Im looking for a cheap amd cpu that will run 96+ v 96+ battles 60fps on the lowest ini settings, im currently strapped for money but love this game to death im currently running amd a10-5800k and a gtx 950 8 gig ddr3 ram. Any suggestions would be appreciated
Honestly, I think you might be better off with an Intel processor. I have heard great things about i5 6600 and the i5 6600k processors which are both have great performance for only $229 and $245 respectively. Planetside tends to run better on Intel based processors and both are great options.
i have an intel i-5 4440 which goes for around 160-190 and i get a good 150 fps sometimes on low coupled with my gtx 960. but realistically during a fight on low you might get around 50-80 unless theres some SERIOUS **** going on.
I would love to go for intel but my motherboard was recently purchased and only works with amd which sucks **** balls
What's your motherboad? I can tell you I had a FX-8120 and it sucked. Then I upgraded to FX-8370 (changed the cooling fan as well) and it runs smooth as hell. Like other users said, for me this is a lesson learned: my next gaming pc will have an Intel processor. I have 2 pcs (one with Intel) and I can tell you the difference is remarkable.
Go with Intel otherwise wait for the Zen, there's no sense investing in the current AMD at the moment. Your A10 should be able to hold up for a while, perhaps get the 6800K or 7850K if you're using an FM2+ socket board. Perhaps youre CPU cooler might be a problem, A10's stock cooler sucks *** so look into an aftermarket cooler if you don't have one. I played BF4 and PS2 and some other games on an A10 6800K with a GTX760 and it was fine. Also using lowest settings usually puts more load onto the CPU than GPU, the GTX950 isn't a half bad card which is better than the GTX750Ti I have, toy with some medium settings, I get 60-70fps with my GTX750Ti on an i3 6100 (yeah yeah it's a replacement GPU for now).
after some tests i concluded that i would get a cooler like you said and later invest in a cpu but for now theres 30+ fps in lower settings than higher settings
Op you can get a great amd cpu for your games without having to switch to intel right now. You need to find out what socket type you have and then by the best FX series cpu as they will run games much better than the a series. a 4.7 GH fx series 9590 runs to around 200 bucks which is cheap is hell for a cpu with that much power. Id buy that and then save for a good video card either NVidia 970gtx or amd radeon 390x. Also keep an eye on ebay for stuff I have built a lot of systems for cheap using ebay.
Sorry mate, even the expensive Intel processors can't do that. At any rate, you'll get more performance per dollar with Intel rather than AMD, even in the cheaper ranges. If you're looking to get anywhere near 60fps in 96+ vs 96+ (graphics settings really don't matter; that's the GPU's issue), you'll need a top-of-the-line processor. As in, an i5 or better. You might be able to get away with AMD's very highest-end CPUs, but you'll be paying more money for less performance and wayyy higher power draw (I think their top end CPU has a TDP of 225 watts. That's almost as much as a Titan X! For a CPU!). I've built many, many computers, and while AMD used to have the value advantage over Intel, their price-to-performance has become quite bad in the recent years, to the point where I can't think of a situation where it would be preferable to choose AMD over Intel, unless you find an AMD proc for dirt cheap on eBay or something.
its not that i want amd its that i have recently purchased a new motherboard and it only works with amd
What socket on the mobo ? Go for the highest clockspeed you can or overclock. AMD tend to add more cores to their higher end processors which helps in general computing stuff but not really in games (although PS2 will utilise more cores, anything more than 4 will see little additional benefit). Looking at the pre-overclocked bundles, the FX 6300 is being sold at 4.4Ghz so that is certainly possible - and not a lot of cash. Will keep your room nice and warm too !
I believe the fx9590 is sold without cooling fan and that's why is so cheap. AMD recommends liquid cooler.
Yup, even on my i7 3770K clocked to 4.5GHz three way biolab fights only netted me ~40fps, the bigger the fights the more CPU bound the game becomes. But hey better than 18fps on an FX 8320 I once built and sold.
The FX 9590 8-core (~$220) performs slightly worse than the i7-4790k quad-core ($250) when using all 8 cores! The 4790k's single-thread performance (what determines max performance in most things, such as games) is over 50% faster than the 9590. The 4790k uses 88 watts. The 9590 uses 220. TWO HUNDRED AND TWENTY! I hope you don't pay for your own electricity. Not to mention that you will need to disperse all of this heat somewhere with a massive and expensive (not included) cooler. Both CPUs can be had for ~$220 to ~$250, but, like I said, the i7 includes a decent and usable cooler (it only has to disperse 88 watts, after all), whereas you'll need to spend extra for a cooler that can handle 220 watts of heat if you choose the 9590. That'll run you an additional $40 at the cheapest. So the Intel is faster overall, much faster in practical use, uses less power, and is cheaper. Honestly, OP, if I were you, I would probably sell the motherboard and just go Intel.
What kind of motherboard did you get? If you have FM2 board your options are pretty limited. If you could please list the full specs of your system we can help you choose a more appropriate AMD CPU.
Still using the fx8350 unlocked version i got 2 1/2 years ago, think was the coolest running 8 core they had at the time, but still used liquid cooling, running at 4.2ghz. With oc gtx770, couple samsung ssd's, still runs the game pretty well. Built the machine before I started playing ps2, and have not had the chance to play with intel processor.
I would wait for the Zen processors to roll out. Also you should get the Evo 212. Works great with my current 6300 FX and is easy to clean.
