Learn to read , please . in anything where the difference is noticeableAre you seriously saying you can tell the difference between 157 . 4 and 139 . 2 fps in dragon age , or 229 . 2 and 209 . 4 fps in skyrim ? In fact , I ' d go further and say that while I ' m all for high refresh rate monitors in general this is clearly a budget system , so anything above 60 fps is basically equivalent because of the monitor . That blows everything except Starcraft 2 into irrelevance , and Starcraft 2 is an RTS so anything above 30 fps in that is plenty as well , the FX 8350 does 47 . 9 . Get the picture ? Not . A . Noticeable . Difference . Meanwhile things like compressiondecompression and video encoding that you actually have to wait for , the FX is better at . I get that you ' re used to the idea that intel anything is automatically better at everything and bulldozer is literally the worst thing ever , but you ' re going to have to set aside your prejudices for a moment and actually think because we ' re comparing one old platform to another here , and on a budget build . This isn ' t should I get a skylake i 3 or an FX where there ' s upgrade paths to consider . This is you marching in and telling someone to throw out their existing platform , buy in used parts that in all probability have no warranty and by the way , good luck getting a USB 3 . 0 board with a decent i 5 in that budget and to do it in order to go from one FPS number above their monitor ' s capability to another FPS number above their monitor ' s capability , all while being primarily GPU bottlenecked in gaming anyway . Seriously , think about how ridiculous you ' re being just because you have it stuck in your head that ' intel is best '.