[SOLVED] Is AMD FX still valid enough nowadays?

Status
Not open for further replies.

msyazwan

Honorable
Feb 3, 2014
12
0
10,510
Hi all, newbie here. Just want to ask for your opinion about topic above.
Currently owning fx6300

Specs:
AMD fx6300
8gb ddr3 ram
Gtx 750ti

With current update on market nowadays, found its hard to upgrade my system with new components. (Except used components out there)

So should I maintain this rig (minor upgrade using used-components) or totally ditch out this rig and build new one?

Average first person shooters gamers with 1080p monitor.

Thank you.
 
Solution


If this is the Biostar TA970 that I'm thinking of, that only has a 4+1 power phase design, which means it's a poor choice for a 125W CPU anyway. With the AM3+ CPUs, manufacturers *really* stretched the definition of supported and a lot of motherboards that claimed to support 125W or even 140W CPUs would throttle with these CPUs at load. The main problem being that those VRMs are overworked and undercooled; these are crucial parts as they convert the +12V power the power supply provides to what the CPU can use.

msyazwan

Honorable
Feb 3, 2014
12
0
10,510
It seems start hit the border. Unable to play newer game with high setting anymore even AA was turned off.

My initial plan was to upgrade to fx8320 and getting decent gpu. But seeing fx are only available as used-parts.
 

Phazoner

Distinguished
It depends on how do you expect to play. Lets take the FX-8350 as an example:

If you want to play at high FPS on a 144Hz monitor, it will be in serious trouble with CPU intensive games. In Battlefield V it is able to keep it over 60FPS mostly all the time, but with Assassin's Creed Odyssey it will be around 60FPS but usually going over 50FPS and even lower, but that game doesn't seem to be really good optimized for GPU neither so I guess it is a good match for a GTX 1060 or a RX 580, when playing at 1080p. If you are going for higher resolutions, the GPU will need more power so you can probably pair it with better GPUs but it's kinda pointless ass you will probably prefer to render at 1080p to try to get at least 60FPS, where as said the FX wont be enough. I don't know how much can you push the performance in Odyssey by lowering the CPU intensive settings, but the 8350 will still be on the edge. No problem if you can live by limiting at 30FPS.

Some proof about its performance:

https://gamegpu.com/rpg/%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B2%D1%8B%D0%B5/assassin-s-creed-odyssey-test-gpu-cpu

https://gamegpu.com/action-/-fps-/-tps/battlefield-v-test-gpu-cpu

Edit: Ok, ninja update after writting all this... *sigh*

You can definitely get better performance upgrading to a 8350 but I would only do that if you can sell good the FX-6300 and get the 8350 really cheap. Probably your FX-6300 has still room for a little better GPU, but it's probably not worth it.
 


The biggest issue is single core performance. The fx 6300 and fx 8350 have the same single core performance when running at the same frequency (every fx 6300 can run at 4.2 without an issue). Getting an fx 8 core is just a waste of money since you are adding 2 extra cores to an already really weak cpu. In games that use 8 cores it's not going to help it much since it will still be severely lacking in the single core performance department.

So tl:dr do NOT upgrade the cpu it's not worth the money at all. A gpu upgrade can be fine but the cpu is still the limiting factor and will cap out at a gtx 1050ti before seriously starting to bottleneck it in certain games.
 

Phazoner

Distinguished
As I previously said, in all-core-demanding games the FX-8350 can still defend itself but not with much better cards unless you push them with high resolutions. So yes, its a waste of money if you can't make the upgrade really, really cheap. The single core performance will only be still an issue in old CPU dependent games which don't use all cores which aren't a lot (Total War Rome II, the WiiU emulator, and not much more cases).
 

DSzymborski

Curmudgeon Pursuivant
Moderator
Even if you were to go to an 8320/8350 -- which I personally wouldn't recommend as a practical use of money in 2019 -- you would need to provide information about your motherboard to get recommendations. A lot of motherboards that would theoretically support a 125W AM3+ CPU are actually cutting it quite close and have throttling issues.

I wouldn't bother with an upgrade unless I scored 8320/8350 very inexpensively (under $30) and I had a proper motherboard for getting value out of it, which means a 990fx motherboard and some 970 motherboards and definitely not one of the budget AM3+ motherboards.
 

DSzymborski

Curmudgeon Pursuivant
Moderator


If this is the Biostar TA970 that I'm thinking of, that only has a 4+1 power phase design, which means it's a poor choice for a 125W CPU anyway. With the AM3+ CPUs, manufacturers *really* stretched the definition of supported and a lot of motherboards that claimed to support 125W or even 140W CPUs would throttle with these CPUs at load. The main problem being that those VRMs are overworked and undercooled; these are crucial parts as they convert the +12V power the power supply provides to what the CPU can use.
 
Solution

msyazwan

Honorable
Feb 3, 2014
12
0
10,510
Yup that's correct indeed. That biostar TA970 serve me for couple of years already. That's why I'm in doubt with my plan on upgrading current system. Afraid it couldn't adapt. In my country, am3+ motherboard pricier that am4 mobo lol
 


Yeah that board is not going to handle any fx8000 series and if it does it will fail quickly. For now you can get a better card and later upgrade the rest of your system.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.