Should I upgrade my CPU platform now (AM3+/FX-8350), or should I wait a little while?

[escrow4]

Because the 5820 is so good for Arma.?.

This is at 1080p ultra without AA in a heavy scene.

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/924-15/jeux-3d-crysis-3-arma-iii.html

ARMA III is a dog like Crysis. Even worse when it comes to being CPU heavy. You want to make it playable, you'll need a lot of overclocked hardware. A 4.0GHz OC on that 5820K is easily doable with a mild voltage bump and the gap will close. Look at the 8350 its close to 10FPS behind again.

 

[Abwx]

ARMA III is a dog like Crysis. Even worse when it comes to being CPU heavy. You want to make it playable, you'll need a lot of overclocked hardware. A 4.0GHz OC on that 5820K is easily doable with a mild voltage bump and the gap will close. Look at the 8350 its close to 10FPS behind again.

Surely that the 8350 suffer in this scene but it s not like the other CPUs do wonders in matter of playability, if you look at the review it will be the same in Xplane, in other games FPS are correct but then the 8350 will also offer good playability, in short you ll get the FPS where you dont need them while being stuck to mediocre framerates anyway in the most lazy games.

Also these are the best possible scores as Hardware.fr removed HT when it was counterproductive, the scores of the 8350 are realistic in respect of the OP set up since Hardware.fr, for some reason, capped their AM3+ plateform to 1600MHz RAM.

 

[TheELF]

Surely that the 8350 suffer in this scene but it s not like the other CPUs do wonders in matter of playability, if you look at the review it will be the same in Xplane, in other games FPS are correct but then the 8350 will also offer good playability, in short you ll get the FPS where you dont need them while being stuck to mediocre framerates anyway in the most lazy games.

If you look at it in that way than just get the I3-4130/60 you will get better overall gaming experience and even at the games where it's slower it's only a little bit slower.
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/901-4/performances-jeux-3d.html
http://www.hardware.fr/medias/photos_news/00/43/IMG0043080.png

 

[Ramses]

i3's like a Miata with an automatic trans.. Retains some of the positive qualities, but still for girls kids and the inferm.

 

[Dankk]

I need 1.5v with high LLC on a lapped 8350 paired with a lapped NH-D14 to be p95 stable at 4.8Ghz. These settings also exceed TCTL_max by about 2C, and require me to disable APM and turbo (i.e. the things that keep FX at 125w) so it pulls ~390w at the wall on a gold SS PSU running P95. It is a first batch / early batch 8350, so later models may have better luck, but it is still a YMMV situation.

My 8350 is from an early batch as well, so that might have something to do with it. I seem to remember purchasing it right when they were new; mid-2012 or so? But, no matter.

I went ahead and pulled the trigger on an i7-4790k, along with an MSI Z97-G45 motherboard. I also ordered a few other new things, like a bigger hard drive for my Steam games and a Corsair H80i cooler. Definitely gonna do some overclocking with it. Needless to say I am excited. Thanks for the help guys.

 

[Bradtech519]

Awesome congrats on the new rig. Same setup I was looking at.

My 8350 is from an early batch as well, so that might have something to do with it. I seem to remember purchasing it right when they were new; mid-2012 or so? But, no matter.

I went ahead and pulled the trigger on an i7-4790k, along with an MSI Z97-G45 motherboard. I also ordered a few other new things, like a bigger hard drive for my Steam games and a Corsair H80i cooler. Definitely gonna do some overclocking with it. Needless to say I am excited. Thanks for the help guys.

 

[chrisjames61]

I'm frustrated with games like Hitman Absolution, which will always dip down to ~40fps in scenes with lots of crowds (I game at 1080p). Or games like ARMA 3. Planetside 2. MMOs such as Guild Wars 2. And - some people will slay me for saying this, but - some Ubisoft games could really benefit from an upgrade too, such as Far Cry 4. These are some examples of titles that make me feel CPU bottlenecked.




People always say the FX-8350 is absurdly easy to overclock; but I think I must've lost the silicon lottery. I can barely push my chip to a stable 4.4GHz without feeding it lots of Vcore, and even then, I don't bother with it because the temperature ends up going too far out of my comfort zone on full load (over 60 degrees).

I'm seriously considering just building a new 4790k rig at this point.

Your board if I remember correctly doesn't have LLC. That would hinder overclocking. I have had a couple 8320's and one 8350 and was able to get to 4.7+ on all of them running at about 50c both core and socket temps full load Prime95 for a couple hours. Sabertooth 990FX R2.

 

[Abwx]

If you look at it in that way than just get the I3-4130/60 you will get better overall gaming experience and even at the games where it's slower it's only a little bit slower.
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/901-4/performances-jeux-3d.html
http://www.hardware.fr/medias/photos_news/00/43/IMG0043080.png

Thoses charts are obsolete, the ones i linked are their new suite with some updated games, the i3/i5 are nowhere at thoses places anymore, compare where the 8350 was in thoses old charts respectively to the 4670K and compare to the charts i linked, the difference although noticeable has been quite reduced.

 

[soccerballtux]

Because the 5820 is so good for Arma.?.

This is at 1080p ultra without AA in a heavy scene.

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/924-15/jeux-3d-crysis-3-arma-iii.html

now that's interseting

 

[SlowSpyder]

Your board if I remember correctly doesn't have LLC. That would hinder overclocking. I have had a couple 8320's and one 8350 and was able to get to 4.7+ on all of them running at about 50c both core and socket temps full load Prime95 for a couple hours. Sabertooth 990FX R2.

Yea, unfortunately that board doesn't have LLC. But, I believe the majority of FX8350's could still easily achieve mid 4GHz if not well above that, it's a decent quality board. But I definitely saw vdroop on that board under load when I really pushed things.

 

[PPB]

Put most emphasis in improving socket and vrm cooling. That is the bane of FX overclocking.

And that exactly is what really kills it if you are not an OCD modder. Why go the lenght of designing a custom backplate cooling solution for your FX so you can reach 4.5+ speeds without exceeding tcase on stress testing, if you can go for an easier overclock with haswell? My 8320's 3rd module is such a dog, that the cpu's p0 VID is 1.4. Im a total silicon lottery loser, lol. And my mobo shouldnt pay the price cause of that.

 

[Arachnotronic]

My 8350 is from an early batch as well, so that might have something to do with it. I seem to remember purchasing it right when they were new; mid-2012 or so? But, no matter.

I went ahead and pulled the trigger on an i7-4790k, along with an MSI Z97-G45 motherboard. I also ordered a few other new things, like a bigger hard drive for my Steam games and a Corsair H80i cooler. Definitely gonna do some overclocking with it. Needless to say I am excited. Thanks for the help guys.

Congrats on the upgrade! :thumbsup:

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

5820K. If you upgrade now go big. And if you still think FX is half decent:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/far-cry-4-benchmark-performance-review,4019-4.html

Look at the minimum for FX at the bottom. It WILL dip. It won't sustain high minimum's which is even more important than average.

I tend to agree.

If the OP is going to spend the money on an upgrade, might as go full tilt and upgrade to a DDR4 setup.

 

[Ramses]

While I don't dispute the upgrade path a bit, sure looks like the 9590, and I assume the 8350 to a proportionately lesser degree, are holding there own pretty well considering. That 55 minimum @1080p just ins't bad for an old chip that was never known for it's gaming prowess in the first place.

 

[frozentundra123456]

now that's interseting

Yea, that is interesting. Pretty much lays to rest the proposition that you can play any game on an FX8350. Even with a fairly standard 10% or slightly more overclock it would not be close to 30FPS. Matter of fact, the 9590 is not even close to playable.

I guess the poster is so desperate to make Intel look bad that he posted a slide that actually has the opposite effect: it shows the glaring weakness of the FX line in any games that are not well threaded.

 

[Headfoot]

I'm frustrated with games like Hitman Absolution, which will always dip down to ~40fps in scenes with lots of crowds (I game at 1080p). Or games like ARMA 3. Planetside 2. MMOs such as Guild Wars 2. And - some people will slay me for saying this, but - some Ubisoft games could really benefit from an upgrade too, such as Far Cry 4. These are some examples of titles that make me feel CPU bottlenecked.




People always say the FX-8350 is absurdly easy to overclock; but I think I must've lost the silicon lottery. I can barely push my chip to a stable 4.4GHz without feeding it lots of Vcore, and even then, I don't bother with it because the temperature ends up going too far out of my comfort zone on full load (over 60 degrees).

I'm seriously considering just building a new 4790k rig at this point.

Over 60 is nothing. Once you start hitting mid 70s on those chips you can worry, that 32nm process is pretty tough. That being said, a 4790k is going to be a much larger upgrade.

 

[Ramses]

Yea, that is interesting. Pretty much lays to rest the proposition that you can play any game on an FX8350. Even with a fairly standard 10% or slightly more overclock it would not be close to 30FPS. Matter of fact, the 9590 is not even close to playable.

I never got into the Arma series, can it really not use more than one core?
I see a bunch of those other i7 scores are pretty rough too.

 

[Abwx]

Yea, that is interesting. Pretty much lays to rest the proposition that you can play any game on an FX8350. Even with a fairly standard 10% or slightly more overclock it would not be close to 30FPS. Matter of fact, the 9590 is not even close to playable.

I guess the poster is so desperate to make Intel look bad that he posted a slide that actually has the opposite effect: it shows the glaring weakness of the FX line in any games that are not well threaded.

Because you think that from 21-22 FPS to 25-28 FPS is an achievement that is worth the 500-1000$ that cost those "higher" performing CPUs..?

The OP was proposed a 5820K that get 26 FPS, while his CPU at 4.2 should provide 22, it s not because the charts are longer that the result is better, at this level it s comparable.

 

[el etro]

I'll keep this short: My FX-8350 is feeling long in the tooth. I'm talking about video games. Frankly, its gaming performance is depressing in most scenarios, and I can actually feel (and measure) its hindrance in some more demanding titles. Benchmarks clearly show it too.

AM3+ is a dying platform. AMD has no visible plans for high-end desktop CPUs for the forseeable future. I would really love having a big boost in CPU gaming performance right now, and it looks like the only direction for me to go is Intel, which means a new motherboard altogether.

My question: Is it worth it right now to upgrade to, say, an i5-4690k? Or is the improvement too marginal to bother with? Is Haswell a good buy at the moment or is it worth waiting for Intel's new CPUs presumably coming out in 2015? (I don't actually follow Intel's release schedule too closely, so sorry if I'm off-base).

What's weighing on me even more, is that DDR3 memory is on its way out and DDR4 has already started trickling in. But the only way to get DDR4 right now is to use one of those really expensive Haswell-E i7 CPUs, right? How much longer until Intel comes out with a next-gen i5, presumably with a DDR4 memory controller? Maybe at that point, DDR4 memory will be cheaper as well, faster, and it would be an overall better investment? What do you think?

With Christmas and end-of-year bonuses from work, I have money to burn, and could easily upgrade right now (if it's a good idea). But if it's better to wait a few months, then I am patient enough to wait. Please advise. Thanks in advance.

Intel processors have a better application performance per game performance ratio, they simply are awesome at gaming. Otherwise i would not recommend upgrade your processor.
Simply there's no upgrade in the mainstream land(Up to FX9590 and i7 4770K) that can worth your money. But in gaming the landscape changes.

 

[escrow4]

Because you think that from 21-22 FPS to 25-28 FPS is an achievement that is worth the 500-1000$ that cost those "higher" performing CPUs..?

The OP was proposed a 5820K that get 26 FPS, while his CPU at 4.2 should provide 22, it s not because the charts are longer that the result is better, at this level it s comparable.

In one game. Conveniently ignoring all those others. Look at FC4 which Tom's Hardware just tested (scroll down):

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/far-cry-4-benchmark-performance-review,4019-4.html

Big difference in the all important minimum's for FX - 15FPS difference for a 9590. FX is not consistent at all. Intel is.

 

[Ramses]

Long as it's over 30 it can be inconsistent as it wants for my casual gaming self.
I'm impressed it manages to do that at this point and consider it a gift.
Not too many years ago you couldn't hope to be getting by with a serious new game on a two+ year old CPU(that wasn't a great gamer when it was new).

 

[Fadaboey]

I'm waiting for AMD to bring out a processor that has at least the same performance as an i7 4790k. If they can do that, I'll definitely buy that instead of the 4790k because AMD will have a lower price for it.

 

[Ramses]

It'd be cool but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[monstercameron]

i agree, why not upgrade your cpu when all you want is more gaming performance. i suggest you buy a pentium anniv ed. and oc it or just get the most expensive intel cpu and you wont have any issues.

 

[2is]

I'm waiting for AMD to bring out a processor that has at least the same performance as an i7 4790k. If they can do that, I'll definitely buy that instead of the 4790k because AMD will have a lower price for it.

By the time that happens, you won't be able to buy a 4790k because Intel will have stopped selling them.