Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Worth upgrading to fx 6300? or should i wait for the fx 8350

Tags:
  • Gaming
  • AMD
  • FPS
  • CPUs
Last response: in CPUs
Share
November 14, 2013 8:54:56 PM

Im looking to uprade my current CPU for gaming purposes. Im getting anywhere between 30-60 fps on BF4 High settings. Some areas drop to 30 and I was hoping a better CPU would help. The 6300 is 129.99 and the 8350 is 200+. I want know how much an increase in FPS im looking at if i get the 6300 and if i should save up and buy the 8350 later.

my current specs:
msi ms-7778 jasmine
8GB DDR3
AMD a10-5700 3.4 GHz
Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 (Overclocked to 1100/1500)

I realize ill need a new motherboard as well so any suggestions on that are appreciated (under $100 if possible)

More about : worth upgrading 6300 wait 8350

a b 4 Gaming
a b À AMD
a c 109 à CPUs
November 14, 2013 8:59:27 PM

the 8350 does better in BF4 and in my opinion would be worth the extra money. Games are starting to utilize 8 cores. The 6300 would perform significantly better than the a10. I'd say save up now and just get the 8350 instead of doing it in steps.
m
0
l
November 14, 2013 9:11:08 PM

ethereal essence said:
the 8350 does better in BF4 and in my opinion would be worth the extra money. Games are starting to utilize 8 cores. The 6300 would perform significantly better than the a10. I'd say save up now and just get the 8350 instead of doing it in steps.


So the extra 80 bucks is worth the performance boost between the 6300 and 8350 in your opinion?
m
0
l
Related resources
a b 4 Gaming
a b À AMD
a c 109 à CPUs
November 14, 2013 9:14:29 PM

Dmilovic said:
ethereal essence said:
the 8350 does better in BF4 and in my opinion would be worth the extra money. Games are starting to utilize 8 cores. The 6300 would perform significantly better than the a10. I'd say save up now and just get the 8350 instead of doing it in steps.


So the extra 80 bucks is worth the performance boost between the 6300 and 8350 in your opinion?


In my opinion it is. However, there is also a happy middle ground with the 8320. That one there would be about half way between the two in price (160-170 depending) and quite close to the 8350 in performance and overclocks well.

Either way I'd recommend going with the 8 core cpus, especially with games like BF4 and watch dogs (and surely others) starting to take advantage of 8 cores.

Edit:

Even if a game doesn't take advantage of 8 cores, the 8320 and 8350 have one more FPU than the 6300 which get used quite a bit in gaming.
m
0
l
November 14, 2013 9:20:24 PM

ethereal essence said:
Dmilovic said:
ethereal essence said:
the 8350 does better in BF4 and in my opinion would be worth the extra money. Games are starting to utilize 8 cores. The 6300 would perform significantly better than the a10. I'd say save up now and just get the 8350 instead of doing it in steps.


So the extra 80 bucks is worth the performance boost between the 6300 and 8350 in your opinion?


In my opinion it is. However, there is also a happy middle ground with the 8320. That one there would be about half way between the two in price (160-170 depending) and quite close to the 8350 in performance and overclocks well.

Either way I'd recommend going with the 8 core cpus, especially with games like BF4 and watch dogs (and surely others) starting to take advantage of 8 cores.

Edit:

Even if a game doesn't take advantage of 8 cores, the 8320 and 8350 have one more FPU than the 6300 which get used quite a bit in gaming.


the 8320 definitely looks appealing. Can you recommend me a motherboard to run these FX cards? Also will my 500w EVGA 80plus bronze PSU be enough for this and my card? I want to overclock it. Im still under the 30 day return policy for it
m
0
l

Best solution

a b 4 Gaming
a b À AMD
a c 109 à CPUs
November 14, 2013 9:26:48 PM

I'd recommend the Asus M5A99FX Pro if you want to do some overclocking it is ~150 or so and is a nice reliable board without breaking the bank too much, I wouldn't go with anything less than a 990FX board with at least 6+2 power phases unless you just want a mild overclock. I've heard of some VRM issues with some of the Gigabyte boards (certain Revisions). The Asus board has a good VRM and a 6+2 power phase (you'd want 8+2 ideally but the Asus board does have a quality VRM).

You might be cutting your psu close, I'd say go for at least 650W if you want to overclock.
Share
November 14, 2013 9:39:00 PM

ethereal essence said:
I'd recommend the Asus M5A99FX Pro if you want to do some overclocking it is ~150 or so and is a nice reliable board without breaking the bank too much, I wouldn't go with anything less than a 990FX board with at least 6+2 power phases unless you just want a mild overclock. I've heard of some VRM issues with some of the Gigabyte boards (certain Revisions). The Asus board has a good VRM and a 6+2 power phase (you'd want 8+2 ideally but the Asus board does have a quality VRM).

You might be cutting your psu close, I'd say go for at least 650W if you want to overclock.


Thank you

bouncedk said:
You could save up for an FX-8320 and just overclock it to 4ghz which makes it the exact same thing as an FX-8350 only cheaper. If you are going for much higher overclocks however, yeah the 8350 would probably be better.

BF4 does not have Mantle enabled yet which will give the game access to all 8 cores, so I'd imagine that would produce a significant performance boost.


Im definitely thinking of going with the 8320 with an OC. Any news on when mantle will become available?

m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b À AMD
a c 109 à CPUs
November 14, 2013 9:43:42 PM

bouncedk said:

BF4 does not have Mantle enabled yet which will give the game access to all 8 cores, so I'd imagine that would produce a significant performance boost.


AFAIK mantle is a graphics API and wouldn't affect CPU performance.

Edit: at least not affect cpu performance in any direct way. It might off load some stuff from the CPU to the GPU but that is all I have heard of it.
m
0
l
!