Will i5 4460 and R9 270X be a good pair.?

[abhijeet lamsar]

I am building a new gaming rig.
My CPU is a Core i5 4460 Haswell.
I am thinking of Buying an MSi R9 270X to pair it with.
Will there be any possible bottlenecks.

If there is any bottleneck please tell me a GFX card in this price range only.

I am only 15 y/o.

thanks!!!!!!!!!!!! 😀

 

[abhijeet lamsar]

Thanks a lot LucoTF.
I am open to more answers

 

[VincentP]

just tell me gtx 960 or r9 270x

Thanks a lot LucoTF.
I am open to more answers

I gave you a link for each card, if the GTX 960 is the limit to your budget, here it is again:
http://www.snapdeal.com/product/zotac-nvidia-geforce-gtx-960/1655509895
GTX 960 for RS18525

 

[VincentP]

The CPU you have chosen is very good. It will allow you to run 60 FPS in any game.

Even an i7-4790K overclocked to 5ghz can not guarantee 60FPS in all games.

Clearly a CPU can never guarantee a frame rate, this is going to be dependent on the graphics card and detail settings as well as the CPU.

Actually the CPU performance does indeed wind up setting the hard limits on FPS.

Obviously the CPU can limit the frame rate, as can the GPU for particular detail settings. Neither can "guarantee" any hard frame rate under all circumstances.

What I am saying is that this CPU will not limit the system to less than 60 FPS.

There is no CPU made that can maintain over 60FPS in all gaming conditions. Yes, even an i5 haswell will dip below 60FPS in some conditions in some games.

At 5ghz, a haswell i7 will dip to as low as ~40FPS in WoW Raids, 20FPS in Tier 10 RoboCraft Battles, and less than 60FPS in many other mulit-player RTS, war, and simulation games in severely congested conditions or with very high view distances active. In these same conditions, the i5-4460 will dip ~30% lower. GPU selection and detail settings are largely irrelevant here as these CPU bound performance limits can not be overcome by any GPU or visual quality setting options (the exception to this is where different API implementations and optimizations effect compute bound performance). A GPU can not render frames for which there is no base data for. Performance originates with the CPU.

I'm happy for you to post a link to a benchmark that shows a situation where a system with this CPU cannot meet average 60 FPS....

The conditions that cause even high end CPU's to bottleneck performance to <60FPS, are not readily benchmark-able because they are not repeatable. They are typically multi-player conditions that could never be replicated precisely enough to generate an accurate benchmark.

If you want to find this information for multi-player performance, we have to turn primarily to user reports in game forums who run FPS monitoring software while playing MP games.

There's a bench-marking "bubble" that many hardware enthusiasts get sucked into. It's a vortex of misinformation because it contains almost entirely single player test sequences that are largely GPU bound. This benchmarking bubble is not representative of real multi-player performance characteristics. The benchmarking "bubble" also has the effect of causing those who focus on it, to associate GPU render performance with FPS performance, rather than visual quality. This is a common mistake because when comparing GPUs, review sites use FPS as the yardstick to compare render throughput of GPUs, but in actual implementation, users will adjust visual quality to achieve their FPS goals anyway, so GPU render throughput winds up manifesting as a difference in visual quality, not FPS.

Most CPU benchmarks of multi-player games are not performed in heavily congested conditions. but there are a few places that have figured out methods that seem to generate somewhat useful results...

Is it a "bubble" or a "vertex"? Hilarious. I'd actually agree that too often people talk about a CPU or GPU "bottle-necking" when this depends entirely on the graphics settings they use. That is, they can change the graphical settings to achieve the desired frame rate from their graphics card providing the CPU is fast enough to achieve this frame rate.

but that a system with a different CPU and the same graphics card and detail settings can meet average 60 FPS.

I fail to see why I should placate to this ex post facto requirement, but hey...

http://pclab.pl/art55318-3.html

Note, that when running AMD's DX11 implementation, the i5-4440 achieves a minimum 44FPS in BF4 MP (in this particular test), while the overclocked i7 maintains over 60FPS.

My quote was average frame rate, not minimum. What I find interesting from this benchmark is that while frame rate scales with CPU performance, the R9 290X frame rates are consistently lower with each CPU compared to the GTX 780. I wonder if there is less load on the CPU with the Nvidia card for some reason.

------------

To be clear, any i5 haswell is a fantastic value gaming CPU, these are close to as good as it gets for gaming. The point I am making here, is that there is no CPU choice that guarantees bottleneck free operation and 60+FPS in all games and conditions, it does not exist.

 

[mdocod]

...What I find interesting from this benchmark is that while frame rate scales with CPU performance, the R9 290X frame rates are consistently lower with each CPU compared to the GTX 780. I wonder if there is less load on the CPU with the Nvidia card for some reason.

In compute bound conditions the nvidia DX11 implementation is almost always faster, as it scales the driver layer workload across multiple threads better. Nvidia's DX11 implementation and optimizations are a really good stopgap to mantle/DX12, in that it accomplishes some of the same goals without needing a whole new API.

 

[abhijeet lamsar]

thanks a lot guys i made up an answer mixing all your answers.
thanks for spending time on me but the solution goes to only one person sorry for that
good luck to all