Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD latest FX CPU or PHENOM II x6 for my AMD3+ motherboard

Tags:
  • Phenom
  • AMD
  • CPUs
  • Motherboards
  • Graphics
  • Performance
Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 30, 2014 6:42:36 AM

Hi,

I want to upgrade my CPU on my amd3+ motherboard before it breath its last breath. how does the new AMD FX CPU compared with the older phenom II line?

In terms of performance, does the FX beat out the phenom II at the same clock speed?

If the FX is inferior to phenom II x6, which FX cpu equal the performance of the Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition?

I heard someone say over 4 cores is not important for gaming, if that is the case, which FX CPU equal the performance of Phenom II X4 980 Black Edition?

thanks

More about : amd latest cpu phenom amd3 motherboard

a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 30, 2014 6:49:03 AM

Core for core, the Phenom wins out. However, the FX (depending on which one) has more cores, thus has better performance over all (assuming similar or higher clock speeds).

But you should post your mobo, so that we may suggest the best pair-up. TDP matters quite the lot, and an older AM3+ motherboard might not handle a higher TDP CPU.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b À AMD
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 30, 2014 6:50:39 AM

FX > Phenom 2. Fx 8350 would do better than x4 processors in gaming.
m
0
l
a c 455 À AMD
a c 1073 à CPUs
a c 1521 V Motherboard
July 30, 2014 6:51:16 AM

Best value FX8320.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 30, 2014 6:51:41 AM

I wouldn't bother upgrading to the FX lineup if you already have a phenom 2 x4 or x6. Not worth the money, just save up for an i5. Not to mention the AM3+ socket is dead.
m
1
l
a b À AMD
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 30, 2014 6:53:56 AM

mouse24 said:
I wouldn't bother upgrading to the FX lineup if you already have a phenom 2 x4 or x6. Not worth the money, just save up for an i5. Not to mention the AM3+ socket is dead.


I agree 100%. That is the reason I'm still on my old X6 PH II. Overclocked of course, lol.

m
0
l
July 30, 2014 7:01:34 AM

I have the Phenom II X3 740 black edition, I tried enabling the 4th core but I am one of the unlucky one to get a defective core and my OS was unstable when I activated the 4th core. So you guys think I shouldn't bother upgrading to the FX line from my phenom II x3 740 BE?
m
0
l
July 30, 2014 7:02:04 AM

Don't bother.

FX-8350 = $180
i3-4150 + Board = $200
i3-4130 + Board = $160
For $20 more, you can get a cpu thats a good 30% more powerful
For $20 less, you can get a cpu thats about 20-25% more powerful
m
0
l
a b À AMD
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 30, 2014 7:03:34 AM

lendbz said:
I have the Phenom II X3 740 black edition, I tried enabling the 4th core but I am one of the unlucky one to get a defective core and my OS was unstable when I activated the 4th core. So you guys think I shouldn't bother upgrading to the FX line from my phenom II x3 740 BE?


I would. Very few people need more power than what the 8000 series FX deliver at the moment.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 30, 2014 7:07:20 AM

lendbz said:
I have the Phenom II X3 740 black edition, I tried enabling the 4th core but I am one of the unlucky one to get a defective core and my OS was unstable when I activated the 4th core. So you guys think I shouldn't bother upgrading to the FX line from my phenom II x3 740 BE?


I suppose it depends more on how often you get paid. If you only have to wait a couple weeks or even a whole month to get an i5 > an FX then I'd wait. But if its gonna be a couple months or something then get the FX.
m
1
l
July 30, 2014 7:24:11 AM

so i am lookin at this ranking page someone gave me as an answer:

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

the fx-8350 has a Passmark CPU Mark of 9029
while the Phenom II X4 980 has a mark of 4657

How does the score read or how does it translate it real world? the fx-8350 has double the score of the II x4, does that mean the fx-8350 perform twice as fast since it has double the score of the phenom II x4 980?
m
0
l
July 30, 2014 7:31:15 AM

Quote:
How does the score read or how does it translate it real world?


It doesn't translate almost at all.

Single thread performance is what you should be looking at, since most games don't handle more than 1-2 threads.

Phenom scores ~1200
FX Scores ~1500
i3 scores ~2000
m
0
l
a b À AMD
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 30, 2014 7:34:39 AM

lendbz said:
so i am lookin at this ranking page someone gave me as an answer:

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

the fx-8350 has a Passmark CPU Mark of 9029
while the Phenom II X4 980 has a mark of 4657

How does the score read or how does it translate it real world? the fx-8350 has double the score of the II x4, does that mean the fx-8350 perform twice as fast since it has double the score of the phenom II x4 980?


Yes, but that is assuming all threads get used to there max potential which is very unlikely in games.
m
0
l
July 30, 2014 7:34:58 AM

hmmm.. what does a score of 9029 for the fx8350 and a score of 4657 for phenomII x4 980 means when I play a game such as skyrim? then those score i saw on that page is meaningless? :X
m
0
l
July 30, 2014 7:35:52 AM

by threads you mean cores?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 30, 2014 7:36:51 AM

Bench marks are hard to translate into real world. but it gives you an idea of each cpu's potential really.
m
0
l
July 30, 2014 7:42:11 AM

Threads and Cores are different things, but function similar. Regardless, most games don't use more than 2 threads or cores. And yes, those benchmarks are largely useless outside of well threaded applications (design software) and a small handful of games.

I wouldn't say it 'gives you an idea', especially when that translation is completely wrong.
m
0
l
a b À AMD
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 30, 2014 7:45:56 AM

lendbz said:
by threads you mean cores?


Cores are not necessary threads. It hard to count fx 8350 as a true 8 core processor as its more like 4 cores with 2 two threads per simultaneous core.

for more on cores:
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-1711355/quick-core...
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 30, 2014 7:57:41 AM

ak47jar3d said:
lendbz said:
by threads you mean cores?


Cores are not necessary threads. It hard to count fx 8350 as a true 8 core processor as its more like 4 cores with 2 two threads per simultaneous core.


We need to be a bit more nuanced than this. What you've described is basically Hyperthreading. Piledriver modules don't share all of their resources, so in terms of multithreaded performance it's a bit better than Hyperthreading. Eight physical cores > 4 Piledriver modules > four Hyperthreaded cores > four physical cores.

Bear in mind I am not claiming an FX-8350 is ever faster than a Core i7, just that its multithreading technology is more efficient than Hyperthreading. It falls behind overall for other reasons.

lendbz said:
Hi,

I want to upgrade my CPU on my amd3+ motherboard before it breath its last breath. how does the new AMD FX CPU compared with the older phenom II line?

In terms of performance, does the FX beat out the phenom II at the same clock speed?

If the FX is inferior to phenom II x6, which FX cpu equal the performance of the Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition?

I heard someone say over 4 cores is not important for gaming, if that is the case, which FX CPU equal the performance of Phenom II X4 980 Black Edition?

thanks



Back when Bulldozer (FX-8150) was the most recent, there was an argument for sticking with the Phenom II's for generally better gaming performance. The FX-8350 is a lot easier to recommend, especially at its current price, and I don't think there's any point in going with an old Phenom II processor anymore.
m
0
l
a c 455 À AMD
a c 1073 à CPUs
a c 1521 V Motherboard
July 30, 2014 7:59:39 AM

I own 2 FX8350 setups , 1 4670K setup , 1 4790k setup , and the i7 buries the others.
m
0
l
July 30, 2014 8:01:46 AM

Hyperthreading and multithreading, at the end of the day, perform very similar, and can be considered as such. When it comes down to it, the power of the cores, regardless of how many, is the deciding factor. The FX CPU's simply don't perform better in almost every situation, except like.. BF4.
m
0
l
a b À AMD
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 30, 2014 8:01:50 AM

oxiide said:
ak47jar3d said:
lendbz said:
by threads you mean cores?


Cores are not necessary threads. It hard to count fx 8350 as a true 8 core processor as its more like 4 cores with 2 two threads per simultaneous core.


We need to be a bit more nuanced than this. What you've described is basically Hyperthreading. Piledriver modules don't share all of their resources, so in terms of multithreaded performance it's a bit better than Hyperthreading. Eight physical cores > 4 Piledriver modules > four Hyperthreaded cores > four physical cores.

Bear in mind I am not claiming an FX-8350 is ever faster than a Core i7, just that its multithreading technology is more efficient than Hyperthreading. It falls behind overall for other reasons.


True. For the sake of keeping it simple, I made it sound like hypethreading even thou its not. To correct myself, hypethreading and multithreading are not the same.
m
0
l
!