I really want to build a gaming PC, but Intel and Nvidia cards seem to be quite a bit more expensive than their AMD counterparts. I mean, I can get an eight-core CPU from AMD for less than an Intel i5! So, if I were to go with AMD, would I be losing out? Like, are they as good as Intel CPUs and Nvidia GPUs?

Would any of these handle gaming?

http://www.ebuyer.com/amd-maf

As far as CPU's go, no. No AMD CPU can compete gaming wise with an i5-3570k. In the lower budget ranges, AMD's saving grace is it's overclocking capability which allows their CPU's to surpass Intel. But for the higher end CPU's, it's Intel all the way.

As far as GPU's go, it's pretty damn even right now. AMD actually might be slightly ahead but it's very close. I find it hard to beat the 7800 and 7900 series in their respective budget ranges though. Nvidia has the 690 which is the dominant card on the very high end and both AMD and Nvidia have a fair split of low-mid range cards.

The good thing is you can go with an intel chipset, but grab an ATI Radeon card, or go with an AMD processor with an Nvidia card. Each has their own pros and cons when you start looking deeper and deeper into things. It's all about how far you want to go down the rabbit hole to learn about things. When you start talking about varying technologies such as nanometer vs nanometer, things can get very confusing.

Intel is pretty stable for processors, however, they can be pretty expensive. Nvidia is good for GPUs, but I stick with Radeons. Only reason some go for Nvidia is the extra processor that is dedicated to physics processing. Personally, I equate the processor to an extra cherry on top. Some want it, others feel it just isn't worth it.

Recently replaced my 5870 card because the fan was humming loudly, upgrading to an ATI Radeon 7970. It runs pretty much everything I can throw at it. Far Cry 3 being a prime example where everything is cranked up to high with only a few settings turned to medium. I rarely dropped below 60fps throughout my entire playthrough. Only time I had a major fps drop was towards the end with a lot of particle effects going on. The fps drop happened two or three times, lasting for .5 to 1 second at the most.

Can their CPUs really not compete? Are they not respectable gaming CPUs at all?

Like, could this CPU run modern games?

http://www.ebuyer.com/409191-amd-fx-6300-3-5ghz-socket-am3-14mb-cache-retail-boxed-processor-fd6300wmhkbox


I don't have a lot of money, but really want to get a decent gaming PC. AMD is like buying the supermarket brand of food instead of the actual proper brands in a way.

They are respectable gaming CPU's and are not a bad choice at all for a budget-orientated build. But pound for pound Intel's flagship ivy bridge processors are just so damn good right now AMD's stuff can't match it. That CPU you linked is great and can overclock like a champ, I would take it over an Intel in that price bracket. If you are looking at spending some big bucks though, go Intel or go home. The only other choice for that price range of the FX6300 on the Intel side of things would be an i3, which can't be overclocked and therefore is not as good as the AMD processor.

You can check out the CPU section of the guide in my sig for more info.

Without over-clocking though, how would that processor fare running games like Crysis 2 and Battlefield 3? It has eight-cores and a speed of 3.5 GHz for just ￡104 GBP (around $170 USD)! That seems really good value!