Need Advice: Fx8150+680sli VS i73930k+680single

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
BlueFoxAlpha

BlueFoxAlpha

Distinguished
Mar 16, 2013
17
0
18,510
Hi, thanks in advance for reading my thread, i was wondering what components i should add/remove to gain ultra performance in games.

Actually i have a Fx8150 cpu | Geforce680 vga | Gskill1600 memories | CroshairV motherboard | XFX 1200w psu | Corsair h80 cooling system

My question is, what will be better for gaming? To replace the [Fx8150 cpu] and the [crosshair v motherboard] with a new [i73930k] and a [rampage formula motherboard]. And leaving a single geforce 680 vga.

Or. Keeping the same components [fx8150|geforce680|crosshairV], and add another [geforce 680] in SLI.

What i expect is rock solid 60fps in Battlefield 3, Crysis 3, with full Antialiasing, super ultra settings, at 1920x1080. Also i expect this in all games. I actually noticed that in bf3 and cry3 some framerate drops when there is too much fog arround or when theres a lot of fire arround (no big deal, but i still don't want that to happend)

Thanks, hope to hear from you soon

P.S: budget does not matter in this case, i know it will be a significan difference between this two options, but it's not too much money. When this is done, the next step is to get a pair of corsair memories maybe.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
morgoth780

morgoth780

Distinguished
Aug 13, 2011
625
0
19,010
Well, I can safely say that one 680 won't be able to perform as you want it to in Crysis 3, although it could in Battlefield 3. Therefore, I would suggest getting a second GTX 680. However, the FX-8150 is not a very good CPU, so you will likely encounter some bottlenecking.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crysis-3-performance-benchmark-gaming,3451-8.html

The benchmark does not have the 8150, but it does have the 8350, which is significantly better. Based off this, the 8150 will definitely bottleneck in Crysis 3, although with overclocking that could be diminished.

I think the best option here depends on what else you use your computer for; if you do more CPU intensive activities, I would get a 3770k or 3930k like you suggested. Otherwise, though, I would recommend getting a second 680. Also, it may be worthwhile to consider putting an FX-8350 in your computer, that could boost your fps in Crysis 3 considerably.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
BlueFoxAlpha

BlueFoxAlpha

Distinguished
Mar 16, 2013
17
0
18,510


Thanks for the anwer i will check that article details. I work in graphic design, branding and web design, also some coding, actually this tasks can perform well with the actual computer.

The next CPU i am getting will be an Intel, i was really dessapointed with the fx 8150, sooner or later the i7-3930k will come and then another 680 to have it running on sli, so this is more like: what to buy first to enjoy a quick performance boost while waiting the next components.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
geofelt

geofelt

Titan
Oct 9, 2006
54,296
4,145
174,240
BF3 multiplayer can be very cpu intensive. Single player less so.
To help clarify your options, run these two tests:

a) Run your games, but lower your resolution and eye candy.
If your FPS increases, it indicates that your cpu is strong enough to drive a better graphics configuration.
If your FPS stays the same, you are likely cpu limited.

b) Limit your cpu, either by reducing the OC, or, in windows power management, limit the maximum cpu% to something like 50%.
This will simulate what a lack of cpu power will do.
Go to control panel/power options/change plan settings/change advanced power settings/processor power management/maximum processor state/
set to 50% and see how you do.
If your FPS drops significantly, it is an indicator that your cpu is the limiting factor, and a cpu upgrade is in order.
It is possible that both tests are positive, indicating that you have a well balanced system, and both cpu and gpu need to be upgraded to get better gaming FPS.
Few games use more than 2-3 cores, so I am doubtful that a 6 core 3930K will perform any better than a less expensive 3570K.
On the graphic side, you should be able to add another GTX680, and that will take care of the graphics issue.
If money is not a problem, a titan would give you better graphics performance without any possible dual card issues.
Perhaps a good plan would be to upgrade graphics now, and wait until june and the haswell launch for a cpu upgrade.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
BlueFoxAlpha

BlueFoxAlpha

Distinguished
Mar 16, 2013
17
0
18,510


Thanks for your reply. I don't have the CPU option in the Power Options advanced section, just something related to the Temperature.

I benchmarked the game wiith FRAPS, 3 minutes with different settings, here is the file and the details.

FX 8150 - stock speeds 3,6 | Zotac Geforce 680 2gb - stock speeds | Gskill 8gb - 1600

CVS File: bf3-benchmark-FRAPS-3min.cvs

http://www.fileconvoy.com/dfl.php?id=g0e69f71e961e9734999245438a50c117e1f3d031a

So i don't know how to read this values, i tryed 1920x1080 at ultra settings with Full AA, the 1920 x 1080 at ultra settings with No AA, and the last one 1280x720 at ultra settings with Full AA.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
geofelt

geofelt

Titan
Oct 9, 2006
54,296
4,145
174,240
I can't seem to read your files.
Was it your impression that lowering the resolution or settings improved your FPS significantly?
If so, then your cpu should be good enough for a second graphics card.

If you did not see a big jump, then your cpu individual core performance is more the limitation, and the more efficient Intel cores would serve you well.

It is difficult to measure multiplayer, but be assured there that the cpu is very important.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
BlueFoxAlpha

BlueFoxAlpha

Distinguished
Mar 16, 2013
17
0
18,510


.XLS version of the same file
http://www.fileconvoy.com/dfl.php?id=g9633c1da799521f8999245447ab22a86092a027fb

56 / 64 Players | Operation Riverside | Capture the Flag


Here is the log text file:

PHP: 
1920x1080 Ultra FullAA
2013-03-16 17:06:58 - bf3
Frames: 14173 - Time: 245374ms - Avg: 57.761 - Min: 43 - Max: 63

1920x1080 Ultra NoAA
2013-03-16 17:12:43 - bf3
Frames: 2461 - Time: 45396ms - Avg: 54.212 - Min: 43 - Max: 62

1280x720 Ultra FullAA
2013-03-16 17:14:56 - bf3
Frames: 13651 - Time: 242051ms - Avg: 56.397 - Min: 39 - Max: 63

The gameplay was similar in al three tests, no vehicles, some explosions. What do you think?

Thanks ;)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
BlueFoxAlpha

BlueFoxAlpha

Distinguished
Mar 16, 2013
17
0
18,510


Thanks, I have to think seriously about which path to choose, also the possibility of hanswell in June. :??:
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Wisecracker

Wisecracker

Splendid
Jan 15, 2007
8,106
17
31,965


Those frame-rates on a 64-player map are excellent. Mid-50s avg with 40-min

With 2xGTX680s in single player you would normally see 70% or so scaling. On a 64-player map, that ain't happening no matter what your CPU is, but you should still see a substantial boost in both your minimums and average.

Your MSAA setting is typically the limiting factor in BF3 -- for both nVidia and AMD, but I think the Radeons take an even greater hit. FXAA has a much more subtle impact on frame rates.

nvidia%201920.png


You've got a decent upgrade path with your Bulldozer. No reason, really, to go with a Piledriver UNLESS you can find an FX-8300 Vishera 95w. I'd jump on that, but otherwise, Steamroller is just around the corner.

Before then, you will have to settle with 2xGTX680s

Poor guy ... :lol:



 
Upvote 0 Downvote
BlueFoxAlpha

BlueFoxAlpha

Distinguished
Mar 16, 2013
17
0
18,510


Thanks for all the info, and thank you all for the quick responses. Within this week I will decide if I buy the second 680, now I'm not 100% sure, because I see that you are fairly comfortable with the benchmark numbers.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
BlueFoxAlpha

BlueFoxAlpha

Distinguished
Mar 16, 2013
17
0
18,510
I finally bought the [i7 3930k] and [Asus Rampage IV motherboard], the second [geforce 680] is arriving in a couple of weeks to the store, so i decided to change the CPU first.

I will be posting new FRAPS Benchmarks for the final results when i finish downloading Battlefield 3.


***UPDATE
I can confirm [60 Constant FPS] on [Battlefield 3] in Ultra Settings (Full AA), at 1920x1080 with the above specs.
This was tested in a couple of maps, 64 player size (50/64 players).
 
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