Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
6600K without question. They are not even remotely in the same league.
Not to mention ancient outdated power hungry platform for the FX. Not even PCIe 3.0 support unless you fool people to think it have with a PLX chip.
Not nearly as power hungry as many would have you believe. Also for a great deal of gaming in midrange pci-e 2.0 is more than enough.6600K without question. They are not even remotely in the same league.
Not to mention ancient outdated power hungry platform for the FX. Not even PCIe 3.0 support unless you fool people to think it have with a PLX chip.
The FX8300 needs a solid OC to even have any kind of relevance in gaming. And then it will most likely still lose in many cases to an i3...
There is no reason to gimp yourself unless its due to price.
An i3 is gimping yourself. My favorite part of posters like you is the lack of experience with the FX platform. You see a few benches then make asinine comments that never reflects real world usage. Just a barrage of unfounded disdain based on nothing more than ignorance. There have been plenty of double blind tests done where the results show the majority of consumers can't tell which platform is which under gaming conditions. Now there is no doubt Intel is stronger but given criteria it may not matter. At 60hz game play it really doesn't 90% of the time. Over that then yes it does. And with certain games it does as well, hence the rational posters here, Sans the one I am responding to, are inquiring if there are more specifics with which to make a better more concise recommendation. Also if you notice we both recommended Intel in general and it didn't require negativity at all.The FX8300 needs a solid OC to even have any kind of relevance in gaming. And then it will most likely still lose in many cases to an i3...
There is no reason to gimp yourself unless its due to price.
The FX8300 needs a solid OC to even have any kind of relevance in gaming. And then it will most likely still lose in many cases to an i3...
There is no reason to gimp yourself unless its due to price.
The FX8300 needs a solid OC to even have any kind of relevance in gaming. And then it will most likely still lose in many cases to an i3...
There is no reason to gimp yourself unless its due to price.
Aww man you beat me to it. That is what I have brought up before. Do you know how hard it is to find a frame time graph for CPUs today? Used to be common. It was great when talking about iGPUs, Intels were terribad. But seems like no one wants to post any in reviews anymore. Those graphs were horrendous on i3s. The high maximums brought up their avgs but were so erratic as to be terrible over all.That statement is not even close to correct. Numbers don't tell the whole;e story there. Games that are heavily threaded will stutter like crazy on my wifes i3 with a r9 290X. Average frame rate is worthless when crap like that happens. That's just one example.
You really need to get off that i3 horse-manure bandwagon. You still haven't posted frametime graphs as I asked of you before. Look a few posts up for verification of the crap i3 experience.i5 is the way to go here, no questions need to be asked.
i3 if you are going to step down to budget. Your minimums/averages going to be much lower with a 8300 vs an intel i3/i5 except for some really well optimized games like DOOM.
Almost every single DX12 game released till date runs faster on an i3 6100 than a 8300 8 core in every benchmark.
It should be a rule that any poster that recommends an i3 in a tech enthusiast forum should be perma-banned.
I am not against the APUs as they have a use in limited space scenarios or cheap total solutions. Obviously not a recommendation as a gaming machine even in this case. I have one but it was shear interest and curiosity that I bought it for.I am up for that if we throw in all of the FM2+ processors as well since none of them are as good CPU wise as an i3.
If you are going with Intel the help you need would be better served in the Intel forum sub section. i5 is a good choice but make sure you ask in the Intel sub forum for exact experience advice. Getting the best components be it by price or performance and get info on what manufacturers to avoid. Trust me it is better than finding out after you buy it that you bought crap.Ok, thanks for all your inputs. So, I think core i5 6600k will be the best option. I am assembly a PC. I will need your help.
You really need to get off that i3 horse-manure bandwagon. You still haven't posted frametime graphs as I asked of you before. Look a few posts up for verification of the crap i3 experience.
It should be a rule that any poster that recommends an i3 in a tech enthusiast forum should be perma-banned.
And you continue to prove your ignorance and bias. Where are these frametime graphs that support your asinine pov? We even have a poster here that proves you are wrong.A Fx 5 Ghz isn't a "powerful" or "enthusiast" chip by any means, it falls into the same category as an i3 - entry level cheap cpu.
There are a lot of people on the "MOAR CORES" bandwagon , but humanity has yet to discover a game that runs faster on Intels 10 core $1700 CPU than an i7-6700k. That explains a lot.
And those 8 cores of a FX arent faster in video rendering or multitasking or anything else when compared to an i5
Why should i provide proof on the general consensus that i3 rapes 8 core fx in gaming?And you continue to prove your ignorance and bias. Where are these frametime graphs that support your asinine pov? We even have a poster here that proves you are wrong.
Why should i provide proof on the general consensus that i3 rapes 8 core fx in gaming?
If you are going against the normal conclusion - you need to provide graphs for latest AAA games.
How do you think 8 cores fare vs an i5 when the pure purpose would be rendering and multitasking?