change my fx 6300 to fx8350 or i5 4440

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
M

Mussin

Reputable
Jul 14, 2015
1
0
4,510
hi there! first of all thanks for help me to decide
i have this configuration:
fx6300
m5a97 r2.0 evo
gtx 970 zotac
8gb ram 1866

now my question
should i change and sell my fx6300 and buy 8350? or i should i buy an i5 4440 and a b85 motherboard?

when directx12 arrives... what will be more usefull? the 8 cores? or 4 cores and the 4 trheard?

i cant sell the mother yet, but about money, i have to pay, 1800$ (im argentinian by the way) and buing the i5 combo, its will cost 2200$

thanks for the help, and sorry about my poor english, im learning yet :)
 
Solution
synphul
I'd rather have less frame drops with an intel chip, provides smoother game play but to each their own. Directx12 is already out with windows 10, the trick is waiting for games to actually use it. By then zen will be out more than likely, skylake is already coming out. The fx won't bottleneck gpus as badly with dx12 once it's being used but that's only part of gaming. The rest of the game still runs on the cpu and the fx ipc performance is still what it is.

This looks like the same copy/paste amd promotion post atf_mart has made in other threads and came out with this youtube comparison where the fx 8350 rides along the bottom of the graph all by its lonesome. Note how in many areas of the majority of these games it's running 20-40fps...
Sort by date Sort by votes
synphul

synphul

Champion
Mar 11, 2011
9,477
7
54,965
I'd rather have less frame drops with an intel chip, provides smoother game play but to each their own. Directx12 is already out with windows 10, the trick is waiting for games to actually use it. By then zen will be out more than likely, skylake is already coming out. The fx won't bottleneck gpus as badly with dx12 once it's being used but that's only part of gaming. The rest of the game still runs on the cpu and the fx ipc performance is still what it is.

This looks like the same copy/paste amd promotion post atf_mart has made in other threads and came out with this youtube comparison where the fx 8350 rides along the bottom of the graph all by its lonesome. Note how in many areas of the majority of these games it's running 20-40fps slower than the intel quad cores (at their stock speeds).

Everyone has their own opinions, however when it comes to gaming none of this logic makes sense. For gaming atf_mart says they could have saved money and instead spent it on a better gpu/ssd. For one, an ssd won't do diddly for fps in games and unless you plan to play indie games AAA titles have gotten so large the little price difference between amd/intel wouldn't have afforded them a 500gb ssd which would actually be useful to hold more than a couple of games. Even a 250gb ssd (to increase game chapter loading time by a second or two) will easily be filled up with games at 50-60gb in size. That's windows plus 4 games allowing for a bit of headroom since you don't want an ssd full to the gills anymore than a regular hdd.

In the case of most gpu's, if someone's working within a budget $50 isn't going to get them a gpu upgrade. The difference between the cheapest gtx 960 and 970 is about $140. 970 to 980 is $170-180 difference. 980 to 980ti, $160 difference. Not really sure how to price compare amd gpus since they're priced all over the place. There are 270x's cheaper than r9 270's and r9 290's cheaper than r9 270x's so go figure.
 
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