PUBG Recommended Processor

[__Lex's__]

sorry to ask i'm not expert at this but i really want to play Battle Ground
i have AMD A4-5300 APU with radeom(tm) HD Graphics 3.40 GHz
in the PUBG the minimum is Intel Core i3-4340 or AMD FX-6300
can i play PUBG smoothly ?

[Cathulhu]

No.
You have a terrible CPU and no videocard, only an integrated videochip.
You will not be able to run the game smoothly, or playable.

[ugafan]

no, it won't play smoothly.

[Astro_80 (WASH YOUR HANDS!)]

Originally posted by __Lex's__:

sorry to ask i'm not expert at this but i really want to play Battle Ground
i have AMD A4-5300 APU with radeom(tm) HD Graphics 3.40 GHz
in the PUBG the minimum is Intel Core i3-4340 or AMD FX-6300
can i play PUBG smoothly ?

Unless you want a slideshow experience you aren't going to be playing that game at a playable framerate.

[rezo]

i3 4340 is old and slow, FX 6300 is just terrible. I'd recommend getting a whole new system and get an 8th generation intel processor and a gtx 1050 ti or powerful

[Sólstafir]

Originally posted by rezo:

i3 4340 is old and slow, FX 6300 is just terrible. I'd recommend getting a whole new system and get an 8th generation intel processor and a gtx 1050 ti or powerful

That's really your only option. There's nothing more you can achieve with that hardware platform, you need something new.

Unfortunately older AMD CPUs aren't like old Intels. You can't just overclock them to 11 and match the latestt and greatest, FX don't have the IPC or overclocking ability for that. Even the relatively powerful FX CPUs are evolutionary dead-ends.

[Yuki]

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/Bnsq6X thats the least i would go, but what is your budget?

[vadim]

Originally posted by 「 Mister .M. 」:

ive tried pubg on fx 6300.. my fps were between 50-80 depending on the location and how many ppl were near me. i tested pubg with fx 8350 and the fps were the same.. all I can tell u is that the gpu is much more important for this game rather than the cpu.

CPU is viable also: https://www.techspot.com/article/1532-pubg-cpu-benchmarks/

[an annoying pirate]

pubg run at 45-60fps on my backup pc with
core2quad q9400 2.6ghz (stock no oc)
8gb ddr3 1333mhz
gt 1030
win 7

im sure anything better will get you 60 fps

[vadim]

Originally posted by 「 Mister .M. 」:

it is, but not as much as the gpu.
gpu in pubg is at 100% while the cpu is only at 31%
pubg is not csgo

PUBG is CPU-bound game. And CPU load means nothing at all. If your CPU has 6 logical cores (you said its FX-6300) you can have CPU bottleneck (hinestly, I HATE this term) while CPU load could be as low as 17%. If game is single-threaded and purely rely on single-thread performance.
Anyway, you should have better FPS with FX-8350. According to the tests PUBG could use up to 4 physical cores, so should run better on quadcore CPU (such as FX-8xxx) than on three-core (FX-6xxx).

[vadim]

Originally posted by 「 Mister .M. 」:

fx8350 is octa core

It is quad with CMT. We already discussed that many times and I see no reasons to repeat. Because of that games which can utilise 4 cores (as PUBG) run better on FX-8350 than on FX-6300.

[vadim]

Originally posted by 「 Mister .M. 」:

thats not what its said on their official website

No doubts. They prefer to call it "ocatacore". It sounds better in terms of marketing. Who cares that this is a lie?

[BooThang]

lol pubg runs horribly you will need at least the minimum system requirements

[vadim]

Originally posted by 「 Mister .M. 」:

if it was a like that, then they could easily get sued for lots of money. no1 would risk that just for a marketing crap. it has 8 cores and 8 threads. try any software and it.ll tell u the same.

They already was. Several times. AMD claims in court that it uses its own definition of the term "core".
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/217672-analysis-amd-lawsuit-over-false-bulldozer-chip-marketing-is-without-merit
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/11/06/amd_sued_cores/
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/11/amd-sued-over-allegedly-misleading-bulldozer-core-count/
https://www.pcworld.com/article/3003113/components-processors/lawsuit-alleges-amds-bulldozer-cpus-arent-really-8-core-processors.html
https://www.kitguru.net/components/cpu/matthew-wilson/amd-responds-to-bulldozer-class-action-lawsuit/

[「 RiuXeN 」]

Originally posted by vadim:

Originally posted by 「 Mister .M. 」:

if it was a like that, then they could easily get sued for lots of money. no1 would risk that just for a marketing crap. it has 8 cores and 8 threads. try any software and it.ll tell u the same.

They already was. Several times. AMD claims in court that it uses its own definition of the term "core".
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/217672-analysis-amd-lawsuit-over-false-bulldozer-chip-marketing-is-without-merit
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/11/06/amd_sued_cores/
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/11/amd-sued-over-allegedly-misleading-bulldozer-core-count/
https://www.pcworld.com/article/3003113/components-processors/lawsuit-alleges-amds-bulldozer-cpus-arent-really-8-core-processors.html
https://www.kitguru.net/components/cpu/matthew-wilson/amd-responds-to-bulldozer-class-action-lawsuit/

who won the lawsuit?