I'm overclocking my AMD FX 6300 and using a gtx 780. Need some advice to see if I can run games over 45fps!

[griffey546]

I have a fx 6300 trying to oc to 4.1ghz, and I am planning on getting a gigabyte windforce gtx 780, I just want to know if I will run into any bottlenecks, like major bottlenecks. I just need an answer from someone who knows what they are talking about please! http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125488&cm_re=gtx_780-_-14-125-488-_-Product graphics card I'm trying to get.

 

[bmacsys]

so i should not get the amd fx 8350 or 4670k, and get the 4460? and could someone tell me what a good motherboard is that is at most $75?

$75 dollars doesn't get a good board no matter what anyone states. To meet that price point you get Chinese caps, weak chokes etc....

 

[jkteddy77]

sadly probably not...
Let me put this straight... an 8350 at 4.6ghz on my Asus 990FX Pro (the superior to the board you linked) still bottled my R9 290, which is even slower than a 970 would be. an 8350 will not hold 60+fps in games, and definitely not while streaming/recording
Here, with the 8350 I played BF4 between 40-85fps. Now that I switched to an i7 4790k, I now get 70-110fps.... same gpu, same ram, osu, same everything except I switched to Intel

Even with an 8370, Tom's Hardware doesn't recommend pairing an FX cpu with anything faster than a 760 or 270x:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-fx-8370e-cpu,3929-7.html
"Depending on the game in question, AMD’s new processor has the potential to keep you happy around the AMD Radeon R9 270X/285 or Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 or 660 Ti level.
A higher- or even high-end graphics card doesn’t make sense, as pairing it with AMD's FX-8370 simply limits the card's potential."

Everyone out there using one with anything higher is either lying to themselves or doesn't know they are bottlenecked...
It ran the same in BF4 Single player, since it rely's on the GPU entirely games, but for BF4 Multiplayer + recording... you will need an intel... an i5 4690k would suffice, but an i7 would be recommended.
It sucks I know, but AMD FX cpu's have aged far too fast. I was not happy to upgrade to an intel either, but it's what you're gonna have to do if you want to truly run 60+ or stream

You never had a bottleneck as your GPU could hit 100% usage under load (I am positive of that). However, if you see someone with an i7 getting a better FPS with the same GPU, it is because the part of the game takes use of the CPU which will result in a higher fps due to the more powerful CPU.

look, if you're GPU isn't at 99-100% in games, you ARE bottlenecked.. yes it hit it, but it didn't STAY there. If your GPU isn't staying at 100%, it's because the game is too intensivr on your GPU... Hence, a bottleneck.

I had an 8350, and have an i7 nbow... I gained FPS in EVERY GAME
Call it what you want, he will never get the performance that GPU is capable of if he pairs it with an FX processor. I'm not just talking a handful of fps, I was seeing a 20fps increase in some games (BF3, BF4, Arma) with my 290 just by swapping out the CPU/Mobo. Those are the kinds of games he will be playing too. If you have never run a 290 and 8350 on that game, do not contribute to how the combo runs the game.

honestly, I would get a cheaper Z87 and a used 4670k (I see them under $200 now). Why get a weaker i5, the 4670k will last longer since you can OC it when it gets too slow. plius, it's only like $40 more.
This mobo: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130695&SortField=0&SummaryType=0&PageSize=10&SelectedRating=-1&VideoOnlyMark=False&IsFeedbackTab=true#scrollFullInfo
and either a cheaper 4670k, or a 4690k. Best proce/performancve, will deliver more than the 8350 can as far as BF3/BF4 go.

If you were only playing single player games, an FX would be fine, but you want high end Multiplayer performance, you need an intel.
Here is video of my 8350 and r9 290 in BF3! a game from 2011.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aq9dSLOElX4&list=UU4WCRSsuAr931g1sycgcDgg
I now run this game all 100+ so...

 

[griffey546]

so i should not get the amd fx 8350 or 4670k, and get the 4460? and could someone tell me what a good motherboard is that is at most $75?

$75 dollars doesn't get a good board no matter what anyone states. To meet that price point you get Chinese caps, weak chokes etc....

sadly probably not...
Let me put this straight... an 8350 at 4.6ghz on my Asus 990FX Pro (the superior to the board you linked) still bottled my R9 290, which is even slower than a 970 would be. an 8350 will not hold 60+fps in games, and definitely not while streaming/recording
Here, with the 8350 I played BF4 between 40-85fps. Now that I switched to an i7 4790k, I now get 70-110fps.... same gpu, same ram, osu, same everything except I switched to Intel

Even with an 8370, Tom's Hardware doesn't recommend pairing an FX cpu with anything faster than a 760 or 270x:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-fx-8370e-cpu,3929-7.html
"Depending on the game in question, AMD’s new processor has the potential to keep you happy around the AMD Radeon R9 270X/285 or Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 or 660 Ti level.
A higher- or even high-end graphics card doesn’t make sense, as pairing it with AMD's FX-8370 simply limits the card's potential."

Everyone out there using one with anything higher is either lying to themselves or doesn't know they are bottlenecked...
It ran the same in BF4 Single player, since it rely's on the GPU entirely games, but for BF4 Multiplayer + recording... you will need an intel... an i5 4690k would suffice, but an i7 would be recommended.
It sucks I know, but AMD FX cpu's have aged far too fast. I was not happy to upgrade to an intel either, but it's what you're gonna have to do if you want to truly run 60+ or stream

You never had a bottleneck as your GPU could hit 100% usage under load (I am positive of that). However, if you see someone with an i7 getting a better FPS with the same GPU, it is because the part of the game takes use of the CPU which will result in a higher fps due to the more powerful CPU.

look, if you're GPU isn't at 99-100% in games, you ARE bottlenecked.. yes it hit it, but it didn't STAY there. If your GPU isn't staying at 100%, it's because the game is too intensivr on your GPU... Hence, a bottleneck.

I had an 8350, and have an i7 nbow... I gained FPS in EVERY GAME
Call it what you want, he will never get the performance that GPU is capable of if he pairs it with an FX processor. I'm not just talking a handful of fps, I was seeing a 20fps increase in some games (BF3, BF4, Arma) with my 290 just by swapping out the CPU/Mobo. Those are the kinds of games he will be playing too. If you have never run a 290 and 8350 on that game, do not contribute to how the combo runs the game.

honestly, I would get a cheaper Z87 and a used 4670k (I see them under $200 now). Why get a weaker i5, the 4670k will last longer since you can OC it when it gets too slow. plius, it's only like $40 more.
This mobo: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130695&SortField=0&SummaryType=0&PageSize=10&SelectedRating=-1&VideoOnlyMark=False&IsFeedbackTab=true#scrollFullInfo
and either a cheaper 4670k, or a 4690k. Best proce/performancve, will deliver more than the 8350 can as far as BF3/BF4 go.

If you were only playing single player games, an FX would be fine, but you want high end Multiplayer performance, you need an intel.
Here is video of my 8350 and r9 290 in BF3! a game from 2011.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aq9dSLOElX4&list=UU4WCRSsuAr931g1sycgcDgg
I now run this game all 100+ so...

well isnt there not much of a difference between the 4460 and a 4670k? as in fps, im also using a 280x, im planning on using a 290 if i can get the money for one

 

[TheMagicalWallaby]

sadly probably not...
Let me put this straight... an 8350 at 4.6ghz on my Asus 990FX Pro (the superior to the board you linked) still bottled my R9 290, which is even slower than a 970 would be. an 8350 will not hold 60+fps in games, and definitely not while streaming/recording
Here, with the 8350 I played BF4 between 40-85fps. Now that I switched to an i7 4790k, I now get 70-110fps.... same gpu, same ram, osu, same everything except I switched to Intel

Even with an 8370, Tom's Hardware doesn't recommend pairing an FX cpu with anything faster than a 760 or 270x:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-fx-8370e-cpu,3929-7.html
"Depending on the game in question, AMD’s new processor has the potential to keep you happy around the AMD Radeon R9 270X/285 or Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 or 660 Ti level.
A higher- or even high-end graphics card doesn’t make sense, as pairing it with AMD's FX-8370 simply limits the card's potential."

Everyone out there using one with anything higher is either lying to themselves or doesn't know they are bottlenecked...
It ran the same in BF4 Single player, since it rely's on the GPU entirely games, but for BF4 Multiplayer + recording... you will need an intel... an i5 4690k would suffice, but an i7 would be recommended.
It sucks I know, but AMD FX cpu's have aged far too fast. I was not happy to upgrade to an intel either, but it's what you're gonna have to do if you want to truly run 60+ or stream

You never had a bottleneck as your GPU could hit 100% usage under load (I am positive of that). However, if you see someone with an i7 getting a better FPS with the same GPU, it is because the part of the game takes use of the CPU which will result in a higher fps due to the more powerful CPU.

look, if you're GPU isn't at 99-100% in games, you ARE bottlenecked.. yes it hit it, but it didn't STAY there. If your GPU isn't staying at 100%, it's because the game is too intensivr on your GPU... Hence, a bottleneck.

I had an 8350, and have an i7 nbow... I gained FPS in EVERY GAME
Call it what you want, he will never get the performance that GPU is capable of if he pairs it with an FX processor. I'm not just talking a handful of fps, I was seeing a 20fps increase in some games (BF3, BF4, Arma) with my 290 just by swapping out the CPU/Mobo. Those are the kinds of games he will be playing too. If you have never run a 290 and 8350 on that game, do not contribute to how the combo runs the game.

honestly, I would get a cheaper Z87 and a used 4670k (I see them under $200 now). Why get a weaker i5, the 4670k will last longer since you can OC it when it gets too slow. plius, it's only like $40 more.
This mobo: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130695&SortField=0&SummaryType=0&PageSize=10&SelectedRating=-1&VideoOnlyMark=False&IsFeedbackTab=true#scrollFullInfo
and either a cheaper 4670k, or a 4690k. Best proce/performancve, will deliver more than the 8350 can as far as BF3/BF4 go.

If you were only playing single player games, an FX would be fine, but you want high end Multiplayer performance, you need an intel.
Here is video of my 8350 and r9 290 in BF3! a game from 2011.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aq9dSLOElX4&list=UU4WCRSsuAr931g1sycgcDgg
I now run this game all 100+ so...

My 8350 does not bottleneck my 970 at all, so I can't believe that your 280x was bottlenecked. And yes getting an i7 will give you an fps boost. Watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAgpvWc4VBM

 

[jkteddy77]

Look, if you aren't getting 85-110fps with your 970, you are simply wasting your money on a stronger GPU that will never be fully utilized...

In that JayZ2Cents video, they are still using the same CPU. That CPU, even using its 4 cores, can power the game better core for core than the FX line's slower single cores can.
At 18:38 in the video, if your GPU usage looks like that at anytime with your 8350, that IS a CPU bottleneck.

Look back at the video I showed you of my 8350/r9 290, the graph looked exactly like that... under 100%... it is indeed then labeled a bottleneck.
What fps does your 970 run at? Show me some video with an fps meter up and showing your settings (max them default ultra). I'd also like to see what your GPU usage is doing. If your GPU usage graph isn't a solid straight line at 99 or 100% while you are playing, your CPU is slowing you down... you should DEFINITIELY not be going under 60 ever with that card with all of your settings maxed. Prove me wrong, let your hardware speak for itself.

If it's not bottlenecking, you still wasted money on a card that will always be held down by your processor.
And I have an R9 290, and I get 70-110 with my i7 now. If you aren't getting more than me, you just wasted a beefy 970 on a slow cpu choice.

 

[griffey546]

just asking magicalwallaby now, http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx?WishListNumber=22434691 would this give me 60+ fps in a game like arma 3? if not what would be the estimated frames in 1080p high settings

 

[TheMagicalWallaby]

Look, if you aren't getting 85-110fps with your 970, you are simply wasting your money on a stronger GPU that will never be fully utilized...

In that JayZ2Cents video, they are still using the same CPU. That CPU, even using its 4 cores, can power the game better core for core than the FX line's slower single cores can.
At 18:38 in the video, if your GPU usage looks like that at anytime with your 8350, that IS a CPU bottleneck.

Look back at the video I showed you of my 8350/r9 290, the graph looked exactly like that... under 100%... it is indeed then labeled a bottleneck.
What fps does your 970 run at? Show me some video with an fps meter up and showing your settings (max them default ultra). I'd also like to see what your GPU usage is doing. If your GPU usage graph isn't a solid straight line at 99 or 100% while you are playing, your CPU is slowing you down... you should DEFINITIELY not be going under 60 ever with that card with all of your settings maxed. Prove me wrong, let your hardware speak for itself.

If it's not bottlenecking, you still wasted money on a card that will always be held down by your processor.
And I have an R9 290, and I get 70-110 with my i7 now. If you aren't getting more than me, you just wasted a beefy 970 on a slow cpu choice.

He disabled cores and features. Clearly you didn't pay attention, and there is way too much research for you to do on processor performance for me to even explain. I will leave you be with your opinion, and let you do the research when you are ready.

 

[jkteddy77]

Look, if you aren't getting 85-110fps with your 970, you are simply wasting your money on a stronger GPU that will never be fully utilized...

In that JayZ2Cents video, they are still using the same CPU. That CPU, even using its 4 cores, can power the game better core for core than the FX line's slower single cores can.
At 18:38 in the video, if your GPU usage looks like that at anytime with your 8350, that IS a CPU bottleneck.

Look back at the video I showed you of my 8350/r9 290, the graph looked exactly like that... under 100%... it is indeed then labeled a bottleneck.
What fps does your 970 run at? Show me some video with an fps meter up and showing your settings (max them default ultra). I'd also like to see what your GPU usage is doing. If your GPU usage graph isn't a solid straight line at 99 or 100% while you are playing, your CPU is slowing you down... you should DEFINITIELY not be going under 60 ever with that card with all of your settings maxed. Prove me wrong, let your hardware speak for itself.

If it's not bottlenecking, you still wasted money on a card that will always be held down by your processor.
And I have an R9 290, and I get 70-110 with my i7 now. If you aren't getting more than me, you just wasted a beefy 970 on a slow cpu choice.

He disabled cores and features. Clearly you didn't pay attention, and there is way too much research for you to do on processor performance for me to even explain. I will leave you be with your opinion, and let you do the research when you are ready.

What I'm saying is that the i7 only running 4 threads is still not a s big of a bottleneck as an 8350 running all 8 of its threads... The i7 with only 4 cores equlas an i5, and i5's don't bottleneck. The i7 only bottles it when using 2 of itscores... which is really sad...
The 8350's individual core speed is as good as phenoms... its basically 8 cores of phenom power, the core strength did not grow with what modern ames expect out of each core.

And where's your proof that you aren't bottled by your own wise guy.Don't brush me off, prove me wrong...


And to Griffey546, that 4460 would handle it, and that motherboard would be good too, but for $30 more, I'd suggest your get a k processor so in a year or two, you can just OC it and not have to entirely swap your CPU again.

But it would handle it, that's my advice, take it or leave it.

INSTEAD OF THE 780, just get the new 970, they are cheaper AND faster. The 970 is on par with the 780ti for like $340, saved you performance and $200...
Have your pick:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007709&IsNodeId=1&Description=gtx%20970&name=Desktop%20Graphics%20Cards&Order=BESTMATCH&isdeptsrh=1
Good luck finding one in stock, they are going like hot cakes, but it is the best option for you.