Insert_Nickname
Diamond Member
- May 6, 2012
- 4,971
- 1,691
- 136
FX is weak on the old ST games.
Always was. DX12 also helps a lot, since DX11 only uses a single rendering thread.
FX is weak on the old ST games.
You make a good case for it, but that 1600AF has better IPC and 4 more threads for the same money. Easy choice for me. But I am glad you shared it with us, some will be grateful for the deal. Oh, and all this coming from someone who paid almost that much for a 8350 that gets molly-whopped by the 1500X.
Always was. DX12 also helps a lot, since DX11 only uses a single rendering thread.
It is true, but to a point, DX11 supported MT, a limited form of multi-threading using deferred contexts, but driver support for it was optional, and only Nvidia supported it, it took a while for games start using deferred contexts and when that happened, only Nvidia supported it, AMD DX11 driver was ST. (i think they support DX11 MT now, i havent checked).
Correct. And when it did, 8350 performed rather well. Here's a nice contrast, when it didn't. Far Cry 2 is mostly ST, I played it the other day. My 4790K @ 4.7 gets bottlenecked sometimes in this game.It is true, but to a point, DX11 supported MT
Lord Gaben from Valve says you are wrong.
Windows has gotten better in general, but, games moved from ST to MT with the parallel occurence of AMD in the PS4 and Xbox One.
If you watch any of the RA Tech vids or Random Gaming in HD vids with FX tests, newer games do much better.
So, if someone hung on to an 83xx chip, it is a good 60 FPS (mostly) gaming chip with a newish vid card, for newer games, oddly enough.
The minimum FPS (less drops / stuttering) on newer games with the 83xx are much better than a 2, 3, or 4 series Intel i5.
FX is weak on the old ST games.
Haha, that 8 core, sub 2ghz Jaguar CPU set the bar low and wide 😂
I would expect as we see more and more console ports that are exclusive to the newest generation consoles many older CPUs will choke, probably the FX CPUs and the 4c/8t Intel parts being the notable casualties. Notable relative to this thread, I think the world at large will mainly only notice the issues with the i7s
Look at the FX with completed auctions on Ebay. Or read the comments on the vids. There are a still many people on FX.
I am working up to slicing the seal on this 8350 box. I will pair it with a 1650 super for now, and see what it can do. With and without adaptive sync.
One man's trash...Just sold one 8350 recently, this thread made me some easy money, thanks all!
One man's trash...
One man's trash...
It wasn't trash so much as he damaged the pins somehow. I've done a lot of work like that (mainly on intel boards) for the last year or two so it was a pretty easy fix.
I fixed a couple, but I still have a 6(3?)00 here where the kid was having trouble so he decided to follow some Internet guides and that included reseating his CPU (which had been working fine for years) so he "does" that but when he put it back on, he did it with the lever down - not up - so the CPU was sitting mainly on top of the socket. He then proceeded to put the heatsink on and when he was tightening it down the HS just moved to the side so a tremendous amount of the pins squished down.
I was really optimistic I could make it work when he said bent pins. A couple hours and a few railed posts later I decided he was right and that new keychain dongle had been created instead
Good stuff, thanks.I thought I would throw this in:
the supply chain issues.
Yeah, it would do far better with AMD hardware due to the known Turing/Ampere driver bottleneck, that was used in the above test. Just imagine ~20% of extra performance 😈I would love to see it paired with a 5700XT or 6700XT for all of the DX12 and Vulcan titles.
i7 was a different class of performance, with the $$$ to go with it and a lot of people seem to think that because they had the money for i7 that the FX 8xxx series was horrible.
I did find this:Good stuff, thanks.
I would love to see it paired with a 5700XT or 6700XT for all of the DX12 and Vulcan titles. I will do it myself, someday, when the massive mining card selloff begins.
I think the general opinion on an enthusiast driven tech form is going to be outside of the norm. That aside, there are some viewing Bulldozer and its descendants through some rose-colored lenses. The chips that AMD had at the end of the architecture were okay for what they were, but there original offerings were bad and there were plenty of instances where the older K10 CPUs performed better.
That era of AMD chips is almost the opposite of what we see now where even the lower-power i5 chips from Intel were competitive with the top end FX CPUs. Maybe in 10 years we'll see a thread like this where people are talking about how great Rocket Lake was at the time, which is kind of true if you get one of the cheaper mid-range parts that AMD doesn't stack up against, but almost anything can be a great product at the right price.