• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Anything after Core 2 is faster than AMD FX by a long shot (gaming)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Associate
Joined
7 Aug 2015
Posts
29
Please resize your images or use spoiler tags. Thanks.

fIuq2Lu.png

UMECrfh.png


This CPU was 15 quid off ebay, total build cost below.

gnB5znm.png


What you need to be looking at is the single thread performance since games love that. Also a note, Westmere-EP can handle a GTX 1070.


Here is where i got the original idea to go x58 from.


3Dmark Time spy. (lower CPU clock 4.4ghz is stable however)
Notice the CPU score.

gIYMJ8x.jpg


r4qf5MA.png





:cool:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Purely for gaming even my old Core 2 Quad Q9550 with a decent overclock on it (helped by a high FSB and some "special" Blade ULV RAM) wasn't far off the FX CPUs.
 
Purely for gaming even my old Core 2 Quad Q9550 with a decent overclock on it (helped by a high FSB and some "special" Blade ULV RAM) wasn't far off the FX CPUs.

I believe it, not hating on AMD, i'm hoping ZEN kicks absolute ass, just this will give people more option to recommend to those guys on a low budget... but x58 is a little complex with overclocking.
 
I did have a 2500K system way back, and this XEON edit's video much better than my 2500K did even at 5ghz, might be the HT doing it's thing, i use Sony Vegas.

Can also add effects with zero slowdown real time.

 
Where? You proved that an 8 thread xeon in as good as an i5 then claim that an i3 is better than an fx chip.

Safe to assume you are new to this or trolling.
 
You oversimplified everything to twist it to your own agenda.

An i3 is faster than an FX in single thread if you leave it stock, overclocked well that's an unfair comparison since i3's beyond the first generation and Skylake cannot overclock.
 
Only just.

Quite amazing really. 32nm 80w TDP, the original Bloomfields were 45nm at 130w TDP.

Overclocked to the speeds needed to beat an FX8 core you are probably looking at double that amount of heat from the chip. Add an X58 motherboard, three sticks of RAM and you you would need to be pretty careful about what case and PSU you used.

If you are going to the trouble of finding an X58 board, then you really want a SLBB 6 core 12 thread Xeon. That or a new FX8 core AM3 system would make the most sense for a 8 thread capable budget build.
 
You oversimplified everything to twist it to your own agenda.

An i3 is faster than an FX in single thread if you leave it stock, overclocked well that's an unfair comparison since i3's beyond the first generation and Skylake cannot overclock.


Bench marking is a scientific process, you made a statement and now I am asking you to prove it, the onus is on you. There is no agenda other than the truth.

When you make statements like "What you need to be looking at is the single thread performance since games love that." you are going to get called on it. Maybe you were right in 2008, but these days Battlefield 1 says hello.

Maybe reformat your initial post with a new title like "unbelievable value from this part selection" and you will get a more favorable response.
 
I run dual channel 8GB Kingston Hyper X Fury Blue 1.5v kit 1600mhz @ 1686mhz 10-11-11 @ 1.6v

And i am using an ITX cooler to cool my CPU - which cost 15 quid. :D



Just uploaded.
 
You oversimplified everything to twist it to your own agenda.

An i3 is faster than an FX in single thread if you leave it stock, overclocked well that's an unfair comparison since i3's beyond the first generation and Skylake cannot overclock.

But isn't a this about value? In that regard you can buy a new FX8 system retail for about the same cost of this build.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom