Integral Fx Dx.
The cheapest 8-threaded CPU around, merely there are better options if you don’t demand that sort of multi-threaded adequacy.
A decent upgrade for an existing AMD setup
Onetime, old tech
still more than power-hungry than Intel
no native USB 3.0 or PCIe back up
When AMD tells united states of america information technology’south sending over a new FX-series CPU, we can’t help the sudden rush of excitement. Information technology’due south an automatic response, born of a time when a new AMD CPU had the potential to offer something genuinely competitive.
But those days seem long gone. All we get now are half-hearted revisions of increasingly elderly fries.
The FX-8320E is the perfect instance of that. AMD released this chip belatedly last twelvemonth, along with the FX-8370E equally a pair of lower-powered octo-cadre CPUs for the more ability-conscious consumer.
These two chips use AMD’s Bulldozer processor tech and squeeze into a 95W TDP. They’re able to practise this past utilising a lower base clock, simply retaining the same Turbo clock as their non-Eastward brethren.
To that end, this FX-8320E is running at 3.2GHz as standard, with the power to hitting 4GHz every bit needed. The standard FX-8320’s clockspeed sits some 300MHz higher at 3.5GHz.
Then far, so practiced. For 30W less power you simply sacrifice 300MHz of CPU horsepower, which seems like a pretty good trade-off.
Only the fact these CPUs are still running with an outdated version of the Bulldozer architecture makes them seem more like an reconsideration than a proper processor release. In the Kaveri APU, launched a year ago, AMD used the latest revision of Bulldozer, codenamed Steamroller. Its adjacent APU, Carrizo, will use the terminal Bulldozer revision which is codenamed Excavator.
This 95W processor then, using the old Piledriver compages, is two generations backside AMD’s top x86 CPU cores.
And it doesn’t look like information technology has any interest at all in shifting the FX range over to the Excavator design, despite the IPC (instructions per clock) boosts that both the Steamroller and Excavator tech take over Piledriver.
The cost of saving
What’s the game with the FX-8320E then?
You lot’d assume that with the focus on hitting a lower TDP, this bit would be looking at small course cistron machines, but that 95W TDP is all the same higher than the 84W Haswell Core i5 processors, even the K-series versions.
But then there’s the price. At just over £100, this is the cheapest eight-core CPU around – fifty-fifty if y’all baulk at referring to its quad-module design every bit a full octo-core setup it still sits every bit the cheapest, viii-threaded processor you tin can buy.
In this context, suddenly the FX-8320E looks like a more intriguing buy.
That’s especially true if you’re sitting on a lower core-count AM3+ chip and experience the need for an upgrade. In performance terms – in both straight CPU and gaming tests – the FX-8320E is evidently behind both the FX-8350 and Intel Core i5-4570, but it’s a good £xxx-50 cheaper than those more powerful chips.
And because it’s an AMD chip, without the needless limitations imposed on it by overzealous marketing execs (looking at you, Mr Intel K-series), y’all can get happy with the overclocking. Well, should your chosen chip and board be capable of it anyways.
Our sample wasn’t very happy running anything above 4GHz. We got a little more than out of it with some voltage tweaks, merely non enough to continue it stable on the MSI 970 Gaming motherboard nosotros were testing information technology in.
Still, at that speed on all cores it runs mighty shut to a stock-clocked, full-fatty AMD FX-8350.
For the AMD upgrader then, information technology’south not a bad budget option. If yous’re looking to build an all-new machine though we’d nevertheless struggle to recommend an AMD setup.
Even though you lot’re getting 8 threads of processing power, a resolutely quad-core, un-overclockable Cadre i5-4570 will still deliver ameliorate CPU performance, and in a smaller power envelope too.
The Intel platform is besides going to be more up to appointment and not much more expensive either. While AMD’due south AM3+ chipsets were queuing upwards for their pensions, Intel’s motherboard chipsets were busy fitting themselves out with native USB 3.0 and PCIe iii.0 back up…
And then there’s gaming.
If yous’re a PC gamer, your AMD CPU is stealing frames from your graphics card. The departure betwixt the Intel Core i5-4570 and this FX chip is almost 20fps on average at 1080p settings with the same GPU. And that’southward with a 50W peak platform power saving over the AMD offering as well.
Yes, it’southward initially a cheaper choice, but you’re paying a different price going the AMD route.
It’s all about the pricing of this AMD CPU. At under £100 it’s the cheapest viii-threaded CPU you can buy. If you’re into your multi-threaded productivity applications then the concurrent performance of the FX chip’southward quad-module blueprint will evangelize a lot of processing power for the money.
And you can overclock likewise. Running at 4GHz you lot’re getting almost the same level of performance as the pricier FX-8350.
AMD’s processor platform is looking seriously geriatric these days. Without native support for either USB iii.0 or PCIe 3.0 it has to rely on the board manufacturers to bring in third-political party silicon to bargain with such things. And that introduces more performance barriers.
Gaming is as well a problem for the FX-8320e – you could potentially lose out on a lot of the performance potential of your graphics card opting for an eight-thread FX chip over a quad-cadre Intel.
As a budget eight-threaded option the FX-8320e is a decent choice of fleck for the productivity folk, but if you’re looking to build a budget gaming rig y’all volition be losing out on some of the performance potential of your GPU.
Integral Fx Dx