F5F Stay Refreshed Power Users Overclocking Will I be able to boost my CPU speed using these components? (FX8350)

Will I be able to boost my CPU speed using these components? (FX8350)

Will I be able to boost my CPU speed using these components? (FX8350)

Pages (2): Previous 1 2
T
TheBGrace
Junior Member
13
11-18-2016, 09:32 AM
#11
It's reasonable to note that the same applies to the rival i3s and i5 models from 2015. In late 2015, it was feasible to obtain an FX-8350 for a price lower than an i5-6400, and nearer to the cost of an i3-6320 during promotions. Those fixed i3 and i5 units might have offered better performance for gaming at that time, but the FX-8350's approximately 33% higher multi-core clock speeds, even without upgrades, kept those components from gaining too much advantage compared to Intel's pricier unlocked alternatives.

Since then, core counts have risen, and many current AAA games demand more threads than older mid-range Intel chips provide. In titles that rely heavily on four threads, the i5 could still deliver over 20% higher frame rates when paired with a better graphics card, whereas the i3 would struggle with just two cores using SMT, likely lagging behind the FX processor and possibly showing worse stability. For games like Warzone, which benefit from more than four threads, even a quad-core i5 might face some limitations, while the i3 would probably underperform significantly.

Many modern titles still favor the i5-6400 due to its higher thread count, even though a GTX 970 often dictates performance more in today's landscape. Consequently, the differences highlighted in reviews using top-tier graphics are less pronounced for this hardware.

It might be useful to test your current setup in Warzone and other titles to assess if performance is adequate. Also, consider reducing graphics settings slightly to see if that eases the load on the card and improves results noticeably. This equipment isn't optimal for gaming now, but it should handle most games reasonably well if you're willing to lower settings and accept occasional drops below 60fps.
T
TheBGrace
11-18-2016, 09:32 AM #11

It's reasonable to note that the same applies to the rival i3s and i5 models from 2015. In late 2015, it was feasible to obtain an FX-8350 for a price lower than an i5-6400, and nearer to the cost of an i3-6320 during promotions. Those fixed i3 and i5 units might have offered better performance for gaming at that time, but the FX-8350's approximately 33% higher multi-core clock speeds, even without upgrades, kept those components from gaining too much advantage compared to Intel's pricier unlocked alternatives.

Since then, core counts have risen, and many current AAA games demand more threads than older mid-range Intel chips provide. In titles that rely heavily on four threads, the i5 could still deliver over 20% higher frame rates when paired with a better graphics card, whereas the i3 would struggle with just two cores using SMT, likely lagging behind the FX processor and possibly showing worse stability. For games like Warzone, which benefit from more than four threads, even a quad-core i5 might face some limitations, while the i3 would probably underperform significantly.

Many modern titles still favor the i5-6400 due to its higher thread count, even though a GTX 970 often dictates performance more in today's landscape. Consequently, the differences highlighted in reviews using top-tier graphics are less pronounced for this hardware.

It might be useful to test your current setup in Warzone and other titles to assess if performance is adequate. Also, consider reducing graphics settings slightly to see if that eases the load on the card and improves results noticeably. This equipment isn't optimal for gaming now, but it should handle most games reasonably well if you're willing to lower settings and accept occasional drops below 60fps.

Pages (2): Previous 1 2