A rig for sc2 and some high end games

[STRIKE-F]

So before I start this thread,I must say that I am using 256G ssd instead of 128G ssd and 1TB hdd because of not-so-good personal experience.

Okay.I managed to set up a rig,and asked it to a community site in Korea,but guess they are not a big fan of AMD.They actually recommended me to rather throw away my money at the cliff,so I just gave up asking ro them.
The rig I'm thinking of is:
AMD FX 8300
Samsung PC3-12800 4G RAM ×2
ASUS M5A97 EVO R2.0
MSI TWIN FROZR 2 R9-270X
Samsung 840 evo 256GB
Topower 500W 80+

I wanna know if I can run 2v2 battle in ultra setting(no AA,of course),averaging over 50fps and min.30fpa.And run BF4 in high setting averaging over 40fps.

And just in case someone tell me why use AMD go intel,I have nothing to say but that even in Desert Strike 2 with ultra physics setting and effect and reflection and etc,A10-6800K 4.1GHz worked very fine for me(but with igpu,meaning medium to low graphic card related settings)

So please tell me.Will it work?
I would appreciate every answers given,or at least try to.

 

[Traciatim]

If it were me I would drop the SSD and sink more money in to processor and video. SSD's are really a luxury item that reduce load times but don't actually change gaming performance by much, if anything at all. If you save 50 bucks from the SSD going to a 1tb regular hard drive you could sink it in to an i5-4670k over the 8320 or up the video card from the 270x to a GTX760 or similar.

Most online games I play that are on my SSD I don't really notice a difference from my spinning disks anyway. Sure I load in 2 seconds instead of 10... while waiting the 20 seconds for the match to start I just wait for 18 seconds doing nothing instead of 10... It does make the day to day use of the machine seem nice and quick.

If you are building specifically for StarCraft 2 you probably want to avoid AMD. I couldn't find a tons of good benchmarks really quickly, but a fairly good chart here: http://www.overclockerscave.com/index.php/96-hot-hardware/274-amd-fx-8350-vs-intel-core-i5-3350p-ivybridge-which-to-buy?showall=&start=1

If you notice in that benchmark the i3 beats the 8350 in StarCraft 2? Yeah, anything that is CPU heavy basically sucks with AMD. This was even before Haswell, which is even faster per clock. The 8350 does really well in things like 7-Zip compression, media encoding, after effects/premier style applications. Gaming is certainly not it's strong point.

 

[STRIKE-F]

Yeah...I know SC2 suck at multicore.But I'm gonna OC this baby to 4.5GHz and recently games are getting better and better at managing multi cores,making i3 kinda out of my mind.

 

[STRIKE-F]

And I also tried some rig with i5-3570k and z77 board,but they just can't meet my needs.In Korea almost every computer parts have some bullshit premiums,so 3570K with MSI Z77-G43 cost about 170$ more.Unfortunately this is over budget.

 

[Traciatim]

Yeah...I know SC2 suck at multicore.But I'm gonna OC this baby to 4.5GHz and recently games are getting better and better at managing multi cores,making i3 kinda out of my mind.

Yep, that 4.5ghz power sucking monster might be able to come close to an i3. Seems legit.

 

[STRIKE-F]

Okay,found myself to be a moron.According to some gaming benchmarks,found out that E3-1230V2 doesn't have much difference with i5-3570K and just beat the hell out of 3570K with games that use many cores better.
Gosh. I'm gonna punch my buddy in his face. He said Xeon sucks and have worse frame drops that 3570K.

A bit sad I cannot OC, though. But it is much cheaper than 3770, at least.

 

[STRIKE-F]

Well, I think I need to focus on GPU now. Can R9 270X(prev.HD7870,as I know) run 2v2 battle in Ultra,no AA averaging 50fps or more?

 

[Romeru]

When it comes down to sc2, it only uses 2 cores and is awfully optimized for new hardware. You'd benefit the most from an Intel cpu in that game thanks to the better single-threaded performance. One such cpu would be a i5 4670k.
For other games a fx-8320 is a good purchase.

 

[Traciatim]

Okay,found myself to be a moron.According to some gaming benchmarks,found out that E3-1230V2 doesn't have much difference with i5-3570K and just beat the hell out of 3570K with games that use many cores better.
Gosh. I'm gonna punch my buddy in his face. He said Xeon sucks and have worse frame drops that 3570K.

A bit sad I cannot OC, though. But it is much cheaper than 3770, at least.

Yeah, that Xeon is essentially just the i7 without the GPU on it. So if you aren't ever going to use the on chip GPU for anything it makes sense. I'm not certain on overclocking potential though.

 

[Traciatim]

Well, I think I need to focus on GPU now. Can R9 270X(prev.HD7870,as I know) run 2v2 battle in Ultra,no AA averaging 50fps or more?

I'm not sure how much has changed, but a quick google puts it pretty up there: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7870-review-benchmark,3148-14.html

The 270x should be slightly faster. Keep in mind these were done on a 2600k at 4.6Ghz, so if you are going with AMD cut the numbers by 30% or so.