Was it ahead of its time?
>released in an era where games only use 2-4 cores top
>mediocre-bad singlethread performance even for the time
>only performs well in DX12 games or Vulkan due to good thread utilization
Was it ahead of its time?
Lucas Sanders
Jack Johnson
It was well ahead of its time. DX12 is still a meme.
Jeremiah Clark
I guess it's just my graphics card that needs a bump for now then
Joseph Cruz
Amd fine wine
Ryan Barnes
8320 oc'd (basically an 8350). That could combined with my 280x has given me nothing but trouble since 2013. Never going full AMD again.
Eli Morris
I have the same build, it's was such a money sink and it's completely turned me off of pc building.
Isaac Lewis
me too but I still loved it
Carson Anderson
I found ways to love it through constant tinkering, oc'ing and reinstalling operating systems. I'm no longer a poor fag so once ram process drop I'm not holding back on my next build.
Tyler Thompson
Because shit programming is gone from the world now and everything is multithreaded?
Robert Sullivan
don't bully the mighty 8 core
Liam Clark
I had an 8120 (yes i know) with r9 280x for years. Now got myself a ryzen 1600 and it's perfect, best way to go if you want to upgrade on a budget. Also don't wait for ram prices to drop unless you're willing to wait ~1 year, it might even get worse than it already is.
Tyler Lee
>amd
>ahead of the tech industry
pick one and only one
Christopher Lee
underageb&
Lincoln Price
Ever heard of AMD64?
Brandon Powell
inb4 merely pretending
Levi Martin
>released in an era where games only use 2-4 cores top
Hahaha. Games using 4 cores in 2011? Yeah. Sure.
Also, FX-8350? Surely you mean FX-6300. If so, then yes, it was released at a time when thing really started to use more cores while still having decent single core performance (compared to 8350 specially).
Camden Russell
Still use mine at 4.6 GHz.
Rise of the Womb Raider, Deus Ex Mankind Divided, Prey (2017), and other modern games play pretty well with my GTX 970 at 1080p.
Not bad for a CPU I got for $130 in 2014
DX12 is still a bit of a meme because most devs are still trying to implement it properly.
I even do some basic video editing with it.
Anything other than a Ryzen 1600 or higher would be a sideways upgrade.
Matthew Cook
>tfw upgraded from 8150 to R7 1700
Shit was bottlenecking my RX470 really hard.
Lucas Brooks
Same. I have one OC'd to 4.7GHz, got it with the motherboard for cheap in 2013, around 130€. I think it was some kids unhappy birthday present.
Only upgraded my graphics card from 6990 to R9 380 to now RX 480.
Still plays everything easily at maxed out graphics 1080p while keeping locked 60 FPS.
Joseph Allen
Don't know about you, but I have a overclocked 6300 and RX 480 and I only get 3% bottleneck by the CPU. This is on CPU heavy software too.
Samuel Roberts
What helps is overclocking the NB frequency and HT freq to 2600 MHz and memory too.
When I upgrade, it will probably be Ryzen 2 or Zen 2 (Ryzen 3).
Brayden Wilson
>60 fps
>not 144+
SHIGGY DIGGY
Josiah Davis
Yes. AMD was banking too early on the moar coars deal. The problem with FX wasn't it's more cores, it was the lack of performance per core. Ryzen has shown that multi-threading is indeed the future. But each Ryzen core is capable of almost 3 times as much performance as a single FX core. So single threaded applications will still run decently enough, but the extra cores/threads are there for when multi-threading applications truly takes off.
That said I had an FX-4100, then upgraded down the road to an FX-9590. I managed to get the 9590 to 5.5Ghz @ 1.57v under custom water. Asus sabertooth 990FX board held it there for 2 years. At the time, nothing even came close to it's encoding prowess.ecen 6c/12t Intel chips at the time were lagging behind in heavy threaded work loads. Was able to turn the heat off in my apartment too.
Joshua Williams
>accidentally break a pin when changing my FX-8320E from one motherboard to another
>send it for warranty even tho broken pins are not actually covered
>they send me back a FX-8350 for free
nice feel
its still garbage but hey slightly better
its more like "more things are multithreaded now"
but yeah, we're still far from a perfect future were every program takes advantages of 8+ core processors
>multi-core processors
>64bit processing
Cooper Mitchell
>Was it ahead of its time?
If you disregard the huge power hungry cores, the stupid cache hierarchy (sharing two levels of cache? really?) and the weak front-end, then yes, the FX was kinda ahead of its time. Even more because no one will ever do CMT again thanks to AMD.
Joshua Brown
>Was it ahead of its time?
Yes. It was. I don't play games, I'm not a child. And I use GNU/Linux. It's scaled multiple cores for a very long time compared to Windows and Windows software. Either all cores are idle or all cores are under medium or high load. This is why AMD CPUs are typically a lot more popular among GNU/Linux users. The FX was no exception, it was great value for it's price when only total all-core performance matters.
I've got the impression that Windows software and Windows games are only catching up now. Which, to me, seems a bit odd.
So you're too young to remember when AMD CPUs were far ahead of Intel? Perhaps you're underage, perhaps not - it's that long ago.
Xavier Reed
Either underage or bait, AMD has been in the industry for awhile now, and they are the reason we are transitioning to multicore processing as well with x64 systems.