is the 8350 really that bad? (if not overclocked?)
Tags:
- Gtx
-
Gigabyte
- Intel i5
-
CPUs
Last response: in CPUs
JussiSavolainen
30 July 2014 09:47:55
hello. i recently got the gigabyte gtx 770 4gb and im playing Dota 2 on 1920x1080 on high settings
, combined with the fx 8350.
my friend has a 2nd generation i5 something like 2550k ( cant recall the exact name) combined with a gigabyte 7950.
He has almost steady 150 fps in dota 2,
while i get 90-120. On same video settings.
Is the 8350 really so underpowered?
, combined with the fx 8350.
my friend has a 2nd generation i5 something like 2550k ( cant recall the exact name) combined with a gigabyte 7950.
He has almost steady 150 fps in dota 2,
while i get 90-120. On same video settings.
Is the 8350 really so underpowered?
More about : 8350 bad overclocked
-
Reply to JussiSavolainen
Same game settings?
CPU's are about the same - http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-2500K-vs-AMD-FX-8...
CPU's are about the same - http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-2500K-vs-AMD-FX-8...
-
Reply to i7Baby
m
1
l
JussiSavolainen
30 July 2014 09:55:52
Related resources
- New AMD FX 8350, really BAD performances - Forum
- How would I know if I got a bad overclocking fx 8350? - Forum
- Fx-8350 temps, really high under load. Help me troubleshoot? - Forum
- Overclocked AMD FX-8350 - Forum
- Is the FX-9590 Really that bad? - Forum
For one it seems the game has a built in fps limit of 120 -> http://www.playdota.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1190923 and http://www.techspot.com/review/785-free-to-play-games-b...
Also given the techspot benchmark it seems the R9 280 (aka 7950) may be better at playing dota 2 than the GTX 770 considering the R9 280X is faster than the GTX 780. Although the FPS limit can cause slight fluctuations in your FPS he probably changed the FPS limit.
Also given the techspot benchmark it seems the R9 280 (aka 7950) may be better at playing dota 2 than the GTX 770 considering the R9 280X is faster than the GTX 780. Although the FPS limit can cause slight fluctuations in your FPS he probably changed the FPS limit.
-
Reply to caqde
m
0
l
There could be other factors for the difference also such as memory used, video cards being different and other stuff running in the back ground. I guess what I'm trying to say here is that while the systems maybe comparable there are enough differences to account for some variance. Heck even then you have to consider that some games run better from one video card to another.
-
Reply to neieus
m
0
l
JussiSavolainen
30 July 2014 10:11:41
JussiSavolainen
30 July 2014 10:13:08
caqde said:
For one it seems the game has a built in fps limit of 120 -> http://www.playdota.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1190923 and http://www.techspot.com/review/785-free-to-play-games-b...Also given the techspot benchmark it seems the R9 280 (aka 7950) may be better at playing dota 2 than the GTX 770 considering the R9 280X is faster than the GTX 780. Although the FPS limit can cause slight fluctuations in your FPS he probably changed the FPS limit.
im talking about those cards
http://
-
Reply to JussiSavolainen
m
0
l
JussiSavolainen
30 July 2014 10:14:01
neieus said:
There could be other factors for the difference also such as memory used, video cards being different and other stuff running in the back ground. I guess what I'm trying to say here is that while the systems maybe comparable there are enough differences to account for some variance. Heck even then you have to consider that some games run better from one video card to another.the only thing that runs in the background is steam, battle.net and the nvidia experience
-
Reply to JussiSavolainen
m
0
l
FX 8350 isn't really as strong as the i5 in gaming, at least in more single threaded heavy games. FX 8350 might not be able to keep up with newer i3s and pentiums in some cases. I believe dota is a game that is a more single threaded game which would explain the fps. It's not really a big deal past 60fps in my opinion. If you have 60 Hz monitor, you might get the annoying screen tearing in most games.
-
Reply to Calnin
m
0
l
JussiSavolainen
30 July 2014 10:18:16
Calnin said:
FX 8350 isn't really as strong as the i5 in gaming, at least in more single threaded heavy games. FX 8350 might not be able to keep up with newer i3s and pentiums in some cases. I believe dota is a game that is a more single threaded game which would explain the fps. It's not really a big deal past 60fps in my opinion. If you have 60 Hz monitor, you might get the annoying screen tearing in most games.this sounds logical. i play planetside2, wildstar on ULTRA decently. we havent compared the fps in those games though.
i know its not big deal, but i've paid much more and i get lower performance and this is disappoints me. you understand
-
Reply to JussiSavolainen
m
0
l
With a 770 and an 8350 I doubt you're getting any bottlenecking in Dota 2.
His advantage is likely just down to settings or driver optimisation.
Nothing wrong with your hardware though, should be no need to worry. In general the i5 will perform better in the majority of games but we're talking minimal fps gains, nowhere near the difference you're seeing there. As I said likely down to settings, or perhaps even the amount of tasks running in the background (with an 8350 this should be no issue, but it can detract from performance if you're running a lot of other tasks).
His advantage is likely just down to settings or driver optimisation.
Nothing wrong with your hardware though, should be no need to worry. In general the i5 will perform better in the majority of games but we're talking minimal fps gains, nowhere near the difference you're seeing there. As I said likely down to settings, or perhaps even the amount of tasks running in the background (with an 8350 this should be no issue, but it can detract from performance if you're running a lot of other tasks).
-
Reply to Montblanchill
m
0
l
i7Baby said:
Same game settings?CPU's are about the same - http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-2500K-vs-AMD-FX-8...
cpuboss is a click bait site, if you want real comparison between the two check out reviews, other than that yes fx 8350 is a lot slower, no matter how far you oc it, i7 will be faster in everything,that holds specially true for i=online games where strong single threaded performance is mostly needed and the fx just doesn't have it, my new pentium ae system @4,7 ghz runs circles around my fx 8350 @5,0ghz in all online games, if you have a choice always go intel
-
Reply to cemerian
m
0
l
Actually there are some games that will gain noticeable fps between the i5 vs the fx 8350. Some of the more recent ones don't really show that as much, but games prior to the past half year to year do have some difference in fps. Only a few games show where the fx 8350 keeps up with the i5 or passes it (assuming all else equivalent of some sort). The fx 8350 won't bottleneck anything, but there is a benefit to having a stronger single thread cpu in some things is basically what I'm saying.
-
Reply to Calnin
m
0
l
JussiSavolainen
30 July 2014 13:38:34
Unless you have a 120-144 hz monitor. There is no real difference in performance at the frame rate you are playing at, turn on vsync to remove frame tearing, if necessary, and you'd be at 60fps, if you're using a 60Hz monitor.
Between the i5 vs fx 8350, it's stronger in applications that would benefit more from multiple cores and multitasking. It's still a good processor especially for its price. The i5 is stronger in single threaded applications. It's a trade off. If you ever do any kind of video editing, live streaming, or 3d rendering, the 8 core would do better in those aspects.
Between the i5 vs fx 8350, it's stronger in applications that would benefit more from multiple cores and multitasking. It's still a good processor especially for its price. The i5 is stronger in single threaded applications. It's a trade off. If you ever do any kind of video editing, live streaming, or 3d rendering, the 8 core would do better in those aspects.
-
Reply to Calnin
m
1
l
JussiSavolainen
1 August 2014 08:27:05
JussiSavolainen said:
im getting 10-12 fps on diablo3 in big fights.. im pretty sure its cuz of the CPU .. i dont understand why it has to be so bad
Having a look on their forums I found people with i5-2500k's getting 10-11 FPS that had 780Ti's so..... Yeah.... Seems Diablo III performance issues are common regardless of how powerful a CPU you have....
EDIT: for more fun you can also find people with OC 4770K's having the same issue
-
Reply to caqde
m
0
l
JussiSavolainen
1 August 2014 09:37:15
caqde said:
JussiSavolainen said:
im getting 10-12 fps on diablo3 in big fights.. im pretty sure its cuz of the CPU .. i dont understand why it has to be so bad
Having a look on their forums I found people with i5-2500k's getting 10-11 FPS that had 780Ti's so..... Yeah.... Seems Diablo III performance issues are common regardless of how powerful a CPU you have....
EDIT: for more fun you can also find people with OC 4770K's having the same issue
oh glad to hear that.. i mean im glad im not the only one..
-
Reply to JussiSavolainen
m
0
l
caqde said:
For one it seems the game has a built in fps limit of 120 -> http://www.playdota.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1190923 and http://www.techspot.com/review/785-free-to-play-games-b...Also given the techspot benchmark it seems the R9 280 (aka 7950) may be better at playing dota 2 than the GTX 770 considering the R9 280X is faster than the GTX 780. Although the FPS limit can cause slight fluctuations in your FPS he probably changed the FPS limit.
The 280x is not faster than the 780! Its at the same level as the 770.
-
Reply to RobCrezz
m
0
l
Calnin said:
The 280x is not faster than the 780! Its at the same level as the 770.
For that game (Dota 2) it is.. If you would read the whole thread you may have understood that.... Not that it really matters as most cards get good enough FPS in that game to begin with. But for most concerns yes the 780 is faster than the 280x. But it seems at least at the time of that benchmark (Feb 2014) that the 280x was a tad bit faster than the 780 in Dota 2.
-
Reply to caqde
m
0
l
Well his cpu has better single thread performance. That's why his fps is so much higher. It's definitely not the gpu's both gpu's should easily handle that game at highest settings. I don't think Dota 2 is thread very well because it doesn't really have to be. That's why his pc run's the game so much better. For example, my friend has a i7 3770 and a hd 6850 1gb card, I have a FX 6350 overclock to 4.5ghz and a R9 270x 2gb card. When we play WoW i get between 60-90 fps on ultra. His setup even though he has a lot weaker gpu he gets between 80-115fps both our rigs have 1080p monitors. WoW doesn't used more then 2 cores so his pc wins.
-
Reply to bobbybamf12
m
0
l
JussiSavolainen
2 August 2014 14:52:12
The 8350 is slower in games that don't use many cores/threads. Dota 2 is an example of that. You can expect it to be slower. I only skim-read this thread, but which motherboard do you have? You could try overclocking a little if it's capable.
The GPU on the other hand makes little difference in this instance.
The GPU on the other hand makes little difference in this instance.
-
Reply to JOOK-D
m
0
l
JussiSavolainen
2 August 2014 15:36:51
JOOK-D said:
The 8350 is slower in games that don't use many cores/threads. Dota 2 is an example of that. You can expect it to be slower. I only skim-read this thread, but which motherboard do you have? You could try overclocking a little if it's capable.The GPU on the other hand makes little difference in this instance.
i have the GA-970A-UD3 and i also have a coolermaster hyper 212 evo.
so i can overclock a little right?? i have never done it again, dont know how and if its possible
-
Reply to JussiSavolainen
m
0
l
JussiSavolainen said:
JOOK-D said:
The 8350 is slower in games that don't use many cores/threads. Dota 2 is an example of that. You can expect it to be slower. I only skim-read this thread, but which motherboard do you have? You could try overclocking a little if it's capable.The GPU on the other hand makes little difference in this instance.
i have the GA-970A-UD3 and i also have a coolermaster hyper 212 evo.
so i can overclock a little right?? i have never done it again, dont know how and if its possible
You have probably the best 970 motherboard for overclocking, so I'd say you'd be good up to around ~4.5GHz motherboard-wise. That depends on what temperatures/voltages your CPU needs to get there, though.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1348623/amd-bulldozer-and-pi... Follow the principles in this guide. It's intended for ASUS motherboards but the same things apply to yours.
-
Reply to JOOK-D
m
0
l
JussiSavolainen
2 August 2014 17:29:06
JOOK-D said:
JussiSavolainen said:
JOOK-D said:
The 8350 is slower in games that don't use many cores/threads. Dota 2 is an example of that. You can expect it to be slower. I only skim-read this thread, but which motherboard do you have? You could try overclocking a little if it's capable.The GPU on the other hand makes little difference in this instance.
i have the GA-970A-UD3 and i also have a coolermaster hyper 212 evo.
so i can overclock a little right?? i have never done it again, dont know how and if its possible
You have probably the best 970 motherboard for overclocking, so I'd say you'd be good up to around ~4.5GHz motherboard-wise. That depends on what temperatures/voltages your CPU needs to get there, though.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1348623/amd-bulldozer-and-pi... Follow the principles in this guide. It's intended for ASUS motherboards but the same things apply to yours.
are you sure mate? because i bought it only for 90 euros.. it was one of the cheapest..
-
Reply to JussiSavolainen
m
0
l
JussiSavolainen said:
JOOK-D said:
JussiSavolainen said:
JOOK-D said:
The 8350 is slower in games that don't use many cores/threads. Dota 2 is an example of that. You can expect it to be slower. I only skim-read this thread, but which motherboard do you have? You could try overclocking a little if it's capable.The GPU on the other hand makes little difference in this instance.
i have the GA-970A-UD3 and i also have a coolermaster hyper 212 evo.
so i can overclock a little right?? i have never done it again, dont know how and if its possible
You have probably the best 970 motherboard for overclocking, so I'd say you'd be good up to around ~4.5GHz motherboard-wise. That depends on what temperatures/voltages your CPU needs to get there, though.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1348623/amd-bulldozer-and-pi... Follow the principles in this guide. It's intended for ASUS motherboards but the same things apply to yours.
are you sure mate? because i bought it only for 90 euros.. it was one of the cheapest..
Without stepping up to the 990FX boards, yes.
It has an 8+2 power phase, and it's heatsinked. Should be good for 4.5GHz IMO. Might be able to push it a little further, but the Hyper 212 EVO might hold you back (only got to 4.4GHz with my 8320 and the same cooler).
http://www.overclock.net/t/946407/amd-motherboards-vrm-... It's there in the first table under gigabyte.
That would give you a decent performance boost anyway, especially in those games that use only a few cores.
-
Reply to JOOK-D
m
0
l
JussiSavolainen
3 August 2014 11:01:29
GObonzo
5 August 2014 13:59:07
own personal benchmarks, both @ 4.2GHz
Intel 3570K (MSI Z77A-GD65 Gaming) vs AMD FX-8350 (ASUS Sabertooth 990FX R2.0)
GTX 770 4GB - G.Skill Ripjaws Z DDR3 2400 8GB - SATA 6GBs 7200RPM - @ 1920x1080p (Ultra Settings / highest available in game menus)
BENCHMARKS
Tomb Raider
⦁ 3570K @ 4xMSAA - Max FPS: 46 / Avg FPS: 37.1
⦁ 3570K @ 2xMSAA - Max FPS: 60 / Avg FPS: 43
⦁ FX-8350 @ 4xMSAA - Max FPS: 42.7 / Avg: 32.3
⦁ FX-8350 @ 2xMSAA - Max FPS: 62 / Avg: 39.6
Hitman Absolution
⦁ 3570K @ 8xMSAA - Max FPS: 42.7 / Avg FPS: 32.7
⦁ 3570K @ 2xMSAA - Max FPS: 100 / Avg FPS: 56.4
⦁ FX-8350 @ 8xMSAA - Max FPS: 104 / Avg: 33.7
⦁ FX-8350 @ 2xMSAA - Max FPS: 78 / Avg: 61
Dirt 3
⦁ 3570K @ 8xMSAA - Max FPS: 91 / Avg FPS: 109.6
⦁ 3570K @ 2xMSAA - Max FPS: 106 / Avg FPS: 129.5
⦁ FX-8350 @ 8xMSAA - Max FPS: 90 / Avg: 107
⦁ FX-8350 @ 2xMSAA - Max FPS: 104 / Avg: 127
3DMark Advanced
Ice Storm (Maxed Settings)
⦁ 3570K - Score: 153222
⦁ FX-8350 - Score: 151269
Fire Strike (Maxed Settings)
⦁ 3570K - Score: 3943
⦁ FX-8350 - Score: 3981
with the price differences I'd say this makes this AMD a much better buy
Intel 3570K (MSI Z77A-GD65 Gaming) vs AMD FX-8350 (ASUS Sabertooth 990FX R2.0)
GTX 770 4GB - G.Skill Ripjaws Z DDR3 2400 8GB - SATA 6GBs 7200RPM - @ 1920x1080p (Ultra Settings / highest available in game menus)
BENCHMARKS
Tomb Raider
⦁ 3570K @ 4xMSAA - Max FPS: 46 / Avg FPS: 37.1
⦁ 3570K @ 2xMSAA - Max FPS: 60 / Avg FPS: 43
⦁ FX-8350 @ 4xMSAA - Max FPS: 42.7 / Avg: 32.3
⦁ FX-8350 @ 2xMSAA - Max FPS: 62 / Avg: 39.6
Hitman Absolution
⦁ 3570K @ 8xMSAA - Max FPS: 42.7 / Avg FPS: 32.7
⦁ 3570K @ 2xMSAA - Max FPS: 100 / Avg FPS: 56.4
⦁ FX-8350 @ 8xMSAA - Max FPS: 104 / Avg: 33.7
⦁ FX-8350 @ 2xMSAA - Max FPS: 78 / Avg: 61
Dirt 3
⦁ 3570K @ 8xMSAA - Max FPS: 91 / Avg FPS: 109.6
⦁ 3570K @ 2xMSAA - Max FPS: 106 / Avg FPS: 129.5
⦁ FX-8350 @ 8xMSAA - Max FPS: 90 / Avg: 107
⦁ FX-8350 @ 2xMSAA - Max FPS: 104 / Avg: 127
3DMark Advanced
Ice Storm (Maxed Settings)
⦁ 3570K - Score: 153222
⦁ FX-8350 - Score: 151269
Fire Strike (Maxed Settings)
⦁ 3570K - Score: 3943
⦁ FX-8350 - Score: 3981
with the price differences I'd say this makes this AMD a much better buy
-
Reply to GObonzo
m
0
l
For single-player stuff, you're never really going to see a difference. Those AAA titles don't tend to put that much strain on the CPU to see a real difference.
I went from an 8320 @ 4.5GHz to a Xeon 1230v3 @ 3.7GHz (equivalent to somewhere between an i7 3770 and i7 4770) and the main place I see the difference, in gaming at least, is online. Single player games still run pretty similarly, except the ones that were always dire on the FX (I'm looking at you, Saints Row 3).
I went from an 8320 @ 4.5GHz to a Xeon 1230v3 @ 3.7GHz (equivalent to somewhere between an i7 3770 and i7 4770) and the main place I see the difference, in gaming at least, is online. Single player games still run pretty similarly, except the ones that were always dire on the FX (I'm looking at you, Saints Row 3).
-
Reply to JOOK-D
m
0
l
Dwell
5 August 2014 16:52:27
JOOK-D said:
For single-player stuff, you're never really going to see a difference. Those AAA titles don't tend to put that much strain on the CPU to see a real difference.I went from an 8320 @ 4.5GHz to a Xeon 1230v3 @ 3.7GHz (equivalent to somewhere between an i7 3770 and i7 4770) and the main place I see the difference, in gaming at least, is online. Single player games still run pretty similarly, except the ones that were always dire on the FX (I'm looking at you, Saints Row 3).
JOOK-D, it's very hard to beat this into people's heads around here. Mutliplayer and singleplayer are completely different beasts when it comes to CPU workload. Everyone pulls gaming benchmarks left and right without realizing that they're all singleplayer.
-
Reply to VenBaja
m
0
l
VenBaja said:
JOOK-D said:
For single-player stuff, you're never really going to see a difference. Those AAA titles don't tend to put that much strain on the CPU to see a real difference.I went from an 8320 @ 4.5GHz to a Xeon 1230v3 @ 3.7GHz (equivalent to somewhere between an i7 3770 and i7 4770) and the main place I see the difference, in gaming at least, is online. Single player games still run pretty similarly, except the ones that were always dire on the FX (I'm looking at you, Saints Row 3).
JOOK-D, it's very hard to beat this into people's heads around here. Mutliplayer and singleplayer are completely different beasts when it comes to CPU workload. Everyone pulls gaming benchmarks left and right without realizing that they're all singleplayer.
I know. Just dropped it in here in case anyone's interested. -
Reply to JOOK-D
m
0
l
adventmind
5 August 2014 19:09:09
lol why are we talking about games that are already over 50 fps? Run a benchmark on each system. That 8350 is much better at certain task and weaker at others. It depends on the software and your hardware. Did you force the memory speeds to be correct? Are you up to date on your drivers? Has fap time infected your system with any unknown processes? Dota 2 is not a measurable benchmark for performance. Its a semi good looking game, thats it.
-
Reply to adventmind
m
0
l
adventmind
5 August 2014 19:11:39
JussiSavolainen said:
im getting 10-12 fps on diablo3 in big fights.. im pretty sure its cuz of the CPU .. i dont understand why it has to be so bad
Its not your cpu, I have a stock 8320 and IT NEVER Falls that low in diablo 3. That game barely stresses the cpu. You have issues somewhere else. Don't always look at your cpu when something is wrong.
-
Reply to adventmind
m
0
l
probal malakar
5 August 2014 19:31:52
JussiSavolainen
5 August 2014 23:03:35
faye__kane
6 August 2014 02:13:35
==-
I know it's too late since you already made the wrong choice, but you REALLY should have bought the 4-core version, the 4350. It costs half as much, stocks 200 MHz faster, and overclocks like a muhh fucckah. I've pushed mine to 5GHz stable, with thermoelectric (active) cooling.
I bought three of them (well, one of them — two were by people who take my advice). But we're all real happy with the 4350, and I feel like singling the praises of that chip to strangers in the street.
8 cores? Who uses more than 4 cores for anything but transcoding porn? OTOH, I don't know anything about games (except second life), so maybe games actually use 8 to feed your fast graphics card.
faye kane ♀ girl brain
JussiSavolainen said:
Is the 8350 really so underpowered?
I know it's too late since you already made the wrong choice, but you REALLY should have bought the 4-core version, the 4350. It costs half as much, stocks 200 MHz faster, and overclocks like a muhh fucckah. I've pushed mine to 5GHz stable, with thermoelectric (active) cooling.
I bought three of them (well, one of them — two were by people who take my advice). But we're all real happy with the 4350, and I feel like singling the praises of that chip to strangers in the street.
8 cores? Who uses more than 4 cores for anything but transcoding porn? OTOH, I don't know anything about games (except second life), so maybe games actually use 8 to feed your fast graphics card.
faye kane ♀ girl brain
-
Reply to faye__kane
m
0
l
zaysk
6 August 2014 04:44:56
JussiSavolainen said:
im getting 10-12 fps on diablo3 in big fights.. im pretty sure its cuz of the CPU .. i dont understand why it has to be so bad
I'm not surprised, that game is very poorly optimized. I have a keyboard with an LCD display that I use to monitor my system resources while gaming. In heavy battles with 4 players all doing their thing, my first CPU core will shoot up to 100% usage, while my other 3 cores stroll about at 20-30% utilization, causing pretty big lag spikes.
This is on a 4.4GHz i5-4670k. Blizzard REALLY needs to optimize their games.
-
Reply to zaysk
m
0
l
faye__kane said:
==-JussiSavolainen said:
Is the 8350 really so underpowered?
I know it's too late since you already made the wrong choice, but you REALLY should have bought the 4-core version, the 4350. It costs half as much, stocks 200 MHz faster, and overclocks like a muhh fucckah. I've pushed mine to 5GHz stable, with thermoelectric (active) cooling.
I bought three of them (well, one of them — two were by people who take my advice). But we're all real happy with the 4350, and I feel like singling the praises of that chip to strangers in the street.
8 cores? Who uses more than 4 cores for anything but transcoding porn? OTOH, I don't know anything about games (except second life), so maybe games actually use 8 to feed your fast graphics card.
faye kane ♀ girl brain
haha nice!
I would never recommend that cpu for gaming but as long as you are happy.
A lot of applications don't really use that many cores but games are starting to use more then 4 cores nowadays. So the extra cores will benefit him with gaming. He still haven't mention what motherboard he has so overclocking may be out of the picture. You also never know when you gotta transcode that porn yo! It's always handy to know that your cpu is powerful enough to transcode that porn if you ever have a desire to do so.
-
Reply to bobbybamf12
m
1
l
faye__kane said:
==-JussiSavolainen said:
Is the 8350 really so underpowered?
I know it's too late since you already made the wrong choice, but you REALLY should have bought the 4-core version, the 4350. It costs half as much, stocks 200 MHz faster, and overclocks like a muhh fucckah. I've pushed mine to 5GHz stable, with thermoelectric (active) cooling.
I bought three of them (well, one of them — two were by people who take my advice). But we're all real happy with the 4350, and I feel like singling the praises of that chip to strangers in the street.
8 cores? Who uses more than 4 cores for anything but transcoding porn? OTOH, I don't know anything about games (except second life), so maybe games actually use 8 to feed your fast graphics card.
faye kane ♀ girl brain
wait, wait, wait, you sure you need a tec for 4350 @5.0ghz? I got my old fx 8350 up to 5,2ghz on custom loop, going with clc you could really save some power? but the problem is fx series only strength's is in its multithread performance and integer math, unfortunately when it comes to single threaded workloads, which require strong FPU's the fx simply cannot do that, no matter how far they are clocked, now with games that can use more than 4 cores you get some nice performance from these fx but still lacking, main problem being minimum fps that you get, i for one know that i would be kicking and screaming if id chosen that 2 module cpu instead of my temporary intel pentium
-
Reply to cemerian
m
0
l
JussiSavolainen
6 August 2014 09:50:08
-
Reply to JussiSavolainen
m
0
l
crysisgamer
6 August 2014 11:04:39
JussiSavolainen
6 August 2014 11:13:35
-
Reply to JussiSavolainen
m
0
l
darkhelmet82
6 August 2014 15:45:11
JussiSavolainen said:
im getting 10-12 fps on diablo3 in big fights.. im pretty sure its cuz of the CPU .. i dont understand why it has to be so bad
10-12??? I have an FX 6300 and radeon 7870 with 6 gb of ram and the same mobo as you and i play diablo3 in 1920x1080 at 100% max settings. I have v-sync on because my monitor is 60hz and I've never once seen the game drop a single frame below 60. On that note, since diablo isn't really that demanding of a game compared to most others these days, i'll just say that i play most every other game from dayz, to arma 3, battlefield 4, watchdogs, all on max settings at 1920x1080 between 30 and 60 fps, which is fine for me, maybe not for some of you frame rate enthusiasts out there. My point is, I don't think that for the particular games you mentioned, esp diablo3, that your hardware is any problem at all. Just my opinion of course.
-
Reply to darkhelmet82
m
0
l
- 1 / 2
- 2
- Newest
Related resources
- SolvedIs Mixing SODIMM RAM really that bad?? Forum
- SolvedBest mobo, ram, and psu of overclocked fx8350 Forum
- Solvedis bronze power supplies really that bad?? Forum
- SolvedIs the i3 4130/Haswell really blowing away the FX4300/6300 and even the 8350?? Forum
- SolvedNeed help playing GTA IV more smoothly - are my computer specs really that bad? Forum
- SolvedIs the Lenovo Y510P SLI technology really bad? Forum
- SolvedOverclocked FX 8350 causes strange speed (time-scale) changes in games. Forum
- SolvedWhere to buy a really cheap AMD FX 8350 an maybe other PC parts Forum
- SolvedWhy I am an idiot. [or how I destroyed 3 things in one move(a really bad move)] Forum
- SolvedOverclocked 8350 or stock 4670k Forum
- SolvedBest air cooler for an overclocked FX-8350? Forum
- SolvedM5A99X REV2 AM3+ FX8350 really hot gaming Forum
- SolvedIs Seagate really as bad as people say? Forum
- SolvedFX 8350 Fan Really Loud Forum
- SolvedI feel really bad. Is the Gigabyte 770 4gb OC a good card? Is it Close to a 780? Forum
- More resources

