FX 6300? Anyone use this CPU?

[admin89]

Quote:in Hungary price matters , i5 is three times expensive than an FX-6300

That's crazy , man
In US :
http://www.microcenter.com/product/413251/Core_i5_4670K_34GHz_Socket_LGA_1150_Boxed_Processor
http://www.microcenter.com/product/401797/FX_6300_Black_Edition_35GHz_Six-Core_Socket_AM3_Boxed_Processor

Quote:i3 is only two real cores 6300 is 3 cores

It's called "module" for AMD side and "Hyper Threading" for Intel side .

Quote:
and has hifgóógher clock.

Higher clock isn't the most important thing to calculate CPU power . A Pentium D dual core @ 3.0GHz can't beat a core 2 dou @ 1.8GHz due to lower IPC

Overall , FX 6300/FX 6350 and A10 6800k are better choice for Dolphin because you can overclock those CPUs to get more performance but you can't overclock the i3 and non-k Haswell i5 (you can overclock i5 3570k , non-k Ivy Bridge , i5 4670k )

Of course , i recommend FX 6300/FX 6350 and A10 6800k over any i3 . FX 6300/8150/8350 vs i5 3350P/3570k/4670k is another story though

[Lorant2]

If I would live in USA, I would go for the i5, difference isnt as big as here.
But still, the FX-6300 isn't a bad cpu!

[NaturalViolence]

admin89 Wrote:It's called "module" for AMD side and "Hyper Threading" for Intel side .

Those are two completely different technologies.

I would say that the FX 6300 does in fact have 6 cores though I suppose that's debatable to some degree.

Lorant2 Wrote:But still, the FX-6300 isn't a bad cpu!

That depends how you're comparing it, which application(s) you're using for the comparison, what you're comparing it against, and how bad it has to perform to be considered "bad". In other words it's subjective.

And when you're giving other people advice on product purchase decisions you should be using the prices in their country, not yours.

ThorhiantheUltimate Wrote:BTW, even if they don't (and btw, games are slowly using more and more cores), most games are bottlenecked by the GFX card, not by the CPU. 6300's and 8320/50 is "good enough" for many games. However, yes, there are some games that you will need the better IPC (im looking at SCII) to get going at 60+ FPS when running intensive parts of said games.

I'll agree that for most PC games it's "good enough". However it's not just about average framerate. Frametime variance is more important. I've written extensively about this subject but don't really feel like digging any of my old posts up right now. We're not really in any kind of serious argument about this so I don't feel it's worth the effort to elaborate unless you're really curious.

Also I keep trying to tell people that the reason the FX series cpus don't do well in gaming is not because of the number of cores games use. It's because the microarchitecture trades away FPU throughput and cache latency for cache size and integer throughput. Games need high FPU throughput and low cache latencies to perform well.

ThorhiantheUltimate Wrote:Games that REALLY need the high IPC per core because they don't take advantage of more than 1 or 2 cores (or simply can't) are out there (making it clear i am talking about PC games in this post, not Dolphin).

Nearly all PC games currently fall into this category.

ThorhiantheUltimate Wrote:One example would be Starcraft 2.

Technically SC2 uses three cores. Not that this effects your argument.

ThorhiantheUltimate Wrote:Also, have you considered an H100 from corsair? It takes more energy to raise the temperature of water, therefore allowing you to get some OC headroom right even in your hotter ambient temperature? Or, of course, I could be getting more thermodynamics all screwed up again...

What does the thermal conductivity of the coolant have to do with my ambient temperature? The fact that water is less thermally conductive than copper or aluminum is actually a bad thing from a cooling perspective. That's not the reason that water cooling can outperform air cooling.

[lamedude]

SMT and CMT in its current form are different means to achieve the same thing. When the front end gets decoupled I'll consider them cores instead of cores*.

[NaturalViolence]

Do you consider GPU SPs "cores"? They too share a frontend but can each manage their own thread. Even the SP clusters share some resources. So is a GK110 GPU a 512 core, 16 core, or single core chip?

The problem is the term core started as a marketing term and was never given a serious technical definition.

With CMT you have different dedicated physical hardware processing code from each thread even if they do share a frontend. That's a pretty strong distinction from HT which only duplicates some registers and state tracking circuits and uses the same execution hardware for both threads.

[lamedude]

Haven't put much thought into in a while but I would consider the individual SMX/CU's cores, but in the simpler time where why no dual core GPUs threads ran amok I did consider each shader a core. Either way point taken and without an ISO definition its best to leave the is this a core game to the fanboys. I just call them modules to avoid the argument but Jaguar is going to mess that up (when I heard that the console APUs were 2 module 8 cores I was like dafuq).