AMD CPU For Newbie

[SPBHM]

I guess I wasn't clear. The k series processors have an unlocked multiplier. The i5 2400 does not. "Turbo" isn't really overclocking in the traditional sense, as it is built into the chip. And +4 bins is a 4% overclock. People buy the k series so they can get more than 100-200 MHz more frequency.

it's 500MHz (4+1x from turbo) + the extra for turbo on single/dual thread + whatever you can get with BCLK.

"While a combination of a 38x CPU multiplier and 105MHz Base Clock should have given us a 3.99GHz CPU frequency, the i5-2400 would only hit this frequency if a single-threaded application was locked to a single core (we set one instance of the smallfft test to run on core 0, for example). For the rest of the time, the i5-2400 fluctuated between a frequency of 3.78GHz and 3.99GHz – we’ll therefore say that we overclocked the i5-2400 to up to 3.99GHz. See How to Overclock an LGA1155 CPU for more details on how we overclocked all the CPUs on test."
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2011/01/03/intel-sandy-bridge-review/14

stock clock is 3.1GHz (3.2 with turbo on), so this is not a 200MHz OC.

the good thing is, SB at 3.7GHz is still comfortable in terms of heat and power usage I think, and it's really fast.

 

[frozentundra123456]

You can probably go for the newly launched 7790 that's based on GCN 1.1 & it can match the 7850 when overclocked. It won't cost you an arm & a leg but depending on your budget it can be a smart choice.

If that ~200$ is just for the video card & nothing else then you really can't go wrong with this as it really is the best bang for buck at that price !

The 7790 looks nice, I am getting by with a 7770. However, the 7790 only has 1GB of vram I believe, which could be limiting. I think a 7850 is probably the sweet spot. I think you can find one slightly under 200.00.

 

[Pilum]

I guess I wasn't clear. The k series processors have an unlocked multiplier. The i5 2400 does not. "Turbo" isn't really overclocking in the traditional sense, as it is built into the chip. And +4 bins is a 4% overclock. People buy the k series so they can get more than 100-200 MHz more frequency.

A bin is 100 MHz. You get +0.4 GHz out of a non-K i5. 3.4 -> 3.8 is a 12% increase. Considering that you can generally use the stock cooler for turbo overclocking, you save more money than the pure CPU price difference. If you run games which prefer single/few-threaded performance, i5+turbo OC is the best price/performance you can get.

 

[MeldarthX]

Of course you can. Turbo overclocking works on any i5 and allows for +4 bins. Maximum speed for load on all four cores should be 3.5 GHz, maximum single-thread speed is 3.8 GHz. For apps/games with one or two threads the 2400 will be faster than any sane AMD FX overclock; at 3.8 GHz a Sandy Bridge should be equivalent to a 5GHz Piledriver.

That's wrong - period - lightly threaded - sandy can be 10-30% faster.......ivy slightly more...

the heavier threaded - Piledriver more than equal to sandy bridge and ivy and surpasses it.....not always - but saying 3.8 is equal to 5 gz is wrong.

new games are more threaded and 6300 is sweet spot at that price....specially with a micro center.....even without its still one of the fastest chips around that price range...

 

[R0H1T]

The 7790 looks nice, I am getting by with a 7770. However, the 7790 only has 1GB of vram I believe, which could be limiting. I think a 7850 is probably the sweet spot. I think you can find one slightly under 200.00.

There are a couple of 7790 models, gigabyte & sapphire IIRC, that have 2GB VRAM & depending on the app/task & multi-monitor usage that bit of extra VRAM could be helpful. The problem with 7850 is that its going out of production, correct me if I'm wrong here, so whatever stock is left will be sold out quickly & at a relative premium based on demand !

 

[Arkaign]

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2013/03/22/sapphire-radeon-hd-7790-1gb-review/3

^ new-ish review with uptodate? drivers I believe.

The 7770 in BF3 does around ~30 fps avg.

While running with these settings:
1,920 x 1,080, 4xAA 16x AF, ultra detail settings, DirectX 11

Unless your willing to lower details ect abit, you ll probably need abit more than a 7770.



*** Instead of useing 100$ on a 7770.
Get one of these for around ~140$ (a 7790).

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814127726

I just wanted to jump in and comment here, as one of my very good friends games with an i5 3450 and a 7770 @ 1080p with a 7770 Ghz Edition. He runs it on high with lower AA, and it's astonishingly good. I run ultra on my 670FTW, but honestly it doesn't really look any different while actually in the heat of battle. If you stop and look at tiny things, it does look better on the 670, but the 7770 is an amazing value by comparison. I can't comment on the possibility of the 7770 holding up to BF4, but for BF3 it's a great option for those willing to dial back some settings very slightly. Honestly in a budget-limited gaming box, I'd almost rather combo the 7770 with a very fast SSD if going with a higher GPU knocked that out of the budget. These new games like BF3 are very disk intensive, and waiting for levels to load on a mechanical HDD is painful. I'm not saying that GPU is unimportant, or even that I'd want to go back to a 7770-level card from my 670, but the 7770 is a very solid gaming card, you just have to be careful about settings. Simply maxing everything will result in a pretty game but mediocre framerate. 7850 is better still though, so if at least that can fit the budget, I'd recommend starting there.

 

[Incorruptible]

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2013/03/22/sapphire-radeon-hd-7790-1gb-review/3

^ new-ish review with uptodate? drivers I believe.

The 7770 in BF3 does around ~30 fps avg.

While running with these settings:
1,920 x 1,080, 4xAA 16x AF, ultra detail settings, DirectX 11

Unless your willing to lower details ect abit, you ll probably need abit more than a 7770.



*** Instead of useing 100$ on a 7770.
Get one of these for around ~140$ (a 7790).

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814127726

I checked the 7790 and it seems good, is the 7850 a better one and would the 7790 also be able to handle BF4?

I have also looked at the 7850 and if there is only a small difference in price between the 7850 and 7790 I think I should just go with the 7850.

I have checked three of them but I dont know much about graphics cards so is there a big difference between the 3 and does it matter which company makes the card?

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicati...619&CatId=7387 $199

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicati...618&CatId=7387 $169

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicati...329&CatId=7387 $174

 

[tweakboy]

My friend FX 6300 would be great for you. Although you need a massive CPU and I think OCed yours can handle it and give out highest FPS you can pretty much get in game. thx gl

 

[Arkaign]

If 7850, only get 2GB model

 

[Incorruptible]

If 7850, only get 2GB model

Alright, I have checked around some of the 2GB models and there are some for under $200. The 7790 is slightly cheaper is there a significant difference between that and the 7850 2GB?

Are there any other graphics cards under $200 that can run BF3/BF4?

 

[Arkaign]

Alright, I have checked around some of the 2GB models and there are some for under $200. The 7790 is slightly cheaper is there a significant difference between that and the 7850 2GB?

Are there any other graphics cards under $200 that can run BF3/BF4?

The 7790 is out primarily to be more profitable to AMD, the 7850 is more robust, as even a moderate overclock puts it out of the realm of 77xx range. We're comparing the 128-bit 7790 to a 256-bit 7850. The PCB on the 256-bit cards is more complex, so their cost is quite a bit higher to manufacture a 7850. One way of looking at the 7790 is as a 'super-OC' model of the 7770.

More concerning still is the limitation of 1GB VRAM. Titles are getting more demanding, and in 2013 I wouldn't pay more than ~$120ish max for a 1GB card personally. Even at just 1080p, 2GB should be what you're looking for.

Check the BF3 results here :

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6837/...eat-sapphire-the-first-desktop-sea-islands/12

The 7790 is pounded pretty hard, even as an 'OC' edition, against the 7850. And keep in mind that a 7850 with a pretty conservative overclock will match or overtake that 660 at the top of the charts there. I recommend looking at models that are proven to OC very well, such as this one (there are plenty of other choices as well, so don't get stuck on a single model) :

http://www.overclockers.com/his_hd_7850_iceq_turbo_review

 

[Incorruptible]

The 7790 is out primarily to be more profitable to AMD, the 7850 is more robust, as even a moderate overclock puts it out of the realm of 77xx range. We're comparing the 128-bit 7790 to a 256-bit 7850. The PCB on the 256-bit cards is more complex, so their cost is quite a bit higher to manufacture a 7850. One way of looking at the 7790 is as a 'super-OC' model of the 7770.

More concerning still is the limitation of 1GB VRAM. Titles are getting more demanding, and in 2013 I wouldn't pay more than ~$120ish max for a 1GB card personally. Even at just 1080p, 2GB should be what you're looking for.

Check the BF3 results here :

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6837/...eat-sapphire-the-first-desktop-sea-islands/12

The 7790 is pounded pretty hard, even as an 'OC' edition, against the 7850. And keep in mind that a 7850 with a pretty conservative overclock will match or overtake that 660 at the top of the charts there. I recommend looking at models that are proven to OC very well, such as this one (there are plenty of other choices as well, so don't get stuck on a single model) :

http://www.overclockers.com/his_hd_7850_iceq_turbo_review

Thanks, I'll probably go with the 7850 2GB. Also I have no intention of overclocking.

For the graphics card I see a bunch of different graphics cards for the 7850 and made by different companies. Does it matter which company I get?

I am looking at this one

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicati...619&CatId=7387

Also if the motherboard is PCI 2.0 will a PCI 3.0 graphics work on it?

 

[FearfulSPARTAN]

Thanks, I'll probably go with the 7850 2GB. Also I have no intention of overclocking.

For the graphics card I see a bunch of different graphics cards for the 7850 and made by different companies. Does it matter which company I get?

I am looking at this one

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicati...619&CatId=7387

Also if the motherboard is PCI 2.0 will a PCI 3.0 graphics work on it?

Yes PCIe 3.0 is backwards compatible with PCIe 2.0 and that 7850 is the same card I have and it works just fine, xfx is a good brand.

 

[Incorruptible]

Yes PCIe 3.0 is backwards compatible with PCIe 2.0 and that 7850 is the same card I have and it works just fine, xfx is a good brand.

Alright thanks. Is there a noticeable difference between PCI 3.0 and PCI 2.0

 

[Denithor]

Alright thanks. Is there a noticeable difference between PCI 3.0 and PCI 2.0

Not at all for single GPU setup.

Small difference for 2 cards, somewhat larger (IIRC) for 3 cards.

Basically single cards haven't even saturated the PCIe 2.0 bus bandwidth and PCIe 3.0 doubles that bandwidth.

EDIT: And if you aren't overclocking the CPUs, I will reiterate the i5 2400 option - look at the bench results - at stock the i5 simply destroys the FX chip. If you overclock both to max the FX will reduce this gap somewhat (because the i5 has limited overclock potential due to being locked, cannot go above 3.8GHz). But at stock it's no comparison at all.

 

[Incorruptible]

Not at all for single GPU setup.

Small difference for 2 cards, somewhat larger (IIRC) for 3 cards.

Basically single cards haven't even saturated the PCIe 2.0 bus bandwidth and PCIe 3.0 doubles that bandwidth.

EDIT: And if you aren't overclocking the CPUs, I will reiterate the i5 2400 option - look at the bench results - at stock the i5 simply destroys the FX chip. If you overclock both to max the FX will reduce this gap somewhat (because the i5 has limited overclock potential due to being locked, cannot go above 3.8GHz). But at stock it's no comparison at all.

I will only be using one graphics card.

I know that Intel is better BUT I am going with the FX-6300 to keep my budget in check. I have no intention of overclocking and the pc will be web browsing/youtube/gaming so it would be hard for me to justify spending more money when the FX-6300 still offers good performance.

Also I dont like to buy used at all especially for a CPU. Thank you for your advice.

 

[Denithor]

LOL. I find the CPU to be the one part I don't mind buying used, I have never seen one burned out (bent pins, yes, burned, no). Have bought many parts off eBay, CPU is the only part I have never gotten a bad one of.

Anyway, an FX-6300 should provide good performance in your stated uses. Have fun with your build!

 

[Incorruptible]

LOL. I find the CPU to be the one part I don't mind buying used, I have never seen one burned out (bent pins, yes, burned, no). Have bought many parts off eBay, CPU is the only part I have never gotten a bad one of.

Anyway, an FX-6300 should provide good performance in your stated uses. Have fun with your build!

I just have a thing with not buying used. I always have to buy new for most things. And would the 7850 work on decent settings for BF4?

Its going to be my first time building a computer and I should be building it in around 10 days. Should be lots of fun

 

[MustangSVT]

Thanks, I'll probably go with the 7850 2GB. Also I have no intention of overclocking.

For the graphics card I see a bunch of different graphics cards for the 7850 and made by different companies. Does it matter which company I get?

I am looking at this one

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicati...619&CatId=7387

Also if the motherboard is PCI 2.0 will a PCI 3.0 graphics work on it?

with such performance from 650 ti boost and crazy price cut on 660, the plot thickens....

 

[joshcloud9]

Not sure if the OP purchased yet but unless he has a MicroCenter nearby it may be worth waiting for a week or so as AMD is apparently dropping the price of the FX-6300 by ~15% by the end of this month.

I'm patiently waiting for this so I can grab one at around $105 is my estimate

No Microcenter anywhere nearby!

 

[Dark Shroud]

Yeah I almost bought a FX-6300 last week for my nephew's computer. I head that rumor a few hours before I went to buy.

 

[Incorruptible]

Not sure if the OP purchased yet but unless he has a MicroCenter nearby it may be worth waiting for a week or so as AMD is apparently dropping the price of the FX-6300 by ~15% by the end of this month.

I'm patiently waiting for this so I can grab one at around $105 is my estimate

No Microcenter anywhere nearby!

I was suppose to have purchased a couple days ago but I had such a hard time deciding on the CPU and graphics card. The other parts are mostly finalized.

Is there any reports on whether AMD is dropping the price? I was set on getting the FX-6300 but I heard that the i5-3470 which is only $60 more would offer significant performance while others said it wouldn't.

I can easily afford the extra $60 but will it offer a noticeable increase for gaming? If it does I will go with the i5-3470, If not I will stick with the 6300

with such performance from 650 ti boost and crazy price cut on 660, the plot thickens....

I was originally planning on going with the 7850 but I was told the GTX 660 which wasn't much more expensive would offer a significant boost in performance. Will it offer a significant boost in performance? If so I will go with the 660.

Keep in mind I will most likely be using a 19" TV and might upgrade to a 32".

 

[Sleepingforest]

If you are willing to overclock, the FX 6300 will certainly provide better value than the i5-3470. If you do not overclock, it will depend on what applications you want to run.

The difference between a 660 and a 7850 is pretty minimal. I would go with the cheaper of the two. If you are willing to overclock, definitely go with the 7850, as it has been reported to (when you get an unlocked voltage card) overclock up to a 7950's performance level.

 

[Pilum]

Is there any reports on whether AMD is dropping the price?

There are rumours about a price drop, but there is no specific information so far. It's likely AMD will drop prices once Haswell comes out, but that's in June.

I was set on getting the FX-6300 but I heard that the i5-3470 which is only $60 more would offer significant performance while others said it wouldn't.

I can easily afford the extra $60 but will it offer a noticeable increase for gaming? If it does I will go with the i5-3470, If not I will stick with the 6300

This depends. Some modern shooters can make good use of the FX's six cores. However, if you plan to play older games, or RPG and strategy titles, the i5 will be better; these games generally prefer high single-threaded performance, and the 3470 is better in this regard.

If you are willing to overclock, the i5 can be overclocked by 0.4 GHz as well when using a Z75 or Z77 mainboard. This would give 4.0 GHz when one or two cores are loaded, or 3.8 GHz when all four cores are loaded. This is slightly faster than a 3570K at default clockspeeds. Just check some benchmarks of your favorite games to see if you'd like to have that kind of performance and then decide.

BTW, turbo overclocking by 0.4 GHz on Intel CPUs is really painless. You can use the stock cooler, just increase the multipliers in the BIOS, leave the voltages alone and it should work without a hitch - speaking from personal experience with my i5-3550.

 

[Incorruptible]

If you are willing to overclock, the FX 6300 will certainly provide better value than the i5-3470. If you do not overclock, it will depend on what applications you want to run.

The difference between a 660 and a 7850 is pretty minimal. I would go with the cheaper of the two. If you are willing to overclock, definitely go with the 7850, as it has been reported to (when you get an unlocked voltage card) overclock up to a 7950's performance level.

I will not be overclocking at all. I won't be doing many complex things it's just going to be gaming, web browsing/youtube/watching movies. Nothing else

There are rumours about a price drop, but there is no specific information so far. It's likely AMD will drop prices once Haswell comes out, but that's in June.


This depends. Some modern shooters can make good use of the FX's six cores. However, if you plan to play older games, or RPG and strategy titles, the i5 will be better; these games generally prefer high single-threaded performance, and the 3470 is better in this regard.

If you are willing to overclock, the i5 can be overclocked by 0.4 GHz as well when using a Z75 or Z77 mainboard. This would give 4.0 GHz when one or two cores are loaded, or 3.8 GHz when all four cores are loaded. This is slightly faster than a 3570K at default clockspeeds. Just check some benchmarks of your favorite games to see if you'd like to have that kind of performance and then decide.

BTW, turbo overclocking by 0.4 GHz on Intel CPUs is really painless. You can use the stock cooler, just increase the multipliers in the BIOS, leave the voltages alone and it should work without a hitch - speaking from personal experience with my i5-3550.

I am only planning on playing BF3/BF4 and maybe WOW but there is low chances of that. Would the FX-6300 be sufficient? I don't want something slow and I can afford to pay extra BUT it has to offer noticeable performance for me to justify the money spent.


Also I am getting a 120GB SSD, If I go with the FX-6300 I can use the money saved for a 180/250GB or if I go with the 3470 I will stick with the 120GB. What would offer the better performance?