Yes, it can be good depending on your needs. It offers a balanced mix of features and performance.
Yes, it can be good depending on your needs. It offers a balanced mix of features and performance.
I'm compiling a list of CPUs and motherboards and questioning whether FM2/FM2+ chips remain viable today. I understand that while LGA 1150 Gen 4 i7s are now considered outdated, they can still handle modern games fairly well. I'm curious if the same applies to the processors you mentioned.
In fact, it varies. For everyday tasks like browsing and email, it works well. For modern gaming, the platform feels outdated, but light gaming is acceptable. I own some FM2+ systems.
From what I remember, FM2/FM2+ was mainly targeted at APUs from the Bulldozer lineup, which restricts the GPU options before you hit a major CPU limitation. My primary gaming PC uses Debian Linux with an FX 8370 (AM3+) and an RX 480. It handles 1080p60 or 4k30 at decent speeds—like maintaining smooth gameplay for Battlefield 1 at 1080p ultra, which runs between 60 and 90 fps. It also runs smoothly above 4GHz with 16GB of RAM. There’s no upgrade route; pushing it higher would hit performance limits due to my CPU. Bulldozer APUs typically ran slower clock speeds and fewer cores. The FX 8370 wouldn’t match a 6th generation i7 or i5, so cutting the core count and speed would severely limit performance. Anything better than a GTX 1050 or RX 460 would struggle significantly. However, if you already own those components and just want to play games, or if you can find them at a bargain price, you might manage 1080p medium or lower resolutions depending on the titles and your tolerance for frame rates. But if you’re serious about upgrading, I’d recommend moving to an AM4 platform for better upgrade potential and overall performance.
Even the Ryzen 1000 showed similar performance to Haswell, so it's best to ignore models below Zen2.
You can easily find a current-gen AM4 CPU with a motherboard that includes Wi-Fi and Bluetooth for under $300. Anything under AM4 isn't worth the investment, and the Ryzen 5 5500 and 5600X have replaced older models like the 3600 and 3600X.
For office use only—reading emails, surfing the web, using Excel or Word, possibly running DOS games, Windows 95 or 98 retro setups, or serving as a home server/NAS. Not suitable for modern gaming; current performance is too slow and limits graphics capabilities due to outdated CPU specs. You might find refurbished Intel machines from the 3rd or 4th generation under $150, but they won’t deliver good results.
The i7s were at least decent when they came out. The A10-7850K (the fastest CPU on FM2+) matched the performance of the i5 750 that was released five years earlier. It's okay if you already have the right gear or got it for free, but for more demanding everyday tasks it will lag significantly and won't be worth the effort. I wouldn't spend any money on an FM2+ board or CPU—they're essentially outdated and wasteful. If you're still comfortable with it, that's fine, but don't go ahead.
The answer is no. This clearly indicates a strong negative response, emphasizing a definitive "hell no" stance.
A modern game typically refers to high-quality titles that leverage advanced graphics and performance capabilities, often requiring powerful hardware to deliver smooth gameplay. These games push the boundaries of what current systems can handle, showcasing impressive visuals and complex mechanics. On platforms like Steam, you might encounter such titles that appear to work on older or less powerful machines, highlighting the gap between expectations and actual system requirements. The distinction becomes clearer when considering different generations of consoles and CPUs, where newer hardware can support more demanding games compared to older models.