Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

amd fx 6300 + r9 280x vs i5 4440 + gtx 760

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 23, 2014 8:11:00 AM

witch config to get
a b à CPUs
January 23, 2014 8:15:58 AM

I would go with the AMD side, not because I'm an AMD fan-boy but because the card+CPU are better that the i5+760 in most of everything. If you want you could go with the i5 and the 280x. Nothing is stopping you from doing that. The AMD processor, though, has 6 cores vs. 4 in the i5. So in the end, it is all up to you whether you want to go AMD vs Intel, or AMD vs Nvidia.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 23, 2014 8:27:16 AM

See, I would go with the second option, because you'll get more consistent framerates (albeit slightly lower averages), and you'll use about 100w less power. How about an i5-4440 and a GTX 770? That card is every bit as powerful as the vastly overpriced R9 280x.
m
0
l
Related resources
January 23, 2014 8:30:50 AM

jessterman21 said:
See, I would go with the second option, because you'll get more consistent framerates (albeit slightly lower averages), and you'll use about 100w less power. How about an i5-4440 and a GTX 770? That card is every bit as powerful as the vastly overpriced R9 280x.


no way in my country 770 is 100 bucks more expensive than r9 280x so i have to chose betwean these two choices
m
0
l
a c 88 à CPUs
January 23, 2014 8:39:41 AM

Given the two options...and you want to get higher fps...then the fx-6300 + 280x wins.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 23, 2014 8:43:01 AM

Vedran Lastric said:
jessterman21 said:
See, I would go with the second option, because you'll get more consistent framerates (albeit slightly lower averages), and you'll use about 100w less power. How about an i5-4440 and a GTX 770? That card is every bit as powerful as the vastly overpriced R9 280x.


no way in my country 770 is 100 bucks more expensive than r9 280x so i have to chose betwean these two choices


Ah, okay - definitely the i5 + GTX 760 then - the FX-6300 is pretty good in games - same as my i3, but you'll have problems in the most demanding ones. The i5 was built for gaming, and the R9 280X is only 15% faster than the GTX 760, and you'll never use more than 2GB VRAM unless you play with MSAA at QHD resolutions. You'll save on your power bill, too.
m
0
l
January 23, 2014 8:48:46 AM

jessterman21 said:
Vedran Lastric said:
jessterman21 said:
See, I would go with the second option, because you'll get more consistent framerates (albeit slightly lower averages), and you'll use about 100w less power. How about an i5-4440 and a GTX 770? That card is every bit as powerful as the vastly overpriced R9 280x.


no way in my country 770 is 100 bucks more expensive than r9 280x so i have to chose betwean these two choices


Ah, okay - definitely the i5 + GTX 760 then - the FX-6300 is pretty good in games - same as my i3, but you'll have problems in the most demanding ones. The i5 was built for gaming, and the R9 280X is only 15% faster than the GTX 760, and you'll never use more than 2GB VRAM unless you play with MSAA at QHD resolutions. You'll save on your power bill, too.


so i5 4440 will give me more fps than fx 6300
m
0
l
a c 88 à CPUs
January 23, 2014 5:53:51 PM

Are you guys telling him that he will get higher fps in games with a 760 than a 280x? Shame on you. The lies....The 280x is very powerful and will easily overcome any supposed limitations.

6300 + 280x will give higher fps in games. I can't believe this is even a discussion.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 23, 2014 6:11:11 PM

jessterman21 said:
See, I would go with the second option, because you'll get more consistent framerates (albeit slightly lower averages), and you'll use about 100w less power. How about an i5-4440 and a GTX 770? That card is every bit as powerful as the vastly overpriced R9 280x.


Vastly overpriced R9 280x?

Newegg:

GTX 770 $339.99: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
R9 280x $399.99: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Performance: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1041?vs=1037

Doesn't look too overpriced to me. I mean its not like GTX 780 Ti overpricing or Titan overpricing by any stretch.

To the OP... What main titles are you looking to play?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 23, 2014 6:17:21 PM

I would definitely take the 6300 + 280x
m
0
l
a c 88 à CPUs
January 24, 2014 1:05:52 AM

dacquesta1 said:
I would definitely take the 6300 + 280x


Agreed, and better yet. A fx-8320 if possible.
m
0
l
a c 88 à CPUs
January 24, 2014 1:18:56 AM

Side note. The 280x is not always more expensive than the 770. Where I live the 280x is, on average, $100 less than the 770. The 280x can be bought for $315-345usd, whereas the 770 are around $430usd. So buying a 280x is a no brainer here.
m
0
l
January 24, 2014 2:56:05 AM

envy14tpe said:
Are you guys telling him that he will get higher fps in games with a 760 than a 280x? Shame on you. The lies....The 280x is very powerful and will easily overcome any supposed limitations.

6300 + 280x will give higher fps in games. I can't believe this is even a discussion.


so r9 will give me more fps
m
0
l
a c 93 à CPUs
January 24, 2014 2:57:59 AM

the 280x is better than the 760.
If you could get the 770 it's on pair with the 280x and is cheaper.
m
0
l
a c 88 à CPUs
January 24, 2014 5:59:07 AM

A 280x is a step above a 760. A fx-6300 paired with a 280x will easily get more fps than a i5 +760.
m
0
l
a c 88 à CPUs
January 24, 2014 6:01:48 AM

Look at this chart, the CPU one:
http://www.techspot.com/review/734-battlefield-4-benchm...

If you had a 290x with a i5-3470 or fx-6350, you essentially get the same fps. So, if the CPUs perform the same, but one CPU has a better GPU what will happen? That's right the system with the better GPU will produce higher fps.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 24, 2014 6:47:54 AM

Sure the R9 will give more average fps, but the i5 will give more minimum fps (much less drops below 40fps). Keeping your minimum and average framerates closer results in an overall smoother experience. I already stated the R9 is 15% faster than the GTX 760, but the i5 + GTX 760 is my recommendation. And again, you'll draw about 100w less power when gaming.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 24, 2014 7:22:21 AM

envy14tpe said:
Look at this chart, the CPU one:
http://www.techspot.com/review/734-battlefield-4-benchm...

If you had a 290x with a i5-3470 or fx-6350, you essentially get the same fps. So, if the CPUs perform the same, but one CPU has a better GPU what will happen? That's right the system with the better GPU will produce higher fps.


battlefield 4 campaign uses no cpu i mean an fx4100 performing on par with a six core i7? that wont happen in too many games so its not exactly the best benchmark to be using unless that is all he plans to play.
as someone who experiences bottlenecks let me say get the 760 and i5. if you go with the 6300 and 280x you will get higher fps but you will have lots of dips to low fps making it less than ideal. i am not saying it is a bad setup but i would go for the i5 without doubt. high fps looks good for benchmarks but in the real world minimum fps is what matters and I believe you will get better with the i5
m
0
l
a c 803 à CPUs
January 24, 2014 7:28:43 AM

ElMoIsEviL said:
jessterman21 said:
See, I would go with the second option, because you'll get more consistent framerates (albeit slightly lower averages), and you'll use about 100w less power. How about an i5-4440 and a GTX 770? That card is every bit as powerful as the vastly overpriced R9 280x.


Vastly overpriced R9 280x?

Newegg:

GTX 770 $339.99: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
R9 280x $399.99: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Performance: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1041?vs=1037

Doesn't look too overpriced to me. I mean its not like GTX 780 Ti overpricing or Titan overpricing by any stretch.

To the OP... What main titles are you looking to play?


Yes vastly overpriced. The target price of the R9 280x was supposed to be $300. Instead they are going for nearly the target price of the R9 290. Makes me glad I bought my HD 7970 when I did.
m
0
l
a c 803 à CPUs
January 24, 2014 7:30:16 AM

envy14tpe said:
Side note. The 280x is not always more expensive than the 770. Where I live the 280x is, on average, $100 less than the 770. The 280x can be bought for $315-345usd, whereas the 770 are around $430usd. So buying a 280x is a no brainer here.


Thanks to the miners out there, top end cards from AMD are severely inflated in price due to low supply.
m
0
l
a c 88 à CPUs
January 24, 2014 8:11:15 AM

logainofhades said:
envy14tpe said:
Side note. The 280x is not always more expensive than the 770. Where I live the 280x is, on average, $100 less than the 770. The 280x can be bought for $315-345usd, whereas the 770 are around $430usd. So buying a 280x is a no brainer here.


Thanks to the miners out there, top end cards from AMD are severely inflated in price due to low supply.


I know. But it depends where you are. In the US the 280x is more expensive but in Taiwan (where I am now) the 280x is priced right and the 770 is $100 more than the 280x. weird? yes.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 24, 2014 8:19:16 AM

thdarkshadow said:
battlefield 4 campaign uses no cpu i mean an fx4100 performing on par with a six core i7? that wont happen in too many games so its not exactly the best benchmark to be using unless that is all he plans to play.
as someone who experiences bottlenecks let me say get the 760 and i5. if you go with the 6300 and 280x you will get higher fps but you will have lots of dips to low fps making it less than ideal. i am not saying it is a bad setup but i would go for the i5 without doubt. high fps looks good for benchmarks but in the real world minimum fps is what matters and I believe you will get better with the i5


That's what I'm talking about :)  Nice setup, btw. I'm about ready for an i5 upgrade, how about you?
m
0
l
January 24, 2014 8:26:11 AM

jessterman21 said:
thdarkshadow said:
battlefield 4 campaign uses no cpu i mean an fx4100 performing on par with a six core i7? that wont happen in too many games so its not exactly the best benchmark to be using unless that is all he plans to play.
as someone who experiences bottlenecks let me say get the 760 and i5. if you go with the 6300 and 280x you will get higher fps but you will have lots of dips to low fps making it less than ideal. i am not saying it is a bad setup but i would go for the i5 without doubt. high fps looks good for benchmarks but in the real world minimum fps is what matters and I believe you will get better with the i5


That's what I'm talking about :)  Nice setup, btw. I'm about ready for an i5 upgrade, how about you?


^^^

Yes, go with the i5 and 760. Also as someone who experienced bottlenecks with an 8350, your gaming experience will be better with the i5 and 760. In an online, MP game you're going to be pushing that 280x to only 60-70% of it's potential a large majority of the time with the FX, whereas the i5 will have that 760 pegged at 100% all the time. With a single-thread game the GPU utilization will be just as low or worse with the AMD CPU. The end result is that the i5/760 will perform at the same or better level in a lot of games due to the FX bottlenecking the 280x.

That combo is a much better balanced system for all gaming scenarios and you can always SLI or upgrade the 760 later on much more easily than replacing a motherboard and CPU.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 24, 2014 8:48:06 AM

@jessterman I'm actually planning to get a Xeon 1230 v2 with my tax return since I am getting into more than just gaming so hyperthreading helps and I don't really want to over clock my CPU.
m
0
l
January 24, 2014 10:31:59 AM

jessterman21 said:
Sure the R9 will give more average fps, but the i5 will give more minimum fps (much less drops below 40fps). Keeping your minimum and average framerates closer results in an overall smoother experience. I already stated the R9 is 15% faster than the GTX 760, but the i5 + GTX 760 is my recommendation. And again, you'll draw about 100w less power when gaming.


wow well that changes everything i didnt know that well if im gona get more stable framerates with intel then i will get inte
m
0
l
January 24, 2014 4:47:57 PM

GPU is always more important than CPU [not saying the CPU should be neglected though]. But there is NO DOUBT (shouldn't be) the 280x is a better card, but when matching "price-performance" the i5+760 is no slouch, especially if one only out to 1080p game with some nice little eye candy, Now if looking to 1440p game...ummmm 280!!! and any CPU that wont bottleneck.

Not to jump off subject too far, but if push come to shove. try looking at a i5+R9 270x. Its even cheaper than the 760 and perform just as good in benchmarks (like 3-4 fps less) which could allow you to get an even higher i5 (like a 4570 or 4670k).

But dont listen to me, im trying to not be bias, because on the down low, Im an All-American Nvidia Fan-boy
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 24, 2014 4:53:30 PM

Get the i5 combination. Yes, the GPU will give you higher FPS. That GPU will also lose its performance a hell of a lot quicker than that CPU will and should be expected to be replaced in around 18 months. A good CPU, like the i5 4440, would last you around 5 years which is me going off on how well first generation i5s still perform.

The FX 6300 is slower than an i3 Haswell which only has 2 cores(!). Its more of a budget choice that offers something that is a cut above an Athlon II 760K for entry level gaming.
m
0
l
January 25, 2014 3:33:39 AM

Lessthannil said:
Get the i5 combination. Yes, the GPU will give you higher FPS. That GPU will also lose its performance a hell of a lot quicker than that CPU will and should be expected to be replaced in around 18 months. A good CPU, like the i5 4440, would last you around 5 years which is me going off on how well first generation i5s still perform.

The FX 6300 is slower than an i3 Haswell which only has 2 cores(!). Its more of a budget choice that offers something that is a cut above an Athlon II 760K for entry level gaming.


tnx man i will go for the if the i5 4570 i finaly got the money i just hope that i wont regreat also i have 60hz monitor so anything above 60 fps is a waste
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 25, 2014 9:41:38 AM

logainofhades said:
ElMoIsEviL said:
jessterman21 said:
See, I would go with the second option, because you'll get more consistent framerates (albeit slightly lower averages), and you'll use about 100w less power. How about an i5-4440 and a GTX 770? That card is every bit as powerful as the vastly overpriced R9 280x.


Vastly overpriced R9 280x?

Newegg:

GTX 770 $339.99: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
R9 280x $399.99: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Performance: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1041?vs=1037

Doesn't look too overpriced to me. I mean its not like GTX 780 Ti overpricing or Titan overpricing by any stretch.

To the OP... What main titles are you looking to play?


Yes vastly overpriced. The target price of the R9 280x was supposed to be $300. Instead they are going for nearly the target price of the R9 290. Makes me glad I bought my HD 7970 when I did.


Well that's not overpriced. That's fair market pricing based on supply vs. demand. It still performs around its current selling price vs competitors. So it's not really vastly overpriced.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 25, 2014 11:31:22 AM

He was meaning it is overpriced for a gaming GPU. If ur mining then its fine but for gaming (in the USA) it is overpriced. The 770 performs on par and its average price is about 70 less than the 280x. For two cards that perform the same $70-100 is way overpricedoverpriced. It is different in other countries I know but loganofhades was referring to the US pricing
m
0
l
a c 803 à CPUs
January 25, 2014 1:49:45 PM

Lessthannil said:
Get the i5 combination. Yes, the GPU will give you higher FPS. That GPU will also lose its performance a hell of a lot quicker than that CPU will and should be expected to be replaced in around 18 months. A good CPU, like the i5 4440, would last you around 5 years which is me going off on how well first generation i5s still perform.

The FX 6300 is slower than an i3 Haswell which only has 2 cores(!). Its more of a budget choice that offers something that is a cut above an Athlon II 760K for entry level gaming.


The FX 6350 just needs to be bumped to an FX 6350 speed to beat i3. Something any 125w capable motherboard can easily handle. The FX will be better in multithreaded titles vs the i3 as well. Hence why THG's min recommendation for Crysis 3 on the AMD side is an FX 6300 and i5 for Intel. If at all possible, get an FX 8320, though. At least it can easily be bumped to FX 8350 speeds on any FX 8350 compatible board.
m
0
l
January 27, 2014 1:16:20 PM

I did not see any mention of what games the OP was interested in playing, and I also do not know why the OP is not considering the I5 4670 vs. the others mentioned, since it is $219 currently, not much more than the others listed (which I think were around $195).

I recently built an I7-4770 with the GTX 760 SC 2MB and can say it is awesome. I can play BF4 on max settings, multiplayer with 60 people, and get nothing but liquid smoothe frame rates. The BF4 built int FPS tool gave 74 FPS the last time I checked. The system never goes below an FPS I would consider less than awesome. Again, I do not have in game FPS displayed on screen, I only use the BF4 tool and it is smoother than I need it to be. I am not overclocking anything at this point.

As I was building the I7 4770 I found many articles and forum comments stating the I7 4770 vs. the I5 4670 were essentially the same in performance, which I have no reason to doubt after seeing many benchmarks and expert reviews.

So, I would assume the I5 4670 and the GTX 760 would rock as well, or so close to it that it does not matter.

(Also, for all of the CPU above, add the suffix "k." I think you can get the non-k versions for even less if you do not plan to OC.)

I cannot offer advice on AMD stuff since I have not used it for at least a decade. I can tell you that I am 100% satisfied with my build, more than that. That is what helped me settle on a build easier...I quit comparing benchmarks (once I had the basic understanding of which were apples and oranges) and started isntead considering the user's reviews.

Here is the rest of my system if it helps to know. Keep in mind, I only have one of the GTX cards listed, but my list included two so I could calculate power needs if I went SLI at some point.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: Intel Core i7-4770K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor ($334.98 @ SuperBiiz)
CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-D14 65.0 CFM CPU Cooler ($73.74 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: Asus Maximus VI Hero ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($189.99 @ NCIX US)
Memory: G.Skill Sniper 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($76.50 @ Newegg)
Storage: Samsung 840 Pro Series 128GB 2.5" Solid State Disk ($121.99 @ B&H)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($59.66 @ OutletPC)
Video Card: EVGA GeForce GTX 760 2GB Video Card (2-Way SLI) ($239.99 @ NCIX US)
Video Card: EVGA GeForce GTX 760 2GB Video Card (2-Way SLI) ($239.99 @ NCIX US)
Case: Fractal Design Define R4 (Titanium Grey) ATX Mid Tower Case ($113.58 @ Newegg)
Case Fan: Noctua NF-A14 FLX 68.0 CFM 140mm Fan ($21.49 @ NCIX US)
Case Fan: Noctua NF-A14 FLX 68.0 CFM 140mm Fan ($21.49 @ NCIX US)
Power Supply: Corsair Professional 750W 80+ Gold Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($129.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS DVD/CD Writer ($16.98 @ OutletPC)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8.1 - OEM (64-bit) ($99.98 @ OutletPC)
Total: $1740.35
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-01-27 16:13 EST-0500)
m
0
l
a c 93 à CPUs
January 28, 2014 12:25:58 AM

leroi said:
I did not see any mention of what games the OP was interested in playing, and I also do not know why the OP is not considering the I5 4670 vs. the others mentioned, since it is $219 currently, not much more than the others listed (which I think were around $195).

I recently built an I7-4770 with the GTX 760 SC 2MB and can say it is awesome. I can play BF4 on max settings, multiplayer with 60 people, and get nothing but liquid smoothe frame rates. The BF4 built int FPS tool gave 74 FPS the last time I checked. The system never goes below an FPS I would consider less than awesome. Again, I do not have in game FPS displayed on screen, I only use the BF4 tool and it is smoother than I need it to be. I am not overclocking anything at this point.

As I was building the I7 4770 I found many articles and forum comments stating the I7 4770 vs. the I5 4670 were essentially the same in performance, which I have no reason to doubt after seeing many benchmarks and expert reviews.

So, I would assume the I5 4670 and the GTX 760 would rock as well, or so close to it that it does not matter.

(Also, for all of the CPU above, add the suffix "k." I think you can get the non-k versions for even less if you do not plan to OC.)

I cannot offer advice on AMD stuff since I have not used it for at least a decade. I can tell you that I am 100% satisfied with my build, more than that. That is what helped me settle on a build easier...I quit comparing benchmarks (once I had the basic understanding of which were apples and oranges) and started isntead considering the user's reviews.

Here is the rest of my system if it helps to know. Keep in mind, I only have one of the GTX cards listed, but my list included two so I could calculate power needs if I went SLI at some point.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: Intel Core i7-4770K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor ($334.98 @ SuperBiiz)
CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-D14 65.0 CFM CPU Cooler ($73.74 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: Asus Maximus VI Hero ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($189.99 @ NCIX US)
Memory: G.Skill Sniper 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($76.50 @ Newegg)
Storage: Samsung 840 Pro Series 128GB 2.5" Solid State Disk ($121.99 @ B&H)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($59.66 @ OutletPC)
Video Card: EVGA GeForce GTX 760 2GB Video Card (2-Way SLI) ($239.99 @ NCIX US)
Video Card: EVGA GeForce GTX 760 2GB Video Card (2-Way SLI) ($239.99 @ NCIX US)
Case: Fractal Design Define R4 (Titanium Grey) ATX Mid Tower Case ($113.58 @ Newegg)
Case Fan: Noctua NF-A14 FLX 68.0 CFM 140mm Fan ($21.49 @ NCIX US)
Case Fan: Noctua NF-A14 FLX 68.0 CFM 140mm Fan ($21.49 @ NCIX US)
Power Supply: Corsair Professional 750W 80+ Gold Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($129.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS DVD/CD Writer ($16.98 @ OutletPC)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8.1 - OEM (64-bit) ($99.98 @ OutletPC)
Total: $1740.35
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-01-27 16:13 EST-0500)

2x 760... why would you do that.
A single but stronger card would be more than enough, like the 780ti.
buying windows 8..
There could have been alot better options to pick.
m
0
l
January 28, 2014 9:15:11 AM

vmN said:

2x 760... why would you do that.
A single but stronger card would be more than enough, like the 780ti.
buying windows 8..
There could have been alot better options to pick.


I am not intending to do that, but wanted the option in case I ran into an inexpensive 760. I built that system with a 760 since I already had that card. In fact, I am enrolled in EVGA's upgrade program for the card you mention, but will make a final decision when I see what upgrade price they throw at me.

The 760 SC 2MB with ACX are $250 and the 780ti are all $700 plus. There are several benchmarks showing 2 of those 760s can keep up and even surpass the 780 in some cases.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfOtmoxLMXI

In addition to already having a 760, I wanted to keep my build costs down (by sticking with the card I had) so I could spend a little more on other components.

I was not sure about Windows...I have 7 already and upgrades to 8, but did not have a full version of 8. I figured if I didnt like how 8 was treating my games, I could always get my 7 discs out.

So far 8 seems to be doing well. I hate the UI, hate how they have things tucked away, but am adjusting to it well enough. I cannot overstate how much I hate Windows 8 UI. One example, I always have my task bar on the right side of my screen, since I always have so many apps running. I have not investigated it fully, but so far I have not found a way to move the charms bar in Win 8.

m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 28, 2014 3:07:06 PM

It really depends on the games you want to play. I will say this though, an AMD FX-6300 paired with a Radeon R9 280x is more than enough horsepower for the most demanding games out there (Battlefield 4).

You may wish to overclock the FX-6300 to around 4 - 4.5GHz in order to get the best results. Games that may not play well, on such a setup, are mostly old games (or games which make use of older technology and older game engines). A prime example of that would be DirectX9 titles (such as Skyrim) which tend to prefer fewer, more powerful cores, over many, weaker, cores.

If you're looking at playing games such as Star Citizen, Thief or Battlefield 4 (once the Mantle patch is released) you will likely get quite the rewarding gaming experience with this setup. Mantle does what DirectX has been unable to do. Mantle allows you to use all available CPU processing resources in a parallel fashion, rather than serial.

I honestly don't see a reason to get an nVIDIA graphics card when the entire industry has been moving away from companies which market/push proprietary solutions and instead moving towards companies that market/push open solutions. A good example would be CUDA vs. OpenCL. CUDA is all but extinct in the consumer arena nowadays (most applications have moved onto OpenCL). Another example would be SteamOS, there is a push towards using Linux (Debian in this case) as a gaming platform right now. Mantle should help (as Mantle is not a Windows only solution) by rendering the drivers pretty much obsolete (unimportant) and instead allowing developers to tap directly into the hardware.

We also see a push for more openness and transparency throughout society. From Edward Snowden to Julian Assange. Anonymous to Wikileaks. Our world is changing and the industry is headed towards more privacy protections as well as more open and transparent solutions.
m
0
l
a c 803 à CPUs
January 30, 2014 8:06:44 AM

I was bored and made some changes to your build. :lol: 
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: Intel Core i7-4770K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor ($327.99 @ NCIX US)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($29.99 @ Microcenter)
Motherboard: ASRock Z87 Extreme4 ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($129.99 @ Microcenter)
Memory: G.Skill Sniper 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($76.50 @ Newegg)
Storage: Crucial M500 240GB 2.5" Solid State Disk ($139.99 @ Amazon)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($59.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: Zotac GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB Video Card ($689.98 @ SuperBiiz)
Case: Fractal Design Core 3000 USB 3.0 (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case ($71.23 @ NCIX US)
Power Supply: Rosewill Capstone 750W 80+ Gold Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($89.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS DVD/CD Writer ($16.98 @ OutletPC)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8.1 - OEM (64-bit) ($89.99 @ NCIX US)
Total: $1722.62
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-01-30 11:06 EST-0500)
m
0
l
!