us, we'll Intel of course has better processors FOR NOW, but when you lower the bar to sub $180 dollars, just below the cheapest i5 we find our slightly outdated fx poledrivers, and boy to they piledrive

When paired with a plethora of graphics cards and resolutions, the difference between an AMD fx processor and a typical I5, the difference in performance is only 30-20%, and for half the price, it's a no brainier for the typical budget gamer. And honestly when building the "sweet spot" 1080p all day gaming pc, you shouldn't even be looking at i5s because unless your gonna be doing productivity or willing to spend $50-$100 more on the cpu and even 150-200 on a mother board, I'm not saying it's not worth it but for the money, going with the fx processor is just going to save you that hard earned cash and let me tell you, you will not regret it at all

Th difference form a price to performance standpoint is so low that when your a budget gamer, you can really make a powerful system for 600-800 that will compete with some $1000 builds with a differne of 10-15 fps, boy does it feel good to save money

Another thing, the fx 6300 ad onward really don't bottle neck gpus until you get to around $300 graphics processors and when I say minimal bottleneck, I mean the gpu will be running at 95% to full percentage, and that's just the 6300, if we start taking 6350 and 8320 and 8350, you can get by with a 970 even and be perfectly fine

So where does his leave me, the fx processors are very very very powerful for the price, and are not all obsolete, not for a while and can still compete wit the i5s for half the price, Don't get me wrong he i5s are still op af AMD can handle 980s and all that, but for raw performance, the difference is just so little when price is added into the equation that I reccomend fx processors for any and all budget builds due to the amazing price to performamce ratio and for all you guys who say it will run hot and run your power bill, it's only like 5 bucks a year so shut yo face

Alright I just wanted to get rid of those Intel fanboys who think AMD is obsolete because AMD is arguably better for the price, yet still both companies make great products and will still do u very well

Cheers m80s

 

[flamefire999]

I'm going to try to keep personal preference out of this and just use the facts (might not work...):

I agree that AMD isn't obsolete, but when there's something you might've overlooked: Intel has a much better upgrade path.

Most people get more than enough power for their PSU so they have room for future upgrades right? They forget about their motherboard though and don't think about that upgrade path. AMD has said that their focusing on their APU's so their won't be many (if any) upgrades to the FX series. On the other hand, Intel has been updating their CPU's frequently.

If you're building a budget rig and you know that you are going to upgrade soonish (2-3 years) then you want a good upgrade path. That's where Intel beats AMD. It would be better to buy an i3 with a good motherboard. It'll be better in the long run.

Again, this was just the facts and I tried to keep personal preference out. Just wanted to throw my 2 cents in

 

[DubbleClick]

A few more facts:

Ivy I5/7's and fx cpu don't show similar results in games. Not even close.

A $110 motherboard is fully capable to get an I5/7 to it's limits under normal cooling. Good luck with the fx, considering it's almost twice as high tdp with the voltage regulation still happening on the motherboard.

Depending on how frequently you use it, intels lower power consumption pays off in the long run.

Haswell I3's and even the $70 pentium beat or strike equal with fx cpu's in games.


Conclusion: amd has no spot in gaming right now. At any budget point above iGpu gaming, there's an intel cpu that outperforms the amd one for that price.
Amd cpu's and especially their fx series have a great spot in the market, but it is NOT gaming. A fx 8320 gives a xeon e3/locked I7 a run in video rendering, project compilation/building and other things. But it's killed by an I3, let alone I5 in games.
If you don't believe it, call me any budget (cpu, motherboard, cooler and gpu) and your corresponding amd recommendation and I'll tell you a better performing intel choice at the same or lower price.

 

[Usacomputer]

I'm going to try to keep personal preference out of this and just use the facts (might not work...):

I agree that AMD isn't obsolete, but when there's something you might've overlooked: Intel has a much better upgrade path.

Most people get more than enough power for their PSU so they have room for future upgrades right? They forget about their motherboard though and don't think about that upgrade path. AMD has said that their focusing on their APU's so their won't be many (if any) upgrades to the FX series. On the other hand, Intel has been updating their CPU's frequently.

If you're building a budget rig and you know that you are going to upgrade soonish (2-3 years) then you want a good upgrade path. That's where Intel beats AMD. It would be better to buy an i3 with a good motherboard. It'll be better in the long run.

Again, this was just the facts and I tried to keep personal preference out. Just wanted to throw my 2 cents in

Yes I do agree that is a very good point, Intel has a much better upgrade path but, if you think about it you still are spending extra money in the end as opposed to saving that extra 200, but yes I tel does have a good upgrade path

 

[Usacomputer]

A few more facts:

Ivy I5/7's and fx cpu don't show similar results in games. Not even close.

A $110 motherboard is fully capable to get an I5/7 to it's limits under normal cooling. Good luck with the fx, considering it's almost twice as high tdp with the voltage regulation still happening on the motherboard.

Depending on how frequently you use it, intels lower power consumption pays off in the long run.

Haswell I3's and even the $70 pentium beat or strike equal with fx cpu's in games.


Conclusion: amd has no spot in gaming right now. At any budget point above iGpu gaming, there's an intel cpu that outperforms the amd one for that price.
Amd cpu's and especially their fx series have a great spot in the market, but it is NOT gaming. A fx 8320 gives a xeon e3/locked I7 a run in video rendering, project compilation/building and other things. But it's killed by an I3, let alone I5 in games.
If you don't believe it, call me any budget (cpu, motherboard, cooler and gpu) and your corresponding amd recommendation and I'll tell you a better performing intel choice at the same or lower price.

I'm sorry I gotta call u out as a fanboy, a core I3 shows similar if not worse results in almost all games, look at all the benchmarks comapared to them, more and more games are scene to use more and more cores and Intel core i3s may have 2 wicked fast cores but it's still not a true quad core and yes you can find a good 100 dollar mobo for an Intel core I3 for $220 dollars but if you go with Intel you can score a good and board for 90 and a 100 fx 6300 for $190 dollars and get better performance on most games that utilize the cores and even in games that can only use 2 cores, we find that the core i3s hyper threading does nothing to help the cpu and the core i3 falls behind,

Yes if you want a better upgrade path go with Intel but if you want best bang for your buck you will get much better results with an fx 6300 over an Intel i3

 

[mlga91]

you can find a good 100 dollar mobo for an Intel core I3 for $220 dollars but if you go with Intel you can score a good and board for 90 and a 100 fx 6300 for $190 dollars and get better performance on most games that utilize the cores and even in games that can only use 2 cores, we find that the core i3s hyper threading does nothing to help the cpu and the core i3 falls behind,

Yes if you want a better upgrade path go with Intel but if you want best bang for your buck you will get much better results with an fx 6300 over an Intel i3

A i3 will easily run on a $50 Motherboard, thing that you cant do with an FX, due to the higher current consumption, and the FX needs an aftermarket cooler to keep it cool, in the end, it can be cheaper to get a i3, the same goes with a FX 83XX and a i5.

 

[DubbleClick]

Strange enough that benchmarks show haswell I3's above fx cpu's in most games. Just google I3 4xxx benchmark and you'll see what I mean. And then, an I3 4130 is $120, working fine on a $40-$50 motherboard. A fx 6300 is the same, but the motherboard costs more and almost requires an aftermarket cooler.

So I ask once again, what is an amd setup where no intel one with same or less price for same or better performance exists. Until that happens, with benchmarks of trustworthy sites (I.e. reflected by others as well), my point stands and the fanboy here certainly isn't me.


http://www.hardcoreware.net/intel-core-i3-4340-review/
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-4340-4330-4130.html

 

[djett427]

I think I'm going to go get some popcorn and watch this chat. AMD all the way!

 

[Gam3r01]

"Aight trolls, communists and Intel fanboys"

Im running a Phenom II from 09 and I still want to see this one go down...
Credible benchmarks dont lie, unless you can back what you say might as well not say it 😀

 

[djett427]

"Aight trolls, communists and Intel fanboys"

Im running a Phenom II from 09 and I still want to see this one go down...
Credible benchmarks dont lie, unless you can back what you say might as well not say it 😀

Thumbs up to you sir!

 

[RCFProd]

tl;dr

 

[madmatt30]

6300 rig in my SIG - CPU ,MB & cooler cost me £120 total.
Pick an Intel component set for that same price & I'll bench absolutely anything you want me to as a comparison.

(Good luck price matching that BTW)

 

[RCFProd]

Pretty sure you can't get the same exact AMD components for 120 GBP either.

 

[madmatt30]

£130 now at this moment in time

 

[RCFProd]

I'm interested in this actually.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i3-4160 3.6GHz Dual-Core Processor (£87.86 @ Ebuyer)
Motherboard: MSI H81M-E35 V2 Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard (£41.77 @ Scan.co.uk)
Total: £129.63
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-03-31 20:31 BST+0100

Only in-game benchmarks allowed, as benchmarks applications support multi-core support properly but games don't.

(I also prefer the FX-6300 over the i3 Haswell but I still want to see the results).

 

[madmatt30]

^ then you need to find someone running a 970 with the i3 or it is not going to be a fair fight at all.

Or at least & half decent GPU - can set both systems to low settings then which should introduce the CPU as the limiter.

I disagree with not using other multi threaded benches though - the 6 thread capability is what makes the 6300 a true bargain.

 

[RCFProd]

I know, but benchmarks are the only programs properly optimised to make use of those cores. So in-game there would be less of a gap between the two CPU's compared to the results in benchmark applications.

It's hard to find someone with such a build though..

 

[Usacomputer]

you can find a good 100 dollar mobo for an Intel core I3 for $220 dollars but if you go with Intel you can score a good and board for 90 and a 100 fx 6300 for $190 dollars and get better performance on most games that utilize the cores and even in games that can only use 2 cores, we find that the core i3s hyper threading does nothing to help the cpu and the core i3 falls behind,

Yes if you want a better upgrade path go with Intel but if you want best bang for your buck you will get much better results with an fx 6300 over an Intel i3

A i3 will easily run on a $50 Motherboard, thing that you cant do with an FX, due to the higher current consumption, and the FX needs an aftermarket cooler to keep it cool, in the end, it can be cheaper to get a i3, the same goes with a FX 83XX and a i5.

An fx 6300 can run on a $50 Msi mobo and still outperform and i3

Look at the benchmarks m80

The i3 just doesn't beat the fx 6300 in games and when paired with a 200-300 gpu it will destroy with a good 20-50 dollars cheaper

And on the Intel side, a 50 mobo is almost going to have no features as apposed to an amd board which for 50 dollars (Msi g43) has a lot of features that a 50 Intel (asrock h97 anniversary) just doesn't have

For the money amd chips pair d with the mobos just have more features and just honestly beat the i3 for much less

Also for reference tek syndicate covers a bit why he prefers amd chips to i3s

 

[madmatt30]

I know, but benchmarks are the only programs properly optimised to make use of those cores. So in-game there would be less of a gap between the two CPU's compared to the results in benchmark applications.

It's hard to find someone with such a build though..

it is because only a loon like me would pair a 280 quid gpu with 120 quids worth of cpu/motherboard 😉

seriously though theres no amd fanboyism my end - if someone has the budget for an i5 setup with a decent gpu then Id personaly advise intel every time.
on a budget though the 6300 always has been & always will be incredibly hard to beat on a price/performance ratio
Its a fantasy it needs an expensive motherboard or cooler to overclock ,its also a fantasy that it has huge power draw or runs particularly hot.
In gaming my cpu will rarely go over 70% usage,power draw is between 60-70w even at 4.3ghz.
I vsync to 60fps ,the 970 sits at 60c at around 70% usage max which is the way I like it - this is a silverstone htpc under tv setup so cool & quiet with good performance still is a priority.
The whole system gaming pulls 300w max from the plug - when you consider the xbox 360 1st revision pulled 225w it makes it relatively efficient in my eyes.

 

[RCFProd]

Not bad at all

 

[madmatt30]

Not bad at all

dont worry ,I can make it pull well in excess of 500w if I really want to maxing gpu & cpu usage 😉
But I see no point at all,on a 60htz screen whats the point in running past 60fps
A lot of the shouting about intel builds seems to me to be the fact that an fx chip can only max out to 80-90fps in games when an intel will pull 120+
On a 60htz screen (which is what 90% of us own) thats pretty much a pointless bragging right imo.
Of course on a 120-144htz screen an amd chip is pretty much going to roll over & die trying to hit 120fps - but if youre buying a 144htz screen you're unlikely to be using a budget rig with it anyway.

I have a fairly decent disposable income,I toyed with the idea of replacing the old rig with an intel setup but then weighed it up & decided that what id gain really would be pretty much nothing,I might lose 5c or so on the temps & save 10 quid a year on electric - not worth the money ,the time rebuilding or reinstalling windows & all my software.

 

[DubbleClick]

£130 now at this moment in time

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor (£74.89 @ Amazon UK)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler (£24.99 @ Amazon UK)
Motherboard: Asus M5A78L-M/USB3 Micro ATX AM3+ Motherboard (£48.95 @ Amazon UK)
Total: £148.83
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-03-31 21:24 BST+0100

Versus

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i3-4150 3.5GHz Dual-Core Processor (£84.16 @ Scan.co.uk)
Motherboard: MSI H81M-P33 Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard (£33.72 @ CCL Computers)
Total: £117.88
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-03-31 21:26 BST+0100


With the latter showing better performance in the majority of games (see: benchmarks) and being cheaper and consuming less power as well as allowing for an upgrade that makes sense later.

The fx 6300 is in no way bad, for a rendering system it will smoke basically anything you can get from intel for that price. But gaming certainly isn't it's strength.

Can't give you benchmarks of a 970 + i3, by the way. Thought of getting a gtx 970 but decided to wait for the launch of the r9 390x somewhen in a few months (hopefully).

 

[DubbleClick]

Also for reference tek syndicate

Disqualified for further discussion.

 

[madmatt30]

£130 now at this moment in time

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor (£74.89 @ Amazon UK)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler (£24.99 @ Amazon UK)
Motherboard: Asus M5A78L-M/USB3 Micro ATX AM3+ Motherboard (£48.95 @ Amazon UK)
Total: £148.83
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-03-31 21:24 BST+0100

Versus

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i3-4150 3.5GHz Dual-Core Processor (£84.16 @ Scan.co.uk)
Motherboard: MSI H81M-P33 Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard (£33.72 @ CCL Computers)
Total: £117.88
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-03-31 21:26 BST+0100


With the latter showing better performance in the majority of games (see: benchmarks) and being cheaper and consuming less power as well as allowing for an upgrade that makes sense later.

The fx 6300 is in no way bad, for a rendering system it will smoke basically anything you can get from intel for that price. But gaming certainly isn't it's strength.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor (£74.89 @ Amazon UK)
CPU Cooler: Zalman CNPS5X Performa CPU Cooler (£13.96 @ Amazon UK)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-78LMT-USB3 Micro ATX AM3+ Motherboard (£39.59 @ Aria PC)
Total: £128.44
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-03-31 21:34 BST+0100

thats a better board than mine & you dont need a 212 evo - for an 8 core yes but not for the 6300
I used those exact components on a build for someone before xmas & pulled a stable 4.6ghz overclock.

nothing against the i3 at all,to say the 6300 is not a viable budget gaming chip though is just absolutely untrue.
It powers my 970 absolutely fine - there is pretty much no reason for me to even consider changing to intel from whats currently there - it would gain me nothing at all running games on a 60htz screen.

 

[DubbleClick]

£130 now at this moment in time

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor (£74.89 @ Amazon UK)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler (£24.99 @ Amazon UK)
Motherboard: Asus M5A78L-M/USB3 Micro ATX AM3+ Motherboard (£48.95 @ Amazon UK)
Total: £148.83
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-03-31 21:24 BST+0100

Versus

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i3-4150 3.5GHz Dual-Core Processor (£84.16 @ Scan.co.uk)
Motherboard: MSI H81M-P33 Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard (£33.72 @ CCL Computers)
Total: £117.88
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-03-31 21:26 BST+0100


With the latter showing better performance in the majority of games (see: benchmarks) and being cheaper and consuming less power as well as allowing for an upgrade that makes sense later.

The fx 6300 is in no way bad, for a rendering system it will smoke basically anything you can get from intel for that price. But gaming certainly isn't it's strength.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor (£74.89 @ Amazon UK)
CPU Cooler: Zalman CNPS5X Performa CPU Cooler (£13.96 @ Amazon UK)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-78LMT-USB3 Micro ATX AM3+ Motherboard (£39.59 @ Aria PC)
Total: £128.44
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-03-31 21:34 BST+0100

thats a better board than mine & you dont need a 212 evo - for an 8 core yes but not for the 6300
I used those exact components on a build for someone before xmas & pulled a stable 4.6ghz overclock.

nothing against the i3 at all,to say the 6300 is not a viable budget gaming chip though is just absolutely untrue.
It powers my 970 absolutely fine - there is pretty much no reason for me to even consider changing to intel from whats currently there - it would gain me nothing at all running games on a 60htz screen.

Didn't say that it's awful - it's not, but it doesn't make sense to get one for gaming when there are in fact better intel options floating on the market.