AMD Next Socket AM3+ or FM2+ ?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
J

Joao Torres

Honorable
May 2, 2015
9
0
10,510
Hi, I just want to know if you guys know if the next cpu AMD is working on is going to be on Fm2+ or AM3+ socket?
I'm building a pc and I know that fx series are really strong for gaming but if the AMD is going to launch some good x4 or x6 cpu's in the future, I'm totally going for an x4 860k, and also a x4 860k is almost 30€ cheaper than fx 6300, here in Portugal.
Thanks!
 
Solution
Eximo
AMD's next socket will be neither to answer that question directly.

No release news for any FM2+ chips as of yet. New laptop APU's just came out though.

AMD has made mention of a potential FX series chip using the Kaverri cores. It is not known if that will be targeted at AM3+.

AMD CPUs are budget processors really. 'Really strong' for gaming would be an Intel i5 or higher.

860k is a decent mid-range quad core. Both it and the FX6300 will provide similar performance to an Intel i3 in games, but can excel at other multitasking processes due to having more cores.
Sort by date Sort by votes
Eximo

Eximo

Titan
Ambassador
May 27, 2010
25,829
4,178
139,340
AMD's next socket will be neither to answer that question directly.

No release news for any FM2+ chips as of yet. New laptop APU's just came out though.

AMD has made mention of a potential FX series chip using the Kaverri cores. It is not known if that will be targeted at AM3+.

AMD CPUs are budget processors really. 'Really strong' for gaming would be an Intel i5 or higher.

860k is a decent mid-range quad core. Both it and the FX6300 will provide similar performance to an Intel i3 in games, but can excel at other multitasking processes due to having more cores.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
Solution
J

Joao Torres

Honorable
May 2, 2015
9
0
10,510


Yes I thought that the fx 6300 and x4 860k were similiar too, I think I'm going with the x4.
Also, you said really strong would be an i5 or higher, yeah for ' Really strong ' it would be an i7 I know.. But an i7 that costs around 300$. But if you want a cpu for the best value I think that fx 8350 is the best option which costs around 180$ or less and outperforms a bunch of i5's...
Thanks for reply!

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
B

bmacsys

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


I have an 8320 and 6300 both in Sabertooth R2's. I really like my 860K and my Crossblade Ranger. At 4.45 GHz it performs really, really well. I find my AM3+ machines collecting dust.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Eximo

Eximo

Titan
Ambassador
May 27, 2010
25,829
4,178
139,340
The FM2+ processes are a newer architecture then the FX series. Even the latest versions of FX processors are just lower power binned samples.

FX8350 has to be overclocked above 4.0Ghz to even have a chance with an entry level i5 when gaming. Kind of why they aren't a very good choice. You get a lot more value out of an Athlon x4 since the total cost is so low. FX-6300 gets you similar value. When you get up to the price of the FX-8320 and FX-8350 (while keeping in mind you need a somewhat nice motherboard to overclock) then the i5-4460 starts to look pretty good with a cheap motherboard.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
P

Pyrodark

Reputable
Aug 21, 2015
1
0
4,510


Correction for performance of AMD cpus: Performance for dollar, FX 8320, 8350, 8370 are WAY over i5. +unlocked, + 2x4cores. Just 32nm, instead of 22, meaning way more heat and energy (TDP > 125W instead of 65-85 typical i5 )
Read through this http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-4460-vs-AMD-FX-8350 and you will see that most of the higher spots of this i5 are an analogy of the single core performance. all the numbers like "performance per dollar", "performance per watt". And the i5 gets a "5" rating for OC when it is locked. LOL. No question in my mind, entry and mid level gaming, better money the AMD. (tried to get the same priced model, this is even 10$ more atm, the 4460 is 209 and the 8350 is 199)
Even more indicative is the benches like:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html
Regards
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Eximo

Eximo

Titan
Ambassador
May 27, 2010
25,829
4,178
139,340
Post is rather old to be responding to. CPU Boss is a rather useless site to use as a reference. Comparing raw numbers and values only gets you so far. And looking at CPU only metrics is not what people are after for gaming. On CPU bound games the single core performance of an Intel chip really does blow the 6/8 cores of the FX out of the water. Some of the latest games are decently multithreaded, but still the main processes benefit from the single core performance far more.

Now if I wanted to know how quickly a computer can unzip a file or process an image, then certainly the metric from cpubenchmark would be useful.

Process node is a fine comparison, but only really applies to similar architectures. ie Broadwell at 14nm vs Haswell at 22nm.

FX processor technology is about 4 years old now. AMD does have lower power CPUs in the 95W and 65W range, just as Intel has higher power chips up to 150W.

Just not really a good recommendation to go for an AMD setup unless you are budget restricted. Then the overclocking potential comes in handy to get more performance for the dollar.

Kind of an old debate, but there is not much you can justify getting an FX processor for. Another generation from Intel is available, so far only the unlocked chips, but give it a few weeks/months and you will see a locked i5 that should be worth looking into. Another 10% or on top of the i5-4460 just reduces what an few multipliers on an FX chip will get you.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Z

ZENprime

Reputable
Jul 2, 2015
503
1
5,360
New unified socket for upcoming CPUs and APUs built on the Zen architecture will be AM4 . Officially ...
b=
current APUs are more like low powered FX-4300 series , top APUs are the a10 / x4 860k
which uses nearly the same core module as the FX series , but built on a lower node with updated chipset features like
native PCI-E 3.0 / USB 3
The whole point of the APUs are to go into cheap builds where you will not need GPU card . so for the integrated GPU the cpu power in these apus are enough .
In my opinion AMD never released updated steamroller FX series because there is nothing to improve in the CPU rather than some chipset improvement
1st Gen of the modular architecture was released as baseline .
2nd Gen (Piledrive) was all about improvement in the CPU cahce system and improvements in CPU clock speeds which led to a better CPU
3rd Gen was adding more resources into the modular CPU , however it did not help , the problems remains in the deep architecture of the CPU therefore no more improvements could be added
so you only improve the APUs internal GPU and leave the FX behind .
That's why there is no 4th Gen desktop processor , simply there will not be any improvements in the CPU power
 
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