Should I replace my fx-8350 with something with less cores?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
B

bohlbrixx

Reputable
Aug 10, 2014
6
0
4,510
Basically, I have a FX-8350 amd processor with a Radeon 7970 3gb card. Usually this setup is great for all of my single player gaming needs (Tomb Raider / Crysis 3), and I can run these games with High / Ultra settings in 1080p no problem. Saying this, I am unhappy with my performance in many MMO's. The only games I can run somewhat well (30+ fps) is ESO and Planetside, which are optimized for multicore support. Most other multiplayer games only use 1-4 cores.

At least 80% of the games I play are MMO's, and I really want to be able have stable fps in raids/dungeons/pvp. I also understand that these games are very cpu dependant so having a good cpu is key. I am currently looking at the AMD 760k richland processor or maybe even the FX-4300 Vishera processor. Both have 4 cores.

P.S. I have 8gb of ram and 650w golden approved psu.
Thank you in advance for any and all responses.
 
Solution
iam2thecrowe

no, that makes no sense, thats not how it works at all. a 4300 has nearly identical per-core performance to an 8350. All cores run at the same speed, you dont divide ghz by number of cores. The only way to get more speed from the...
Sort by date Sort by votes
B

bohlbrixx

Reputable
Aug 10, 2014
6
0
4,510
The reason I was going to downgrade is that although the FX-8350 and the 4300 have the same base clock, the 4300 has half as many cores. This means that the fx8350 has a 0.5ghz clock each core, when the fx4300 has double that (due to its lesser cores). So, for example, if I play a game that uses 2 cores with the 8350, I will only get about 1 ghz of power going toward that game. If I played the same game but using the 4300, it was use 2ghz of power. Does that make sense? And thank you for the feedback
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
G

Guest

Guest


And that too. Though I should have qualified it by saying: if the BIOS/uEFI will let you disable cores.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
B

bohlbrixx

Reputable
Aug 10, 2014
6
0
4,510


If I did that, would the cores that I keep enabled wear faster and reduce the life span of the cpu?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
G

Guest

Guest

Firstly, when overclocking, make sure you are using a good heatsink (at least a CM Hyper 212 Evo) - do NOT use stock AMD cooler to OC.

Secondly, you will degrade a CPU when OC'ing, hence the better the cooler the less effect you will have on your CPU. As for how much the individual cores will degrade relative to one another, where you have active and (manually) disable cores, I do have to say that I do not know. But, due to the proximity of the cores, I would have to say that even the ones turned off would be influenced by the heat/higher voltage. Plus, in theory, AMD FX (Piledriver) CPUs should have an automatic core parking.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
B

bmacsys

Honorable
BANNED
Jul 4, 2013
1,854
9
12,165


I am literally still using cpu's in old machines dating from the late 1980's.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
LookItsRain

LookItsRain

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


That is not how a cpu works at all not even close, going to a 4300 will not improve single core performence one bit. A fx 8350 has a core clock of 4 ghz PER CORE it is not divided or not additive.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
iam2thecrowe

iam2thecrowe

Glorious
Jul 4, 2010
10,591
21
44,965

no, that makes no sense, thats not how it works at all. a 4300 has nearly identical per-core performance to an 8350. All cores run at the same speed, you dont divide ghz by number of cores. The only way to get more speed from the cores is to OC them (you can even disable cores on the 8350 to get higher OC's on less cores), or switch to an Intel setup that has much faster per-core performance regardless of ghz and core count.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom