Is this fx-6300 rig good for gaming?

[jakejake2115]

I am currently building a gaming rig which I hope to play all modern games at decent frame rates. I will be using a 720p monitor, and playing on medium-high settings doesn't bother me. I have around $300-375 to spend on both a gpu and cpu, and i was planning on getting an fx-6300 and a gtx 760 2gb. I already have a am3+ mobo so i have to stick with that chipset. I also already have 8gb of ram. Would these parts be able yo play games like battlefield 4, shadow of morder, and dragon age inquisition at decent framerates at med/high 720p, or would I need a better am3+ CPU? Also, what is a comfortable frame rate to play at on games? Thanks for any replies

 

[sam_222]

I would honestly say go with a much lesser GPU and spend the money on a good Intel CPU. The CPU gives you the performance and the GPU gives you the image quality. I think people will enjoy gaming at 60fps min more than they will with max settings at not so smooth fps. Games these days don't really look much better on Low/Med or High/ultra. If you want to run high levels of AA then invest in a powerful GPU but otherwise go Intel for gaming.

I disagree with this post entirely, fx-6300 has plenty of power to run gtx 760, don't get me wrong, I have an intel i5-4670k myself, a better gpu will make the difference melt away, gtx 760+fx 6300 is the way to go, if you can add up a little and buy gtx 770 especially 4gb version you have all my votes with that budget, and you will play most games at high setting, if not gtx 760 has plenty of power to render most games even battlefield 4 at high settings at 720p

 

[gibbly]

In far cry 4 ultra settings 1080p the 6300 will bottleneck a 970 by ~15 fps, and gives enough power for active 3d in bf4. Ya, look at the benchmarks. That's using 4 cores not the six, more and more games are able to use 8. Also nvidia has been getting very competitive with prices

 

[slyu9213]

Because what is the point of getting a Good CPU (Intel) + Good GPU so you can get better FPS at lower settings, when getting a cheaper AMD + Great GPU can get you a High FPS at higher settings and decent minimum FPS too. Spending $190 on the cheapest i5 leaves less than half the budget for the GPU if it's $300 and $185 for $375. By going with a $100 FX 6300 you get a $200-275 for the GPU.

It makes sense to get a Intel CPU for the sake of high minimum FPS and the scalability when lowering graphical settings. But choosing between Intel and AMD depends on the situation. Let's say that the OP had a video card already. In that case going with Intel would make sense because getting an Intel build would provide more FPS than going with AMD on the same GPU. But in this case he has yet to get the CPU or GPU. GPU is more important for general performance so sacrificing on the CPU side gives the OP a stronger GPU which will provide more FPS at higher settings. OP said playing on medium-high doesn't bother him but no one is going to say no to high-ultra settings.

 

[mdocod]

For a 720P@60FPS goal, an i5 + GTX750Ti or GTX660 or R9 270 would result in a far better overall balance of performance and visual quality than the FX-6300+GTX760.

The 6300+760 @ 720P would constantly be teetering back and forth from compute to refresh rate bottlenecks, and would rarely ever make full use of the GTX760.

-------

Match the CPU to the compute workload generated by the games you want to play, the conditions you want to play them in, and your FPS goals. If your FPS goal is 30, the FX-6300 is fine for most games, if your FPS goal is 60, the FX-6300 is NOT going to cut it. The GPU in question here does not matter, these are hard limits on performance that will be in play whether running a $100 GPU at 720P or a $400 GPU at 1440P.

Match the GPU to the render workload generated by the visual quality you want to play at (resolution, detail, and post processing settings) and your FPS goals. For 720P, there isn't much useful performance scaling beyond ~$150-200 unless you have a high refresh rate monitor and very high FPS goals.

--------

AN FX-6300 can be a very suitable CPU choice for a GTX760, if the goal is to play at 30FPS on a 1440P display. With a different resolution or performance goal, these may not be a good match at all. Any wide-brushed opinion about the suitability of CPU-GPU pairing should be ignored. (caughsam22)

 

[mdocod]

Sadly.... the mystical, fundamentally flawed "CPU/GPU" relationship that computer hardware enthusiasts like to placate to, shows up in articles and reviews written by "should-be" professionals all the time. It's like a virus of misinformation that can't be wiped out. The elegance and novelty of the mystical approach is just too enticing for people to let go of, regardless of how inaccurate it is.

----------

real-world example:

I like to play a game called RoboCraft.

I have several GPUs here to use, but it doesn't matter if I play on the monitor connected to the GT520 with the visual quality turned all the way down, or the one connected to the GTX460 with the visual quality turned all the way up, or if I install one of my HD7870XT's (similar to R9 280), the performance limits imposed by my FX-8350 are always in play. I really can't play high-tier battles in that game at better than a slideshow (<10FPS) regardless of the GPU selected, so most of the time I don't even bother participating in T8-10 battles.

This may be an extreme example, but the principal point here carries over to almost ALL popular games. The things that make games awesome, and popular (complexity, unit count, AI, multiplayer, etc) are also the things that make them compute intensive.

 

[mdocod]

Your experience is precisely on point.

Intel's choice to focus on intra-core parallelism when AMD chose to focus on inter-core parallelism, was a crucial dividing point. For real-time workloads like gaming, the intra-core parallelism has proven to offer better performance scaling in most cases.

 

[madmatt30]

you guys are on a intel vs amd kick but the guy clearly stated in his first post he ALREADY HAS an am3+ board!!!

jakejake2115

a 6300 will suit you fine mate,
pair it with a r9 280 ,its more powerful than the gtx 760 & can be found a little cheaper
this is a decent card & is cheap
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131570&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&cm_sp=&AID=10446076&PID=3938566&SID=
at 720p you will more than likely be able to ultra most new titles with this combo.

what motherboard do you have , a cheapish aftermarket cooler will let you push the 6300 upto 4ghz+ if you feel the need

& for the naysayers, fx6300 (admittedly at 4ghz) here with a gtx 970 - all at 1080p
mordor - ultra 60fps vysnced solid - no fps drops
The Crew - as above
Farcry 4 - as above
Lords OF The Fallen - as above
AC Unity - some options on ultra/some on high - vsycnced to 60fps once again - no drops

Any more for any more ?? Ill benchmark anything I have for you - the 6300 is better than some of you think - especially with a little overclock & it is DAMN cheap for a fact.

 

[madmatt30]

you guys are on a intel vs amd kick but the guy clearly stated in his first post he ALREADY HAS an am3+ board!!!

jakejake2115

a 6300 will suit you fine mate,
pair it with a r9 280 ,its more powerful than the gtx 760 & can be found a little cheaper
this is a decent card & is cheap
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131570&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&cm_sp=&AID=10446076&PID=3938566&SID=
at 720p you will more than likely be able to ultra most new titles with this combo.

what motherboard do you have , a cheapish aftermarket cooler will let you push the 6300 upto 4ghz+ if you feel the need

In my experience going from AMD to Intel just days ago it was a much smarter upgrade than keeping on the same slow AM3+ platform. Hey just helping out man.

I understand that mate,but the guy is playing at 720p,the 6300 is like what $90 or so in the us??
he honestly doesnt need any more than a 6300 & a r9 280 to pretty much max anything at all

 

[slyu9213]

I've got no problem with Intel, and definitely know the improvements in overall FPS (especially the minimums). For people just starting I tend to always recommend Intel because everything from their Dual-Cores to Quad-Core are pretty amazing for gaming purposes (and other purposes). But I don't recommend every user to go Intel no matter what, especially when they own a particular piece of hardware already. The OP specifically said he has/wants to stick with the AM3+ socket. I have nothing against telling a user the great things about Intel and how it outperforms AMD in XXX cases. That will help the user make a decision, but if the user decides to stick with a particular choice then we should accept that fact and help him from their viewpoint.

Now as the OP is wanting to play at 720P it's true that the Intel will perform better. But with AMD having VSR it shouldn't be as a big problem.