Will an FX-6300 @ 4.5 Ghz Bottleneck an R9-290

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
T

The_

Reputable
Nov 11, 2014
15
0
4,520
Will an FX-6300 @ 4.5 Ghz Bottleneck an R9-290, and also on a side note, what would be the best AIO cpu coller to do so?
 
Solution
madmatt30
a 6300 at 4.5ghz stable is not going to bottleneck a 290 - thats a fact,bottleneck is a dirty word & should only be used in extreme cases.

It may limit max fps in some heavily single threaded titles but bottleneck?? NO

If youre happy with 60 fps vsynced it will do the job in 99% of titles at max settings.

A 212 evo or raijintek themis is capable of cooling a 6300 at that speed fairly easily - theres no need to spend a massive amount on expensive coolers - you will more likely be limited by the chip itself - once past 4.3ghz most fx chiups require a substancial voltage increase & the performance to temp/power trade off isnt worth it - hence mine running at 4.3ghz.
Mine was entirely capable of 4.6ghz but at 1.4v+ not worth it - it...
Sort by date Sort by votes
Threaded or older games, no. Intensive but unoptimized games, yes. I am satisfied though with my 6300 in my budget build, but I would say getting an 8350/8370 and maby a cooler master 212 for your oc would be money better spent than on an AIO
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Why on earth do people still think that a fx 8320 is superior to a fx 6300? At the same clock rates, it is not. They don't get to their limit because they don't have enough cores, but because of their awful single core experience. Even a hypothetical fx 128000 with 128 cores will limit your performance as much as a fx 6300.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote

^
he's right u know. this might help for all you people think that MORE CORES > LESS CORES
Cpu Clock is divided by how many cores ur Processors get. then, 4GHz is divided to 2/4/6/8 Cores.
https://youtu.be/yQ59vHSFfZA?t=1m25s
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Java: 
[quotemsg=15620976,0,1830710]Threaded or older games, no. Intensive but unoptimized games, yes. I am satisfied though with my 6300 in my budget build, but [b]I would say getting an 8350/8370 [/b]and maby a cooler master 212 for your oc would be money better spent than on an AIO[/quotemsg]

[quotemsg=15620857,0,1622381]Actually yes it will bottleneck it a bit.[b] An FX-8320 wouldn't though.[/b]
These are the liquid coolers I'd recommend: [url=http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835181089&cm_re=corsair_liquid-_-35-181-089-_-Product]Corsair H80i GT[/url], [url=http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835181032&cm_re=corsair_liquid-_-35-181-032-_-Product]Corsair H100i[/url], [url=http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835181060&cm_re=corsair_liquid-_-35-181-060-_-Product]Corsair H105[/url] and [url=http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835146042&cm_re=kraken_x61-_-35-146-042-_-Product]Kraken X61[/url] / [url=http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835146041&cm_re=kraken_x41-_-35-146-041-_-Product]Kraken X41[/url].
Any of em will get the job done perfectly.[/quotemsg]

they think a 8350 is better than 6300. i just wanna clarify things.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
What about this one
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJpCsAUmr20 maybe someone could tell me how accurate that is, I own a 8350 but I don't have that GPU, With that said how big is the difference between 6300 and 8350? When it comes to gaming all I know is that my old 6300 had no issues powering 2 660's, I'm more of a workstation guy today. Did any of what I said make any sense? If it didn't try to explain. :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
a 6300 at 4.5ghz stable is not going to bottleneck a 290 - thats a fact,bottleneck is a dirty word & should only be used in extreme cases.

It may limit max fps in some heavily single threaded titles but bottleneck?? NO

If youre happy with 60 fps vsynced it will do the job in 99% of titles at max settings.

A 212 evo or raijintek themis is capable of cooling a 6300 at that speed fairly easily - theres no need to spend a massive amount on expensive coolers - you will more likely be limited by the chip itself - once past 4.3ghz most fx chiups require a substancial voltage increase & the performance to temp/power trade off isnt worth it - hence mine running at 4.3ghz.
Mine was entirely capable of 4.6ghz but at 1.4v+ not worth it - it pushes a gtx 970 admirably at 4.3ghz anyway.























 
Upvote 1 Downvote
Solution
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
If limits the performance, it does indeed bottleneck. That's by definition of the word bottleneck. Certain times the cpu can't throughput or calculate everything required and the gpu and framerate get limited then. That 100% cpu load has nothing to do with a bottleneck, even with only 13% cpu load a fx 8350 may bottleneck a gpu.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
^don't like the word bottleneck as when its Used people automatically associate it with real crippling performance.
A phenom 2 or an old pentium paired with a gtx 970/r9 280 etc Id be happy using the term.
With something like the pairing above Im not though.

Vicious - there's little difference between 6 & 8 core fx chips in gaming at comparative speeds.
The 6300 in my SIG performs virtually the same as the 8320 in my SIG at the same speed in virtually any game you care to mention.
The 6300 actually has some minor benefits ie. You can get away with a decent over clock on a cheap 4 phase board & with a cheaper cooler.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
well, yes. in some cases it will bottleneck the GPU when something is CPU bound. But this happens with all processors, my 4790k included. The difference between the 6300 and, say, the 4690k would be that the 4690k will potentially bottleneck less often and when it does bottleneck, it wont be as noticeable.

But, if you were to throw on the Heaven benchmark with a 6300@4.5 + 290 and compare it to an i7 + 290, there probably would be no to minimal difference as both cpus can fundamentally drive the GPUs.

I agree with Madmatt30. a true bottleneck would be something like a phenom 2 + 290 where the gpu would never be able to stretch its legs per se.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
If your game is threaded to be able to use 8 cores then the 8350 will woop the 6300, if not then they are about the same. That was not my point, my point was that watercooling is excessive in most situations and a relatively good air cooler can sometimes outperform a cheap watercooler.
You should be able to get the same clocks on an 8 core processor and air cooler for similar price
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Thank you all for your responses! I have a 970 chipset, so I wont be upgrading to an 8XXX, but I've learned a lot from reading the varying responses. on my stock cooler I'm running 4.0Ghz at stock voltage and under load my cpu maxes 65 C, so what could I push the chip to?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Id be dubious about even pushing 4ghz on a stock cooler.
The chances are if youre hitting 4ghz on stock voltage then there's a good chance of 4.2/4.3.
Do yourself a favour though & spend $20 or so on a decent cooler.
The themis is $27 at newegg (if it fits your case).
The cryorig h7 is $32.50 - will fit all but the smallest cases & is a bargain buy at the minute.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


What? I didn't say that, what the hell are you on about.


I'm majoring in computer science and still have not even a slight clue the fuck you are on about. What you're saying doesn't even belong together, what does a "5ghz pentium on liquid nitrogen" have to do with vishera cpu's?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

Somebody earlier was saying that the clockspeed is divided up between cores, he thought that you were refering to that in saying that an 8350 would not be an upgrade, it CAN be an upgrade depending on how many threads the game uses, and yes more games are using 8 core so its becoming more and more usefull to have the extra 2 cores
 
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