Would a FX-9590 be able to handle the raw power of a GTX-Titan Z?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
T

Tim stro59

Reputable
Apr 23, 2015
16
0
4,510
I'm considering options for a super build I'm going to be saving up for and the FX-9590 prices well for it's power. I'm asking because....if it's not then could someone pick out a good graphics match for the processor. (preferably under $500, but I'm not picky.)
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Your cpu can handle any gpu.
See here for Titan Z comparison to other nvidia cards:
http://international.download.nvidia.com/webassets/en_US/shared/images/products/shared/lineup-full.png

Some cards can be SLI'd for much better performance than the Titan Z, for example two 970's will beat a titan z, and you don't have to pay the super high price of a titan z.

For under $500, there is not much competition to the Titan Z other than maybe two 960's which would not be more powerful but it would get close.


What do you want to use the graphics card for? if gaming, at what resolution/refresh rate?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I want to be able to oculus rift any and every game in at least 90 FPS at 1080p and play games normally at 4k with at least 60 FPS.

Anyway I go I'm still going to need a new motherboard and PSU.

edit: and maybe, if I can extend my attention, make high quality CGA-movies.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Actually the FX-9590 is not a good bang for the buck at all! For its price you can get an i5-4690k which has a far superior gaming performance. Not to mention that the enormous power draw and heat generation of the AMD CPU will force you to buy an expensive motherboard and cooling solution to be able to handle the power draw and heat generation respectively.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


I plan on liquid cooling anyway.

update: http://pcpartpicker.com/part/cooler-master-cpu-cooler-rls12v24pkr1
http://pcpartpicker.com/part/asrock-motherboard-970performance

 
Upvote 0 Downvote


the 4690K will be better unless you plan on doing something that requires more than 4 cores(because gaming does not). And water cooling does not give you better performance, it just keeps stuff cool. So water cool the 4690K if you're wanting to water cool
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Actually not. Since Intel cores can do more. And you get more performance per each 100 MHz oc from the Intel chip because it is more efficient and has higher IPC. Even in heavily multithreaded application the current Haswell line up is on bar with the highest AMD has to offer. But the OP can suit himself anyway.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

A lot of games now use more than 4 cores. Battlefield, Crysis 3, GTA V to name a few, can all use more than 4 cores, and the list will only get bigger.

The 9590 isn't worth the money, as others have said. Get an 8350 if you really need the extra cores, or otherwise get the 4690k as suggested.


 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Sure, they use the extra cores, but the performance increase just isnt there. But I do agree that we are moving towards using more than four cores, but I still think it is a few years off before that becomes a problem
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


$50-$100 bi-monthly....it's going to take a long time.

but to answer you, I plan on saving for 24 to 36 months.
so somewhere between $4,800 to $7,200 is my budget. (more can be added if income tax doesn't screw me over...which it will)

 
Upvote 0 Downvote


PC components are changing at such a rapid rate, what's the best choice today will not be the best choice even a month from now or so, so it really is not smart to get any specific builds set up two or three years before you are going to build it.

It is smart to research stuff so when the time comes you are aware of your options and what the best choice is
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Games have dynamic loads; they do not necessarily symmetrically or evenly stress the cores of a processor, making single threaded performance all the more important, game benchmarks prove that. Also The inefficiency of the FX chips is also caused by an inefficient memory controller and much slower cache than that of the Intel chips. All of that attributes to their disappointing performance in many modern gaming titles. The fact that a 4 Core Haswell Processor is equivalent to an 8 core AMD processor is enough of an evidence of how weak those AMD cores are.
Take a look at that to see how much single core performance influence the smoothness of gameplay:
500x1000px-LL-fc38fed7_c3-50ms.gif
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
^Bit late to the party here 😛

In all seriousness, we all know AMD is behind Intel for IPC and general performance currently.

If you are mostly gaming, or need good single and multi-thread performance, get an Intel CPU(i3 or above, Pentium usually struggles)

If you need a cheap, high thread count CPU, and are using AMD favouring software(I know its rare to find)then why not get an AMD CPU?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Thank you everyone for your advice, I will take everything into consideration and simply wait until I have built up a good budget to work this.

but before I go....is this a good setup?
FX-6300 black edition
M5A78l-m/usb3
9 Gbs DDR3-1333
EVGA GTX 750TI 2Gbs superclocked
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
It is not exactly entry level, but it is aimed more at mainstream gamers. If you dial down the graphics settings, AA in particular in BF4, I am sure you can easily hit 60 fps. Even some of the faster AMD and nVidia cards can't handle 4xAA.
 
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