• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Best amd APU for gaming?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

deltawars

Registered
Joined
May 27, 2014
I want to build a tiny gaming pc which can play games like WOW, WOT, FFXIV and I have a few questions.
I want to use a Mini itx MBO.

1. Is any of the AMD APU series good enough to play theses games on 1280p?
2. Witch one of the AMD APU series has the best graphics?
3. Is there a better CPU with Integrated graphics better then any of the AMD APU Series?
4. If you have any tips please tell me them.
5. Thanks for any help, it is really appreciated :)
 
If you want APU for gaming then you have to pick the highest one or performance will be low. Check the difference between each graphics chip in these APUs and you will see that every step lower graphics is losing shaders or other parts of the gpu that are important for gaming. When you go for a cheap series then it won't be playable at all.
Tbh for me better is to get something like 2 core Pentium G3258 + overclockable H81 ITX board and cheaper PCIe graphics card than play with these APUs.
WoT will probably run without issues on any IGP but wow or some other games will have problems on APU. I also doubt that you will stop on these 3 titles and will probably play something newer soon.

Also count that APU are built on 2 threaded modules so 4 threaded one runs more like 2 core +ht comparing to Intel but performance core to core will be lower on APU. That's why I said that Pentium G3258 with unlocked ratio is better option.
 
WoT runs AWFULLY on AMD CPU's.
My buddy who is playing it 4/5 huors a day is so despaired that I am about to give him the 3470/DP67BG in sig: his [email protected] with a 7970 is stuck@30/35FPS.

I'd go with a low end Intel setup, as Woomack suggests.

Look at that, the i3 does better than the highest end AMD CPU:
wot cpu.jpg
 
As I said many times in other threads, A8 [email protected] is performing almost like i3 [email protected] at 1080p playing various games ( personal experience ). IGP in Intels is slightly worse but they're not losing so much graphics power with each lower CPU. It would be still better idea to get Pentium + $100 graphics card than $100+ APU which will be slower.

Online games right now need good access time and AMD has bad memory/cache speed. It's also good to think about SSD, even from lower series to speed all up. Especially when you see many characters on the screen then you will see the difference.
 
I just recently built an ITX gaming build, I ended up using a dual core athlon FM2+ cpu (370K), and a 650 TI that I had. The system can run everything I through at it on 1080P which is all I asked for, I even tested to see what kind of bottle neck there was with the CPU to go to a slightly larger GPU (GTX 660 TI). I continued to see improvement. So I would concur a dual core Intel, or AMD not focused on APU, with a proper video card would be the way to go here.
 
Ok so APU are really bad for gaming.
What do you guys think of,
AMD FX8350 and R9 270X 2GB OC. I have 2 mining rigs with R9 270 OC and i over clocked them to 1125 Core and they have been running fine for over a year.
Or do you guys know any better intel cpu and nividia gpu for the same price?
 
Have you checked the chart in my previous post? AMD is a big no no for WoT.

Get an i5.
 
AMD is a big no for most games. Also if you want to use it in a small case then FX series is total mistake because of the heat that they're generating.
 
I have decided just to go with what ever form factor, and im going to go with the i5-4670K.
Why does the FX-9590 score better then the i5-4670K but the I5 is better at gaming? is that benchmark website rubbish?
 
Because the single thread perf of the FX serie is meh, and games take advantage of 4 cores max.

BTW, you can OC the 4670k to 4.3/4.5GHz with a $30 air cooler and a $100Mobo, when you need at least an AIO ($100+) and a $160 MoBo to run the 9590@stock. And don't expext anything more than a couple of hundreds MHz extra with the 9590 unless you go custom loop.

Regarding the website, nobody uses it on this site.

And if you look attentively, the 4 cores 3.5GHz i5 4670k is like 1% behind the 8 cores 4.7GHz FX 9590.

So, ven with the stock cooler, you can take the intel to 3.9/4GHz, and it will be ahead by 10/15% at least.
 
Oh, yes, go with the 4690k instead of the 4670k (unless you find one with a nice discount), as it runs @4GHZ@stock, when the 3670k runs @3.5GHz.
 
Wow thanks for your helps guys, if it wasn't for you I would have wasted my money on amd, after doing some research amd is only better at getting a high benchmark score, nividia and intel give higher fps and are better and rendering. I probably should have searched the forum room before making a unnecessary post sorry :/

What is the point of amd lol?
 
the Kaveri APU series has much better single threaded performance and the iGPU in them is vastly superior to that found in even a haswell intel.

For the cost it is hard to beat.

With that said the capability of an i3 is hard to discount. The i5 isnt really worth the extra cost - performance difference over a identically clocked i3. i7 is of course performance king.

The a10 7850k offers some decent capability and should easily overclock into the 4ghz range with a $20ish aftermarket cooler.

The FX series has some fairly appalling single core performance and WOT is not well threaded so the advantage of the core count is not useful in WOT.

the Kaveri APU (a10 7850k) would look quite a bit better on that WOT performance chart

If you check the other benchmark results at gamegpu.ru (where that bench pic is from) you will see that it is a far more diverse situation than Intel & Nvidia > AMD & AMD

First figure your budget - if it is unlimited then go with an i7 devils canyon - otherwise consider your needs and find something that fits them.

At the lower end AMD is unbeatable $ for $

In the mid range AMD has only an end of life product (the AM3+ platform) but with that said intel never keeps a platform nearly that long anyway. So it is really down to buying a current gen intel i3 (4 threads), intel i5 (4 threads still but 4 cores - not really an amazing deal over an i3 unless you overclock), or a 6 or 8 core (6 or 8 threads) FX series AMD.

Clock for clock the FX will lose to the intel. Dollar for dollar the i3 is probably best unless you play highly threaded content - then the AMD will win out dollar for dollar.

If you are in the higher end frame of mind there is nowhere but intel to look right now.


On the GPU side there is no point in the nvidia vs amd arguments - they both have games that work better for them. The $/performance levels between them are almost identical so it really just comes down to which you personally prefer or which games are bundled - that said AMD is about to get started on a one year advantage in technology over nvidia (probably an odd feeling for amd after the huge tech gap between them and intel on CPU design due to the bulldozer core being a poor choice) due to their technical role in developing new memory technology.

Dont be swayed by blind fanboys - get what works best for you within your budget and dont get anything that runs less than 4 threads.
 
the Kaveri APU series has much better single threaded performance and the iGPU in them is vastly superior to that found in even a haswell intel.

For the cost it is hard to beat.

With that said the capability of an i3 is hard to discount. The i5 isnt really worth the extra cost - performance difference over a identically clocked i3. i7 is of course performance king.

The a10 7850k offers some decent capability and should easily overclock into the 4ghz range with a $20ish aftermarket cooler.

The FX series has some fairly appalling single core performance and WOT is not well threaded so the advantage of the core count is not useful in WOT.

the Kaveri APU (a10 7850k) would look quite a bit better on that WOT performance chart

If you check the other benchmark results at gamegpu.ru (where that bench pic is from) you will see that it is a far more diverse situation than Intel & Nvidia > AMD & AMD

First figure your budget - if it is unlimited then go with an i7 devils canyon - otherwise consider your needs and find something that fits them.

At the lower end AMD is unbeatable $ for $

In the mid range AMD has only an end of life product (the AM3+ platform) but with that said intel never keeps a platform nearly that long anyway. So it is really down to buying a current gen intel i3 (4 threads), intel i5 (4 threads still but 4 cores - not really an amazing deal over an i3 unless you overclock), or a 6 or 8 core (6 or 8 threads) FX series AMD.

Clock for clock the FX will lose to the intel. Dollar for dollar the i3 is probably best unless you play highly threaded content - then the AMD will win out dollar for dollar.

If you are in the higher end frame of mind there is nowhere but intel to look right now.


On the GPU side there is no point in the nvidia vs amd arguments - they both have games that work better for them. The $/performance levels between them are almost identical so it really just comes down to which you personally prefer or which games are bundled - that said AMD is about to get started on a one year advantage in technology over nvidia (probably an odd feeling for amd after the huge tech gap between them and intel on CPU design due to the bulldozer core being a poor choice) due to their technical role in developing new memory technology.

Dont be swayed by blind fanboys - get what works best for you within your budget and dont get anything that runs less than 4 threads.


I concur with your counsel here with the exception of what I have high lighted in yellow. Would you elaborate on that please?
 
the Kaveri APU series has much better single threaded performance and the iGPU in them is vastly superior to that found in even a haswell intel.

For the cost it is hard to beat.

With that said the capability of an i3 is hard to discount. The i5 isnt really worth the extra cost - performance difference over a identically clocked i3. i7 is of course performance king.

The a10 7850k offers some decent capability and should easily overclock into the 4ghz range with a $20ish aftermarket cooler.

The FX series has some fairly appalling single core performance and WOT is not well threaded so the advantage of the core count is not useful in WOT.

the Kaveri APU (a10 7850k) would look quite a bit better on that WOT performance chart

If you check the other benchmark results at gamegpu.ru (where that bench pic is from) you will see that it is a far more diverse situation than Intel & Nvidia > AMD & AMD

First figure your budget - if it is unlimited then go with an i7 devils canyon - otherwise consider your needs and find something that fits them.

At the lower end AMD is unbeatable $ for $

In the mid range AMD has only an end of life product (the AM3+ platform) but with that said intel never keeps a platform nearly that long anyway. So it is really down to buying a current gen intel i3 (4 threads), intel i5 (4 threads still but 4 cores - not really an amazing deal over an i3 unless you overclock), or a 6 or 8 core (6 or 8 threads) FX series AMD.

Clock for clock the FX will lose to the intel. Dollar for dollar the i3 is probably best unless you play highly threaded content - then the AMD will win out dollar for dollar.

If you are in the higher end frame of mind there is nowhere but intel to look right now.


On the GPU side there is no point in the nvidia vs amd arguments - they both have games that work better for them. The $/performance levels between them are almost identical so it really just comes down to which you personally prefer or which games are bundled - that said AMD is about to get started on a one year advantage in technology over nvidia (probably an odd feeling for amd after the huge tech gap between them and intel on CPU design due to the bulldozer core being a poor choice) due to their technical role in developing new memory technology.

Dont be swayed by blind fanboys - get what works best for you within your budget and dont get anything that runs less than 4 threads.


I have to disagree with this. How could Kaveri have much better ipc than FX chips when it has already been proven to be best case scenario a 7% advantage. Inversely how could FX cpu's have such terrible ipc if they are within 7% of Kaveri. Which you touted as having much better ipc?
 
Last edited:
Back