FX-8350 vs Phenom II X6 1090T in 2020 - Was FX Really a Downgrade?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 2 жов 2024
- You can support my work here: www.buymeacoff...
-
Ryzen 9 7950X
US: amzn.to/3ZNAQHj
UK: amzn.to/41SBV2u
DE: amzn.to/3Ux0JcK
CA: amzn.to/3mweH25
Ryzen 9 7900X
US: amzn.to/3zRA01j
UK: amzn.to/3Jgkstf
DE: amzn.to/3GGBShf
CA: amzn.to/3GHkQzg
Ryzen 7 7800X3D
US: amzn.to/404coRM
UK: amzn.to/415SOpg
DE: amzn.to/3KGP2fo
CA: amzn.to/404cUPI
Ryzen 7 7700X
US: amzn.to/3kO9oKv
UK: amzn.to/3IXpdqi
DE: amzn.to/3MGHXxR
CA: amzn.to/413nt6B
Ryzen 5 7600X
US: amzn.to/3ygeqCL
UK: amzn.to/3ybWwRH
DE: amzn.to/43rPdng
CA: amzn.to/41jXis4
Ryzen 7 5800X3D
US: amzn.to/3GBvWGb
UK: amzn.to/400A60Z
DE: amzn.to/3oc0oAt
CA: amzn.to/41mt9Zl
Ryzen 5 5600X
US: amzn.to/4164qsA
UK: amzn.to/3mt6zQ3
DE: amzn.to/3o0wAXa
CA: amzn.to/3MFW9qR
Ryzen 5 5500
US: amzn.to/3NbXmpF
UK: amzn.to/42mdkSs
DE: amzn.to/43Gke65
CA: amzn.to/42ig2s5
i9 13900K
US: amzn.to/3L5tw5P
UK: amzn.to/3ILZIIk
DE: amzn.to/43salK7
CA: amzn.to/3KXuHDI
i7 13700K
US: amzn.to/3F1z4uh
UK: amzn.to/3kQDrRP
DE: amzn.to/3zUQ1U3
CA: amzn.to/41nBXhr
i5 13600K
US: amzn.to/3YrilXQ
UK: amzn.to/3JeWyyu
DE: amzn.to/3GGqwJM
CA: amzn.to/404iAcb
i5 13400
US: amzn.to/3ocF1yC
UK: amzn.to/3mvSjG9
DE: amzn.to/3KUdmM0
CA: amzn.to/406bcgF
i3 13100
US: amzn.to/3Ael2mh
UK: amzn.to/415VZ0a
DE: amzn.to/3MXNKiT
CA: amzn.to/41nCKPr
i9 12900K
US: amzn.to/400BJvD
UK: amzn.to/3GKbPFJ
DE: amzn.to/3Kr11xm
CA: amzn.to/3KxcuM0
i7 12700K
US: amzn.to/3IUWraA
UK: amzn.to/43mKlPU
DE: amzn.to/3N9pv0y
CA: amzn.to/3WOm7eK
i5 12600K
US: amzn.to/43nAwkB
UK: amzn.to/3NbBk6B
DE: amzn.to/3MPy9Ab
CA: amzn.to/45KfRZw
Amazon US: amzn.to/2q1uWBp
Amazon UK: amzn.to/2q1vI1b
Amazon DE: amzn.to/2pA5djM
Amazon CA: amzn.to/2y7wsKI
Links provided above are affiliate links, using them helps me earn a small commission without any extra cost to you.
-
Social media:
/ ratechyt
/ ratechyt
/ ratechyt
As you probably noticed, I decided not to include any music since a lot of my videos have been getting copyright claims. Either way, thanks for watching and happy holidays!
Edit: To those who say that this is an unfair comparison and that I should have compared the six core Phenom to the FX 6300 cause they have the same core count. I recently got a six core FX, so I will definitely compare it to the Phenom II X6 after I upload the FX-6300 review first. The comparison is not unfair though, since the point of this video was not to compare core to core performance.
Thanks for watching! You can support my work here: www.buymeacoffee.com/ratechyt
discord.gg/PFb9cMstZH ▪ instagram.com/ratechyt ▪ twitter.com/ratechyt ▪ facebook.com/ratechyt
We dont need music. This video is well made l used fx 8320 for 6years, now l upg to 8700k :P
Did you end up trying out the intel instruction emulator?
It adds all of the instruction sets the cpu lacks as long as its installed with only about a 1% "hit" on performance but a large uplift in 1%and 0.1% lows, and will even see an uplift in quite a few games like fortnite
I haven't, since by the time I already finished testing the Phenom II and had a different CPU installed.
Yeah, thats annoying, you do all the hardwork and all money goes to someone else due to those few seconds ( even if by accident like in background music in games).
Also, the hyperX memory are not good for phenom 2 cpus, the phenom is memory and NB sensitive in games, it would definitely perform better with Gskill sniper memory ( because gskill sniper have 160ns TRef timing and are usually double rank while hyperx have 260ns and are single rank )
First video from you I've watched, did not need music!
So clearly AMD should have just made an X8 Phenom III :P
Naah, clearly AMD should have to made an FX "Excavator Core" X8 28nm 5,0 Ghz CPU
Bulldozer IPC = 100%
Piledriver IPC = 113%
Steamroller IPC = 126%
Excavator IPC = 141% (Like an 8350 @ 7 Ghz?)
But, this dream never come true :_(
@@charlie_goldschmied i agree... i wonder why they never made steamroller or excavator socket AM3 models.... makes no sense.
Cornholio Casts Putting that R&D into Ryzen was much more valuable.
AMD realized quite quickly that the bulldozer architecture was a dead end and cut their losses when they could. The laptop parts relied on superior graphics and good enough CPU power. On desktop they couldn’t be remotely competitive without razor thin margins because Intel could get the same performance from much smaller chips.
@@charlie_goldschmied They would have if they could have, but there were limitations to Excavator. You have to remember Excavator was built for mobile and this meant a few compromises. First, used 28nm on a density focused node as opposed to a performance focused node like Bulldozer and Piledriver, this in addition to changes to the pipeline meant it was never going to clock as high. No matter how much you cool it, Excavator is really never stable over 4 GHz.
@@Ty4ons I believe you are right .. but still.. how much could it cost them to make steamroller AM3 cpues... it was a decent upgrade over piledriver and AMD had to make money until Ryzen was ready.
I was running an FX-8350 from 2015 up until Chirstmas 2019 when I upgraded to a 3600X, and it held up pretty well even against new games at 1080p. The only people who think the FX-8000 series were bad chips never owned one.
TBH, the entire tech media and PCMR Nubs are at fault for that. They never really gave it a fair shake because it was touted as an 8 core that lost to dual core i3s. They never considered multicore workloads or even price to performance.
in 2016, I got an 8320e with a Gigabyte 970 MOBO + a R7 370. At stock, I was able to run all my games just fine because of the GPU bottleneck. Then I learned how to OC and upgraded to an R9 Nano. At 4Ghz, all the games I played ran at over 60FPS on a 4K Freesync monitor. I played all my games at 1800p/1440p and I was super happy. My entire rig was the price of an i7 + highend MOBO combo. To this day, that rig is even better because of all the multi threaded games that are out there.
I owned a 4300 then upgraded to a 6300 then finally put in a 8370e and loved it like a charm for years, sold it sadly upgraded to a ryzen 1600x few years ago
@@4m470 Lots of silly comparisons back then weren't there? Reviewer, lets compare single thread scores clock for clock giving the Blue team a 600 mhz overclock , lets compare power useage 4 physical cores vs 8 . Lets compare benchmark scores where the FX has lacks the necessary instruction set for it to be efficient and has to use the Intel compiler to run it at all . etc etc etc. The went well out of their way to show it in it's worst light. The funny thing is that without the HT or SMT performance hit - A 5 ghz ,16 core FX would run right with the first 2 generations of Ryzen 8c/16t cpus in loads like multi core cinebench. The would have dimmed the lights for 2 blocks in all directions, but the performance would be very similar lol.
That's EXACTLY what I say because people who used one are overwhemingly positive about it. I know I am and I have no reason to lie.
@@cssorkinman My favourite was comparing the Phenom II X4 940 not to the Core2Quad Q9400 which it was aimed at but the i7-920 which was TRIPLE the price.
A 6 core FX would have been better for comparison. The biggest downfall of Phenom II is it's lack of instruction sets.
I built a fx 6100 based system in 2011 or early 2012. Clock for clock Phenom II is better then Bulldozer in almost every way. One thing I always thought was weird was everyone said bulldozer was hot but for me it wasn't bad at all. I could clock the 6100 to 4.4ghz on an ASRock 970 extreme3 rev1.0 with a hyper 212 plus cooler and never would go over 50-55c unless I ran prime95 and then it would only get into the low to mid 60's. I honestly loved the fx series. They were great overclockers and ran cool in my experience anyway and last but not least was the price. All that being said.. if I had the money at the time I would have bought the i7 2600/2700k.
This is exactly why I never upgraded form a Phenom X6 to the FX. The FX6000 was very circumstantial whether it was faster or not and even for the FX8000 I didn't see that it'd justify the cost of switching from AM2+ to AM3. By the time the FX8000 got cheap and multi-thread support improved enough to make enough speed difference, the FX also became obsolete and it was just better to wait a couple of months for the Ryzen.
I had both the Phenom II X6 1055T and FX 6300. The FX 6300 performed better, but the clock speeds on the FX were much higher than the Phenom.
@James Smith the entire point of he discussion between phenom ii and FX is literally the IPC, comparing a 6 core to an 8 core is completely retarded, no to mention that he's completely skipping the bulldozer architecture and going straight to pile-driver.
@@randymiracle4958 the stock coolers were trash though. My FX-6300 would thermal throttle all day with the stock cooler due to its anemic 70 mm fan.
I upgraded from a Phenom II x4 955 to an FX-8370e a couple years ago, it was a noticeable upgrade.
I upgraded from the same to an fx8350 just this year, it performs well enough for me
Do you still use the cpu as your primary?
It's high time that you upgraded to Ryzen. Get a Ryzen 5 3600 for just $200. It's literally twice as fast as your FX-8370.
@@kennethdavidson6508 Yes the FX is still my primary, overclocked to 4.8Ghz.
same here, i added ram (12GB now) and a RX580 8gb, still good
I had my Phenom II 1090t BE and HD 6950 from 2010 - Fall of 2015. It was a great setup and definitely held its own.
@@Sheesharito Not sure if you ever upgraded but you should get an i3 10100f they go on sale for $90 dollars and they’re on par with an i7 7700k.
I used a 1035t with an hd 7770from 2012 - 2016 upgraded and used a 6700k and r9 290 from 2016 to 2021 now im on a i7 12700k and a gtx 1080. Before the Phenom i had a pentiun 4 lmao. My dad still uses that Phenom 1035t to this very day except with a 1050ti.
@@daytimerocker3808 Yeah I did, now I have a Ryzen 5 2600, bought it in may of 2020. I pretty much have everything new, MBD, CPU, PSU, RAM, case and fans. But now I have a new problem, my GPU died like a week ago, the R9 380X, and now I have no GPU and the prices are insane, I am currently making a deal with a guy who's selling a used RX 570 4GB (he said it didn't mine and I hope it's true) for 250€, I'm gonna try to haggle down to like 180€ and below but that's not possible I guess. Will have to figure something out in these tough times. About 3 months after the prices skyrocketed I found a store with old, non inflated prices. I found a Gainward 1660S for 220€ but I didn't have money at the moment, and the store updated it's prices. So now that my R9 380X gave up on me, I don't know what to do.
@@Sheesharito Thats a pretty insane price for a 570 4gb model, 180 is much more reasonable. Ive seen gtx 970s go for $150 usd in my area and that should hold u over fine or even a 1050 ti for like 75.
The FX 8350 is always going to hold a special place in my heart. It was the first CPU I ever purchased when I stopped using pre-builts. I bought it brand new for $50 back in 2014 so the price to performance for it was pretty nuts. Yet I still got a bunch of crap from my at the time more "tech savvy" friends. I've never been an AMD or Intel fan boy, as all I care about is the best value I can get and it boggles my mind how people are so bent on somethings shortcomings that they refuse to look at any positives. Was the FX-8350 the best CPU you could get? No, but if I got it for $50 it's surely a better value than forking out $300 for an i7. Though I've personally replaced my FX-8350 with a Ryzen 5 3600, my old 8350 still lives on with the original M5A97 LE R2.0 as a hand-me down to my wife's younger brother who at the time was using a Core 2 Duo.
Fuzzy Face how is that 3600 compared to the fox 8350?
@@Atomic88 I'd love to give you specific examples but honestly I did pretty much a whole system upgrade when I got the 3600. I went from a GTX 970 to an RTX 2080 as well. I had quite a few games that were initially being bottlenecked more by the 8350 than the 970 for 1080P gaming but that's probably because I had never done any overclocking. Metro Exodus and SotR to name a couple. I also changed over to 1440P so there are basically no CPU bottlenecks with a 2080 at that resolution. I think the best I could tell you is that my 8350 at stock scored around 600ish on Cinebench R15 whereas my 3600 I've got at a stable 4.25ghz on 1.27v had 1750ish.
Fuzzy Face wow I’m currently running the same CPU and graphics card combo as your old setup lol. Thanks for your input!
I bought my fx 8350 in 2018 for 64.99. still works great with a RX 590.
i bought my fx8350 for $189.99 so yes it was a disappointment. i've been with amd since sempron and duron days and made switch to intel 8600k and just love. one thing though intel is more expensive with motherboard combo but for me its totally worth it
I think the FX 8150 should've also tested, since the early comparsions were with the frst FXs, but interesting video
That was my thought as well. First gen Bulldozer was markedly worse than their later-gen siblings.
Agreed an 6 core fx bulldozer vs 8 core fx bulldozer vs a 8 core fx piledriver would do this right.
8150 is faster
Still using my 8350 in 2020.
Sell it when it still has a value and get a Ryzen 5 1600 af . Used FX-8350 is worth almost same as a new Ryzen 5 1600 af.
The 8350 ain’t that good in 2020 but it’s such a fun processor to tweak and overclock :D
Orun Makarov you would have to get a new mother board ram etc. not worth
@@ignaciovillarreal8404 definitely worth. i did it.
still using phenom...
I was very happy with the FX 8350 even after upgrading to Ryzen . I have 2 FX 8350 and a few Phenom II 960t that are unlock and oc to 4ghz - AMD makes great processors and I have been buying them since the the 80386 days. Great Video !!
Yep. AMD should have taken the Phenom II and rebuilt it on the 32nm process instead of FX. Called it Phenom III X4, X6, X8. If it OC'ed really well like FX did "5ghz" Phenom III would have been better and closer to Intel.
Why is 5ghz in quotes?
The problem is fx took an ipc hit in order to do higher clocks (one of those engineering trade offs). So if they made phenom capable of the same clocks they would basically made a more complicated fx chip. But sure, a phenom redesign and update on a smaller node probably would be preferable.
@@anthonym9626 Thats the magic frequency of moores Law. There is a limit to the maximum frequency which is called a "wall". Intel and Amd havent really broken the 5 ghz barrier without overclocking Which is unacceptable.
AMD plan was to lay the foundations of the arch in 32nm and later fix the flaws at 20 nm.
But GloFo never delivered the promised 20 node and without the extra transistors, the IPC could never be improved.
An ivy 22nm vs a FX at 20 nm could have been a nice close race to see, since ivy was just a shaft to Intel fanboys: 3% improvementsin a 40% less die space (cheaper to manofacture) than sandy but a higher temps and prices
There was some lower-end Athlon on the newer Piledriver arch that improved IPC by like 20% over Vishera. So clearly the design of the FX had some headroom.
Now that they do so well with Ryzen, how about they rebuild some Phenom on 14 nm and sell it as "anniversary kit"
Intel could do the same with Prescott.
always thought fx8320 was very good idk why everyone complained
People complained about the Bulldozer architecture, not Piledriver. Back when Bulldozer first came out people were still building systems with the Phenom II CPU's but that mostly stopped when the second gen FX CPU's came out.
I'm still use phenom x4 9950be on 2020
I upgraded from Phenom X6 1045T @2.8GHz to FX-8350 4GHz/4.2GHz Turbo. I experience a significant boost in performance on my HD7770 1GB GGR5 in Need for Speed - The Run. A significant bump in performance, no skipped frames, no stuttering while driving with high speed, the game ran smooth and fast, no frame drops, the FX-8350 offered a good experience.
Still running an FX 9370 "Centurion" @ 4,4 Ghz, NB/HT@ 2.6Ghz in my secondary system, cooled by a Noctua NH-D14, together with a Sabertooth 990FX, 16GB 1866mhz Ram and a RX 570. This thing flies through everything, including the games I play. I could very well use it as my primary system if the rendering times on my Ryzen system werent that much better.
I had a phenom II 1070T, but upgraded to an FX 8350 a few years ago. Loved both CPU's, but I did notice that the FX 8350 was better. Especially at 4.4ghz OC. That being said I am currently overhauling my rig, upgrading to Ryzen 7 2700!
Get a 3600 it's a better jump if you don't already have a ryzen series cpu
Edit: Just checked Newegg. Ryzen 7 2700 isn't too terribly over its norm of ~$150, being $165 at the time of this edit. Amazon, on the other hand, is at a slightly better price point at $158.
If you are gonna upgrade to ryzen 7 2700, I'd hold out for a bit and wait for prices to drop by $10 to $20. Prices are currently more than what they've previously been the past couple of weeks. At least from what I've seen on Newegg. Amazon might be a different story. I'd make sure to check CamelCamelCamel to see if prices are currently fair on Amazon.
@@UKKNGaming Honestly depends on your use case outside of gaming. Like I recently upgraded to a ryzen 7 2700X rather than a ryzen 5 3600 because my use case outside of gaming (which, in a nutshell, is virtualization) makes the two extra cores worth it.
@@UKKNGaming I would take 8 over 6 cores any day.
@@jamegumb7298 fx isn't an 8 core chip through it's a 4 core 8threads CPU it was poor advertisement on AMD's part they actually got sued years later for it. Intel was known for not doubling their thread count they were pushing I7's at 4 cores and 4 threads.
The problem was never that the Phenom was faster overall. It's that it was already old and behind Intel, then they went and reduced IPC in the same time as Intel improved it dramatically with Sandy Bridge. The gap was just enormous. And even compared to Phenom the fact that the brand new CPU with 2 extra cores was at max 20% faster and often it was slower than the old one is just embarrasing.
And it was fx8150 that was after Phenom, its worse than 8350 in many things.
@Dalle Smalhals That period when AMD smoked Intel first with the AthlonXP and then with the A64. Only plus 35+ remember it :P
P4 had one thing they were actually good at: Rendering. Or rather, anything that can keep the pipeline filled.
For buyers at the time, though, getting that performance meant buying an i5 around $175, or an i7 that often was $300, sometimes more for the K. If you wanted to overclock, add $100-200, for the K CPU and Z motherboard. Meanwhile, the FXes had decent CPUs from $75 to $150, got good gains from fast RAM, fast RAM was cheap (I remember I bought 32GB of 2133CL9 for $120 - DDR3-2133 and 2400 was cheap in 2012-2014), and you didn't need more than a $100-125 motherboard for even a 8350. In 2013-2014, as the 6000s got under $100, they were especially good buys, if you couldn't afford a higher-end Intel CPU, *especially* if you did more than just play games.
Nobody that bought an i7 or Xeon back then ever complained, myself included. But, the cost difference was not small, either, and the Core i3s were rather anemic. Just like the budget buyers that got 6300s and 8300s, we got to smugly say we told you so, about how X threads and Y MB cache was plenty for gaming.
Too bad GloFo never delivered the 20 nm Node. Whith the extra transistors an "FX II" , AMD could easily take the lead over Ivy bridge, since the subjacent arch is way better. CMT is in paper better than Hyperthreading because it do not stop other procesing units and ivy was not improved over sandy, no significative advances.
Top in the AMD priorities was to widen the decoder and fix the cache latencies. With the rest put more execution units to improve IPC. Enough to match or exced Ivy
Before the initial Ryzen launch, I upgraded from a Phenom II X4 965 BE to an FX-8370 and it was definitely a step up. In all honesty, it was a bit of a pain to get dialed-in with a stable OC, but I have been running it at 4.6 GHz for several years and it has performed admirably in the face of endless criticism. Paired with an RX-580 I have had no issue playing AAA titles on High + settings. I am currently waiting for the last couple of components to upgrade my system to a Ryzen 7 3700X, which I am expecting to be a big boost in performance. When all is said and done, the FX-8370 will hold fond underdog memories in my mind.
my 1100T was a beast from new until retirement in 2017 XD
20:00 That's something I suffer too with my phenom x4 955 pc, some youtube videos for any reason refuse to play or play with huge buffer issues. I think it's for the lack of modern cpu instructions because for newer cpus I haven't seen it.
Thank you for your input.
@Dalle Smalhals A 1050ti should be more than enought gpu power to play youtube videos. You can see the game tests I've done in my channel, cpu it's doing ok with a 1050ti. I only use Opera, so maybe is the browser, I'll test it with other browsers.
@Dalle Smalhals No it's not. It depends on a video. I can easily play Linus tech Tips videos on 4K on my Phenom II X4, but not Hardware unboxed' videos. My guess is that it depends on the video encoding.
Have you tried using the browser plugin h264ify to force it to use the H264 codec?
Chris Fraser I use it on my good old i3 laptop, now youtube playback is nice and smooth but can’t play 1440p or 4K videos.
My previous CPU was a Phenom II X4 965. Now I have an 8350 and I don't see it as a downgrade at all. It works as I would expect. I never thought either one was a bad chip but I like the 8350 more.
Forum keyboard warriors and BS review channels on youtube are total idiots i never listen to any of them, why would AMD make a new generation CPU that is slower? i mean seriously. the phenomII 965BE quad core is the king for gaming due to it being able to run at over 4.2ghz on air with only 1.4v if the phenomII was an 8core part it would easily be the winner by a quite a large amount, you should have compared the fx6300 really.
FX 8350 was a refined upgrade of the original FX 8150 Bulldozer, over which it improved performance by a lot in some areas. I think most of the bad press of the FX processor is due to the initial version of the architecture, which was not very good and represented a downgrade with respect to Phenom II. The FX 8350 is a decent part even today, albeit it could never compete with Intel processors of similar clock speed and number of threads.
This test is interesting. I'm an owner of the Intel i5 2500k.. and I've said for years. A 8350 would have served me better in the long run. In GTA5 my 4 cores and 4 threads are pushed to 100% almost constantly despite a decent overclock of 4.4 Ghz... I tried to stream GTA5 a few years ago, impossible. While people with 8350's did it just fine. Without capture cards or some dedicated streaming PC. And similar GPU hardware.
I'm going Ryzen next, and very soon if all goes to plan.
I believe the FX processors was meant for the server market. The design make little sense on the desktop... something got AMD panicing and they pushed this one and was stuck with it for a long time.
I actually can't wait to get my hands on a second or third gen i5 to test it out. I've seen plenty of people complain about frame rate inconsistencies in what I assume to be multi-threaded areas, where CPUs with extra cores or threads would show better performance.
@@RATechYT I cant play GTA5 anymore. The world is not loading fast enough or what ever, it used to run just fine. Maybe the Intel security patches has killed my i5. I will be getting a 3700X in the coming weeks if things work out for me, its abit up in the air atm but hopefully. Rebuilding all of my PC, only keeping my RX 580 8 gb, I cant stretch to a new GPU as well and the 580 is good enough for now, ccuz I had to get a 144 hz monitor too or will... so it got a bit expensive this venture.. xD closing in on 2000$ already :< GPU upgrade will come later. No point in upgrading GPU with a 60 Hz monitor.. lol
@@RATechYT Been playig Witcher 3 again for example just last night. I had 60 fps solid where ever I went with very high settings at 1080p and the CPU and GPU seem to cope well. But I still think a 8350 would actually be better. The Intel just wins when you push 140 - 150 fps, and thats true now as well. And most people dont do that, how many even today got more than a 144 Hz panel? I'm guessing very few. Most are still on 60 hz. Thats why I kinda find the FPS craze almost offensive and irrelevant mostly.
FX ARE SELLING LIKE HOTCAKES AND ARE BACK IN DEMAND !!!!!!
I HAVE 2 I love them fucking awesome..
Paired with a GTX 1060 3G
FX 4100 4 CORE
FX 8150 8 CORE
Outstanding system 4 SSD'S Kingston Raid 0
FUCKING SICK SPEEDS bam done Boom loaded..
32G of DDR 3 1600MHZ CL9
I was wondering... AMD haves an custom chipset center (for Xbox and PS4 for example). What if, when we do an Kickstarter campaign for example 1 Million pieces of an 8-Core Excavator with L3 Cache an 28nm for an AM3 socket?
The 28nm production must be very cheap now for AMD, the core design is in the drawer and now its enough time between Excavator an Zen (Because of comparing). The first time in the history a company can fullfill the customers speacial request!
What you all think about it ? If they can do it for something between 99 and 129 dollar, i order alone 25 of them xD
I have a Phenom II 's Great CPU the Phenom !!
BUT !!! FX is way better what lies they spread..
The FX had 10x the POWER thus the name BullDozer try 4K and see the difference..
In games with a 3080 GPU . Then see the Phenom choke and the FX fly's !!!!
I love my FX 8150 it's outstanding play's games with insane power..!
Very pleased with that purchase. I just gave mine a new makeover >>>
New ram 32G New CPU heatsink Glow Blue and Blue fans Better Video card SSD's 4 in raid 0
Now it's unstoppable..
If you're running Linux, these CPUs and even older unsupported (by AMD) GPUs are getting treated to open source driver development on an ongoing basis.
Something that would make for an interesting comparison, get clocks as close as possible, disable both chips to 4 cores, specially for the FX-8350 so that the 4 FPUs aren't the bottle neck, or disable 2 cores on the same FPU and see what 6v6 looks like
I enjoy your content as I like messing around with the older Phemon II and FX CPUs. Well aware that Ryzen would yield better results, but I have a soft spot for the older AMD offerings. Might even be getting a 9590 if I can find a reasonably priced one.
I have the phenom 2 x6 in my main pc, but I have an fx8350 layin around.. Yeah
. I rock old stuff... Haha... But hey.. Works well still.... Thanks for the comparison... Guess I need to do some surgery
I'm kind of surprised by your results.
I've got a 1055T and an FX 6300 and the 6300 outperforms the Phenom in almost everything I use.
Video encoding is incredibly faster on the FX. I don't have hard numbers and my Phenom II has been retired, at least for the short term, but I wanna say the FX is nearly twice as fast in x264 and x265 encoding.
The 6300 is a beast. The 6100 aswell. Phenom II too old and overpriced, even for todays used market.
I dont know a lot of the issues Bulldozer had however I did have an FX4100 that I used in a spare PC of mine and it honestly ran quite well with the things I did which was web usage and some lighter gaming. Not a bad little CPU per the price I paid for it.
No because the Phenom lacks newer instructions. FX is still going strong even today.
Wow. Impressive results. I like the way you benchmark the CPU's... Thanks for the good content, keep it up!
Thank you!
Hi! Nice comparisson. I reviewed the FX 8130, back in its time... and in that time, the Phenom II x4 940 (unlocked to x6), was able to beat it in a few benches, and get a few points before the FX, while being a lot cheaper. So IN THAT TIME, the Phenom was a wiser choice.
Right now, with the wider use of the newer instructions, the FX takes the lead... so makes a lot of sense...
Bulldozer in general was really bad.
This is a great video. I have the 1100T, and had recently been considering an upgrade to the 8350 or 8370. Two things stopped me. My motherboard has the 970 chipset, not the 990, and most of what I've read suggests the 4+1 VRMs would run too hot when overclocking an FX. Although your video seems to suggest the opposite due to the lower voltage required. So I'm not sure what to think now. The second is that here in the United States the 8350 and 8370 are going for ridiculously high prices. For as much as I'd love to try one it is hard to justify when I can get a much faster Ryzen processor for less money. In any case the 1100T has served me quite well for the last 8 years. I've definitely gotten my money's worth out of it.
Get yourself a ASUS M5A99FX PRO motherboard, I've been using it for years now without issue.
@@wileymonair I appreciate the suggestion, but if I need to buy a new motherboard to support an 8350 processor that I also would need to purchase it just isn't worth it. It would make much more sense to go with a later gen Ryzen board,processor and ram.
You can upgrade to an FX-8350 and slightly undervolt it. You should even be able to push it to around 4.2 GHz on all cores while doing so, maybe even further depending on how lucky you got with your chip.
The highest end CPUs on a socket are crazy overpriced. I’ve wanted to give my 3570k a boost, but the 3770k are like $100+ which feels a bit much for just adding hyper-threading.
I have a 970 chipset that I ran a fx 6100 and a fx 8320 undervolted oc for years. I was overclocking it to 4 at stock voltages till I got nervous and undervolted it after learning more. But I really didn't have any problems. Now it way undervolted it and underclocked it to run boinc 24/7 (underclocked it cuz otherwise between that PC and my new ryzen one I could get warm upstairs). Already went from a r5 1600 to a r7 3700x on my new system. That said I really would just stick with your phenom unless u get an fx for about free. I liked mine ok, but ryzen and the new chips are just unbelievable and I feel with the new consoles coming out that use stronger cores it will be really tough on fx processors.
Phenom or any old cpu that lacks current instruction set can run newer softwares by running them via *Intel® Software Development Emulator* , though due to emulation overhead the software will run slower and may be jittery/laggy than it would have if the software was designed to use old instructions if new instructions are not available.
This video is much appreciated. I've been arguing this point for years, dunno how I didn't see this video until recently.
I've got an FX 6300 and a Phenom II x6 1055T, both overclocked. The FX is a good deal faster in a lot of situations. People have rose colored glasses when they remember the Phenom II and also they go back and reference old benchmarks made for dual core CPUs. Even going to apps that only use 4 threads the FX starts to pull away and anything over that is a good deal faster than the Phenom II. AVX support helps tons in games.
FX8150 would be have been better for comparison.
I'm glad the guy stated what I felt going from a phenom x6 1100t to a 8350; it was small gains in gaming. Where I noticed bigger differences was on things like dvd ripping where fx cut my ripping time almost in half.
I have had my fx8350 machine for 7 years. Within the first year and a half of ownership I upgraded from 1tb hdd to 2 samsung 840pro/evo sata ssds and from 8gb 1866mhz ddr3 ram to 16gb.
I have had the pc long enough to where it has been used with 3 video cards! Initially a radeon 6770 for the first 9 months carried over from my previous PC. Then I upgraded to a radeon 7970(!), which was a solid 1080p performer for 5.5 years until the card finally started receiving occasional artifacting. Then early this year I bought an rx580 off ebay for just 100$. This machine is overall still a solid 1080p performer with no sacrifices in setting in any title. The worst performing titles were released in the 2015-2017 era right before ryzen when games could only utilize 2-4 CPU cores. Then later 2017 onwards more games can fully utilize all the threads despite the fx8350 only having 4 floating point units were 2 cores.
If someone asked me if the fx8350 would bottleneck a modern midrange card I would have to admittingly say yes and not recommend it, but the bottleneck doesnt hurt enough to stop you from averaging at least 1080p 60 in 99% of all titles.
If you could get an fx8350 and the motherboard. For 50$ I might still recommend it. A athlon 3000ge or 200ge will actually perform very similar assuming you aren't running any background processes to bog the 2 cores 4 threads down, which us why I recommend to at least get the fx8350 with the motherboard. But nothing beyond that.
I used to run my fx8350 at 4.62ghz all day long with just setting front side bus and cpu multiplier! never had to touch the power to the cpu.
Still running a Phenom II X3 720 daily since early 2009. No problems whatsoever and I can even unlock it's fourth core.
I'll probably build a new PC with Ryzen 5 3500x for Cyberpunk next year
I have a FX-8150, FX-8350, Phenom II 1090T, and a A10-7890K. All these boxes run Linux, so not a lot for me to compare when it comes to gaming. But I have used all 4 boxes for handbrake encoding. When doing H.264 encoding The results were FX-8350>1090T>FX-8150>A10-7890K (sorry I don't have numbers it has been a while, but the FX-8150 and the 1090T were very close in encoding speed with the 1090T being slightly faster if memory serves. But when doing H.265 encoding it looks like FX-8350>FX-8150>A10-7890K>1090T (I am sure this is due to the lack for AVX instructions on the 1090T). I might do some benchmarks at some point and post an update).
Cheers!
I bought a X6 1055T about the same time when FX-8150 was released. Never regretted that.
Why didn't you use a FX-6300 for the comparison with Phenom CPU
Well, I can do that too if you insist.
@@RATechYT I think it would be more interesting, apples to apples
Will start working on it after uploading the FX-6300 review.
@@RATechYT I love how in depth you go into the fx series, haven't been able to find anyone who even compares, thanks for your hard work ✌️
Thank you!
I still use my 1100T here. Playing God Of War, RDR2 and others (check my channel). I'm not the least bit worried about switching CPUs anytime soon.
The day the FX series came out, I woke up early to look at those benchmarks. They were disappointing AF and a lot of ppl were left with a sinking feeling because no one knew if Intel was going to start price gouging.
The Phenom II series was an incredible value compared to Intel 1st Gen lineup and Core 2 series, but AMD lost their footing when Intel released Sandy Bridge. The FX-series wasn't able to fill the hole that Phenom II had occupied a couple years prior. I was hoping the FX series would be able to challenge the i5-2500 in gaming, but instead the FX-8100 series was only able to challenge the 2nd Gen i5 series in multithreaded performance.
Looking back.... Intel didn't price gouge as much as expected, except with +8 HEDT core processors. The way Nvidia is price gouging nowadays is what people expected of Intel. Sure, Intel stagnated with 4-core processors, but at that time they wouldn't have been able to release a 6-core or 8-core CPU that had a high clock speed. Intel instead choose to move forward with higher clocked processors like the 4790k and 7700k.
To play devil's advocate, Piledriver was actually faster than K10, although first-gen Bulldozer and K10 were at roughly the same level if era-appropriate benchmarks don't lie, also, XP was never optimized for Bulldozer/Piledriver/Steamroller/Excavator's multithreading scheme so that OS was slower on FX in general due to simple lack of system-level optimizations that later versions of Windows got which specifically addressed that unusual multithreading scheme.
I was going to go from a Phenom II X4 940 straight to an FX-6100 but Bulldozer was so bad that I bought a Phenom II X4 965 just so that I could use all the hardware that I'd purchased. When the FX-8350 came out, I grabbed one for an absurdly low price of $170CAD. The difference was easily noticeable and that CPU lasted me for about 5 years (2012-2017). I was going to get an R5-1800X but came across a great deal that gave me an R7-1700 for only $40 more. Funnily enough, it had been about 5 years since I'd used my FX-8350 and I used it as the core of my mining rig because that 990FX chipset handles multi-card setups beautifully.
I did of course disable 4 of the 8 cores. Initially I had disabled six but Windows 10 didn't like only two cores with no SMT. Sure, it ran but it had a detrimental effect on the mining so I enabled two more. Now it runs perfectly and I guess that it's now an FX-4350, albeit one that runs at 4GHz.
I upgraded my Phenom II X6 1090T Black to an FX8350 because of instruction sets. Apex legends doesn't use the instruction set indicated, the ANTI-CHEAT software does. However, most modern games today use AVX and the Phenom line doesn't have it. I bought my FX for $60, then got $30 back from the false-advertising class action lawsuit at the end of 2019 iirc. And until I can actually get a new CPU/GPU for the computer I just built, I have to work with 30fps in Cyberpunk 2077 on my FX8350/RX580 system on a Forumula IV motherboard with beta supported bios.
Piledriver succeeded Bulldozer. FX was a miserable downgrade from Phenom when Phenom was replaced by the 8120. The fact a 6 core two generations prior is keeping up so well with the 8 core second gen FX definitely shows how depressing this must have been to Phenom owners who didn't get a worthy successor for a decade. AMD should have just added instructions to phenom instead of scrapping it, or at the very least abandoned AM3+. Having their flagship chipset scaling to 4M 8Threads while their low end consumer boards had access to 2 more generations of architecture upgrades was always weird to me since they were always quad core/thread. Kaveri cores might not have been top dogs, they atleast had enough IPC to sort of close the gap in single threaded with clocks against locked I5s from 3rd and 4th, and carrizo being almost completely laptop except 1 FM2+ cpu. I often think about how much better AMD could have been with FX cpus that had the most modern architectures they already had. Had a great experience with that Godavari A10 that was overclocked to the moon on a cryorig $35 cooler, it did great against the Intel I5 4460. Had that been an 8 Core kaveri architecture I'm sure frugal users today would still be enjoying.
you have terrible AMD Phenom 1090T
I was able to overclock mine to 3.7GHz (turbo OFF, Cool.n.Quiet OFF) without even touching voltage
I got it to 4.0GHz CPU, 3GHz HT and NB with just slight overvoltage (maybe 0.15v) I actually had to rise NB voltage a same value to get RAM to be stable (I use ECC RAM, so I see errors as they happen and NOT as they crash system)
we are talking 1.475v (actually turbo core voltage of this CPU)
1.55V - I would not even attempt this - this is crazy
those CPUs are running below 1.20V at 3.2GHz (AMD intentionally raises voltage to get superb stability)
I still use my old FX8350 as my main machine a system that when new boasted the HD7970 32Gb Ram and Sata 2 drives and cost me a cool £1000. Now it has a Gigabyte 970 Gaming board with M2 boot drive Sata3 storage and a Vega64 card (upgraded from 7970 to R9 290x 8Gb and then RX570 8Gb). Just bought new 58" TV and running world of tank 4k Ultra at 60/80fp the RX 570 managed medium at 70fps. I could buy a new Ryzen 3600x system by why when my current system which is now 7 yrs old works just fine (for now).
i just upgraded my quad opteron 6100x system, which previously used 48 K10 cores, with two Opteron 63xx which give 32 Piledriver cores. The Piledrivers are a bit better, but the main gain with them is memory controller performance.
i have fx8350 and gtx 970 and i can run horizon zero dawn just fine at med settings.... med settings being what most console games are set as comparted to PC.... currently i am playing cyberpunk 2077 just fine and it runs smooth at about 40 fps.....4k? whats that???? hyper techno super techno core chip what so ever what????? all this techno babble means nothing to me..... gaming at 4k... seriously... lol.... WHY??????? lol seriously 4k on a screen the same size as mine... my friend waas boasting all this crap....... all i could say was yes yes its cool and bla bla.... since i honestly couldnt tell the difference LOL.....
Phenom was great but definitely needed replaced. Bulldozer might not have been the best, but managed to fix memory, clock, and bridge issues phenom had. For example, bulldozer easily could support 2133 ddr3 while phenom had issues with 1600 ddr3. Bulldozer also had a faster bridge. Much faster. Phenom was painfully slow, which showed compared to even old core 2 quad builds. But let's remember where bulldozer really started to fly and make its mark, it can clock and scale really well past 4.5ghz with ease. Sure you needed the cooling, but assuming that you had the correct cooling you could easily hit it with just a multiplier overclock. Hell even on stock voltages.
Bulldozer was not great, but I think people were too hard on it. It lead to what ryzen is now, without it we wouldn't have ryzen. On top of that, games were only using around 2-3 cores on average, Intel while at the time had lower core count but higher ipc did better but you can successfully run an fx8350 build today and expect to game decently at 1440p and 4k( not ryzen or current gen Intel but 60hz no problem).
I believe the buffering issues on that youtube video are because chrome probably loaded the video with the AV1 codec. I am currently running an 1100T and can't watch the video with AV1 1080p@60fps at normal speed in firefox. While it isn't the same browser, they use the same AV1 decoder, so this shouldn't make a difference.
both cpu's have crossbars that are bottlenecks along with inter-core hyper-transport links that top out a 200mhz increasing the bus speed on either chip reliefs a bit of the hyper transport part but your not going to get much out it (4.0gbs-6.6Gbs) . The Crossbar was horrible it's even slower. The new infinity links where needed, because the crossbar and inter-core links where to slow to ever improve ipc. TheL1 cache in FX has more instructions per-clock than Phenom II. It just splits that work between two integer cores and a dual threaded flexFPU unit. when one of the integer cores are off the flexfpu gets that benefit.
I love piledriver.. I'm buying all the used 990 boards and chips off eBay or AliExpress.. omg. And of course Rx 570/80s... Used parts are expensive though
I overclocked FX 8350 to 4.8 ghz on air and large desk fan as the cooler, paired with GTX 580, that desktop eats all games in 2011 without any problem and the framerates are 120+ fps, I didn't see any problem in gaming. That's a story in the past.
i think video was lagging because of VP9 codec, if you install h264ify extensions problem is solved, probably old Edge didn't support VP9 and used another codec that's why there was no lag
The problem of FX CPUs was that they had more cores without having higher transistor count (compared to Intel)
Ryzen CPUs are so much better
Fx tiene mas instrucciones para mas juegos y programas a comparacion de phenom , el cod warzone no corre en phenom
fx was good for me, upgraded from athlon x2 5000+ to fx 6300... games started requiring 4 cores, even if it's 3/6 cpu it was similar to i5 in performance and half the price, got it for 100€ new in 2014!
Im using a 1090T since 2011, nowadays Just in my second System. Never had any problems with any browser in terms of streaming. Wether UA-cam nor anithing Else. No idea what causes this issue to you
Friends, i have the 1090T. I found an FX 8320 (not 8350) for a good price. In my case, is it worth replacing? Thank you.
I ran a 1090T for 7 years, 2011-18. When I built the system I intended to upgrade to FX eventually but I never did, not because FX wasn't faster, but the performance difference for the price was never worth it.
It might be worthwhile to check out FX 8150 alongside the X6 1090T as that was a more contemporary comparison between the two architectures and I think where alot of the stigma that Phenom was better than FX comes from. Piledriver was a decent improvement over Bulldozer..
I'm thinking of getting an 8150 to compare it to the Phenom as well as the 8350.
I had the Phenom II x6 1100T at 4ghz, I moved to the FX8320, it took the FX 8320 at 4.5ish ghz to beat my 4ghz 1100T in Battlefield 4, Other games the FX did do better mostly in my experience, though not a night and day, battlefield was definitely a weird one.
@Dalle Smalhals It wasn't worth it at the time, I mean going form lets a say a Phenom ii x4 965 to a FX 8350 is a decent gain in performance today, but back then it just wasn't, nothing really could use 8 threads.
i dont think anyones comes close to my setup for price to performance
300$ can get you pretty far with a fx8350 5.2ghz on air and 1070 or 1080 (non ti)
I upgraded to the FX8350 from the Phenom II 965 and I noticed a big up lift BUT I waited for second Gen FX because I was indeed disappointed in the performance of the first FX CPU's (8120/8150) and if anyone can remember back then you could actually upgrade your Motherboard FIRST before the new FX CPU's even came out and thats what I did as the older Phenom II's could and was still support on your newer AM3+ Motherboard. I also agree with others and in fact at the tme I even said why didnt they just make a 8core Phenom II CPU it would of been great! But when the FX 8350 Came out it showed good performance uplift from first FX so I jumped onto it and was very pleased with it even to this day.
You should compare with 8150 the first bulldozer.
I use a FX8350 with 16gb ram plus a gtx970 using high settings on csgo I can get between 255 and 285 fps is that good ??
I have this motherboard with the FX8350, and before that cpu I had the Phenom II 955 same board, I had no video issue whatsoever. The cpu upgrade was quite visible, I am surprised this discussion even happened. I am still using this setup but with 12GB Ram and RX580 8GB, I still play everything no probs, though around 60 fps no shadows and post process stuff.
My upgrade path wasn't quite analogous to this, but I went from an X4 955 to an FX 8300. My Phenom II was able to modestly overclock, at the time, using a 120mm AIO to about 3.6 GHz and I managed a 4.4 GHz stable on my FX 8300. At stock, they were most definitely more in line with what you demonstrated today, but today, still using my 8300 at said OC, I'm more than happy with its overall performance. It handily outpaces the Phenom in titles that it can launch. I most definitely endured the scourge of the lack of instruction sets (why I ultimately upgraded in the first place). I did keep the old Phenom as a HTPC/guest PC for my parents and maintain this Piledriver build as my HTPC/Gaming rig for the living room (I'm now on 1st gen Ryzen on my main). Thanks for the comparo and look back at some recent history!
i got a x6 1100T stoked to try it out, it came with a case i bought off fb marketplace so it was a nice surprise!
Im still using fx 8370 in 2020, planning to upgrade to ryzen, but i still rekt noobs in esport games so i decided not.
I loved my Fx 8320.... 8 cores for 100 bucks... lasted for 5 years..
4K youtube video is fine for P II X6. I have watched many of them . Including ChrisFix . Top of that, i was watching 8K videos. My PII X4 was terrible with 8K but fine with 4K.
So basically it’s about playing games normally, on highest settings as I used to, and the difference is nullified. Great!
move the camera angle. This angle is looking down at the viewer, adjust so its equal
What cooler would be a good idea for the 8350, I'm planning on using one for a build
Honestly a Hyper 212 or something similar is good enough and gives you a bit of wiggle room for OCing as well. You COULD use the stock cooler if you wanted, but it's honestly one of the loudest things in the world.
I'd look for something like a Noctua NH-D15 or be quiet! Dark Rock 4 if you're thinking of pushing it hard. For stock usage or a slight overclock, a Hyper 212 Evo should work just fine.
Thanks guys
Look for Arctic Freezer Coolers, or even the EKL Alpenföhn Broken ECO/ Ben Nevis models. They are very good in value and performance and fit in nearly every case. If you want to ramp them up, just go for a push/pull configuration by adding another 120mm fan.
My FX8350 was on 4,5Ghz and never really got into trouble with the Broken ECO
Deep Cool Assassin 3
I guess disabling hpet would increase a little the performance
I've an 1090T and i got no issue at all on youtube. tho fb is a problem here, crash often
Does AMD AM2+ socket motherboards support Phenom II X6 processors?
Hope amd change Ryzen naming scheme to phenom lll/FX ll
I think most people who noticed a performance drop going from Phenom II to FX had a motherboard which was not up to the task of powering an FX-8350. A friend of mine had to run his 8350 as a 3.5GHz six-core as his motherboard could provide more power. There were quite a lot of "simpler" AM3 motherboards which got updated to support AM3+, but just could reliably run the higher-end SKUs
I put, my Fx 8300 to 4.9Ghz, along with an Rtx 2060, was good, take a look, on my channel, thanks
@@FxGamesPro Great for you, but you got a proper 900 series AM3+ board. I talk about AM3 boards jury-rigged to support AM3+ parts in my comment
@@FxGamesPro Also friendly word of advice for your videos. The volume level is quite high compared to most others. Also, there's far too much unnecessary stuff, graphics and colours in the descriptions. Ditch the game links, victory sign and all emoijs
@@WouterVerbruggen Thanks for the friendly advice, slow and learning.
If a motherboard they had could handle a Phenom II X6, then it shouldn't really have any issues powering an FX-8350.
I was able to hit 4.92 ghz at 1.45v on my FX-8350 when I had one and at that speed it was actually pretty decent. Of course the IPC wasn't as good as some cpu's but at effectively 5ghz it just didnt matter. I now have a ryzen and its awesome!
I have a 8320 as well
My Nephew is still rocking an FX8350 with crossfired AMD RX480/8 graphics
I'm still running an i7 4970k, with a 1070ti.
Same era CPU
I wouldn't want to swap pmsl
I also still have the 4790k, and bought it on release day. Brilliant CPU at the time and is still relevant. Cost a lot more than the 8350 though. For the price of a 4790k alone I could have got the 8350 plus mobo plus RAM. I'm glad I didn't though.
to be honest fx was just misunderstood once 6 series were released it was to late for the 8 series people were already not liking fx
Bigger cache, lower cache latency.
The memory controller is moved inside the FX processor and maybe it helps with latency a little bit.
Even tho Phenom has better ipc because of smaller pipeline, the clock speed advantage of FX results in better single core performance.
in gaming i think the difference comes mostly from cache
The AVC codec runs shitty, VP9 is fine.
Btw.: The Phenom series has a malfunctioning temperature sensor that underreports temperatures by about 12°C.
That is also true for the FX.
Yeah, haha, FX shows below ambient temps at idle (so thermodynamically it must be generating energy and cooling your room right? Haha!)
over 100 fps in Crysis 3 for the P II X6 not so bad.
Russian overclokers -----} 10.2Ghz
I just bought an 8370 for my gf, she only plays League of Legends/wow/ dishonored/gta5. Got it for 25$ as a kit alongside a gigabyte ga 990x gaming. Performance isn't the best, but for that price I'll take it even now
That's a bargain.
Great video!
Now could you please make one about 1440p or 4K gaming on FX with mid-range-ish GPU? Like RTX 2060 or GTX 1070. My idea is that if you want better resolution but can't afford high end GPU, FX could be better choice than 4 core i5 2500 or similar?
I have FX-8350 but no i5 :P
Maybe in the future.
Thanks!
The FX will be fine for that, I paired a Titan Xp with one and it was clear even at stock it would handle duel Titan Xp in SLI. You really can’t hit even 60 fps with any single GPU, Titan RTX and 2080ti overclocked are approaching possible but still not enough, so don’t worry too much, haha, the FX does 60+ fps just fine and enough for those cards! 1440p may be a more reasonable target since to me, 4k is all about the graphical fidelity so I’d rather run high refresh 1440p if I can’t run 4k on high settings, that way it still looks nice and can get the smoothness of 60+ fps while also not requiring a small fortune with duel Titan RTX or similar (though I do get basically the same performance as that would be for just $500 in quad Fury, for reference Crysis 3 in 4k ultra will run a choppy 45 fps on the Titan but a mind blowing silky smooth 100 fps on my quad Fury, tested with TR-1950x for the PCIe lanes obviously).
But FX will be overkill for those GPUs, those are really targeted as 120 fps 1080p (I know my laptop does a decent job getting close to its 120Hz screen with a 1070 overclocked to outbench overclocked desktop 1070, haha, the only GPU I can think of where the mobile edition has way more CUDA cores so the performance can get anywhere close, lol, they were historically like 60% slower than desktop and very misleading, but MaxQ still mislead on that generation and should have been called MINperformance because those were horrible!)
So don’t worry, at high res FX won’t really be holding you back, it’s just that Ryzen is insanely faster and such better value if you can afford it. But then again it’s obvious not everyone has unlimited budgets, otherwise quad SLI would still be a thing (I laugh at the GPU market if someone tried 4k 120hz monitors, Minecraft maybe... without raytracing...)
I got since September 2011 amd phenom ii x6 1100t. I think you got too high voltage and also ddr3 oc can go up to 2133 mhz giving in cb15 some about 615 points exactly same setting as you have. Also in watch dogs i have average 70 fps using asus strix 1060 6gb. I can send you some screenshots if you want :)
About youtube video yes. I have this issue