cageymaru
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2003
- Messages
- 22,091
It's bad if you recommend someone to buy one now, it wouldve been fine as a 2 year old purchase,
Bad because expensive and slow.
It's 60 fps in 99.9% of the games I have played. The FX-8320 was $99 on Amazon this past Black Friday and you can OC the heck out of it. The only game I had problems with was Tera. But in that game if you hit the hotkey to disable the UI my fps would literally triple. Not sure what the problem was with that game.
The new AMD motherboards have USB 3.1 and all the new bells and whistles.
Intel hasn't made a truly new chip since the 2500K. There is very little difference in my FX-9370 and a 2500K. That's why many of the forum users here keep running their 900 series Intel chips; not enough of an upgrade to justify the expense. The only worthwhile upgrade for me is a 6, 8 or more core Intel. I'll do that when I stop getting 60 fps in games.
If I were on a budget and I had to choose between a 4790K for $350 and a FX-8320 for $99, I'd go with the FX and spend the other $250 on a better video card or upgrade my monitor to FreeSync / GSYNC. If I had an unlimited budget I would spring for the Intel. Heck I would toss in 4x Titan X for kicks.
They even do well with SLi.
Here are my motherboard's stats circa 2011. I'd like PCIe 3.0, but look what it gets you in the tests I linked above.