Is it time to bite the financial bullet and switch to Intel?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
M

mstringer06

Reputable
Feb 7, 2015
42
0
4,530
Ok, so have recently put a few upgrades into my computer, two of them being GTX 970's. I've posted online in the battlefield forums and asked how to best tweak my settings to get best trade off with quality and FPS. Pretty much everyone is telling me that my FPS is way to low for my hardware, and that its pretty pathetic considering. They point to my CPU and say that it is holding the GTX's back. I currently have a fx 8350 OC to 4.6. I bought it a couple of years ago and I though with OC it would be able to keep up. They say I should get an I5 at least and recommend a i7 4790k (which is probably what I would buy).
So my question is, is this all fanboyism or is there something to this. Will I notice as big an improvement as they say? Will the fx 9590 not provide the same results? (so I can keep my MOBO I JUST bought)

Oh, and "1-800-2-EASY":

I know you like to follow me around on Online forums, but I've heard plenty of your opinion and I don't want to hear any more of it. Thanks :)
 
Solution
sincreator


It seems that you are forgetting that the OP is trying to run GTX 970's. I don't think money is an issue, lol. All these cheap chips are pointless for SLI GTX970 unless the OP wants a huge CPU bottleneck. Go read the link I posted way earlier in the thread that explores CPU bottlenecks. Even crossfire 7970 was held back by the FX chips, so SLI 970 would be bottlenecked way worse since they are twice as powerful.

From the conclusion of the article I mentioned:
" From now on, we'll need to limit the use...
Sort by date Sort by votes
The 9590 is just a overclocked 8350 so you'd be spending a lot for a 100mhz boost as they don't usually have much if any room left to oc further. If all you are doing is gaming get the 4690k as the performance diffence between it and the 4790k in games is not worth the extra cost. If you are doing other tasks like streaming or video editing then you would see some benefit from the i7.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I've only built AMD before this, but the Darkside now has better cookies..

AMD's CPU "strategy" has resulted in a dearth of innovative MoBos for their high end offerings; you have like 8 or 9 motherboards total that can support their best cpus.

And their highest end offering is almost two years old - the 9590, released back in July of 2013

Whatever the heck AMD corporate has in mind, they've not impressed me enough to buy the last new AM3+ socket CPU they will ever make, and a MoBo for it.

I was going to, but I've come around to the Darkside, for now:

Besides all the above, game for game intel's multi-threading and hyper-threading now beat the snot out AMD in CPU-intensive games, and beat AMD only slightly less horribly in multi-core games and apps, Ghz for Ghz.

It's a shame, but at least their GPUs are kicking ass :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
[video="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDVcpAhegWs"][/video]

Keep in mind none of these CPUs were overclocked when tested and they all can be overclocked, personally the results fall in the No-Brainer category if performance is what you are after!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


So you don't think there is a huge diference between 4690k and 4790k? And I can pretty much rule out the fx9590 right of the bat then. Ok well I'll check into prices, along with the mobo. I really like the idea of the dual Lan and PCIe 3.0. Unfortunately they usally come with wifi and bluetooth built in, so thats another $70 wasted on wifi and bluetooth adapters, along with the new mobo I just bought 🙁 I also like the mobos that have that like plastic casing over them to help with airflow. (Not sure if they really do anything, but they look cool lol)

Stupid question, what do you mean by streaming? Just like watching online movies off my cloud and such?

Oh and for the optimized games that do well with SLI, I'm getting 90-100% GPU usage.
and I upgraded from a refernce HD 7950 and when I saw all the Nvidia only options in games (most notably when I was playing FC4, I said F it and bought the 970s.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


When I played it and I maxed out MSAA and The post processing I got around 40ish fps.. and with explosions and shiz down to like 25-30. I've seen people with 970 SLI (with i7) get around 100fps
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


I couldn't run a fx9590 with a M5a99fx Pro R2 and a Corsair H80i?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


EVERYONE else tells me cpu. If it's not what do you think it is ?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
the thing is amd is a better value... you can get an 8 core amd wich cost as much as a higher end i3 cpu and preform as good as an i5 that's almost double the price... for most builds I recommend amd... amd is just a better value... when you get to the really powerful cpu's like i7's and debatably i5(can go either way for i5) intel wins imo because amd doesn't make anything better than an i5... so your choice I guess but I prefer amd because I get more bang for my buck...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
the thing is amd is a better value... you can get an 8 core amd wich cost as much as a higher end i3 cpu and preform as good as an i5 that's almost double the price... for most builds I recommend amd... amd is just a better value... when you get to the really powerful cpu's like i7's and debatably i5(can go either way for i5) intel wins imo because amd doesn't make anything better than an i5... so your choice I guess but I prefer amd because I get more bang for my buck...
Click to expand...

This was true 3 years ago when the Piledriver FX cpus came out, but now no way. Intel is better at every price range. An i5 is no where near twice as much as an 8 core AMD. It's more like $30-50, and the current i3s actually beat the 8 core AMDs most of the time when it counts.
 
Upvote 2 Downvote
the thing is an i3 might narrowly beat an 8 core amd is single-dual threaded tasks... watch what happens when you play a game that utilizes 4-8 cores... amd wins in newer gen multi threaded games price performance... shore intel wins in older games but in older games amd's weaker more numerous cores will fare fine because well there older games and easy to run...

this
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116993&cm_re=intel_core_i3-_-19-116-993-_-Product
or this
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113284&cm_re=fx_8350-_-19-113-284-_-Product

lets say the intel cores are 50-75% more powerful, amd's cpu is around the same price and over double the power... 8 cores that are 50-75% weaker is more than 2 that are stronger... I rather play assassins creed unity and watch dogs with an 8 core amd cpu... shore an i3 will do better in skyrim but both can easily achieve 60 fps so does that even matter? I admit an i3 will do a little better in certain cases...but in newer games that need the extra power amd whoops intel price/performance in low-mid range gaming cpu's.. even if the intel cores were double the power amd would still win...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
this
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116973&cm_re=intel_celeron-_-19-116-973-_-Product
or this
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113348&cm_re=amd-_-19-113-348-_-Product

even if that is the case you could just get one of amd's higher end cpu's for the same price on intels lower end ones... you can beat intel with brute force strength difference of a lower end intel or mid-high range amd... I know that intels low range are better than amd's low range cpus and intels mid range are better than amd's mid range cpus ect but a higher end amd cost as much as a low-mid range intel cpus that's why amd wins... I do admit when you get to i7 intel dominates and debatably i5's(can go ethier way) but for most gaming pc's were you don't have unlimited cash imo amd wins...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom