FX-4300 FX-6300 FX-8320 Speed Differences

In news:alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64, Yousuf Khan
posted on Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:53:45 -0500 the
following:

On 30/12/2012 6:02 AM, Damaeus wrote:
[...]
I see the point now. I don't typically do a LOT of multitasking, but
sometimes I do. I do play some Facebook games, and those are amazingly
processor-intensive. I know it ran my dual-core processor fluctuating
between 35% and 60%, even more than Final Fantasy XI, which is a real,
full-screen video game.

I don't think any of the facebook apps will be much of a challenge to
any one of these cores. A world of difference between the old Athlon 64
X2 and these FX chips.

I hope so. They weren't really a challenge (judging by the smoothness of
playing) even to my Athlon 64 X2 4200+ as long as I only had one game
running at a time, although I think my bad capacitor next to the PCIe slot
was causing some animation problems in certain games.

And I hope I didn't mess things up by buying over-rated parts this time
around. All these discussions in this group and others have got me
worried pretty deeply. Yet when I built my Fatal1ty AN9 32x system, I
didn't think about the speed at which the CPU could utilize memory. I
just got some memory I knew was compatible along with a mid-range
processor, and that was the most stable system I have ever built. Maybe
by happenstance, I just picked out the right hardware without thinking
about it.

I put a lot of thought into what I was doing with this new hardware, but
now I'm all stressed out. I don't care if it's not the fastest computer
in town as long as it's stable. And I always take my time putting it all
together and making sure all the cables and wires are plugged into the
right spots. If I see sparks and smoke, I'll be stuck using this Abit
NF-7 I'm using now, and I think of jokes about 386 machines. With the
processing power that's needed today for certain things, trying to cram
that down this PCs throat does make it act like a 386.

Damaeus