I'm trying to select a CPU for a home studio audio workstation build.  There sure are a lot of choices.
 
The AMD FX's like the 6300/6350/8300/8350 are appealing, as are the Intel Core i3's with onboard graphics.  As I read posts and take note of the pc specs in the signatures I see those processors listed fairly often.
 
I don't need top of the line or the latest and greatest.  I just want to be able to record two to four tracks at a time, use AD2 or EZD2, and mix with a reasonable number of plugins.
 
Are those FX's or Core i3's sufficient?  For the Core i3's, are the newer generations better?
 
Thanks.

There are folks running DAWs on AMD, but for low latency audio, it seems that Intel has the edge.
 
I have a 3rd gen Intel Core i3 that I built a few years ago that is perfect for home recording.  I get low latency and it is capable of many more tracks than I care to manage.
 
I have always used Intel, since the Pentium 1 days, so I don't really know much about the AMD nomenclature.
 
As far as Intel goes, the i3 desktop CPU is half of an i7, so instead of 4 cores and 8 threads, you get two cores and 4 threads.  The desktop i5 scales up with 4 cores, but just 4 threads.  The price goes up quickly though.
 
If your demands are going to be moderate, get the latest gen Core i3 with the fastest clock you can afford.  I have been running my 3.4GHz CPU which rarely goes over 50% with what I do.  Usually much lower, in fact.
 
The thing to remember is that a single thread can only run as fast as the CPU clock, so that is the speed limit.  Good software developers in some cases have learned how to split up their workload across multiple cores and threads, so in that case a quad core can outperform a dual core.  But the real difference comes down to how heavy you plan to use the system.  Sonar is one application that can take advantage of that and spread the load.
 
Sure you could buy an i7 and many will say you need it. But unless you plan to run dozens of tracks with multiple plugin effects on each one, you probably can get by fine with an i3 for what you say you need.  It's not a crippled CPU by any measure, it's just that you often see them in cheaply made off-the-shelf PC's, so they have a certain reputation.  But if you pick a quality motherboard, power supply, RAM, you should be good.  And start out with an SSD for the OS drive, the prices on those are very affordable now.  That gives a huge boost to system responsiveness!!!
 
You can compare prices here:
http://pcpartpicker.com/list/

You probably won't find a better processor for under $100 other than the FX6300.
If you can find a i7 4770K for around $250 that will last you for quite some time. The prices on them are dropping.
 

Not sure what your budget is, but something like this might do help: 

kitekrazy1
 
You probably won't find a better processor for under $100 other than the FX6300.
If you can find a i7 4770K for around $250 that will last you for quite some time. The prices on them are dropping.
 

 
I have a FX6300 on my home PC. Specs are in my Sig. I do not do any recording with it. Just projects that have 50+ trks of audio. And I can run a lot of fx before it starts to choke. I use it as a test bed before I put something on my music PC. That and internet surfing.
 
My music PC has a i7 2600K (I just looked on newegg and they want over $400 for that part! I don't think I paid that much when it was new!!) It can take whatever Project I have on my home PC that is choking it, and play it with ease.
 
If you do go with an AMD, get a good MB. Asus, Gigabyte, MSI. Or at least look around here and see what othrs are using trouble free.

I use gigabyte or Asus. Better support when things go wrong imo.

I do some PC support/repair.  When anyone asks me about buying (or building) a new PC my responses are (1) Buy as much as your wallet can stand or (2) Buy overkill.  I say that as I see those that "only want a PC to check e-mail" and after they get it they start to do many other things and if they bought the "cheapest" they either are upgrading or buying another.  No difference in recording PC's.  

I have an 8350 in a desktop DAW that works great with sonar. Like the recommendation for the 6300, the 8350 is a great "bang for the buck" CPU and I would certainly recommend it.
 
I have it on a Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5 motherboard with 16Gig of RAM.
 
gabo

fireberd
I do some PC support/repair.  When anyone asks me about buying (or building) a new PC my responses are (1) Buy as much as your wallet can stand or (2) Buy overkill.  I say that as I see those that "only want a PC to check e-mail" and after they get it they start to do many other things and if they bought the "cheapest" they either are upgrading or buying another.  No difference in recording PC's.

Here I disagree... For someone reading e-mails and skyping  I normally recommend a cheap tablet. There are other solutions for the job, but for comparable weight, usability and accu time, the price difference is 3-5 times.
One year "old" middle priced notebooks can do Office tasks not worse then $2k monster, which in Office will use clocked down CPU and build in graphics, leaving its most expensive components (discrete graphics and multi-core turbo speed) off.
Prices drop fast, I always remember a friend who bought FullHD TV when they still was "top", but had no FullHD signal source for 3 years...
When someone has a bit more money but I am sure the "power" is not going to be an issue, I recommend to invest into quality and/or silence. With questionable application in the observable future, into upgradability. "Most power for $" does not sound like a constructive approach for me.

My theory is to build the infrastructure of your PC as high as you can stand, but get a low end CPU for that chipset and socket.  That will save you a few hundred bucks and leave an easy upgrade path in your future.
 
For example, buy a motherboard with the latest current chipset, CPU socket, and i/o ports, so that you will futureproof your build.
 
Get a decent case with quiet fans, and a solid power supply.
 
Then drop in a low end CPU with enough Ghz to get the job done.  If you need to upgrade later, you can just drop in a top end CPU that uses the same socket.
 
Or you may find that the CPU is not your bottleneck anymore, and spend your money saved on SSD's or audio interfaces!