GTX 760 for 2-3 years?

[KiPratama]

Hey guys, i'm planning to upgrade my pc but i have to save my money for like a year and i'm planning to buy a MSI GTX 760 next year, oh and i also will be gaming on a 1440x900 resolution, i'm not gonna buy a 1080p monitor because of my budget. So what do guys think i should do? should i buy a gtx 760 next year or waiting for a new gpu?

Here's what i'm gonna build :
AMD FX 6300
MSI GTX 760 Gaming OC
Corsair 8gb ram
Asus M5A78L motherbord
Cooler Master G 600W

 

[bradsctt]

By next year, you should be able to get a 800 series card instead.

 

[KiPratama]

wow thanks for the fast reply.. yeah but i'm worried about the price 🙁

 

[bradsctt]

Pricing should be around the same, the GTX 660 Ti was about the same price as the GTX 760 is now.

What is your intended budget?

I may be able to suggest a PC build that you could then save towards.

 

[Rationale]

By next year the FX-6300 will already be out of date. It's pretty much out of date now. An i3-4150 is faster.

Cooler Master makes mostly terrible power supplies. I don't know about that particular model, so look for professional reviews.

By next year the GTX 800 series will most likely have released, but the GTX 760 would easily last 2-3 years at 900p.

 

[KiPratama]

around $625

 

[bradsctt]

An FX 6300 is still faster in multi threaded tasks than an i3 4150, and more and more software is becoming multi threaded.

 

[Rationale]

An FX 6300 is still faster in multi threaded tasks than an i3 4150, and more and more software is becoming multi threaded.

You must not have looked at any in-game tests for a couple years.

 

[KiPratama]

By next year the FX-6300 will already be out of date. It's pretty much out of date now. An i3-4150 is faster.

Cooler Master makes mostly terrible power supplies. I don't know about that particular model, so look for professional reviews.

By next year the GTX 800 series will most likely have released, but the GTX 760 would easily last 2-3 years at 900p.

so should i pick corsair instead? yeah i hope that fx 8350 price will drop next year..

 

[Rationale]

By next year the FX-6300 will already be out of date. It's pretty much out of date now. An i3-4150 is faster.

Cooler Master makes mostly terrible power supplies. I don't know about that particular model, so look for professional reviews.

By next year the GTX 800 series will most likely have released, but the GTX 760 would easily last 2-3 years at 900p.

so should i pick corsair instead? yeah i hope that fx 8350 price will drop next year..

That depends on the Corsair PSU. Most of theirs are at least moderate quality.

Replacing an FX-6300 with an FX-8350 would be mostly pointless. They're both on a dead socket, and they perform similarly in games.

 

[Ohmybad]

By next year your current part list will be obsolete... best bet is start saving, and when you reach your goal a) your current list will be cheaper b) you'll be able to buy better components with your budget.

 

[KiPratama]

By next year the FX-6300 will already be out of date. It's pretty much out of date now. An i3-4150 is faster.

Cooler Master makes mostly terrible power supplies. I don't know about that particular model, so look for professional reviews.

By next year the GTX 800 series will most likely have released, but the GTX 760 would easily last 2-3 years at 900p.

so should i pick corsair instead? yeah i hope that fx 8350 price will drop next year..

That depends on the Corsair PSU. Most of theirs are at least moderate quality.

Replacing an FX-6300 with an FX-8350 would be mostly pointless. They're both on a dead socket, and they perform similarly in games.

i think i'm gonna use the Corsair CX 600W .

 

[Rationale]

By next year the FX-6300 will already be out of date. It's pretty much out of date now. An i3-4150 is faster.

Cooler Master makes mostly terrible power supplies. I don't know about that particular model, so look for professional reviews.

By next year the GTX 800 series will most likely have released, but the GTX 760 would easily last 2-3 years at 900p.

so should i pick corsair instead? yeah i hope that fx 8350 price will drop next year..

That depends on the Corsair PSU. Most of theirs are at least moderate quality.

Replacing an FX-6300 with an FX-8350 would be mostly pointless. They're both on a dead socket, and they perform similarly in games.

i think i'm gonna use the Corsair CX 600W .

The CX600 isn't bad. It's not *amazing* but it's easily enough for a gaming PC on a budget.

As for what I was saying before...

For reference, Watch Dogs is among the highest multithreaded games out right now, which gives AMD an advantage and allows them to play to their strengths.

http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/827/bench/CPU_...

As you can see, an i3-4130 matches an FX-6350, which is a higher clocked FX-6300, and the FX-8350 is only 3 fps ahead on average. An i3-4150 would far outpace a stock FX-6300, even in the areas where AMD is most at home.

 

[KiPratama]

By next year your current part list will be obsolete... best bet is start saving, and when you reach your goal a) your current list will be cheaper b) you'll be able to buy better components with your budget.

how much do you think the price will drop? i certainly hope that the price will drop significantly

 

[KiPratama]

By next year the FX-6300 will already be out of date. It's pretty much out of date now. An i3-4150 is faster.

Cooler Master makes mostly terrible power supplies. I don't know about that particular model, so look for professional reviews.

By next year the GTX 800 series will most likely have released, but the GTX 760 would easily last 2-3 years at 900p.

so should i pick corsair instead? yeah i hope that fx 8350 price will drop next year..

That depends on the Corsair PSU. Most of theirs are at least moderate quality.

Replacing an FX-6300 with an FX-8350 would be mostly pointless. They're both on a dead socket, and they perform similarly in games.

i think i'm gonna use the Corsair CX 600W .

The CX600 isn't bad. It's not *amazing* but it's easily enough for a gaming PC on a budget.

As for what I was saying before...

For reference, Watch Dogs is among the highest multithreaded games out right now, which gives AMD an advantage and allows them to play to their strengths.

http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/827/bench/CPU_...

As you can see, an i3-4130 matches an FX-6350, which is a higher clocked FX-6300, and the FX-8350 is only 3 fps ahead on average. An i3-4150 would far outpace a stock FX-6300, even in the areas where AMD is most at home.

the page not found mate. but in Game-Debate i3 4150 is 24% worse than FX 6300 this is confusing -_-

 

[Rationale]

By next year the FX-6300 will already be out of date. It's pretty much out of date now. An i3-4150 is faster.

Cooler Master makes mostly terrible power supplies. I don't know about that particular model, so look for professional reviews.

By next year the GTX 800 series will most likely have released, but the GTX 760 would easily last 2-3 years at 900p.

so should i pick corsair instead? yeah i hope that fx 8350 price will drop next year..

That depends on the Corsair PSU. Most of theirs are at least moderate quality.

Replacing an FX-6300 with an FX-8350 would be mostly pointless. They're both on a dead socket, and they perform similarly in games.

i think i'm gonna use the Corsair CX 600W .

The CX600 isn't bad. It's not *amazing* but it's easily enough for a gaming PC on a budget.

As for what I was saying before...

For reference, Watch Dogs is among the highest multithreaded games out right now, which gives AMD an advantage and allows them to play to their strengths.

http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/827/bench/CPU_...

As you can see, an i3-4130 matches an FX-6350, which is a higher clocked FX-6300, and the FX-8350 is only 3 fps ahead on average. An i3-4150 would far outpace a stock FX-6300, even in the areas where AMD is most at home.

the page not found mate. but in Game-Debate i3 4150 is 24% worse than FX 6300 this is confusing -_-

Game Debate uses artificial benchmarks, and does not account for system architecture, only raw specs. They're not reliable, and they don't test in actual games for their performance ratings.

Game Debate even shows the GTX 660 and R9 270X perform the same, but that's not true. In reality, the R9 270X is significantly stronger than the GTX 660. And I own a GTX 660, so there's no motivation for me to lie about that.
http://www.game-debate.com/gpu/index.php?gid=1863&gid2=1280&compare=radeon-r9-270x-vs-geforce-gtx-660-msi-hawk-2gb-edition

Moral: Don't trust Game Debate, and don't trust artificial benchmarks unless they're accompanied by real-world tests inn actual games and programs.

Sorry, here. I accidentally broke the link by copy-pasting it last time with the ellipsis.
http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/827/bench/CPU_01.png

 

[KiPratama]

By next year the FX-6300 will already be out of date. It's pretty much out of date now. An i3-4150 is faster.

Cooler Master makes mostly terrible power supplies. I don't know about that particular model, so look for professional reviews.

By next year the GTX 800 series will most likely have released, but the GTX 760 would easily last 2-3 years at 900p.

so should i pick corsair instead? yeah i hope that fx 8350 price will drop next year..

That depends on the Corsair PSU. Most of theirs are at least moderate quality.

Replacing an FX-6300 with an FX-8350 would be mostly pointless. They're both on a dead socket, and they perform similarly in games.

i think i'm gonna use the Corsair CX 600W .

The CX600 isn't bad. It's not *amazing* but it's easily enough for a gaming PC on a budget.

As for what I was saying before...

For reference, Watch Dogs is among the highest multithreaded games out right now, which gives AMD an advantage and allows them to play to their strengths.

http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/827/bench/CPU_...

As you can see, an i3-4130 matches an FX-6350, which is a higher clocked FX-6300, and the FX-8350 is only 3 fps ahead on average. An i3-4150 would far outpace a stock FX-6300, even in the areas where AMD is most at home.

the page not found mate. but in Game-Debate i3 4150 is 24% worse than FX 6300 this is confusing -_-

Game Debate uses artificial benchmarks, and does not account for system architecture, only raw specs. They're not reliable, and they don't test in actual games for their performance ratings.

Game Debate even shows the GTX 660 and R9 270X perform the same, but in reality the R9 270X is significantly stronger. And I own a GTX 660, so there's no motivation for me to lie about that.
http://www.game-debate.com/gpu/index.php?gid=1863&gid2=1280&compare=radeon-r9-270x-vs-geforce-gtx-660-msi-hawk-2gb-edition

Sorry, here. I accidentally broke the link by copy-pasting it last time with the ellipsis.
http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/827/bench/CPU_01.png

i see. how much do you think i3 4150 will outrun fx 6300?

 

[Rationale]

By next year the FX-6300 will already be out of date. It's pretty much out of date now. An i3-4150 is faster.

Cooler Master makes mostly terrible power supplies. I don't know about that particular model, so look for professional reviews.

By next year the GTX 800 series will most likely have released, but the GTX 760 would easily last 2-3 years at 900p.

so should i pick corsair instead? yeah i hope that fx 8350 price will drop next year..

That depends on the Corsair PSU. Most of theirs are at least moderate quality.

Replacing an FX-6300 with an FX-8350 would be mostly pointless. They're both on a dead socket, and they perform similarly in games.

i think i'm gonna use the Corsair CX 600W .

The CX600 isn't bad. It's not *amazing* but it's easily enough for a gaming PC on a budget.

As for what I was saying before...

For reference, Watch Dogs is among the highest multithreaded games out right now, which gives AMD an advantage and allows them to play to their strengths.

http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/827/bench/CPU_...

As you can see, an i3-4130 matches an FX-6350, which is a higher clocked FX-6300, and the FX-8350 is only 3 fps ahead on average. An i3-4150 would far outpace a stock FX-6300, even in the areas where AMD is most at home.

the page not found mate. but in Game-Debate i3 4150 is 24% worse than FX 6300 this is confusing -_-

Game Debate uses artificial benchmarks, and does not account for system architecture, only raw specs. They're not reliable, and they don't test in actual games for their performance ratings.

Game Debate even shows the GTX 660 and R9 270X perform the same, but in reality the R9 270X is significantly stronger. And I own a GTX 660, so there's no motivation for me to lie about that.
http://www.game-debate.com/gpu/index.php?gid=1863&gid2=1280&compare=radeon-r9-270x-vs-geforce-gtx-660-msi-hawk-2gb-edition

Sorry, here. I accidentally broke the link by copy-pasting it last time with the ellipsis.
http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/827/bench/CPU_01.png

i see. how much do you think i3 4150 will outrun fx 6300?

It depends on the game.

In heavily multithreaded games like BF4 or Watchdogs, probably just 4-5 fps, and both would keep enough above 60 that it wouldn't really matter much.

In games that use 2-4 cores, like the Assassin's Creed series, Thief, Skyrim, etc, the i3-4150 will be ahead by a larger amount. For example, Skyrim uses 4 cores officially, and there the i3-4130 beats a stock FX-8350 by 15 fps at the lowest point, and matches it at the highest point.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2013/11/14/intel-core-i3-4130-haswell-review/5

 

[KiPratama]

By next year the FX-6300 will already be out of date. It's pretty much out of date now. An i3-4150 is faster.

Cooler Master makes mostly terrible power supplies. I don't know about that particular model, so look for professional reviews.

By next year the GTX 800 series will most likely have released, but the GTX 760 would easily last 2-3 years at 900p.

so should i pick corsair instead? yeah i hope that fx 8350 price will drop next year..

That depends on the Corsair PSU. Most of theirs are at least moderate quality.

Replacing an FX-6300 with an FX-8350 would be mostly pointless. They're both on a dead socket, and they perform similarly in games.

i think i'm gonna use the Corsair CX 600W .

The CX600 isn't bad. It's not *amazing* but it's easily enough for a gaming PC on a budget.

As for what I was saying before...

For reference, Watch Dogs is among the highest multithreaded games out right now, which gives AMD an advantage and allows them to play to their strengths.

http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/827/bench/CPU_...

As you can see, an i3-4130 matches an FX-6350, which is a higher clocked FX-6300, and the FX-8350 is only 3 fps ahead on average. An i3-4150 would far outpace a stock FX-6300, even in the areas where AMD is most at home.

the page not found mate. but in Game-Debate i3 4150 is 24% worse than FX 6300 this is confusing -_-

Game Debate uses artificial benchmarks, and does not account for system architecture, only raw specs. They're not reliable, and they don't test in actual games for their performance ratings.

Game Debate even shows the GTX 660 and R9 270X perform the same, but in reality the R9 270X is significantly stronger. And I own a GTX 660, so there's no motivation for me to lie about that.
http://www.game-debate.com/gpu/index.php?gid=1863&gid2=1280&compare=radeon-r9-270x-vs-geforce-gtx-660-msi-hawk-2gb-edition

Sorry, here. I accidentally broke the link by copy-pasting it last time with the ellipsis.
http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/827/bench/CPU_01.png

i see. how much do you think i3 4150 will outrun fx 6300?

It depends on the game. In heavily multithreaded games like BF4 or Watchdogs, probably just 4-5 fps, and both would keep enough above 60 that it wouldn't really matter much.

In games that use 2-4 cores, like the Assassin's Creed series, Thief, Skyrim, etc, the i3-4150 will be ahead by a larger amount. For example, Skyrim uses 4 cores for most tasks, and there the i3-4130 beats a stock FX-8350 by an average of 20 fps.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2013/11/14/intel-core-i3-4130-haswell-review/5

wow 20 FPS is a lot. so an FX is better for a multithreaded games.. i think i'm still gonna buy an FX cpu unless amd make a new cpu

 

[Rationale]

By next year the FX-6300 will already be out of date. It's pretty much out of date now. An i3-4150 is faster.

Cooler Master makes mostly terrible power supplies. I don't know about that particular model, so look for professional reviews.

By next year the GTX 800 series will most likely have released, but the GTX 760 would easily last 2-3 years at 900p.

so should i pick corsair instead? yeah i hope that fx 8350 price will drop next year..

That depends on the Corsair PSU. Most of theirs are at least moderate quality.

Replacing an FX-6300 with an FX-8350 would be mostly pointless. They're both on a dead socket, and they perform similarly in games.

i think i'm gonna use the Corsair CX 600W .

The CX600 isn't bad. It's not *amazing* but it's easily enough for a gaming PC on a budget.

As for what I was saying before...

For reference, Watch Dogs is among the highest multithreaded games out right now, which gives AMD an advantage and allows them to play to their strengths.

http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/827/bench/CPU_...

As you can see, an i3-4130 matches an FX-6350, which is a higher clocked FX-6300, and the FX-8350 is only 3 fps ahead on average. An i3-4150 would far outpace a stock FX-6300, even in the areas where AMD is most at home.

the page not found mate. but in Game-Debate i3 4150 is 24% worse than FX 6300 this is confusing -_-

Game Debate uses artificial benchmarks, and does not account for system architecture, only raw specs. They're not reliable, and they don't test in actual games for their performance ratings.

Game Debate even shows the GTX 660 and R9 270X perform the same, but in reality the R9 270X is significantly stronger. And I own a GTX 660, so there's no motivation for me to lie about that.
http://www.game-debate.com/gpu/index.php?gid=1863&gid2=1280&compare=radeon-r9-270x-vs-geforce-gtx-660-msi-hawk-2gb-edition

Sorry, here. I accidentally broke the link by copy-pasting it last time with the ellipsis.
http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/827/bench/CPU_01.png

i see. how much do you think i3 4150 will outrun fx 6300?

It depends on the game. In heavily multithreaded games like BF4 or Watchdogs, probably just 4-5 fps, and both would keep enough above 60 that it wouldn't really matter much.

In games that use 2-4 cores, like the Assassin's Creed series, Thief, Skyrim, etc, the i3-4150 will be ahead by a larger amount. For example, Skyrim uses 4 cores for most tasks, and there the i3-4130 beats a stock FX-8350 by an average of 20 fps.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2013/11/14/intel-core-i3-4130-haswell-review/5

wow 20 FPS is a lot. so an FX is better for a multithreaded games.. i think i'm still gonna buy an FX cpu unless amd make a new cpu

FX CPUs aren't better for multithreaded games than Intel; they're just not far behind.

 

[bradsctt]

An FX 6300 is still faster in multi threaded tasks than an i3 4150, and more and more software is becoming multi threaded.

You must not have looked at any in-game tests for a couple years.

Yeah, i have actually...

They trade blows in most games, but in a few, like BF4, Watch_Dogs and Crysis 3, the FX 6300 is a winner, due to better multi-core optimization, and better resource allocation. Single threaded games still suffer on AMD, but they are becoming less common.

The FX 6300 in some cases provides a more stable frame rate than the i3 during CPU intensive scenes in games, due to being able to spread load over more cores. The same thing has been seen in reviews of the new Pentium G3258, where it will get the same average frame rates as an i5, but has much more random frame rate drop at certain CPU intensive points.

Of course, games like Skyrim, which is well known to favour Intel, brings the FX 6300 to its knees.

The AMD processors do however provide reasonable performance over the i3 in productivity, due to its higher core count.

Anyway, as you said, AM3+ is essentially dead. Last CPU release was over a year ago, and there is no sign of a new CPU series release. The 760G, 970 and 990FX chipsets are becoming more and more outdated compared with Intel, lacking many newer features that have just been introduced on Z97.

Best option is to wait till closer to the purchase date, and then revise the build to take into account updates to CPUs, GPUs and RAM (DDR4 maybe).

 

[Rationale]

They trade blows in most games, but in a few, like BF4, Watch_Dogs and Crysis 3, the FX 6300 is a winner, due to better multi-core optimization, and better resource allocation. Single threaded games still suffer on AMD, but they are becoming less common.

I just posted a link in this same thread, literally 5 minutes ago, showing the FX-6350 matching an i3-4130 exactly in average framerate in Watchdogs. How do you suppose we can extrapolate that into an FX-6300 versus an i3-4150?

 

[bradsctt]

The thing that a lot of people forget while comparing Intel and AMD CPUs, (and Rationale, im sure you can agree on this), is that most people Vsync at 60FPS (Right?), and when people complain about FPS being lower on AMD, they won't even notice with Vsync on.

For example: When people say 'Skyrim gets (insert drop here) FPS lower on AMD CPU on a GTX 760/R9 270X etc', they tend to forget the fact that even after the FPS decrease, the frame rate is still well above 60 FPS with Vsync off, making no difference to a large majority of gamers.(Unless they are using a 120Hz monitor etc)

 

[bradsctt]

I was halfway through typing that reply when you posted the benchmarks, i had to go fix something and then came back and posted without realising you had posted in between.

 

[Rationale]

The thing that a lot of people forget while comparing Intel and AMD CPUs, (and Rationale, im sure you can agree on this), is that most people Vsync at 60FPS (Right?), and when people complain about FPS being lower on AMD, they won't even notice with Vsync on.

For example: When people say 'Skyrim gets (insert drop here) FPS lower on AMD CPU on a GTX 760', they tend to forget the fact that even after the FPS decrease, the frame rate is still well above 60 FPS with Vsync off, making no difference to a large majority of gamers.(Unless they are using a 120Hz monitor etc)

That still does not favorably reflect on longevity. And if we just say "it's all 60 fps so it's the same", then the i3 is still ahead due to the lower TDP.