[INCREDIBLEHULK]

I did all my research on intel
It was 10 years since I had built a "rig"

So the question is, can anyone provide a refreshing

"newest socket / newest chips" of AMD?

I am on point with all the intel goods but clueless on AMD right now, looking to build a very very budget rig and I know AMD's $ vs performance is amazing.

Thanks in advance to any information given!

 

[BeastRider]

If you are looking for the performance for a budget then take a look at AMD's APU's. They are processors with low-end graphics built in to them. They are really cheap and provide good performance for the money. Usually they are socket AM3 and AM3+, the models are AMD A6, AMD A8, and AMD A10. The performance increases with the number as you can imagine.

Hope this helps. Cheers.

 

[deienache]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeastRider

If you are looking for the performance for a budget then take a look at AMD's APU's. They are processors with low-end graphics built in to them. They are really cheap and provide good performance for the money. Usually they are socket AM3 and AM3+, the models are AMD A6, AMD A8, and AMD A10. The performance increases with the number as you can imagine.

Hope this helps. Cheers.

Absolutely wrong.

The budget APU's he is talking about are cpu and gpu slapped in one chip, and they are going on the FM2 scket. And to be honest, the A10-6800k is a preety decent one. It is a quad core and the integrated can play most games up to date with decent frames and quality.

The other side of amd is going on the FX line of cpu's, running on AM3+ socket. The most "top" of the line on amd now is the 8350. I am saying top because there is a 9590 out there too, but that is an overclcoked 8350. That cpu provides the performance you need for all the games out there. In higly threaded app you would position it between the 3570k and the 3770k. That is only in highly threaded apps, not 4 or less threads. That is where the intel shines, as their performance per clock is higher.

 

[mikeo01]

Agree with above.

Although from a budget point of view I would recommend an APU straight out, because you won't need a discrete graphics card.

Top of the line unlocked APU (A10-6800K) from AMD, £113 or $149. Exceptional performance from such a cheap chip. Comes with two free games too

 

[BlackGambit]

To add to what deienache said, if you are on a budget, as I was on my current build, go APU. I'm running the a10 6800k, 16GB of beefy dd3, water cooled, in an ITX build and my over all costs at this point are still under or right around $550-$600. I've got the thing running stable at 4.8Ghz, limited only by the general system temps being outside of where I want to see them (a common issue when you go ITX). With a few more little air flow improvements and a better NB cooler, I'll be running her at 5Ghz, and I'll OC my 1866 Ballistix Elite to 2133 and still have temperature head room to play with. Build log is on going in the AMD build logs section if you wanna check it out...but I digress.

That to say, you can go with the A10 6800k, an MSI board to run it, 8GB of decent ddr3 and you'd have the mobo kit covered for $275 or less and be able to handle most games on the market without a problem running at stock settings. With the FX-8350 going for around $200 and AM3 boards fetching high prices as well, you'd be looking at about $375 for similar quality build in the FX-8350 range...granted that extra hundred dollars does fetch a fair bit of extra power, but then you also need a GPU, bringing you up closer to the $475 range if you go decent range GPU.

Bottom line, go APU if you're on the cheap, but go FX-8350 if you have a little extra coin and want better expandability in the future. Just my two cents.

 

[BeastRider]

Quote:

Originally Posted by deienache

Absolutely wrong.

The budget APU's he is talking about are cpu and gpu slapped in one chip, and they are going on the FM2 scket. And to be honest, the A10-6800k is a preety decent one. It is a quad core and the integrated can play most games up to date with decent frames and quality.

The other side of amd is going on the FX line of cpu's, running on AM3+ socket. The most "top" of the line on amd now is the 8350. I am saying top because there is a 9590 out there too, but that is an overclcoked 8350. That cpu provides the performance you need for all the games out there. In higly threaded app you would position it between the 3570k and the 3770k. That is only in highly threaded apps, not 4 or less threads. That is where the intel shines, as their performance per clock is higher.

Sorry my bad. Yeah I meant it uses the FM2 socket,I got them switched with the AM3+. Apologies for the misleading information.

 

[EniGma1987]

Just remember that the graphics in the APU is so "strong" (for integrated at least) that it is bottlenecked by slow RAM speeds. If you go the APU route then you should get some DDR-2133 memory to boost your gaming performance. Since it is a budget build, 8GB is fine to go with. I would also recommend a good $35 aftermarket heatsink, like the Enermax ETS-T40-TB or Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO. This will let you stay cool on the CPU and also let you overclock the integrated graphics a bit for better gaming performance. Probably dont need to OC the CPU cores because they already run over 4GHz and will provide plenty of performance for the integrated graphics.

Another great way to go and probably better for right around the same price would be to get an Athlon 750K, cheaper RAM, and an AMD 7750 graphics card. You can get those things for $220. Toss in an ASRock FM2A75 Pro4-M for another $75, which is a quality low cost board.

 

[logan]

Socket AM3+: All FX series processors. The standouts in terms of value are the 6300 (3.5GHz 6 core for around $120), and the 8320 (3.5GHz 8 core, around $160).

Socket FM2: All trinity and richland APU's (5xxx and 6xxx series A series). The standouts in value here re the models without integrated graphics if you're "actually" into gaming. The Athlon X4 750K (3.4Ghz quad core, $84). is the one to look for there.

Old AM3 chips can be great deals as well (phenom II's and Athlon II's), but I'd go with one of the above FX or Athlon X4 chips personally. They (the FX chips and APU's) can all OC to at least 4.5GHz, and are quite a steal of a deal for a budget gaming rig.

Good luck

.

 

[EniGma1987]

Older AM3 socket chips like the Phenom and THuban do not all overclock to 4.5GHz, more like 4GHz with a good number also being able to hit up near 4.2.

Also, I just noticed because the prices you said on the FX processors, looks like many places are price gouging because they have sold for $20-40 less for a long time until just recently.

 

[logan]

Sorry about the confusion. I was referring to the chips above (the FX chips and APU's) about the OC limits, and not the Phenom II's. The Phenom II's usually topped out around 3.6-4.2GHz on average, for reference (depending on the age of the chip, and the stepping).

And I put the average selling price up there, so when you look them up and find that they're less, its a happy moment, instead of a sad one. That said, Currently the 8320 is selling for $145, and I grabbed my 6300 a few weeks ago for $109. So you could very well find a better deal than what I said.

I've edited the post to make it make real, actual sense though now, so that should help clear up any other confusion

.

 

[INCREDIBLEHULK]

Wow I appreciate the mass response

Haven't been able to go online today till now(2am)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113285
AMD FX-8320 Vishera 3.5GHz (4.0GHz Turbo) Socket AM3+ 125W Eight-Core Desktop Processor FD8320FRHKBOX

So all in all, a FX-8320 for $160 would be considered the best bang for the buck? i haven't had a performance AMD chip in a long time and I don't know how a quad core amd will perform vs an i5 and I don't know how the FX 8320/8350 compare vs an i7.

It's one of those if I drop another $100 and the i7 blows the AMD away I might have to change the build around. Spending $160 for a lower GHz 8core DOES seem nice though

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113284
AMD FX-8350 Vishera 4.0GHz (4.2GHz Turbo) Socket AM3+ 125W Eight-Core Desktop Processor FD8350FRHKBOX

 

[jason387]

Quote:

Originally Posted by INCREDIBLEHULK

Wow I appreciate the mass response

Haven't been able to go online today till now(2am)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113285
AMD FX-8320 Vishera 3.5GHz (4.0GHz Turbo) Socket AM3+ 125W Eight-Core Desktop Processor FD8320FRHKBOX

So all in all, a FX-8320 for $160 would be considered the best bang for the buck? i haven't had a performance AMD chip in a long time and I don't know how a quad core amd will perform vs an i5 and I don't know how the FX 8320/8350 compare vs an i7.

It's one of those if I drop another $100 and the i7 blows the AMD away I might have to change the build around. Spending $160 for a lower GHz 8core DOES seem nice though

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113284
AMD FX-8350 Vishera 4.0GHz (4.2GHz Turbo) Socket AM3+ 125W Eight-Core Desktop Processor FD8350FRHKBOX

The 8 core FX chip would equal a core i5 3570K. I have the FX 6300 and at 4.8Ghz my chip equals a stock core i5 3570K. Here in India the i5 is doule the price of the AMD chip that I bought. So I'm more than happy with my purchase.

 

[INCREDIBLEHULK]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jason387

The 8 core FX chip would equal a core i5 3570K. I have the FX 6300 and at 4.8Ghz my chip equals a stock core i5 3570K. Here in India the i5 is doule the price of the AMD chip that I bought. So I'm more than happy with my purchase.

nice

i'm more curious about the 8cores, i havent even read to see if its HT or if it's an actual 8core chip

researching AMD is going to be fun

because we all know to research you have to research the past present and future. i just need to research till i can find out the big difference on this 8core FX vs an i7

 

[jason387]

Quote:

Originally Posted by INCREDIBLEHULK

nice

i'm more curious about the 8cores, i havent even read to see if its HT or if it's an actual 8core chip

researching AMD is going to be fun

because we all know to research you have to research the past present and future. i just need to research till i can find out the big difference on this 8core FX vs an i7

It's an 8 core chip with shared resources. They are better called modules. The difference wouldn't be as much as the difference in price. Since you would benefit more from seeing benches. I have a 6 core chip. Collect info on the intel benches. Tell me which cpu benches to run. I'll overclock and run them and then you can see the difference. Maybe other owners here of the 8 core chip would also do the same

 

[agrims]

If you are looking at the 8 cores, the 8350 is more $ but generally they OC a bit higher than the 8320 due to binning. There is so much info out there that your choice will be easy. If you want outright performance, the i7 will be your chip, but you pay premiums for Intel. The 8 cores can keep up with a 3770k in really heavily multithreaded apps, but even some of those an i7 can beat the 8 cores. If you can handle the fact that you would be buying basically an i5 3570k in an 8 core, go with the 8 core. They sit somewhere between a 3570k and 3770k.

 

[INCREDIBLEHULK]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jason387

It's an 8 core chip with shared resources. They are better called modules. The difference wouldn't be as much as the difference in price. Since you would benefit more from seeing benches. I have a 6 core chip. Collect info on the intel benches. Tell me which cpu benches to run. I'll overclock and run them and then you can see the difference. Maybe other owners here of the 8 core chip would also do the same

i appreciate but i wouldnt want to waste peoples time xD

im sure there has been tests like this with similar ram/ssd/psu + amd cpu/mobo vs intel cpu/mobo

i need to research untill i find what the catch is. people aren't just buying i7's because they "overclock better" the majority of people could not be sleeping on AMD!

 

[agrims]

The catch is Intel has way higher IPC vs AMD. Most games use high IPC and that is why many people go Intel.

 

[DaveLT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by agrims

The catch is Intel has way higher IPC vs AMD. Most games use high IPC and that is why many people go Intel.

You mean games which have outdated engines from 2007

 

[jason387]

Quote:

Originally Posted by agrims

The catch is Intel has way higher IPC vs AMD. Most games use high IPC and that is why many people go Intel.

Right on the money. This counts for gaming. It's the IPC which keeps Intel in the lead. However, for multi-tasking and heavy loads and streaming while gaming, it's the FX 8*** which people turn to. It all depends on what you need to do and what's your budget like.

 

[jason387]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveLT

You mean games which have outdated engines from 2007

LOL. True as Crysis 3 plays as good on AMD chips as it plays using Intel. This is where the FX 8350/8320/6300 really shine.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1363058/pc-games-hardware-crysis-3-in-the-cpu-test-amd-fx-processors-dominate-our-benchmarks

http://www.techspot.com/review/642-crysis-3-performance/page6.html