XFX 7970 & AMD FX4170: How bad will they bottleneck?

Solution


+1 for that answer.

Some games only max out 1-2 cores. Others will use all of your cores. However, the difference will usually be small if you are gaming on a single card at 1080p.

For reference:

Actrons did a video on YouTube comparing an FX 6100 and i7 3770k in Battlefield 3. At his resolution and settings there is a small difference of 5-7 FPS but usually a tie between the two. This is probably a 'Best Case' type scenario.

Shuyin200 did a video on YouTube comparing the FX 8350 and i5 3570k in Guild Wars 2. This game will only max 1 core, and use 50-60% of 2 more. His method was good as he tested in Lions Arch (Heavily...
you'll be bottle-necked in any single or dual threaded task... unfortunately, most games are single or dual threaded. That's a very uneven build. How about scaling back the gpu to a 7950/7870/660ti/660 and getting a FX6300 to replace that bulldozer cpu?

you'll be less bottlenecked~

 


+1 for that answer.

Some games only max out 1-2 cores. Others will use all of your cores. However, the difference will usually be small if you are gaming on a single card at 1080p.

For reference:

Actrons did a video on YouTube comparing an FX 6100 and i7 3770k in Battlefield 3. At his resolution and settings there is a small difference of 5-7 FPS but usually a tie between the two. This is probably a 'Best Case' type scenario.

Shuyin200 did a video on YouTube comparing the FX 8350 and i5 3570k in Guild Wars 2. This game will only max 1 core, and use 50-60% of 2 more. His method was good as he tested in Lions Arch (Heavily populated city in this MMO). The difference is more noticeable, but still within 8-12 FPS of each other.


If you already have an AM3+ board and 1600 or 1866 RAM, the fx 6300 or 8300 series would be your next logical step up. They use the Vishera core and perform very close to the i5 3570k or i7 3770k for much lower cost.
 
Solution