84°
EXPIRED
AMD Athlon X4 760k Black Edition Quad Processor AD760kWOHLBOX @ Amazon, £59.70
AMD Athlon X4 760k Black Edition Quad Processor AD760kWOHLBOX @ Amazon, £59.70

AMD Athlon X4 760k Black Edition Quad Processor AD760kWOHLBOX @ Amazon, £59.70

Buy forBuy forBuy for£59.70
GETGet dealVisit site and get deal
AMD Athlon X4 760k Black Edition Quad Processor (Socket FM2, 3.8GHz, 4MB, 100W, AD760kWOHLBOX, Richland, Turbo Core 3.0 Technology, Virtualization Technology)

Product Dimensions 12.1 x 8.9 x 7 cm
Item model number AD760KWOHLBOX
Processor Count 4
Wattage 100 watts

16 Comments

you can buy the x4 860k for £57.03
amazon.co.uk/AMD…60k

but i still think you would be better off withe the pentium G3258

bob990

you can buy the x4 860k for … you can buy the x4 860k for £57.03http://www.amazon.co.uk/AMD-Athlon-Quad-Core-Desktop-Processor/dp/B00MU00IOQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1420840462&sr=8-1&keywords=x4+860kbut i still think you would be better off withe the pentium G3258



What if you aren't overclocking? Wouldn't this be a better option?

The G3258 runs rings around this at stock, OC'ing the G3258 will far exceed the performance of the 760k. The AMD will, however, marginally outperform the G3258 for graphics. I say marginally - it is very, very marginal (like 1 fps in game) - in saying that, you won't be doing much gaming with either of these chips anyway, certainly not in any games High graphic settings, where FPS is the be-and-end all.

Half the power requirement, better performance all over - G3258 wins hands down.

GrantG182

The G3258 runs rings around this at stock, OC'ing the G3258 will far … The G3258 runs rings around this at stock, OC'ing the G3258 will far exceed the performance of the 760k. The AMD will, however, marginally outperform the G3258 for graphics. I say marginally - it is very, very marginal (like 1 fps in game) - in saying that, you won't be doing much gaming with either of these chips anyway, certainly not in any games High graphic settings, where FPS is the be-and-end all.Half the power requirement, better performance all over - G3258 wins hands down.



Even the 860k? o.0

What about games that require 4 cores, isn't this or the 860k more future proof?

GrantG182

The G3258 runs rings around this at stock, OC'ing the G3258 will far … The G3258 runs rings around this at stock, OC'ing the G3258 will far exceed the performance of the 760k. The AMD will, however, marginally outperform the G3258 for graphics. I say marginally - it is very, very marginal (like 1 fps in game) - in saying that, you won't be doing much gaming with either of these chips anyway, certainly not in any games High graphic settings, where FPS is the be-and-end all.Half the power requirement, better performance all over - G3258 wins hands down.


The 760K doesn't even have an integrated GPU. And the G3258 using half the power is just nonsense.

http://abload.de/img/average-power-consumpofuef.png
tomshardware.co.uk/pen…tml

Incidentally, on other pages of that article are plenty of benchmarks, which handily compare these exact two chips and show almost zero difference in game framerates between the 750K and the G3258, so the idea that the latter whips it is again nonsense. They perform extremely similarly.

Additionally, there's the consideration of games that outright won't run on a dual core CPU. Far Cry 4 and Dragon Age: Inquisition are two recent games that won't even boot on dual core CPUs, and require a third party program to bypass that limitation. It's only going to keep going that way IMO, with the new consoles having extremely weak single-threaded performance, but plenty of core. Games are only going to get more heavily multi-threaded going forwards.
Edited by: "Aretak" 9th Jan 2015

Yup 760k has no GPU on the die...
Well it actually does but it's disabled and cant be used.
Does the Pentium even have on board?

How does this compare to a low level i5

The G3258 has HD4000 (I think) on die. I based my comments on the 750k, which isn't far behind the 760.

Incidentally, that same website - Toms hardware - has a full review of the 750k v G3258 and the G3258 takes the 750 to the cleaners, all day, every day. I would be massively surprised if the 760 outperforms the 750 to such a degree that it is any better than the G3258.

GrantG182

The G3258 has HD4000 (I think) on die. I based my comments on the 750k, … The G3258 has HD4000 (I think) on die. I based my comments on the 750k, which isn't far behind the 760.Incidentally, that same website - Toms hardware - has a full review of the 750k v G3258 and the G3258 takes the 750 to the cleaners, all day, every day. I would be massively surprised if the 760 outperforms the 750 to such a degree that it is any better than the G3258.

just checked on the Intel site and you are correct it does have onboard gpu. Impressive for the money.

This CPU has been the recommended choice for super budget builds for quite a while now. Paired with a good graphics card you can get a very capable system up and running for under £400.
Although really your choice should consider future upgrades so a G3258 might be the better long term choice.
Edited by: "corgi74" 10th Jan 2015

Banned

huzi7868

How does this compare to a low level i5



Not even close I'm afraid.

This is a difficult situation. The intel g is a better chip in my eyes as it's got the much better single core performance. The main reason though is you have a long update path, bring able to easily go to an i7 without having to change your board.

Yes this is a true quad core which will help in current games but you are then stuck with the top chip the AMD platform can support, with no upgrade options at all.

Not sure why this is getting heat when you can get the 860k for less.

Original Poster

At the moment I have the AMD Athlon II X4 750K....

gowingnator

At the moment I have the AMD Athlon II X4 750K....

We have a 740 in one of our desktops is alright I suppose. Got it to 4.3ghz on air cooler been like that since we bought it on launch.

People talking about the pentium anniversary chip need to understand that even though it is stronger per core than any athlon, games in the future will stop supporting dual cores. It sucks but will ensure better ports for the PC I guess, what with the consoles having 8 cores which means easier porting to the PC as majority of PC gaming users have been on quad cores for ages.

Low level API's such as directX 12 and Mantle will help reduce CPU bottlenecks and use the full potential of GPU's, get a cheap athlon 860k quad core, overclock and you'll be able to play all the games you want without any future compatibility problems!
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text