AMD's FX Processors Were Very Underestimated - The Truth of AMD FX 

Thanks for making people like me rocking the fx 8350 still feel better.

i hate those youtubers who say, "If you are still using a FX processor, i feel bad for you." No thanks bud. i don't feel the need to upgrade, when my 6300@4.1 is doing alright. stop trying to sell us shit.

I remember back then i3's were faster at gaming with the AMD FX CPUs being average but acceptable, now the same i3's are useless and the AMD FX CPUs are STILL average and acceptable. AMD is fantastic for value and bang for buck.

These are definitely good arguements. I had the FX-8350 and i loved that cpu. I only upgraded recently to ryzen 3700x because it finally got to a point where i wanted to upgrade out of want, but not necessity. Now i can give my old rig to a friend and he can play new games as well.

I never thought that the FX chips were that bad, but they were a little ahead of their time, in that most games (and some other software) didn't take good advantage of their architecture or all of their threads. The absolutely most powerful multi-threaded CPUs were still Intel at the time, but they were just way more expensive, but power users who cared about that tended not to bother with the 8-core FX chips, but the 8-core FX chips were great value for some people. AMD just wasn't able to sell enough of them. Ryzen seemed to continue the same sort of trend of offering even more threads, but its single threaded performance also improved a lot as well, and it represented AMD getting a lot closer to Intel's highest performing chips, whereas Intel's IPC and manufacturing improvements had slowed down a lot (making it possible for AMD to catch up). Now, just exactly how Intel allowed AMD to overtake them is, on the other hand, a much more complex question. It's not like Intel is dead yet or anything. They're still selling lots of CPUs and making lots of profits, it's just that their sales and their profits are going to be in decline for a while. Whether Intel will be able to get things under control and stay competitive enough to defend a lot of their market share in the CPU market is not clear to me, but it seems that their reliance on their own manufacturing has made them less flexible than AMD, at least for now.

And now? I still keep my FX-8350 / R9 Fury setup which runs fine. And AMD has begun mauling Intel on every front! Ryzen 9 Anyone? LOL!!

This is correct. Testing my old Ryzen 5 1500X vs my old i5 4570 showed me how important testing multiple areas is. Now to be fair, the 1500X was faster in single core too, but in some games or scenes it would be a few percents. However, testing in extremely demanding scenes in some games had the i5 get literally crushed by the SMT enabled 1500X, up to 53% even.

The power consumption argument definitely hinges on computer usage time each day, and geographical location, whether AMD was a choice that generation. The performance of the chips are still pretty good, thanks to their multi threaded performance, so a bit of a shame AMD never tried, or could, go further than Piledriver on this socket. Even just one more move to Steamroller would have been quite an enhancement.

still have my fx 8320... in 2019

Nice video. For my PC's Final AM3+ build - it was more then Enough for my needs. Following was my setup before I had to switch from AM3+ an AM4 build. Case was the Thermal Take Commander G-42. PSU was the Seasonic Pime 650w FM 80+ Titanium , MotherBoard was the Gigabyte GA 990FX-Gaming , Ram was 32 gb ( 4 x 8 ) Crucial Ballistix Sports XT ddr3 @ 1866 mhz , Storage was the 1 tb Samsung 970 Evo NVME M.2 , GPU was the MSI Radeon RX - 580 Gaming X 8 gb , CPU was the AMD FX-9590 @ 4.7 ghz base / 5.0 Ghz boost , CPU Cooler was the Corsair H100i GTX AIO.- Optical Drives were 2 x LG HL DT ST BD RE WH10LS30 ( BluRay - ReWriters ). - OS was Win 7 Pro 64 / Win 10 Pro 64 after free upgrade. In that configuration I didn't feel there was a Need to upgrade while it was working. Even to this day somehow my 990FX-Gaming mb got some damage { most likely } some electrical damage that caused the MB not to boot properly. If the mb hadn't gotten Damaged I would probably still be using that setup today as my daily use machine.

Still rocking fx 9590 :D and i dont see the need to upgrade.

Love my FX 9370, all these years overclocked to the max and still solid going as strong as ever. AMD makes quality that lasts for the best price. I do intend to upgrade when the Ryzen 3 comes out though. :)

FX6300 user also here. I have a pretty good chip working 4.3GHz @ 1.28v and I dare to say, I would like to upgrade but I can't find many reasons... True, I will eventually upgrade to an R5 3600 but he only thing that suffers (performance wise) is video editing and encoding/rendering. I'm pretty satisfied with everything else. Well said man!

this kind of explains why i can play literally every game with my premature GPU upgrade (5700XT Red Devil) with my ancient FX-8320

My sons pc which is parts of my old pc runs a FX 8350 with a 1050ti 4gb. Add a ssd to that and a decent motherboard, we got a decent older gaming rig that still holds up! I havbe always loved amd. RED TEAM GO!

I have an 8320 and it is a superb chip. On its default settings it was overheating. But I could not believe my eyes when I overclocked it to 4.1 while undervolting it by 0.1V! The temperatures dropped more than 20 oC and I had a faster chip! Paired with an overclocked 7870 Ghz edition, I really believe I really hit the sweet budget spot back then in 2013.

*Edit as of 8th of July, 2020: Ignore what I said starting from **3:24** to **3:32**. I recently tested the i3 3240, and that information is incorrect. The reason I said that was because that's what I've seen a lot of people write and talk about, which turned out to be bs, and I'd like to apologize for misinformation.* - I also want to add that it's just unfortunate that FX received a lot of hate, just cause most reviewers weren't able to show their true capabilities at the time. Even though Piledriver CPUs were behind compared to Intel's processors in some areas due to lower single core performance, they still performed better in other multi-core intensive locations of the game, and the thing that I dislike the most is that most reviewers that I watch did not even talk about this. Also back then most people would only show you average and minimum frame rates without frame time graphs or anything, which obviously wasn't sufficient to demonstrate which product is better over the other. I would always hear people recommend getting an i3 with a better single core over a 6 or even an 8 core FX CPU, and even I myself would believe that locked i3's and i5's were a better choice. After years of research and experience, I realized that was wrong. Having more cores, even with an exchange of 15-25% worse single core performance seems to be a better decision, of course unless you use tasks that are only single core dependant. Basically my point here is to spread some awareness and explain people that frame rate graphs are not always enough to understand what a CPU is capable of in gaming. Look for benchmarks that show you frame time graphs and the gameplay footage itself, preferably of a few different locations, cause that seems to be the best way of benchmarking CPUs.

Proud owner here of a FX 8350 and still gaming on in 2022 💪🏻😎

before i upgraded to my ryzen5 2600x i had the fx 8350. loved it, it took care of just about anything i would throw at it. and never once gave me an issue. sold it to my best friend for an amazing deal. and its still gaming today. he loves it just as i did. im proud of amd for making that chip.

FX processors still holding strong after 10 years.

The FX processors ages very well and as you said was underestimated just like iGPUS.

My HTPC was built in 2012 for ~$350, upgraded from my maxed out Athlon X2 6400+ system. I saw all of the negative reviews of the FX line, but decided to research it more. Having experienced AMD's ever so slight performance deficit, without tweaking, for 15 years at that point I knew the story and the brand loyalty of megacorp loyalists. I heard the arguments for Intel from friends in the media industry saying that seconds of render time was money, etc. Well, I was into media rendering and games, but I also never put down more than $300 total on a PC upgrade. The FX-8150 was the most I ever spent on a single PC component up until that point. I wasn't disappointed either. Videos rendered six to eight times faster than my Athlon X2, games with framerate issues were non existent and I didn't even need to upgrade my older Video card. Then Sony and Microsoft went with AMD APU solutions and I knew what was coming, better software optimization for AMD architecture and higher core counts were coming. Because of the FX-8150, I was able to comfortably sit out this generation of settop boxes. I later upgraded my Radeon HD 4850 with an HD 7870 in summer of 2016, and then pounced on a Powercolor Red Devil RX 480 8GB by November of that year. Both purchases turned out to be just in time for the price hike caused by miners, and Sony and Microsoft's incremental and much more expensive "upgrades" in the Pro and One X . I even upgraded the old X2 machine to an Athlon X4 860K that same year because my X2's motherboard was shutting off randomly. I remember specifically picking the 860K because online reviews at the time were comparing it favorably to my then four year old FX-8150 and the price was much lower. I figured if the naysayers were right I'd have a cheaper version of the same PC in two places, but the Athlon X4 is nowhere near as capable as the FX-8150 in my testing. I expect to be using both machines well into the 2020s with no real trouble.

That's why we always add the frametime graph in our videos! Everything said after 12:39 is on point; FX cpus draw a lot of power for sure, but recent gpus are efficient enough to balance the whole system's power draw.

Didn't know the FX 6300 could beat i3s in modern games, I totally understand for FX 8320/8350/8370 since they still perform pretty ok in modern demanding games unlike the 6300 and old i3s. The crazy thing is that the fx 6300 in 2013 and beyond was priced below all i3s and the 8320 was typically found at the price of an i3, which is why I recommended them for pretty much every budget build and would only recommend intel if you could get at least an i5, which would be paired with at least a 300$ gpu, anything lower and there was no reason not to go for fx.

I had an FX 8370 from around 2013 to 2017. When I picked up a 1600. It served me super well during that time.

Loved that processor, FX 8320 I won the silicon lottery with. 5.2 ghz at 1.4895 volts. Water cooling of course. Sitting here right now with a 3950x. AMD sure has come a long ways.

still got my FX8320 + HD7970, works well up to these days.

Yea...I always felt this way when I had my 8350...I upgraded to a Ryzen 3 1200AF...and feel like the FX chip was actually a tab faster in multi threaded apps. I plan to get a Ryzen 7 when I can afford it...which is why I upgraded...had to get new MB and ram...so had to cheap out on the CPU for now...

overclocked my fx8320 to @4.2ghz, ram @2110mhz, cpu nb to @2480mhz and it runs awesome. In bf5 i dont get fps lower than 60, shadow of tomb raider runs maxed out with gtx1070 gives me 70+fps

I had an FX at one time and sold it off when I stopped needing so many threads. Still running 15h in the form of an Athlon X4 870K, and it does as well today as it did when I got it in 2014. I've put off upgrading a few times just because the old 870K still does the job.

I have a FX8300 (upgraded from FX6300 in late 2017) and... It's AMAZING!! It runs with less stutters than the previous one, runs smoothly (even when playing the division 2 at higher graphics preset), can render quite fast (my opinion - tested on Camtazia 9 while making 3 minute projects), and sometimes even defies laws of physics, thermodynamics, my country and cheese. All of that with basic clocks?! I've considered overclocking... In 2 years, maybe. I'll probably switch to a new MB when DDR5 is 2 years old (price might drop). When it's paired with eurobeat, nothing can stop it (except for my old USB drive which crashed the whole PC instantly).

Thankfully AMD has gotten 5 million times better with their stock coolers. I remember I had a FX 6120 back in the day and when I upgraded the mobo and cooler from OEM parts when I got a gtx 960 the stock cooler was incredibly small and had gotten so hot my FX 6120 had char marks on it! It was a surprisingly solid CPU tho and was plenty for my gtx 960 back then. Rockin an i5 6600k and gtx 1060 6gb nowadays and honestly I don't feel I will need an upgrade till I get a 4k TV might even be able to just get away with overclocking the 6600k to 4.5 ghz all core if I don't go higher than the 5700XT otherwise the 3700X is a no brainer or hell I bet I would be plenty happy with a 3600

A proud FX-8350 owner, paired with Sabertooth 990FX R2.0, I never looked back.

I've since upgraded to an R7 2700X, but I had an FX 8350 for three years at least...paired it with an RX 480 4GB, then a 580 8GB, and went with a Hyper 212 Evo cooler from the getgo. While I could see microstutter in cinematic areas, it had no problem keeping up with Assassin's Creed Odyssey in game at stock, which usually maxed out around 4.3Ghz on any given/all cores. My wife now has that system and it still runs great. Never once regretted buying it.

Still using an FX-6300 in 2024 (my main rig died and this is my old one I've recently revived). It's still quite capable and honestly, the FX series CPU's aged very gracefully. They were ahead of their time in core count and those extra cores plus their great overclocking capacity are allowing them to still cling onto relevance even 12+ years later now. That's incredibly impressive for a ~$130 chip I bought in 2012. Paired with a decent GPU this FX6300 can still play modern titles at 30-50fps.

I like my Fx 8320e better than my i5 6400. Fx processors still running good in 2021.

My fx6350 at 4.9ghz did it's job just fine

I'd say AMD was a victim of thinking too far ahead. AMD designed a processor architecture that was good at multi-threading using elements that reduced IPC and single threaded performance. The world was not ready for that as applications still favored single threaded performance for most of FX processor's existence. FX processors only started to show its usefulness as more multi-threaded applications popped up and Microsoft fixed its support for the processor after Windows 8. By then, AMD dropped FX versions of Steamroller and Excavator as it was more focused on Zen with higher IPC and SMT.

Wife is still using my FX8350 with RSX570 and is extremely happy. Comparing frame rates vs my 1700X and RX480, while my computer is "faster" it's not by much really.

You have to understand when the chips came out both games and APIs were mostly single threaded. They did not take advantage of the multicore architecture of the FX chips (Clustered Multi Threading/CMT). It wasn't until the last couple of years that patches for older games and APIs have come that take advantage of the multithreaded nature of today's processors, literally marked by a mainstream user's current needs. This switch in programming from single threaded majority to a more balanced almost leaning on multi threaded majority is what breathes new life into these FX processors. AMD would call it fine wine. I call it lucky timing.

Love my fx chip. I had two intel chips shit out on me and due to how some stupid return policy I was sol. I've been AMD since then for all my builds and have been happy. Also LinusDicktips LMFAOO!!

yep, glad I went with it in 2013. It has really aged well. Been running mine at 4.4 for most of that time.

One the best channels i have come across so far. This guy has no side, his just here to tell the facts. Thanks

Gave my dad my old FX-6300@4.8GHz/1060 3GB he likes it for Doom 2016 at over 100 FPS on ultra

Same here I am still rocking an FX 8350 it's overclocked to 4.6ghz

I wouldn't be surprised if half of the power usage complaints came down to the 1.4 voltage setting that AMD seemingly loved shipping everything with. When I am overclocking an AMD CPU the first thing I do is turn the voltage down.

Lets all be honest, FX CPUs werent hated for no reason, at the time almost no games utilized more than 2 cores and so the performance was horrible. I had an FX 6300 and i had to change it with a 4690K because my GTX 970 was being bottlenecked by the AMD CPU. I remember like it was yesterday when GTA 5 came out on PC how dissapointed i was by the performance i had. Sure, they aged better compared to i5s of that era, but at that time they were very average CPUs in gaming, for workloads they were fine.

Exactly why I had bought AMD when I built my first real gaming PC in 2011. Still using the same ASUS M5A97 EVO motherboard, PC Power and Cooling MkII psu, and Antec 300 case. Started out the the Athlon II X4 640, then to the Phenom II X6 1100T, then to the FX8350. GPU wise, went from the HD 6770, then to the HD 6950, then to a free replacement to a HD 7870, then finally to the RX 580 that I have now. All in all, the system has served me VERY well.

🙂 thx for the review, yes, having the actual live line graph is essential to demonstrating cpu performance under a live load, thats when you can see when more threads can sometimes make a big difference

I still use the A8 5600K that I found at the dump with Mobo, Case and PSU for 6€

i'm getting fx 8320 in 2 weeks... now running on fx 4300... still awesome tho

I was using a bulldozer FX 8150 running at 4.4GHz with AIO water cooling that was purchased in 2012. In July 2019 it was replaced by a Ryzen 7 3700X. There was no issue playing games when paired with the right video card.

You spitting some truth my man.

If games properly used all cores, FX-8350 would be better than all i5 and i3.

I am using an FX8350 with a GTX 1080ti with a 2K/144Mhz monitor, not a single game drops below 50-60fps. On WoW i get steady 100+ fps on CS:GO from 150-200 FPS. Multitasking is not a problem also! FX is crap you say, the hell you say?! Until a game hits the market that cant be run on this system, i dont see the need to upgrade it. 7 years old and still rolling.

It was ahead of its time, at the time of release, most software that was used was from circa 2008-2011 which didn't utilize more than 2 cores in games and programs. Gaming and video editing and playback was 720p or 1080p. So technically, it was faster in heavily multithreaded applications, but their low availability/usage at the time caused the FX to slip to shadows rather quickly. There were many of such examples in computer development, the great product and great idea behind it, but if it could not be accommodated to the market of the era, it usually wasn't successful.

You got a witness in me. I still run, since 2015, FX8350 @4.8 stable on a Sabertooth 990x R2. Can't remember it giving me any headaches all this time. I also have an Asus ROG GTX 1080Ti.

One issue my father had with an fx-6300 was that the motherboard vrms would overheat constantly on stock speeds.

I upgraded my 8320E 4.2ghz last month for a 3600, everything you are saying is so true. The real reason why I ended up upgrading is multi-tasking lol

Great analysis. It seems like AMD's vision has always been a little ahead of their competitors' but lack of money and poor management left them with inferior products. But none of this FX performance in modern games makes them good CPUs. They are just not as bad as everyone thought they were.

Loved my 9370FX BE, Fixed OC at 4.7Ghz all cores with a H100i (V1 and V2), topping 68-72c. Only upgraded as wanted more cores for graphical workflow, editing, code compiling ect. Ran a r9 290x windforce OC with it and would run anything I through at it med to high at 1080p@144herts. currently running a 2950x TR with the same R9 290x until I can get my paws on a 5700xt, Likely the Nitro pulse, or GB windforce.

My FX-8370 running at 4.2GHz was only 23% faster than my older Athlon II x4 635 running at 3.29GHz with dual channel mode disabled.

Loved my FX-8300 oc'd to 4.75 ghz but recently upgraded bc i got a killer deal on an i7-6800k/x99 mobo combo for $150

I changed my 8350 to a 3900xt. I gave my 8350 pc to my GF and it still plays most of games well. This processor has a place in my heart

Everywhere except California, AMD's 8-core FX processors are indeed 8-core processors.

You have made me feel much better about my 8370 lol! It's 2024 and I'm learning overclocking on an FX processor!

Still rocking the FX-6300

fx in 2012 = are you a joke fx in 2020 = best budget cpus for 1080p gaming

My FX 6300 is still enough for me in 2019 :)

The FX series is the only AMD processor family that I skipped since the K6-2 days. I had a Phenom II x6 1035T and had no reason to upgrade. I wish I would have bought one just to have it though.

I recently bought a 970m Pro 3 Mobo, FX 6300 cpu and 16gb ddr3 (don't remember the speed) memory combo for $60 USD off a kid who upgraded to a Ryzen system. Seems like a great deal to me. I'm doing an experimental build to "upgrade" my Dell Dimension E521 with an AM2 Athlon 64 X2 from 13 years ago. The big challenge is the system is built on a micro BTX case and the case has proprietary USB port and power button and LED connectors. I also have an i5-9400F and a Ryzen 1600 build that I was able to build on the cheap for budget system comparison

Yes a lot of people parrot common beliefs that are not based on facts. People shape the test to produce the outcome they want. On top of that people always forget that multiple cores do little for you if the software being used is not designed to utilize the extra cores. You can not blame a CPU for what the software developer failed to take advantage of.

Friend of mine runs a FX 8150 and that chip to this day lets him game (tho not modern titles. WOW, WC3, Starcraft, League of Legends, Pubg etc.) untill Zen2 hits the market. The performance is underwhelming, but the chips where okay for a long time. While 2-4 core chips slowly turned from good performance to irrelevancy, the FX chips held their okayish performance up untill the approach of 6 core 12 thread cpus with Zen and Coffeelake.

FINALLY SOME FUGGING SUPPORT DAMN

I dont think FX was underestimated. But underused since 6 or 8 cores on PC arent the thing at the time. But specially, games are heavily GPU bound back at the time with old GPUs.

I have 9370fx still combined with 1070ti and i can play all games 60fps with max settings.. Only thing i but on mid settings is shades

Here in Portugal still have my FX 6300 OC at 4.5Ghz with a Asus Strix OC 8Gb and....impossible ask for more

AMD tends to release products geared for future needs before widespread support. The issue seems to be sacrificing too much of today's performance to make it happen. Even Vega cards perform much better in newer games than when it came out.

FX was the right chip at the wrong time.

I know this is old and I'm late but because you helped clear the air on proper testing you gained a sub keep up the good work!

I've moved on to an i7 9700K but my FX 8300 served me well for a few good years and I keep that computer in my room nice and covered up at the ready should I need it.

greetings from bavaria!! keep youre FX!!!!!!! still running a fx 8350 on a asrock pro3m clocked to 4,968mhz on 1.5 volts,32gigs ram clocked at 1660mhz. runs ok since 3jears now. i paired it with a rx 580 overclocked to 1480mhz and every game runs fine on 1080p with max to ultra settings. temps on gpu are a litttle bit high, but it holds the clockspeed on 80c. prozessor is cooled by a cheap 280aio cpu stays on 64c on an aida64 stresstest.

Video is spot on! Not only in your analysis and conclusions, but also showing that GN and LTT, etc.. reviews and conclusions are short-sited, and fail to do a full analysis.

Running my FX 6300 at 4.1GHZ with 35-40ºC on iddle and 50-55ºC under load Using a Segotep ICE 120

This guy needs more subscribers!!

This is a great video bro! I have been criticized back then by many saying fx cpu are great buy and will not be like those i3 or i5's. Even jay2cents called me a crack head

Thank you, i do really enjoy your work *thumbs up* additionaly, a little correction has to be outspoken: The Quadcore i5-7600K has following specs: 4x 3.8 GHz Baseclock and 4.2 GHz Turboclock

I loved my 8150 and it was an alright performer. The only reason I really swapped it out is because I needed a CPU that was more power efficient and far better performing. also, my 8150 was a terrible overclocker and wouldn't go past +200MHz on theCore even at 1.5v vCore and the HTBUS was super unstable unless I kept it stock. I now run an R5 2600 and will be looking into going with a R5 2600 or better as they have additional IPC gains.

Thank you for educating me. You gained a sub! Cheers!

This review is honest and telling the truth, back then I had fx8350 overclocked to 4.8 ghz with additional cooler paired with GTX 580, it performed on par with 7700k in most games, the drawback is only the power consumption.

It’s a funny thing when u compare price points. Intel always looks good on paper but when it comes down to brass tax it’s like comparing a Camaro to a BMW, it’s all personal preference. My little brother and I both made pc’s with the same cost and he went all intel/Nvidia and I went all AMD. Mine was bigger louder and had more sheer processing power but his was smaller silent and ran on next to nothing. I have an FX 8350 with an R9 290x and he has an i3 with a GTX 660. At the end of the day we got almost the same performance and when we didn’t it was skewed to have one of us out perform the other. It all comes down to the drivers and programming taking advantage of what hardware we have so it’s no surprise the programming finally caught up to the power of AMD. Too bad it took them almost 7 years

I still have a FX8320 build sitting around for back up

Great video. I remember going back and forth about this in the comments section of one of Steve from HW Unboxed's videos a few years back. He tried to convince me that an i3 was better than an x58 or x79 series 6 or 8 core Xeon with HT. This was at the time of first-gen Ryzen and I was talking about some Xeon options for cheap if someone was looking to upgrade from AMD FX but didn't want to completely start over and keep their DDR3 RAM. This was right in the middle of the RAM price hike. I said at the time I would only leave my FX 8300 for a 6 or 8 core Xeon where I could reuse my RAM and still get the benefit of more cores and using DX 12 in games that have good multi-core support. Reviewers have never been completely upfront about the comparison between i3 or i5 CPU's vs. FX 6 and 8 core CPUs.

When I built my pc Most reviews said the i5 7600k was the best gaming cpu . So I bought one. then after playing open world games I realized frame timing and 1% lows are more important than FPS. I dropped in a 7700k in my mother board. I remember to listening to all that 4cores is enough bull crap.

still remember a friend of mine who bought an I5 when it was new (first or second gen) and he was so amazed by its performance. Now he only has fps problems in like every game and cant even run csgo over 100fps. My Fx8300 still going strong on 4.1ghz thx to your oc guide.

I had an i7 2600k back in the FX days, but I wouldn't have felt stupid if I'd gone the FX route instead. All I was doing with my PC was gaming, so I went with the CPU that gave me the best gaming performance and overclockability. I was fine with paying the Intel tax for that, but I still don't have anything bad to say about what I've seen in realworld situations from the FX's in other peoples' machines I'd seen. And they were stunningly affordable. Just because I've got expendable income and usually buy the premium thing doesn't mean I don't applaud the existence of great budget options as well. Long live FX! Keep truckin', AMD.

i used the fx 8350 @4.8ghz with a rx 580 on a asrock micro atx board with custom vram cooling. it runs still okay for 1080p gaming.

Dude the only time i doubted my cpu was yesterday when someone told me that it's not actually 8 cores but 4!!! tbh even now I'm not that pissed at AMD for marketing it as 8, the line between hardware and software can be blurred when it comes to functionality. I have had this cpu for 6 years and it has held out great, still love my pc and not going to be upgrading it for potentially a good 3 more years.

I definitely agree with the frametime with the FX8320 being poor. I have one and it stutters in a lot of games.

Yes, it's like comparing 2 people by seeing how they lift weight. would you compare the 2 by seeing how many reps can they lift a 3 kg weight or would you see how many times can they lift a 30, 40, 50 kg? Not being able to lift faster but can lift heavier at decent pace without getting fatigue is the way to go. Back in the days I saw many recommending a pentium over an FX 6300 or 8320. I was like WTH, they were only doing themselves disservices by limiting the CPU max capacity.