$300-400 Build?

[«DN»Lasky®]

Actually the AMD-FX 8350 actually has 8 physical cores. CPU-ID even says that... here:

[Milfeulle]

«DN»Lasky®, I recommend you read the following article about AMD being sued over its line of Bulldozer processors actually having less cores than what they have claimed: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/11/06/amd_sued_cores/

This trend has continued in the Piledriver line (which the FX-8350 is part of), and the legal dispute is what actually considered a "core" seeing as some consider the Modules in these lines design as actual "cores", in which case they are indeed 4 in number, while others count the individual parts of those modules, 2 in each (called integer cores) as the actual cores, which will number them to 8 in that case.

I can also refer you to this technical review of the FX-8350 in particular, which basically sums up the dispute in a single paragraph:
"Piledriver is still based on the same basic design as Bulldozer, with the ‘8-core’ chip containing four Piledriver modules, each of which contains a pair of integer cores. While AMD markets these as individual CPU cores, each module’s pair of integer cores shares a number of resources, including the fetch and decode units, a Floating Point scheduler (FPU) and 2MB of L2 cache. This is part of AMD’s design philosophy of focusing on multi-threaded performance, with each module able to process two threads simultaneously. As we found last year though, this comes at the cost of single-threaded performance and with the down-side that relatively few applications are able to make use of four cores in multi-threaded workloads, let alone eight."

[«DN»Lasky®]

This image suggests that the AMD FX-8350 (and other CPU's in the same series) indeed has 8 cores and not 4 cores/8 threads.

I am sure that any court will rule in AMD's favor and that this dispute is all hot air.

[Milfeulle]

But what about the fact they share "a number of resources, including the fetch and decode units, a Floating Point scheduler (FPU) and 2MB of L2 cache"?

Doesn't this partially take away from them being actual separate cores and explains the downgrade in performance compared to completely separate core designs with similar specs?

[Milfeulle]

The same processor with different description schematic:
http://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=arti ... ile&id=773
& ^This one shows the modules as the cores.

[«DN»Lasky®]

why not do this Milfeulle?

[Doomsday]

Decided to go for an i5 and RX 480, even though this will be around 600 its worth it as it will last longer than amd cpu's

i will just put the gpu of my current computer in a test machine i have with decent specs.

[Doomsday]

Actually the AMD-FX 8350 actually has 8 physical cores. CPU-ID even says that... here:

amd has 8 cores, yes.
However, it takes both cores to run.
So in fact, there is only 4 cores. Technically because It takes both cores to run both cores if that makes any sense.

sorry for double post.