Solved

Has CPU become more important for gaming? Do I need to upgrade? (help)

Specs
CPU: A8 3280 Quad core processor 2.5
GPU: Nvidia GTX 780
RAM: 8GB

I just recently decided to give PC gaming a try So I started to convert my home PC into a gaming PC, so I bought a 780 from my friend. I never paid any attention to my CPU specs because a few years ago whenever I looked at games.

Because I always thought the important specs were always ram and gpu. I mean when i was younger I remember how whenever I wanted a game the only thing stopping me was the stock gpu. And I always thought a decent CPU's would last for around 7 years

but recently I found out my CPU does not meet the requirements for certain games like witcher 3 BF1 and syndicate.

I am only looking for 1080p 40-50 fps gaming on mid-high.

Not sure if I should upgrade
7 answers Last reply Best Answer
More about cpu important gaming upgrade
  1. What is your budget? Pretty much any current cpu would be a huge upgrade for you. I recommend the i3 6100 as a good starting place.
  2. well $200-250, motherboard included, I need to get a new motherboard. I was thinking about getting the cheapest micro motherboard in the market with a good CPU like amd fx 8 core. Is there any downside to performance getting a cheap tiny motherboard?
  3. Best answer
    Don't upgrade your really old system with an almost as old FX8350. The FX8350 would run like crap on a cheap motherboard anyway. Even at it's best, it's not as good as an i3 6100.

    I recommend a 4th gen i5 since you could reuse your RAM. Are you sure you don't need a new psu too?


    PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

    CPU: Intel Core i5-4460 3.2GHz Quad-Core Processor ($189.99 @ Newegg)
    Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-B85M-DS3H-A Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($54.98 @ Newegg)
    Total: $229.97
    Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
    Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-09-27 03:59 EDT-0400
  4. CTurbo said:
    Don't upgrade your really old system with an almost as old FX8350. The FX8350 would run like crap on a cheap motherboard anyway. Even at it's best, it's not as good as an i3 6100.

    I recommend a 4th gen i5 since you could reuse your RAM. Are you sure you don't need a new psu too?


    PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

    CPU: Intel Core i5-4460 3.2GHz Quad-Core Processor ($189.99 @ Newegg)
    Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-B85M-DS3H-A Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($54.98 @ Newegg)
    Total: $229.97
    Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
    Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-09-27 03:59 EDT-0400


    ______________________________________________________________________________________________
    Your absolutely right. PSU was the first thing i was going to buy, 780 is really power intensive. I am going to just buy an evga 600W. I am confused about why the FX 8 core is a bad idea. How do you judge a CPU's value? I thought AMDs are cheap and dedicated towards gaming.

    I can't lie, I really like what you suggested, never really went near intel because it was to pricy. But is there any downsides to getting a cheap motherboard?
  5. James_386 said:

    Your absolutely right. PSU was the first thing i was going to buy, 780 is really power intensive. I am going to just buy an evga 600W. I am confused about why the FX 8 core is a bad idea. How do you judge a CPU's value? I thought AMDs are cheap and dedicated towards gaming.

    I can't lie, I really like what you suggested, never really went near intel because it was to pricy. But is there any downsides to getting a cheap motherboard?


    A lot of study, or just simple "CPU X vs CPU X" google searchs.

    It's basically boils down to:
    AMDs: Cheap multicore CPUs that have many threads, but low single core performance. Most programs, games, applications are single core, meaning they only run on the 1st core, and don't care how many you have. Only a few extremely high intensity programs use more than one core, like video editing software, where AMDs are a good cheap alternative, but still fall far behind what Intel offers if you're serious about doing lots of video editing.

    Intel: Higher cost (typically worth it) multithreaded CPUs that have a lower amount of cores, but employ a technology called Hyper-threading that allows two tasks (threads) to be run on the same core so it performs like it has twice the cores it has when necessary. They also have vastly higher single threaded performance vs AMD, as like Turbo said, an i3 6100 (Intel's low end model) is better than the AMD FX 8350 (AMD's high end model).

    Single threaded performance is like, how fast a car's wheel can spin.
    CPU cores are like how many wheels a car has.
    An 8 wheeled semi-truck with a trailer is great for hauling lots of cargo (i.e. processing large video files) but bad at commuting to work every day vs like a motorcycle (a fast 2 core CPU).
  6. hello!

    i say sense you want to play bf1 it has direct x12 so a fx 8300 processor would be grate also get a nice 990fx mobo off of ebay and your set an i3 wont perform as well in bf one but you get a good upgrade path so its a trade off chose wisely do your own researcher like i researcher mine. and don't be afraid to go agenst the grain to get the best performance. also if you want to get even better performance you can oc it with a good cooler ask me if you want some suggestions.
  7. I'm with CTurbo on this one, I think with your budget a quad-core Intel would be best for your gaming needs. The extra cores that the AMD offers are only useful in certain circumstances, and generally perform far worse than Intel. A dual-core OTOH, even hyperthreaded, may not be sufficient for upcoming titles.
Ask a new question