38 months ago
Hey guys, I made this 820 dollar PC (with monitor, mouse and keyboard) and I wanted your opinions on it if possible:
Not with that processor/motherboard combo no.
AMD's FX processors are badly out of date being basically 5 year old chips at this point while that Mobo won't even let you properly overclock it to make it suck less.
And I say this as someone adamantly fond of AMD.
As much as I loathe to say it, go for the i5-6400 if you can afford it and get only 8 gigs of ram.
Also, make sure to go for a monitor with Freesync to match your GPU.
Thanks! I was already wondering why the price was so low for a 4.2GHz processor
Okay, let me explain this.
There are a number of things to really keep in mind when buying a processor.
1) Speed: This is the GHz rating we all know and love and it's the most obvious of the factors. In most but not all cases faster is better. Of course more speed means more heat, which is one of the reasons that AMD proccessors run so hot and consume so much power. They run fast.
2) ICP. This means instructions per clock. It's how much if can do with one of those herz. It doesn't matter if your processor is 20% faster if it can only do 60% as much with each clock cycle. This is highly dependent on a chips microarchitecture and it's why Intel is so much better than AMD at the moment. Back in 2011 AMD dropped the ball with its Bulldozer microarchitecture (All current generation AMD processors are based on an evolution of Bulldozer) while Intel scored a hole in one with its Sandy Bridge microarchitecture (which forms the evolutionary foundation of all current gen Intel processors). That said, it looks like AMD might be making a come back with its new Zen processors which will allow it to compete again and shake up the stagnant CPU market.
3) Core/Thread count: Most old games only really depended on single core performance but with DX12 and Vulkan slowly becoming the new standard, multi-threaded operation in games is becoming more important than ever. Cores are individual processing cores, while threads are basically work pipelines. Intel's Hyperthreading and AMD's Simultaneous Multi-threading are basically "fake" cores that work by allowing CPU's to more efficiently leverage their resources by allowing them to process a secondary thread. In general, there's no good reason these days to by a processor without 4 threads (some games don't even run on two-threaded processors), with a true quad core often being preferable to a Duel Core with Multithreaded operation. My suggestion is avoid the Pentium series entirely, and for your sub-$100 processors stick to AMD's Athlon X4 series, while above $100 suck it up and go for the i3/i5/i7 processors. This will probably change once Zen comes out early next year.
4) manufacturing process: This really isn't a figure to consider as much as a general indicator to how advanced a processor is. Over time, the size of the transistors on a GPU and CPU will shrink as the manufacturing process comes more refined. To give you an example, the FX-6300 is based on the 32nm process while the Skylake microarchitecture used by the current Gen Core processoes is based on the 14nm process. That means that Intel's transistors are less than 1/2 the size of the ones AMD is using in the FX series. This normally becomes relevant because smaller transistors allow a processor to be faster, cooler, and more energy efficient. A classic example of this in action is nVidia's Pascal generation of Graphics Processors. They use the exact same microarchitecture as their previous generation of Maxwell GPUs but the die shrink from 28nm to 16nm makes it possible to get much better clocks and temps out of them.
In essence, the things to watch are ICP, Speed, and Core Count with the Manufacturing process and microarchitecture being strong issue of consideration.
To give an example, the FX-6300 and i3-6100 are generally considered competitors, and in most benchmarks and activities that will leverage multiple threads, the six true cores of the FX 6300 will clean the clock of the i3 6100's duel cores and duel virtual cores. The problem is that while this is changing, most games don't leverage those cores very well, meaning the i3's vastly superior ICP will often lead it to victory in practical applications. And while yes, you can shrink the gap by overclocking the 6300, the issue is that it's older manufacturing process and microarchitecture makes it significantly hotter and less energy efficient meaning to do so you need a higher grade motherboard and an elaborate cooling solution which would significantly add to the price. (IE you could go full on 6300 OC... but for the money you could just buy an i5-6400/6500 instead and come out ahead).
Thanks! But I've heard the RX 480 runs better than the 1060, so should I change it to the 480?
I'd stick with the 480. the 1060 is stronger in DX11 games but the 480 is better in DX12 and will only get better as AMD's drivers mature.
MY big suggestion for this, get a RX 480 and a Freesync monitor.