r7 260x + i5 4440 or r9 270x + fx 6300?

Jatin Bhatt · Jul 22, 2014

I am on a limited budget. Want to play games like Battlefied 4, Crysis 3 on high to ultra settings. Either I have to sacrifice on the GPU or on the processor. I won't be overclocking and will upgrade in 2-3 years. Which one do you think is the better option of the two?

Gunmetal_61 · Jul 22, 2014

Always sacrifice on the processor. The GPU is the driving force behind the majority of the framerate count.

laviniuc · Jul 22, 2014

Gunmetal_61 :

+1

Jatin Bhatt · Jul 22, 2014

Thank you both. One more thing though. If I save a little more and stretch my budget, will it be worth getting the i5 4440 with the r9 270x? If there is a massive difference in performance, and it is more future proof, I could try getting them both.?

Gunmetal_61 · Jul 22, 2014

The i5 has better per-core performance while the strength of the FX lies in its core count. Most games don't really use that many threads and cores that the AMD has to offer as of now, so it is the weaker choice in my eyes. But the AMD will get on the i5's level as time goes on and new games add compatibility to execute their code on all cores. It's a matter of future vs now. But if you do choose the AMD, keep in mind that it will be relatively weaker in the future vs processors of the future. The i5 will show its age in the future as well, but it will have enjoyed its glory days when it was out on top.

Get the i5 for performance, FX for price. If you choose the i5 route though, I recommend the 4460 (~$190). Costs the same as the 4440, but is slightly faster by 0.1 GHz and runs on the new Z97 boards (with backwards compatibility to the Z87). The 4440 can only run on Z87, so you can't upgrade to Broadwell if you choose to in the future.

The i5-4590 is has the best price-to-performance ratio of the i5's, but costs $10 more.

laviniuc · Jul 22, 2014

Gunmetal_61 :

The i5 has better per-core performance while the strength of the FX lies in its core count. Most games don't really use that many threads and cores that the AMD has to offer as of now, so it is the weaker choice in my eyes. But the AMD will get on the i5's level as time goes on and new games add compatibility to execute their code on all cores. It's a matter of future vs now. But if you do choose the AMD, keep in mind that it will be relatively weaker in the future vs processors of the future. The i5 will show its age in the future as well, but it will have enjoyed its glory days when it was out on top.

Get the i5 for performance, FX for price. If you choose the i5 route though, I recommend the 4460 (~$190). Costs the same as the 4440, but is slightly faster by 0.1 GHz and runs on the new Z97 boards (with backwards compatibility to the Z87). The 4440 can only run on Z87, so you can't upgrade to Broadwell if you choose to in the future.

The i5-4590 is has the best price-to-performance ratio of the i5's, but costs $10 more.

you sure the 4440 can't run on Z97? i thought the boards support all 1150 cpu-s

Gunmetal_61 · Jul 22, 2014

Oh. I retract my statement. It actually can. Sorry, all the confusion over this mess that Intel made with the Z97 has gotten to me. I'd still get the 4460 if it costs the same.

Jatin Bhatt · Aug 3, 2014

Sorry guys I am a little late. I thank you both for your input. I am trying to squeeze in the i5.

Search

r7 260x + i5 4440 or r9 270x + fx 6300?

Jatin Bhatt

Distinguished

Gunmetal_61

Gunmetal_61

Reputable

laviniuc

Judicious

Jatin Bhatt

Distinguished

Gunmetal_61

Reputable

laviniuc

Judicious

Gunmetal_61

Reputable

Jatin Bhatt

Distinguished

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page