Which of these CPUs should i get

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
greyfire

greyfire

Reputable
Oct 18, 2014
37
0
4,540
Hi, I bought a AMD FX 4350 CPU for the custom computer im building [Link to parts: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/dDTLbv]

But I Recently started using http://cpuboss.com/compare-cpus to compare a few CPUs im thinking about refunding/sending back the FX 4350 back to upgrade if it's worth it. Would any of the CPUs below be worth sending it back for? Also are 8 cores worth the investment? & Do l2 & l3 cache amounts make a big difference? Would any of the CPUs bottleneck my GPU?

Note: I'm not expecting one person to answer all those questions (although it would be nice) so if you have just one answer its still very appreciated thanks.

- AMD FX 4350 [Good single core performance but only has 4 cores. Cost less. Is actually newer.]
- AMD FX 6300 [Slightly less single core performance. Moderate price.
- AMD FX 8350 [Less performance per $ but more cores. Same single core performance as FX 4350 Cost almost twice as much. Is older]

Comparison links below:

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/AMD-FX-8350-vs-AMD-FX-4350

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/AMD-FX-6300-vs-AMD-FX-4350

---------------------------
Thanks for the help.
 
Solution
rolli59
They are better because they have more cores and can handle more work load therefore. More and more programs and games are requiring CPU's that can handle more threads and if you do multitasking the programs do not have to share resources. Basically you get more from more cores than fewer cores at higher speed.
Sort by date Sort by votes
greyfire

greyfire

Reputable
Oct 18, 2014
37
0
4,540


I know you definately know much more about this than i do based on all of your badges, but it says here on this website
http://cpuboss.com/cpus/AMD-FX-8320-vs-AMD-FX-4350
That the 4350 has Higher clock speed 4.2 GHz vs 3.5 GHz More than 20% higher clock speed

Could you explain why i should get the 8320 or 8350 vs the one I already have? Thanks - sorry if I'm missing something obvious here
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
rolli59

rolli59

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


Correct it has more clock speed which means if you overclock the 6300 to its speed they will have the same single core performance.
Here you see comparison between FX8320 and 4300 http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/700?vs=697 the 8 core is superior in everything that is not single threaded and will be equal in single threaded if run at the same clock speed (easy with OC).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
greyfire

greyfire

Reputable
Oct 18, 2014
37
0
4,540


Thanks for answering again. (Although i was comparing the fx 4350 not the 4300) And the 4350 has the same (And a tiny bit more) Overclocking abilities as the 8320 & 6300. So are those worth the extra cost? (& why). Thanks again. If you can answer that one ill definitely give you best solution.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
rolli59

rolli59

Titan
Oct 27, 2007
47,790
283
130,890
They are better because they have more cores and can handle more work load therefore. More and more programs and games are requiring CPU's that can handle more threads and if you do multitasking the programs do not have to share resources. Basically you get more from more cores than fewer cores at higher speed.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
CTurbo

CTurbo

Pizza Monster
Moderator
Aug 27, 2013
22,424
14
84,965
It would be fine for you to keep what you already have, but the FX6300 is only $99 so that would be a much better deal. The FX8320 would only be a little more than your FX4350 so that wouldn't be a bad choice either. I think the FX6300 offers the best bang for buck. Pretty much all of the x3xx cpus can be overclocked to reach the same clock speed(within reason), and since they are all the same generation, you CAN compare their clock speeds directly.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom