AMD CPU Gaming benchmarks

[SiliconWars]

FX-6350 is $140. i5-4430P is $190. $50 difference. I doubt it's 100 Euro between the cheapest i5 and FX-6300 series where you live.

As far as me linking GameGPU, I could link plenty of other sites that show the same theme - AMD's CPUs are losing badly to Intel's i5/i7s in gaming.

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/FX-6350-CPU-256517/Tests/Test-AMD-FX-6350-FX-4350-1068215/

Note that those are low-resolution, 0xAA/AF CPU gaming benchmarks from May this year. They include a huge win for Intel in Starcraft II. It doesn't (believably) get any better for Intel than this. This is not cherry-picking, it's the whole benchmark suite of games.

The i5-4330 would be (extrapolated from the performance of the 3470 here) ~25% faster while costing 36% more. But it can't be overclocked and will never benefit from future games using more than 4 cores.

The FX-4350 performs slightly better for $10 less as well, but it would make sense to pay the extra $10 and overclock the 6350 to 4350 speeds, getting the best of both worlds.

If you did that (OC'd the 6350 to 4350 speeds), the i5-4330 would be around 15% faster for 36% higher cost.

That's up for grabs as far as I'm concerned. If *I* was buying a PC for myself I'd stretch to the Intel chip, or more likely a faster and unlockable one. However if I was building a mid-range gaming machine for somebody else then that $60 cheaper 6350 CPU for 15-20% less performance is a very viable alternative.

Incidentally, the i5 760 is 13% faster than the 965 BE, which is about where it should be based on initial benchmarks.

 

[toyota]

a gtx660 at just 1366 is like having a Titan at 1920x1080. a 6300 would really hold back a gtx660 at that resolution. I am not saying not to get it but just don't expect to get anywhere near full use out of the card and some games will not even be able to maintain 60fps with that cpu.

 

[exar333]

I have a better gaming experience with my 8350 compared to my 3770K, both @ stock. So I am a bit puzzled why people say AMD systems are inferior in gaming compared to Intel

Yeah, no...

I think the only cases where they are within the margin of error are some 64 player MP maps.

 

[SPBHM]

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/FX-6350-CPU-256517/Tests/Test-AMD-FX-6350-FX-4350-1068215/

here another 6350 test with the 4430 included

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/899-5/performances-jeux-3d.html


the 6350 is a 125w TDP CPU, and you need a decent MB,

but I don't recommend buying the 4430, the 4570 is up to 400Mhz higher and with TSX and only $10 more, it's basically the same performance as the 4670K without OC http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/prozessoren/2013/sechs-haswell-mit-vier-kernen/25/



Intel Core i5-4570 Haswell 3.2GHz LGA 1150 84W Quad-Core Desktop Processor Intel HD Graphics BX80646I54570
$199.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819116896

MSI B85M-P33
$64.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813130703

basic high performance and high efficiency latest gen CPU+MB for $265.

if you are paying $200 or more for a VGA it looks to me like a big mistake going lower than this, because in some games/conditions you are giving up visible performance, the MB is basic, but the CPU performance is there, the PCIe 3.0 slot, the memory slots, sata 6 and appropriate VRMs for the CPU should be there.

AMD FX-6350 Vishera 3.9GHz Socket AM3+ 125W Six-Core Desktop Processor FD6350FRHKBOX
$139.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819113327

ASUS M5A97 LE R2.0
$78.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813131872

with rebates you gain $10 back, but the average price for a 125w ready am3+ motherboard is higher than b85, also H81 is going to be released soon to go even cheaper,

that's what? $50?

I would rather use a 4570 than a 6350... as you can see on this topic in many games the difference is quite drastic... if you are only buying something like a 650 Ti it's a totally different story, but with a highly overclocked 7850 or higher...


anyway, AMD could look better using the 6300, but the default HSF is also of lower quality than the 6350 for overclocking, and without OC performance is lower.

 

[SiliconWars]

Hardware.fr is a great review site and their conclusion nails it basically. Any AMD CPU is a hard sell for gaming, but there are reasons why you might choose one.

I could link videos of 20 games on youtube with the 6350 vs any i5 and the vast majority of them would have indiscernible differences. If you then go to somebody and say that one of them costs $60 less, most people will take it.

One thing that everybody misses is that most of the games are being tested at absolute maximum settings. AMD CPU's always struggled badly with maximum shadows in any game I've played, but if shadows were dropped to medium/high quality instead of high or max, the IQ difference was hardly noticeable and the fps stayed much closer to the Intel CPU.

Instead of looking at losing 20%-30% fps, it's a lot smarter to lose a little bit of shadow quality and keep the fps totals the same. This makes the older AMD CPU's still perfectly good at gaming in most modern titles and I suspect this is also why many AMD guys feel that there is no difference between their CPU's and Intel CPU's in gaming.

 

[SPBHM]

there is a huge variety of games out there, and in a few the FX performs quite badly, in others not really, also youtube videos is hardly the most reliable way of comparing CPUs, most of the stuff is recorded using software (you absolutely need an external device to make something useful, a camera, a capture card preferably), and some users don't have a clue about testing choose poorly the game conditions,

also worth mentioning that many of the settings with huge effect on GPU load have no or little effect on CPU load, so you can lower a few settings and make a slower VGA demand as much, or more from the CPU.

as I said, for anyone building a gaming PC, with a nicer VGA, like a 7870 or higher I think it's hard to justify saving this kind of money on such essential part like the CPU...

for lower cost system it can be OK (that doesn't mean the difference is never going to be noticed, go play some bad MMO and you could end bottlenecking a 7750)

 

[justin4pack]

Believe me if i come across a good deal with an intel i will go that rout but really my budget is as close to 200 i can get with cpu/mb. I am even buying used from ebay and our fs/ft section.

 

[Silverforce11]

@Russian, I agree with you on most things, but here you have to be honest. A lot of newer games run like crap on even the best single GPU. Its well below the 60 fps mark already. Does it matter if that PC has a FX8 or i5? Nope. It's already well beyond the GPU bottleneck the CPU is almost irrelevant.

On older games, again it doesn't matter, because the FPS is already so high even on a low CPU.

The only time CPU grunt matters for games are a) in titles that are so poorly optimize even a i5 runs below 60fps (thus, fx would be at ~40fps), b) for people who CF/SLI two top single gpus or more.

For gamers on a small budget, they have to factor in the best compromise. It is always better to get a better graphics card than to get a crap GPU and go with a better CPU, for gaming.

This holds true down the road as well, when new games come out to even crush $1,000 GPUs, mid-range gpus have no hope of not being a bottleneck.

ie. what's a more better gaming machine for a fixed budget? Fx8 with 7950 or i5 with 7790? No contest.

 

[SPBHM]

ie. what's a more better gaming machine for a fixed budget? Fx8 with 7950 or i5 with 7790? No contest.

$40 is the price difference from the 8320 to the 4570, and you can possibly take some of that back with a cheaper MB, the difference from 7790 to 7950 is more like $140.

it could be different, let's say you can afford the 7950, if you add the extra $40 going with the FX, how much faster can you go on the GPU side?

 

[toyota]

unless you are a moron and crank the max SSAA or MSAA, the only games that drop below 60 fps with top end gpu are going to be because of the cpu NOT the gpu.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

ie. what's a more better gaming machine for a fixed budget? Fx8 with 7950 or i5 with 7790? No contest.

Seems like a loaded question..

8320 + UD5 is $330

i5-4670k + UD4 is $340

 

[Silverforce11]

$40 is the price difference from the 8320 to the 4570, and you can possibly take some of that back with a cheaper MB, the difference from 7790 to 7950 is more like $140.

it could be different, let's say you can afford the 7950, if you add the extra $40 going with the FX, how much faster can you go on the GPU side?

No, because that Intel CPU is not the K variant for overclocking. Its not fair to compare to an unlocked CPU that can hit 5ghz.

The comparison is vs i5-4670K.

MB differences are also around $40. The total difference is ~$100 or above, for my local price, it is exactly the price difference to a 7950.

 

[SPBHM]

No, because that Intel CPU is not the K variant for overclocking. Its not fair to compare to an unlocked CPU that can hit 5ghz.

The comparison is vs i5-4670K.

MB differences are also around $40. The total difference is ~$100 or above, for my local price, it is exactly the price difference to a 7950.

5GHz overclocking and you are desperate to save $40... good luck with that...
5GHz FX 8320 overclock requires luck, a great quality MB, great cooling, this costs $$$.

and even at 5GHz the 8320 is not going to impress as much as you might think for gaming
http://pclab.pl/art51730-14.html

the difference is $40 for a fast haswell i5 vs the 8320, or less, considering it's a lower TDP CPU from the Intel side.

newegg.

SAPPHIRE 100356OCL Radeon HD 7790 OC 1GB DDR5 PCI-Express Video Card

$124.99
Save: 17%
$114.99 after $10.00 rebate card

SAPPHIRE 100352-3L Radeon HD 7950 3GB 384-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFireX
$269.99
Save: 13%
$249.99 after $20.00 rebate card

 

[Silverforce11]

5GHz overclocking and you are desperate to save $40... good luck with that...
5GHz FX 8320 overclock requires luck, a great quality MB, great cooling, this costs $$$.

In Australia, http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=138_803

Asrock E4 Z87 = $199 (Z is required for OC)
Asrock E4 970 = $109

If you want to OC and go with Intel, the core i5 4670K = $269
If you want to OC and go with AMD, the fx8320 = $185

Total difference = $174

Both will need an aftermarket cooler because the stock is rubbish. $30 for a artic i30 or similar.

Can benches in games with poor multithread (World of Tanks uses 1 thread, along with a few of the ones on your list) support isn't going to prove your point when new releases are predominantly multithreaded.

Now if you want to compare stock i5 vs OC fx8 and which is more future proof, consider the nature of multithreading in newer games as well as the next console cycle being AMD.. no contest for the price.

Again, my point stands. i5 with low end GPU vs fx8 with high end GPU. Also, I always consider OC potential when I build rigs. Getting an intel non K CPU is stupid when the K ed is a bit extra for massive performance OC. As such, getting the K requires more expensive Z MBs..

 

[justin4pack]

What u guys are arguing is not even relivent ro my question. If i was going to buy an 8350 yes i would jump to haswell but im not. Im asking about $130 cpu.

 

[Silverforce11]

What u guys are arguing is not even relivent ro my question. If i was going to buy an 8350 yes i would jump to haswell but im not. Im asking about $130 cpu.

I already presented my point. I don't consider the CPU very important for gaming because if you game at 1080p or above, in most games, the bottleneck is always on the GPU. There are recent games where Titan cant even achieve 60 fps. Sure, there's a few where the CPU is the major bottleneck, but these games remain the odd ones out and not the norm.

Practically any CPU will do and if all your budget allows for is $130, then get the fx6300.. unless you want to go with a new MB to switch to Intel that is.

 

[SPBHM]

In Australia, http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=138_803

Asrock E4 Z87 = $199 (Z is required for OC)
Asrock E4 970 = $109

If you want to OC and go with Intel, the core i5 4670K = $269
If you want to OC and go with AMD, the fx8320 = $185

Total difference = $174

Both will need an aftermarket cooler because the stock is rubbish. $30 for a artic i30 or similar.

Can benches in games with poor multithread (World of Tanks uses 1 thread, along with a few of the ones on your list) support isn't going to prove your point when new releases are predominantly multithreaded.

Now if you want to compare stock i5 vs OC fx8 and which is more future proof, consider the nature of multithreading in newer games as well as the next console cycle being AMD.. no contest for the price.

Again, my point stands. i5 with low end GPU vs fx8 with high end GPU. Also, I always consider OC potential when I build rigs. Getting an intel non K CPU is stupid when the K ed is a bit extra for massive performance OC. As such, getting the K requires more expensive Z MBs..

the link I posted have 3 pages of 5GHz testing, and the games represent well what you can find in the real world,

a stock i5 is sufficient to outperform or compete with the overclocked FX for the most part, and so you can compare a stock i5, with stock HSF, cheap motherboard and find better value, you are desperate to save some money to justify the FX, but fail to acknowledge this way of saving money.

also on the link you posted I can see z87 boards for 125!?

AND you can overclock with b85, H81 and h87
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2328236

as long as you use the K CPU, and download the appropriate bios

the FX is more future proof, based on what? the number of cores? it's not like 1 PD core = 1 Haswell core...

the i5 have pcie 3.0, AVX2, maybe that's a factor for the future also, maybe not.

your i5 vs fx with different level of GPUs comparison is unrealistic.

What u guys are arguing is not even relivent ro my question. If i was going to buy an 8350 yes i would jump to haswell but im not. Im asking about $130 cpu.

for $130 I would recommend the 6300, but if you really need to save some money and don't care much about the CPU, the Athlon X4 750k is much cheaper and it's ok for most games.

if you can afford to expend another $50-70 with the CPU, without being forced to buy a much slower graphics card, I highly recommend buying some Core i5, like the 4570.

 

[ViRGE]

We're done here. This help thread has been very unhelpful.

justin4pack, I think you've gotten some decent answers to work with. But if you want to have another thread, please shoot me a PM and we'll work something out.

-ViRGE