Sign-in / Sign-up
Your question
Solved

Best CPU under 150 to go with nVidia GTX 650ti 2GB

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Go
  • Nvidia
  • Gtx
  • Graphics Cards
Last response: in CPUs
November 11, 2013 5:51:47 PM

Hello all!!!

I am looking to purchase a new CPU in the near future to go with my recently purchased graphics card. I do not want to spend more than 150 dollars on the CPU.

My current graphics card:
ASUS nVidia GTX 650ti 2GB
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Whenever I ask for advice, I always ask the intel fans, so I never get any good things from the amd side.

I want to be able to play games like BF and ARMA 2-3 at a decent, playable framerate.

I'm not a real "fan" of either company, so I don't care what I get.


Thanks for the help!!!

More about : cpu 150 nvidia gtx 650ti 2gb

a b à CPUs
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2013 6:03:57 PM

FX-6300 or FX-8320 if you can afford it :) 
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 482 à CPUs
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2013 6:08:50 PM

Here's my draft, hopefully it will help you decide :)  :

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.

For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 (might as well get the 8320, it's an 8350 clocked lower at stock which you can change) [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have caught up in performance and in some cases deliver better performance than the intel's for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks between the FX 83xx series and the i5/i7's: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE & http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc




Personally went with an 8320, and its awesome even at stock. BF4 is good n the FX line, and just see for yourself how ARMA performs in the links above.
Share
Related resources
November 11, 2013 6:19:02 PM

For amd, don't get an a10 because you're already getting a discrete graphics card. I would get the FX-XXX, in your price range you could get the 6350.

For Intel, get the i5 4330 or 4340
m
0
l
November 12, 2013 8:47:30 AM

Thanks to everyone for your answers. I'll probably go with the 8320, hopefully I'll have it soon. Again, thanks for your help!
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 12, 2013 9:41:05 AM

ob8014 said:
Hello all!!!
I am looking to purchase a new CPU in the near future to go with my recently purchased graphics card. I do not want to spend more than 150 dollars on the CPU.
My current graphics card:
ASUS nVidia GTX 650ti 2GB
Aside from building a system in reverse and selecting the CPU after you have bought the GPU..
I am wearing my flame retardant outerwear this morning so it's safe to recommend the A10-6800k for your replacement, if you're willing to upgrade the motherboard to FM2+ and make yourself ready for the 7000 series Kaveri APU with the steamroller core, the FX 8350 uses the Vishera core and Steamroller is basically Vishera 2.0, you can't go wrong with Kaveri but lot's of died in the wool Intel fans are still going to steer you the other way, follow your heart and be happy with your decisions what they may be but i would recommend you do a little extended research on the future of gaming,,

m
0
l
a c 482 à CPUs
a b U Graphics card
November 12, 2013 11:03:06 AM

gman97005 said:
ob8014 said:
Hello all!!!
I am looking to purchase a new CPU in the near future to go with my recently purchased graphics card. I do not want to spend more than 150 dollars on the CPU.
My current graphics card:
ASUS nVidia GTX 650ti 2GB
Aside from building a system in reverse and selecting the CPU after you have bought the GPU..
I am wearing my flame retardant outerwear this morning so it's safe to recommend the A10-6800k for your replacement, if you're willing to upgrade the motherboard to FM2+ and make yourself ready for the 7000 series Kaveri APU with the steamroller core, the FX 8350 uses the Vishera core and Steamroller is basically Vishera 2.0, you can't go wrong with Kaveri but lot's of died in the wool Intel fans are still going to steer you the other way, follow your heart and be happy with your decisions what they may be but i would recommend you do a little extended research on the future of gaming,,



Can't be 100% that those new APUs will perform any better than Vishera. Remember bulldozer... :p 
m
0
l
November 12, 2013 12:38:26 PM

JOOK-D said:
Here's my draft, hopefully it will help you decide :)  :

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.

For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 (might as well get the 8320, it's an 8350 clocked lower at stock which you can change) [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have caught up in performance and in some cases deliver better performance than the intel's for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks between the FX 83xx series and the i5/i7's: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE & http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc




Personally went with an 8320, and its awesome even at stock. BF4 is good n the FX line, and just see for yourself how ARMA performs in the links above.


You might want to say where you got that from because we all know you didn't write it....
m
0
l
a c 482 à CPUs
a b U Graphics card
November 12, 2013 12:43:23 PM

cbarkachi said:
JOOK-D said:
Here's my draft, hopefully it will help you decide :)  :

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.

For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 (might as well get the 8320, it's an 8350 clocked lower at stock which you can change) [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have caught up in performance and in some cases deliver better performance than the intel's for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks between the FX 83xx series and the i5/i7's: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE & http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc




Personally went with an 8320, and its awesome even at stock. BF4 is good n the FX line, and just see for yourself how ARMA performs in the links above.


You might want to say where you got that from because we all know you didn't write it....


I legit wrote it haha.
m
0
l
November 12, 2013 12:46:54 PM

JOOK-D said:
cbarkachi said:
JOOK-D said:
Here's my draft, hopefully it will help you decide :)  :

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.

For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 (might as well get the 8320, it's an 8350 clocked lower at stock which you can change) [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have caught up in performance and in some cases deliver better performance than the intel's for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks between the FX 83xx series and the i5/i7's: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE & http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc




Personally went with an 8320, and its awesome even at stock. BF4 is good n the FX line, and just see for yourself how ARMA performs in the links above.


You might want to say where you got that from because we all know you didn't write it....


I legit wrote it haha.


Now I feel like shit lol
m
0
l
a c 482 à CPUs
a b U Graphics card
November 12, 2013 12:47:55 PM

cbarkachi said:
JOOK-D said:
cbarkachi said:
JOOK-D said:
Here's my draft, hopefully it will help you decide :)  :

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.

For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 (might as well get the 8320, it's an 8350 clocked lower at stock which you can change) [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have caught up in performance and in some cases deliver better performance than the intel's for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks between the FX 83xx series and the i5/i7's: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE & http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc




Personally went with an 8320, and its awesome even at stock. BF4 is good n the FX line, and just see for yourself how ARMA performs in the links above.


You might want to say where you got that from because we all know you didn't write it....


I legit wrote it haha.


Now I feel like shit lol


Don't, it's a result of too many internet trolls and too little sunlight. :lol: 
m
0
l