FX-8350- Motherboard suggestions

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
H

Hassan Latif

Reputable
Aug 2, 2014
10
0
4,510
Hi,

I'm building a budgeted PC and I know I should be getting either the 970, 990X or 990FX.
Because I'm on a budget I want to pick the 970, I just wanted to know what will be my opportunity cost if I do pick the 970.

I have no graphics card and I'm not planning on getting one anytime soon. If i do get one it will be 2 max.

 
Sort by date Sort by votes
rolli59

rolli59

Titan
Oct 27, 2007
47,790
283
130,890

None of those chipsets have integrated GPU so you will have to get a GPU! Cheap but a good board http://pcpartpicker.com/part/gigabyte-motherboard-ga970aud3p
Good mainstream 990FX board http://pcpartpicker.com/part/asus-motherboard-m5a99fxpror20
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
photonboy

photonboy

Titan
Jun 20, 2006
21,567
13
85,015
Update:
Not sure if you might game in the future. Also not sure of current PURPOSE of build (video editing, or just basic?). Anyway, read the following and also consider the $65 G3258 has HD Graphics built in. You can even get an inexpensive H81 Asus board that can slightly overclock it.

Not only that, since the G3258 consumes so little power compared to the FX-8350 the included stock fan might be reasonably quiet so that's something else you wouldn't have to purchase.

If you haven't bought the FX-8350 I strongly suggest one of the Intel i5 CPU's. For gaming, the i5's vary by the game but up to 40% (Skyrim). For a few modern games that are well threaded the i5 and FX-8350 are roughly the same though even in those games the FPS on the LOW end favors the Intel CPU's due to the stronger per-core processing power Intel has. (If a 2-core Pentium G3258 beats the 8-core FX-8350 in Skyrim there's got to be a huge difference there per core..)

For many games, the Intel G3258 beats the FX-8350 and it only costs $65. Great for a budget, plus you can add a better i5/i7 later if needed since it's Socket 1150 (4th gen such as i5-4440).

I designed a "budget" system for someone and used the approximate $100 difference to buy a much better graphics card.

*It's still hard to make recommendations, and I know you just asked for a motherboard (the above Asus seems fine) but if you want the absolute best advice give a total BUDGET (including Windows if needed) because the best system is all about the BALANCE of parts. Especially the CPU and Graphics Card.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Armo1000

Armo1000

Reputable
Jul 25, 2014
414
0
4,960


Older games use less cores max of 2.. Intel's single core performance may beat AMD at older games but entering into the future , the games are going to be more core hungry and the 8 core fx 8350 will bring out the beast within..
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
photonboy

photonboy

Titan
Jun 20, 2006
21,567
13
85,015
Armo1000,
As per your above... Yes, the FX-8350 will beat the G3258 in games that use more than a certain number of threads well. Like BF4 in Multiplayer, Metro LL and a few others.

HOWEVER, he also isn't gaming right away. He has the option to drop in a better Haswell CPU if he wants, and the G3258 has an iGPU so that's another purchase not needed. And again he may not need an after market cooler like he would want with the FX-8350.

The cost of a low-end graphics card and cooler like the CM Hyper EVO cost the SAME PRICE as the G3258 even!

So, based on my limited info about his build I'm not seeing much reason to go a different way.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
photonboy

photonboy

Titan
Jun 20, 2006
21,567
13
85,015


You are completely wrong on that. The FX-8350 only breaks even in a few modern games, and is well behind by up to 40% in several games. Not sure where you're getting your numbers but it's well known that even something like an i5-4440 beats the FX-8350.

Looking at the below graph, keep in mind that HASWELL is 10% faster than IVY at the same frequency. If you look at the Turbo frequency and factor that in, the i5-4460 is slightly faster than the i5-3470. Thus, the i5-4460 for Skyrim (for this PC configuration) is 45% faster. Yes. That's not representative of all games but it's worth pointing out.

Skyrim CPU comparison: http://techreport.com/review/23750/amd-fx-8350-processor-reviewed/5

As for the FUTURE who can say? With the Haswell's being roughly 40% better per core (in some cases more) you need to use a lot of the FX-8350 to break even. The numbers I've seen suggest you break even, with an i5 of the same frequency, at the point you use SIX CORES FULLY of the FX-8350.

For that to happen regularly we'll need Mantle and DX12 support for improved multi-threading but then they've already discussed how much they can reduce the overall CPU processing power required so it's looking unlikely that we'll need more than an i5-4460 in the near future.

Long story short, I just can't recommend an AMD CPU for any scenario. We've got the G3258 for $65, and the i5-4460 at $185 beats the FX-8350.

Not trying to be a jerk, I'm just trying to give my best advice. If you have some solid BENCHMARKS that are more than a handful of games that show the FX-8350 actually winning I'd love to see them. Meanwhile, there are tonnes of reviews that say Haswell is best for gaming, and even ones saying how great the G3258 is for a budget gaming build.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Jovan93

Jovan93

Reputable
May 18, 2014
768
0
5,060


i have FX-8350 and M5A99FX PRO R2.0 i OC it to 4.525MHz with CM HyperEVO 212 and its giving me really good results i have 66c on socket while stress test and 30c on MOBO (air conditioner ON) 68-71c on socket and 31c on MOBO (air conditioner OFF) ill reccomend this one but the M5A97X Evo R2.0 is probably good like this FX MOBO is
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
photonboy

photonboy

Titan
Jun 20, 2006
21,567
13
85,015
Jovan93,
I'm glad you like your system, but I think for recommendations to other people we should be looking at BENCHMARKS for whatever he plans to do as the only worthwhile reference.

Anyway, let's wait for some feedback because we'd really need more information.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Armo1000

Armo1000

Reputable
Jul 25, 2014
414
0
4,960
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform much better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future, see here: http://www.corsair.com/blog/ps4-xbone-pcgaming/ ).

AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.

For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.

For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks for AMD FX 83xx vs i5/i7:
Gaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc
Gaming and Streaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE
Having shown that, the intel wins 9 times out of 10 in most purely gaming benchmarks as AMD cannot match its per-core performance. Also these particular benchmarks have been scrutinised many a time. If you wish to find out more you can google benchmarks for each processor.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have caught up in performance and in some cases deliver better performance than the intel's for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.

Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
sourodip

sourodip

Distinguished
Jul 9, 2011
2,491
0
20,460
For no O.C ing-970 Board is fine.
For Serious O.Cing 990FX boards are recommended.
For SLI/Xfire-990Fx boards are recommended.
For single GPU-you can pick any one of the 990GX/970 depending upon your budget.
The Gigabyte 970A-UD3 has got a 8+2 power phase design but not suitable board for doing SLI/Xfir while on the other hand the MSI 970A-G46 is a suitable board for doing SLI/Xfire but not suitable for O.C ing since it has got a 4+1 power phase design.
The 990FX boards are clear winners both in terms of O.C ing and using dual gpu.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
H

Hassan Latif

Reputable
Aug 2, 2014
10
0
4,510


The AMD stays. Getting a discount on it from a friend working at amd. This is a general use build, very little gaming that doesn't require a GPU. thus I want a good motherboard that has an integrated graphics and good with the FX-8350.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
LookItsRain

LookItsRain

Distinguished
Jun 4, 2013
2,014
0
20,160
AMD does not beat intel, and 8350 gets beat by any i5 in almost all games, 3258 beats almost everything amd has to offer. Amd also produces more heat and uses more energy.

To the OP, AM3+ boards do not have an intergrated GPU, you need an intel or an amd apu.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
sourodip

sourodip

Distinguished
Jul 9, 2011
2,491
0
20,460
There's no IGPU(integrated graphics adapter) available from any of the 990FX/970 chipsets.
Here's a piece of advice: If you already own the 8350,then get a good and cheap 970 board like the Asus M5A97 LE 2.0/Gigabyte 970A-UD3 and buy a GPU.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
photonboy

photonboy

Titan
Jun 20, 2006
21,567
13
85,015
*Quick answer is get the GTX750Ti:

More information:
R7-250X:
Here's how it scales (with an Intel CPU to avoid any bottleneck): http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r7-250x-graphics-card-review,3747-3.html

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GTX_750_Ti_OC/25.html (compare to HD7770)

GTX750Ti vs R7-250X:
a) over 50% faster
b) 2GB vs 1GB VRAM
c) $20 difference (for similar quality)
d) NVidia has SHADOWPLAY for game recording with minimal impact (may not compare about other features)

**Recommended card:
http://pcpartpicker.com/part/evga-video-card-02gp43751kr
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
LookItsRain

LookItsRain

Distinguished
Jun 4, 2013
2,014
0
20,160


The price of the 750 ti is dropping alot recently.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
sourodip

sourodip

Distinguished
Jul 9, 2011
2,491
0
20,460
The R7 250x(rebranded HD7770) is a nice card but if the 750Ti is only 20$ costlier,then get the 750Ti. It's a lot faster than the 250x. But if the 250x is much cheaper than the 750Ti in your country and if you are happy with the 250x which is much faster then the 240,then buy the 250x.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom