Low FPS

No. It's just that AMD processors aren't that good at doing the maths that BeamNG makes heavy use of.

 

Ah okay, About 17 years ago I was running an old AMD Single core processor but once I went Intel there was no going back

 

i was using a Q9400 and a GT 740 but it did not run very well so i recommend you upgrade i now run a FX 8350 and a gtx 690 now the game only uses one of the gpu's so i only get around 40 Fps on most maps and can go as high as 6 or 7 cars with minimal fps drops but ia m looking forward to the game supporting more than one GPU.

 

K6 much? They were good in the K6 days, a good alternative to the Intel chips, though you could sometimes go further with the overclockable Celeron chips in slot 1 format or socket format. The athlon Slot A processor cards were pretty good, I had a 1ghz one that was fantastic until the corrupt informants tasered my abit board when I was like 18 and blew out the caps near the VRM area. Asus ftw... In pentium 4 times, the Athlon XP and Athlon II X2 series blew right past the P4's because of 9-10 hops per process in the cpu VS Pentium 4's northwood-style 14 hops. So they threw lots of clockspeed @ the problem (Intel did). Then when they were noticing they were losing to AMD, they re-did things a bit, went back to Pentium 3 style 9-hop processes and released Core series micro-processors for the desktop as the Core2Duo (2006) and it's equivalent laptop processors. AMD countered with the Phenom II microprocessors in time.
Unfortunately, AMD has been relatively unable to advance much beyond the Core2-class of processors that intel released many many MANY years ago, combined with the long strides in Math-Coprocessing (FPU) advancement *AND* IPC (Integer performance per-core, also known as Thread Performance)... this has seriously tipped the scales in Intel's favor. Reminds me very much of Cyrix back in the 6x86 days when they did not improve their FPU's since the 4x86 days (although they were really good with 32-bit stuff, pentium pro/Pentium II good, whereas the pentium 5x86 was better @ 16-bit than 32-bit) , they lost out and got bought out by Via.
The reason games like GTAV and other games will run well on an AMD FX microprocessor, is because of the Physics calculations. Sure, GTAV has car damage... maybe about 5% as much as BEAM as per points on the car, and it only does it 1% as much (20hz on GTAV, 2000hz on BEAMNG.DRIVE). HZ=times per second. That's already 100x more per second PER VEHICLE, on an exponentially greater amount of points on the vehicle. This is why you can have a map of 100 vehicles in play in GTAV, + pedestrians, and still possibly get equal or greater FPS in GTAV than Beam. Beam is truly next gen, and processors need to catch up a bit. I've poked around under the hood of GTAV quite a bit, and a whole lot more in Beam. Let me tell you, GTAV is entirely like an arcade racer like OUTRUN was in the 90s, compared to Beam.

For all those people who think: Oh Beam is an unoptimised "mess" or whatever the negetivity of the day warrants, well I've got to say one thing -
Yes, it's only version 0.5.1.x? and it's not done yet. The vehicles currently run one per core, so AMD guys with FX cpus with poor math performance AND poor IPC performance (detailed in past posts and a bit above) are somewhat left in the dust until the game code is optimised to run processes spread over more cores (this is known, and possibly being addressed). This isn't the only game though, many games that are physics or AI-heavy in processing will fully demonstrate to you, to a varying degree, the difference between Intel and AMD processors. I know this difference, my last PC was based on a 970 chipset and an FX 6300 cpu @ a paltry 4.2ghz OC. I positively hated that slug. So I built an i7 rig, as many other people have, and saw the light. If you can't afford to, just pull up the passmark single-threaded performance benchmark on the passmark website (link in previous post, page 2-3), that'll give you a judge of the FPS you'll get. Beyond that in a close second is the over-all benchmark of processors, run on ALL of the cores at once, for a total performance, this will tell you about how many cars you can have. One car per core, on 4ghz chips you may be able to put 2 cars per core and you'll still have 35fps or so. The more ghz, the more physics per second you can run, the more cores, the more cars on the map @ once without slowdown.
Even the mighty AMD FX 9590 benched it on per-core (threaded) performance at only 60% (give or take a few %) of what a mid-level enthusiast (or high end, depending on your view) 4790k i7 cpu. That's comparing a 4.7ghz-5.0ghz (not sure exactly) 9590 to a 4.4ghz intel i7 Devil's Canyon (haswell sub-revision) chip.

So looking forward, if AMD delivers on ZEN/Zeppelin processors, with the proposed 40% IPC increase, they should be within 10-15% of the per-core speed of Haswell cpus of similar GHZ, this will be a new socket AM4 coming in Q4 2016. Hopefully, for us consumers, they deliver. This will heat things up on the processor market and mean us consumers get more bang for our buck.

More Ghz, More Cores, More Features, and above all most importantly, More BEAMNG.DRIVE!
--- Post updated ---

The FX8350 isn't an upgrade in architecture as much as it's just higher ghz speeds, which will enable more performance per second. If someone's going to go all out and upgrade for Beam, with the current state of the game there is little choice but to go Intel if one cannot wait for the game to be optimized for the AMD fpu issues. Sure, there are changes, and it does multitask some better than the Core2 series did (ofcourse)... but the intel performance when measuring a 4ghz sandy-bridge-and-newer chip to a 4ghz AMD FX is almost 2:1 per core (this is why the AMD's have so many cores). Haswell and newer is where this is most true, as the math computational circuts are much improved even over the few-years-old Sandy Bridge and Westmere.

 

Try playing GTA V or FO4 with that 7850. Won't go well.
Also, stop writing so much.
--- Post updated ---

You don't need a detailed comparison of AMD and Intel architectures. FX CPUs have bad ST performance. Still better than a C2Q. CPU is not the issue here. BeamNG doesn't support SLI (IIRC), a GTX 690 is two SLI'd underclocked 680s, a single 680 can't run BeamNG on high settings with dynamic reflections @1080p60.