i3-4130 bottleneck gtx 760

That's what i've been reading all over the forums about i3-4130. Some just say it will bottleneck , some say it will slightly bottleneck. And what the real thing about the numbers - nobody knows and just keep on saying it will bottleneck. Even though if CPU works 97% and gpu 83% in cpu intensive games, then i'd say gtx 760 might be worth a buy. That's why im asking if somebody knows the real numbers and not rumours or own thoughts cuz it's only a dual core. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXPK9doyMLg - this is weird since it bottlenecks on cards over 7950. There still comes out games that use 2-4 cores and with gtx 760 those wouldn't be a bottleneck for sure since CPU and GPU might be like 70% / 100 %. And still there comes out a lot of them. Im just curious about CPU intensive games. If those run like 100% CPU and 60% GPU then obviously it is not worth buying though. Rather take some gtx 660 then, but if the gpu is up to 80% and more then it's a real option. I'll be playing something like gta V or project cars 2014 mostly. I bought the procesor two months ago and that's be waste of money to sell it, so i'd take some GPU and after 3 years just buy other CPU on that lg1150 and continue gaming. Thank you guys for helping . Currently i have about 250$ .

i will buy some xeon 1230v3 if i still would be able to find some after 3 years or so. Does anybody else have any other opinions about this combo ?

If wasn't clear until i found this ... and it is clear why tomshardware guys put only intel cpu's to best cpu for money list.
Watch the benchmark very carefully about the frequrencies that are being used


i3-530 2,93ghz - 45fps avg, i3-2100 3,1 ghz - 56 fps and what about i3 - 3220 and then i3 - 4130. Oops - and here it stands right next to the fx 6300 while mad fx is twice hotter than i3-4130 while making the same performance. Now you can overclock fx 6300 but you need better m/b so you wouldn't burn it and some evo 212 cooler so the temperatures are good and tdp goes to somewhere like 120watts. For all that money you can buy brand new i5 that even beats fx 8350 on their own amd optimized game lol . So i5 + cheap m/b is like fx 8350 + cheap m/b but intel wins and you actually already need aftermarket cooler for fx since it runs 125watt tdp and 4ghz. Ok you can oc fx 8350 but you need better m/b so you wouldn't burn it and also some evo 212. For that money you can already buy xeon 1230v2 and cheap m/b and get more performance and twice less heat for the same money. Now i get it why tomshardware guys don't offer amd so don't you please start offering that cheap crap mad fx 6300. And plus amd stock cooler is loud really, i had one before, but i will never buy amd again. And lets take a look on games that are not optimized so nicely for amd : http://gamegpu.ru/images/remote/http--www.gamegpu.ru-images-stories-Test_GPU-Action-Call_of_Duty_Ghosts-test-ghost_proz.jpg - as you see fx 8350 fighting with ancient i3-2100 is just absurd. And we are going to get a lot of games like that though in a few years. So yea, on amd optimized games amd procesors can only try to keep up with intel but other games just absolutely destroys amd. I mean i was not against amd but i was shocked how actually weak amd cpu's are... I foudn this an hour ago. It is now clear about this list : http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106.html . Oh and after all, try image where would fx 6300 / fx 8350 be if they'd be set to 2,8ghz in this list ? So why in this comparision they put so old intel cpus that run at low frequencies ? They should put in the same old processors as fx ones.

So people say fx 6300 with gtx 760 is ok and it won't bottleneck and i3-4130 (the same performance as stock fx 6300) will bottleneck it for sure. So i just don't get it. Anybody have any other thoughts ? And don't offer me please amd again since i lost my money on athlon II x4 645 (lousy) and i could get i3-2100 (quiet). Any help always appreciated guys

As i said i aint no fan boy of nothing. Even take a look at this benchmark : http://media.bestofmicro.com/O/M/375430/original/Crysis3-CPU.png - fx 8350 is about 245$ in my country and cheapest m/b that support sata 3, usb 3.0 , dddr3 1866 memory is 72$ . = 317$ . And this is where you CANNOT OC it because stock cooler is already too small with no OC and if so the m/b won't last long since it's not capable to keep up with higher than normal voltages and etc.(you need just more expensive m/b for OC). Now Xeon 1230v2 is 280$ + 60$ m/b = 340$ . There is no game that could actually reach intel i7 (xeon 1230v2) which is weird. And fx 8350 sometimes can reach i5 speed on amd optimized games, but only reach ? I mean it aint beat it on other games no way. Ok, lets take a look fx 8320 192$ + 72$ m/b (couldn't be OC). = 264$ . Fx 8320 runs 3.5ghz and in bf4 it's somewhere below to i5 since the game is really good optimized for amd. So i5 3350p 208$ + 60$ m/b = 268$ . Just like amd fx 8320, but the difference is is loud, almost uses double power and gives you almost double heat at the same time. 69watt vs 125watt. Prices may be different, it is in my country like this. So i just don't get the point where exactly amd is better on games ? Im not talking about dry benchmarks and intel almost always get beaten up in those, but in games it has been like this for years. Even that bf4 comparising scale is with old cpu's that are no longer being sold. That's the only game that acutally you can say amd can try reach intel speed and im not even talking about other apps. If you gimme new amd model that beats intel - imma take it no doubt since im no fan boy of nothing. Now intel offers better for gaming. And seriously take a look at the comparision : stock fx 6300 is somewhere equal but a little higher to i3-4130 and both of them bottleneck gtx 760 slightly, But fx 6300 can OC which requires 88$ m/b minimum + 40$ heatsink + 140$ processor it self = 268$ . Now you can OC it to 4.5ghz and get ~120-125watt tdp and really way better performance. So i5 3350p 208$ + 60$ m/b = 268$ . Prices may be lower, but that's what i got and all the prices are higher here a bit, but still it's the same principle. I've been trying to understand all this and if you have some amount of money you can take either AMD or INTEL system. So basically it goes for the same price you get the same performance in games like bf4,crisys 3. But the difference is that intel just destroy amd on other games on price/performance list and on amd optimized it goes somewhere equal and also intel doesn't give you almost twice heat. Why i was finally like "why the heck would you buy amd at all ? " lol . I gave you exact prices and the performance that you can get in my country for some amount of money.

I found fx 6300 @ stock bottlenecks gtx 760 in cpu intensive games. So mine i3-4130 also will do the same. But if you're watching a video and you're playing bf4 you couldn't really see how much exactly is the gtx 760 being bottlenecked by i3-4130 neither using fx 6300@stock . Which means it's slightly, but i would really love too see real benchmarks about both of their usage if someone might find . Thank you.

I have already told fx-6300 is really loud and for it's money it ain't really bring too much performance. i3 is quiet 54watt and bf4 mp keeping gtx 760 up to ~93-98% all the time. ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_MPb7Rinq0 ) . And hey, is that all heat and loudness worth theorical performance? Or you can tell your friend you got a 3 core tractor like fx-6300 instead of 2 core i3 (3 core sound cool). Benchmarks would be actually almost the same testing games on gtx760 using i3-4130 or fx6300, but with ares II there's a bit more difference, but that's theorical only cuz in real world nobody's putting no better vga than gtx760.

and with mantle there's is even more joke of fx6300

Nop. Still many games coming out and i3-2100 beat fx8000 series so... Talking about bf4 those two are equal in real world gaming except noise for the same money that u spend on ur pc. That is the thing that fx6300 cannot handle more and WON'T handle more neither in the future... That's why it's not worth. Im done of those "hopes" and phrases "it will be better in the future" but for so many years it aint never been no better and even oldie i3-2100 still is on the list handling new games while other cpus from those days from amd that's can't keep up with i3-2100... And everybody told "it will be better in the future". Yea, sure son

It's not optimization fault. It's AMD that is WEAK! They advertise they product as "6 core" but that is 3 core a lot of energy eating cpu. For example on bf4 amd fx6300 works ~80% and it aint bring too much performance does it? But it brings nice amount of heat and nice tractor sound.