NEXT-GEN Games with a FX 8350?

It would depend if the game is made to utilize all the threads or not. In most cases, a quad i5 would do. Which makes your AMD good.

I think the assertion that AMD 8 core chips will be needed for next gen games is AMD FUD.
No game developer will have an 8 core requirement, or they won't sell many games.

The link shows that a dual core i3-3245 is ok which tells me that a quad will be plenty.
For recommendation, I see a 3770 which makes no sense to me when there are better chips available at a lesser price.

High/ultra settings are the province of your graphics card, not the cpu.
Buy a strong graphics card first.

If you have concluded that your current cpu is not up to the task, then ask why not?

To help clarify your CPU/GPU options, run these two tests:

a) Run your games, but lower your resolution and eye candy.
If your FPS increases, it indicates that your cpu is strong enough to drive a better graphics configuration.
If your FPS stays the same, you are likely more cpu limited.

b) Limit your cpu, either by reducing the OC, or, in windows power management, limit the maximum cpu% to something like 70%.
Go to control panel/power options/change plan settings/change advanced power settings/processor power management/maximum processor state/
This will simulate what a lack of cpu power will do.
Conversely what a 30% improvement in core speed might do.

You could also experiment with removing one core in the bios. This will tell you how sensitive your games are to the benefits of many cores.

If your FPS drops significantly, it is an indicator that your cpu is the limiting factor, and a cpu upgrade is in order.

It is possible that both tests are positive, indicating that you have a well balanced system, and both cpu and gpu need to be upgraded to get better gaming FPS.


For the cpu, look at the latest tom's best gaming cpu's report.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106.html

Only the FX-6300 finds a place at $110, all the others above and below are intel.

If your motherboard supports a FX-8350, then you could upgrade.
But, all you get are more cores which do not help gaming.
Actually, your X4 965 is very decent for gaming. I am told that less expensive am3+ motherboards do not do well with FX-8350.

If you need to replace it, then intel will be much better way to go.
Here is an older report on <$200 gaming cpu's.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-processor-frame-rate-performance,3427-9.html

Don't get me wrong, you will still get solid performance with that setup in Civilization V (see link below). I just meant that in certain games, intel CPUs perform significantly better.

Looking at the first chart in the link, at 1440p and max settings in Civ V with an FX-8350 and a Radeon 7970, they were getting a solid 70 fps. You will more likely have it at a lower resolution and with a better GPU so you will be just fine!

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6934/choosing-a-gaming-cpu-single-multigpu-at-1440p/7

I too am a civilization fan.
I still play 2.42, BTS and civ 5.

Graphics is not an issue, the games are capped at 60fps.
A GTX780 will deliver a constant 60fps on even a 2560 x 1600 monitor.

The real performance bottleneck is individual core speeds.
civ 5 is a pain with long turns. That is because it is single threaded.
It looks in windows task manager that it may use 4 cores, each at 25%, but that is just windows allocating
the task to different cores.

The absolute best cpu for civ gaming would be the G3258, a $70 dual core that when overclocked, can run faster than even a i7-4790K

Food for thought.

I have no problem running Civilization V at max @1080p, with my HD6850 & FX-8320. The higher resolution you play at, the less the CPU becomes the determining factor.

Aside from that, next gen games will be using multi-threading more and more. The current consoles are forcing developers to optimize for multiple threads since single thread performance is not gonna cut it for them. I think the FX series is therefore more future proof than people believe.