Fx 6300 + GTX 770 VS Fx 6300 Msi R9 280x

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Solution
photonboy
Similar performance. About 3% in favor of the GTX770 assuming the same quality of cooler and same frequency.

The R9-280X has the advantage of more VRAM which may or may not matter (Watch Dogs came out and possibly needs more than 2GB but I have yet to review the game and see if this is really necessary at proper settings to maintain at least 40FPS. I suspect not.

The NVidia cards offer:
- PhysX
- Shadowplay
- TXAA
- G-Sync support (upcoming monitors)

I can make a case for either card. If none of the NVidia reasons interest you (including the Watch Dogs game which should be included; AMD may have a choice of older games) then get the GTX770 (ASUS). Otherwise, get the AMD.

CPU:
The FX-6300 is only about $120 but will bottleneck many...
Sort by date Sort by votes
Deus Gladiorum

Deus Gladiorum

Distinguished
Jun 29, 2013
1,434
0
19,960
What do you mean by "The r9 will Dual Graphics With My CPU"? The FX-6300 has no graphics card of its own unlike AMD APUs and Intel CPUs. The FX-6300 is just a processor, and that's it so there's no dual graphics to be had there unless you buy two R9 280Xs. Anyway, the GTX 770 is a better GPU than the R9 280X by quite a bit and is objectively more powerful. Aside from price, there's really no reason to consider the R9 280X.

Just a warning though; I have the same setup -- an FX-6300 and a GTX 770 -- and it's quite powerful, however there is significant bottlenecking going on depending on the game. The GTX 770 is too much of a beast for the FX-6300 and it's not going to complement such a GPU as well as an i5. That's just something to look out for, but overall you'll see better performance in games that don't result in CPU bottlenecking with the GTX 770 than with the R9 280X.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
photonboy

photonboy

Titan
Jun 20, 2006
21,567
13
85,015
Similar performance. About 3% in favor of the GTX770 assuming the same quality of cooler and same frequency.

The R9-280X has the advantage of more VRAM which may or may not matter (Watch Dogs came out and possibly needs more than 2GB but I have yet to review the game and see if this is really necessary at proper settings to maintain at least 40FPS. I suspect not.

The NVidia cards offer:
- PhysX
- Shadowplay
- TXAA
- G-Sync support (upcoming monitors)

I can make a case for either card. If none of the NVidia reasons interest you (including the Watch Dogs game which should be included; AMD may have a choice of older games) then get the GTX770 (ASUS). Otherwise, get the AMD.

CPU:
The FX-6300 is only about $120 but will bottleneck many games by as much as 40% (Skyrim). The i5, four-core Intels like the i5-4460 are about $185 (just over 50% more) but rarely bottleneck a game.

$65 seems like a lot more (assuming all other parts equal) but it's not a big deal looking at the TOTAL cost compared to the benefit. Put another way, that's 6.5% of $1000 and you might get up to 40% improvement.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom