Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

I'm overclocking my AMD FX 6300 and using a gtx 780. Need some advice to see if I can run games over 45fps!

Tags:
  • Gtx
  • Overclocking
  • Bottleneck
  • CPUs
Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 14, 2014 4:11:14 PM

I have a fx 6300 trying to oc to 4.1ghz, and I am planning on getting a gigabyte windforce gtx 780, I just want to know if I will run into any bottlenecks, like major bottlenecks. I just need an answer from someone who knows what they are talking about please! http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... graphics card I'm trying to get.

More about : overclocking amd 6300 gtx 780 advice run games 45fps

a b K Overclocking
a b à CPUs
October 14, 2014 4:50:45 PM

The 6300 will be the limiting factor in a lot of games but you still should get decent FPS. Consider getting a 970, they have lower power draw and better performance.
m
0
l
October 14, 2014 5:25:44 PM

do you know what the frame difference would be?
m
0
l
Related resources
October 14, 2014 5:42:20 PM

and if i upgrade my cpu what would be a good am3+ cpu that is under $150
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 14, 2014 5:47:44 PM

griffey546 said:
and if i upgrade my cpu what would be a good am3+ cpu that is under $150


The 8320 is $139.99.
m
0
l

Best solution

a b K Overclocking
a b à CPUs
October 14, 2014 5:57:48 PM

Yeah i'd go for an 8320 as suggested above which can be overclocked to match an 8350. What motherboard and PSU do you have?
Share
October 14, 2014 6:08:14 PM

i have a 650w psu,and an msi 760gm p34fx, im set with watercooling too
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b à CPUs
October 14, 2014 6:22:40 PM

That motherboard will overheat with the 8320.
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b à CPUs
October 14, 2014 6:32:09 PM

What 650w PSU? Also not a great motherboard. Do you already have watercooling or are you going to set it up? I think you may want to rethink your strategy, maybe get a 280x, get a new mobo, CPU and end up with a much more balanced build. Maybe something like an i5 4440 (or 4590 is you live near a micro mart), an Asrock H97 Performance and a R9 280x.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-4590 3.3GHz Quad-Core Processor ($159.99 @ Micro Center)
Motherboard: ASRock H97 PERFORMANCE ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($90.91 @ Newegg)
Video Card: Asus Radeon R9 280X 3GB DirectCU II Video Card ($239.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $490.89
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-10-14 21:31 EDT-0400
m
0
l
October 14, 2014 7:10:07 PM

well i cant switch to intel, and i use nvidia cards for stuff like streaming, im trying to get an nvidia card that can play bf4 60fps+ in 768p or 1080p without bottlenecking, maybe 1440p, so in short term, id need a gtx 770 or higher (not going over $390 with the graphic card) so really i need an amd cpu $150 or less that can play with a gtx 770 or 970, and a motherboard that is good under $65
m
0
l
October 14, 2014 7:22:36 PM

i forgot to add that i am using an extreme rock power psu, and a corsair h100i
m
0
l
October 14, 2014 9:25:30 PM

sadly probably not...
Let me put this straight... an 8350 at 4.6ghz on my Asus 990FX Pro (the superior to the board you linked) still bottled my R9 290, which is even slower than a 970 would be. an 8350 will not hold 60+fps in games, and definitely not while streaming/recording
Here, with the 8350 I played BF4 between 40-85fps. Now that I switched to an i7 4790k, I now get 70-110fps.... same gpu, same ram, osu, same everything except I switched to Intel

Even with an 8370, Tom's Hardware doesn't recommend pairing an FX cpu with anything faster than a 760 or 270x:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-fx-8370e-cpu,39...
"Depending on the game in question, AMD’s new processor has the potential to keep you happy around the AMD Radeon R9 270X/285 or Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 or 660 Ti level.
A higher- or even high-end graphics card doesn’t make sense, as pairing it with AMD's FX-8370 simply limits the card's potential."

Everyone out there using one with anything higher is either lying to themselves or doesn't know they are bottlenecked...
It ran the same in BF4 Single player, since it rely's on the GPU entirely games, but for BF4 Multiplayer + recording... you will need an intel... an i5 4690k would suffice, but an i7 would be recommended.
It sucks I know, but AMD FX cpu's have aged far too fast. I was not happy to upgrade to an intel either, but it's what you're gonna have to do if you want to truly run 60+ or stream
m
0
l
October 15, 2014 6:11:56 AM

byza said:
What 650w PSU? Also not a great motherboard. Do you already have watercooling or are you going to set it up? I think you may want to rethink your strategy, maybe get a 280x, get a new mobo, CPU and end up with a much more balanced build. Maybe something like an i5 4440 (or 4590 is you live near a micro mart), an Asrock H97 Performance and a R9 280x.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
would an intel i5 4460 go well with this r9 290 fine? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
CPU: Intel Core i5-4590 3.3GHz Quad-Core Processor ($159.99 @ Micro Center)
Motherboard: ASRock H97 PERFORMANCE ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($90.91 @ Newegg)
Video Card: Asus Radeon R9 280X 3GB DirectCU II Video Card ($239.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $490.89
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-10-14 21:31 EDT-0400


would the intel i5-4460 go well with a r9 290? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
m
0
l
October 15, 2014 6:45:11 AM

griffey546 said:
byza said:
What 650w PSU? Also not a great motherboard. Do you already have watercooling or are you going to set it up? I think you may want to rethink your strategy, maybe get a 280x, get a new mobo, CPU and end up with a much more balanced build. Maybe something like an i5 4440 (or 4590 is you live near a micro mart), an Asrock H97 Performance and a R9 280x.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
would an intel i5 4460 go well with this r9 290 fine? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
CPU: Intel Core i5-4590 3.3GHz Quad-Core Processor ($159.99 @ Micro Center)
Motherboard: ASRock H97 PERFORMANCE ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($90.91 @ Newegg)
Video Card: Asus Radeon R9 280X 3GB DirectCU II Video Card ($239.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $490.89
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-10-14 21:31 EDT-0400


would the intel i5-4460 go well with a r9 290? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


Hmm, maybe, someone else might know more about this. I would aim for a 4690k, or even a used 4670k
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 15, 2014 9:15:11 AM

jkteddy77 said:
griffey546 said:
byza said:
What 650w PSU? Also not a great motherboard. Do you already have watercooling or are you going to set it up? I think you may want to rethink your strategy, maybe get a 280x, get a new mobo, CPU and end up with a much more balanced build. Maybe something like an i5 4440 (or 4590 is you live near a micro mart), an Asrock H97 Performance and a R9 280x.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
would an intel i5 4460 go well with this r9 290 fine? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
CPU: Intel Core i5-4590 3.3GHz Quad-Core Processor ($159.99 @ Micro Center)
Motherboard: ASRock H97 PERFORMANCE ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($90.91 @ Newegg)
Video Card: Asus Radeon R9 280X 3GB DirectCU II Video Card ($239.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $490.89
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-10-14 21:31 EDT-0400


would the intel i5-4460 go well with a r9 290? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


Hmm, maybe, someone else might know more about this. I would aim for a 4690k, or even a used 4670k


No reason to buy an unlocked (K) processor unless you are going to overclock it at some point.

The 4460 will work fine with a 290.
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b à CPUs
October 15, 2014 10:21:44 AM

jkteddy77 said:
sadly probably not...
Let me put this straight... an 8350 at 4.6ghz on my Asus 990FX Pro (the superior to the board you linked) still bottled my R9 290, which is even slower than a 970 would be. an 8350 will not hold 60+fps in games, and definitely not while streaming/recording
Here, with the 8350 I played BF4 between 40-85fps. Now that I switched to an i7 4790k, I now get 70-110fps.... same gpu, same ram, osu, same everything except I switched to Intel

Even with an 8370, Tom's Hardware doesn't recommend pairing an FX cpu with anything faster than a 760 or 270x:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-fx-8370e-cpu,39...
"Depending on the game in question, AMD’s new processor has the potential to keep you happy around the AMD Radeon R9 270X/285 or Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 or 660 Ti level.
A higher- or even high-end graphics card doesn’t make sense, as pairing it with AMD's FX-8370 simply limits the card's potential."

Everyone out there using one with anything higher is either lying to themselves or doesn't know they are bottlenecked...
It ran the same in BF4 Single player, since it rely's on the GPU entirely games, but for BF4 Multiplayer + recording... you will need an intel... an i5 4690k would suffice, but an i7 would be recommended.
It sucks I know, but AMD FX cpu's have aged far too fast. I was not happy to upgrade to an intel either, but it's what you're gonna have to do if you want to truly run 60+ or stream


You never had a bottleneck as your GPU could hit 100% usage under load (I am positive of that). However, if you see someone with an i7 getting a better FPS with the same GPU, it is because the part of the game takes use of the CPU which will result in a higher fps due to the more powerful CPU.
m
0
l
October 15, 2014 11:34:04 AM

so i should not get the amd fx 8350 or 4670k, and get the 4460? and could someone tell me what a good motherboard is that is at most $75?
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b à CPUs
October 15, 2014 12:43:45 PM

griffey546 said:
so i should not get the amd fx 8350 or 4670k, and get the 4460? and could someone tell me what a good motherboard is that is at most $75?


You don't need to upgrade at all. You won't have a bottleneck and if you somehow do, just buy the new motherboard and CPU then.
m
0
l
October 15, 2014 2:12:32 PM

TheMagicalWallaby said:
griffey546 said:
so i should not get the amd fx 8350 or 4670k, and get the 4460? and could someone tell me what a good motherboard is that is at most $75?


You don't need to upgrade at all. You won't have a bottleneck and if you somehow do, just buy the new motherboard and CPU then.

well i was told that the fx 6300 isnt a good cpu for the cards that im going for, and everyone tells me that it will bottleneck, right now im just trying to play games like arma 3 and get the best performance, and i also heard that arma games are based on cpu, so what type of cpu should i get to play that type of game 60+fps on high or very high
m
0
l
October 15, 2014 3:13:24 PM

actually i have another question, what would happen if i get an fx 8350 and r9 290, would i run into any bottlenecks? and could someone try to send me a good motherboard for that that is under $70 if that combo is good?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 15, 2014 3:16:20 PM

griffey546 said:
actually i have another question, what would happen if i get an fx 8350 and r9 290, would i run into any bottlenecks? and could someone try to send me a good motherboard for that that is under $70 if that combo is good?


Yes, you may run into a bottleneck. If the game you are playing doesn't utilize all cores, you may have a problem.

It is better to go with an i5.
m
0
l
October 15, 2014 3:58:24 PM

frag06 said:
griffey546 said:
actually i have another question, what would happen if i get an fx 8350 and r9 290, would i run into any bottlenecks? and could someone try to send me a good motherboard for that that is under $70 if that combo is good?


Yes, you may run into a bottleneck. If the game you are playing doesn't utilize all cores, you may have a problem.

It is better to go with an i5.

alright so i should just go with the i5 4460 and 280x, and what motherboard should i get too? and do you know what the fps would be in games like arma 3 or bf4 in 1080p?
edit:
byza already linked a mobo to me

m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 15, 2014 4:09:42 PM

griffey546 said:
frag06 said:
griffey546 said:
actually i have another question, what would happen if i get an fx 8350 and r9 290, would i run into any bottlenecks? and could someone try to send me a good motherboard for that that is under $70 if that combo is good?


Yes, you may run into a bottleneck. If the game you are playing doesn't utilize all cores, you may have a problem.

It is better to go with an i5.

alright so i should just go with the i5 4460 and 280x, and what motherboard should i get too? and do you know what the fps would be in games like arma 3 or bf4 in 1080p?
edit:
byza already linked a mobo to me



The 280X should be able to run BF4 at 60 FPS.

The FPS you will get in Arma 3 is completely unknown. I play it all of the time on a 4790K with a 970 and I average anywhere from the 40's to the 80's depending on the server, but it is quite common to get big dips in FPS. The game only uses two cores, so it is CPU limited. I can tell you though, that if you go AMD, you will almost certainly not get playable FPS in Arma 3.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 15, 2014 4:15:21 PM

griffey546 said:
i have a 650w psu,and an msi 760gm p34fx, im set with watercooling too


That boarDwould roast with an 8350 or 8320. Just as Wallaby states. I am sure it throttles with your 6300 too. Only the 970 and 990 chipset boards have native support for FX cpu's.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 15, 2014 4:17:31 PM

griffey546 said:
so i should not get the amd fx 8350 or 4670k, and get the 4460? and could someone tell me what a good motherboard is that is at most $75?


$75 dollars doesn't get a good board no matter what anyone states. To meet that price point you get Chinese caps, weak chokes etc....
m
0
l
October 15, 2014 5:19:00 PM

TheMagicalWallaby said:
jkteddy77 said:
sadly probably not...
Let me put this straight... an 8350 at 4.6ghz on my Asus 990FX Pro (the superior to the board you linked) still bottled my R9 290, which is even slower than a 970 would be. an 8350 will not hold 60+fps in games, and definitely not while streaming/recording
Here, with the 8350 I played BF4 between 40-85fps. Now that I switched to an i7 4790k, I now get 70-110fps.... same gpu, same ram, osu, same everything except I switched to Intel

Even with an 8370, Tom's Hardware doesn't recommend pairing an FX cpu with anything faster than a 760 or 270x:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-fx-8370e-cpu,39...
"Depending on the game in question, AMD’s new processor has the potential to keep you happy around the AMD Radeon R9 270X/285 or Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 or 660 Ti level.
A higher- or even high-end graphics card doesn’t make sense, as pairing it with AMD's FX-8370 simply limits the card's potential."

Everyone out there using one with anything higher is either lying to themselves or doesn't know they are bottlenecked...
It ran the same in BF4 Single player, since it rely's on the GPU entirely games, but for BF4 Multiplayer + recording... you will need an intel... an i5 4690k would suffice, but an i7 would be recommended.
It sucks I know, but AMD FX cpu's have aged far too fast. I was not happy to upgrade to an intel either, but it's what you're gonna have to do if you want to truly run 60+ or stream


You never had a bottleneck as your GPU could hit 100% usage under load (I am positive of that). However, if you see someone with an i7 getting a better FPS with the same GPU, it is because the part of the game takes use of the CPU which will result in a higher fps due to the more powerful CPU.


look, if you're GPU isn't at 99-100% in games, you ARE bottlenecked.. yes it hit it, but it didn't STAY there. If your GPU isn't staying at 100%, it's because the game is too intensivr on your GPU... Hence, a bottleneck.

I had an 8350, and have an i7 nbow... I gained FPS in EVERY GAME
Call it what you want, he will never get the performance that GPU is capable of if he pairs it with an FX processor. I'm not just talking a handful of fps, I was seeing a 20fps increase in some games (BF3, BF4, Arma) with my 290 just by swapping out the CPU/Mobo. Those are the kinds of games he will be playing too. If you have never run a 290 and 8350 on that game, do not contribute to how the combo runs the game.

honestly, I would get a cheaper Z87 and a used 4670k (I see them under $200 now). Why get a weaker i5, the 4670k will last longer since you can OC it when it gets too slow. plius, it's only like $40 more.
This mobo: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
and either a cheaper 4670k, or a 4690k. Best proce/performancve, will deliver more than the 8350 can as far as BF3/BF4 go.

If you were only playing single player games, an FX would be fine, but you want high end Multiplayer performance, you need an intel.
Here is video of my 8350 and r9 290 in BF3! a game from 2011.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aq9dSLOElX4&list=UU4WCR...
I now run this game all 100+ so...
m
0
l
October 15, 2014 7:09:04 PM

bmacsys said:
griffey546 said:
so i should not get the amd fx 8350 or 4670k, and get the 4460? and could someone tell me what a good motherboard is that is at most $75?


$75 dollars doesn't get a good board no matter what anyone states. To meet that price point you get Chinese caps, weak chokes etc....


jkteddy77 said:
TheMagicalWallaby said:
jkteddy77 said:
sadly probably not...
Let me put this straight... an 8350 at 4.6ghz on my Asus 990FX Pro (the superior to the board you linked) still bottled my R9 290, which is even slower than a 970 would be. an 8350 will not hold 60+fps in games, and definitely not while streaming/recording
Here, with the 8350 I played BF4 between 40-85fps. Now that I switched to an i7 4790k, I now get 70-110fps.... same gpu, same ram, osu, same everything except I switched to Intel

Even with an 8370, Tom's Hardware doesn't recommend pairing an FX cpu with anything faster than a 760 or 270x:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-fx-8370e-cpu,39...
"Depending on the game in question, AMD’s new processor has the potential to keep you happy around the AMD Radeon R9 270X/285 or Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 or 660 Ti level.
A higher- or even high-end graphics card doesn’t make sense, as pairing it with AMD's FX-8370 simply limits the card's potential."

Everyone out there using one with anything higher is either lying to themselves or doesn't know they are bottlenecked...
It ran the same in BF4 Single player, since it rely's on the GPU entirely games, but for BF4 Multiplayer + recording... you will need an intel... an i5 4690k would suffice, but an i7 would be recommended.
It sucks I know, but AMD FX cpu's have aged far too fast. I was not happy to upgrade to an intel either, but it's what you're gonna have to do if you want to truly run 60+ or stream


You never had a bottleneck as your GPU could hit 100% usage under load (I am positive of that). However, if you see someone with an i7 getting a better FPS with the same GPU, it is because the part of the game takes use of the CPU which will result in a higher fps due to the more powerful CPU.


look, if you're GPU isn't at 99-100% in games, you ARE bottlenecked.. yes it hit it, but it didn't STAY there. If your GPU isn't staying at 100%, it's because the game is too intensivr on your GPU... Hence, a bottleneck.

I had an 8350, and have an i7 nbow... I gained FPS in EVERY GAME
Call it what you want, he will never get the performance that GPU is capable of if he pairs it with an FX processor. I'm not just talking a handful of fps, I was seeing a 20fps increase in some games (BF3, BF4, Arma) with my 290 just by swapping out the CPU/Mobo. Those are the kinds of games he will be playing too. If you have never run a 290 and 8350 on that game, do not contribute to how the combo runs the game.

honestly, I would get a cheaper Z87 and a used 4670k (I see them under $200 now). Why get a weaker i5, the 4670k will last longer since you can OC it when it gets too slow. plius, it's only like $40 more.
This mobo: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
and either a cheaper 4670k, or a 4690k. Best proce/performancve, will deliver more than the 8350 can as far as BF3/BF4 go.

If you were only playing single player games, an FX would be fine, but you want high end Multiplayer performance, you need an intel.
Here is video of my 8350 and r9 290 in BF3! a game from 2011.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aq9dSLOElX4&list=UU4WCR...
I now run this game all 100+ so...


well isnt there not much of a difference between the 4460 and a 4670k? as in fps, im also using a 280x, im planning on using a 290 if i can get the money for one
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b à CPUs
October 15, 2014 7:31:16 PM

jkteddy77 said:
TheMagicalWallaby said:
jkteddy77 said:
sadly probably not...
Let me put this straight... an 8350 at 4.6ghz on my Asus 990FX Pro (the superior to the board you linked) still bottled my R9 290, which is even slower than a 970 would be. an 8350 will not hold 60+fps in games, and definitely not while streaming/recording
Here, with the 8350 I played BF4 between 40-85fps. Now that I switched to an i7 4790k, I now get 70-110fps.... same gpu, same ram, osu, same everything except I switched to Intel

Even with an 8370, Tom's Hardware doesn't recommend pairing an FX cpu with anything faster than a 760 or 270x:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-fx-8370e-cpu,39...
"Depending on the game in question, AMD’s new processor has the potential to keep you happy around the AMD Radeon R9 270X/285 or Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 or 660 Ti level.
A higher- or even high-end graphics card doesn’t make sense, as pairing it with AMD's FX-8370 simply limits the card's potential."

Everyone out there using one with anything higher is either lying to themselves or doesn't know they are bottlenecked...
It ran the same in BF4 Single player, since it rely's on the GPU entirely games, but for BF4 Multiplayer + recording... you will need an intel... an i5 4690k would suffice, but an i7 would be recommended.
It sucks I know, but AMD FX cpu's have aged far too fast. I was not happy to upgrade to an intel either, but it's what you're gonna have to do if you want to truly run 60+ or stream


You never had a bottleneck as your GPU could hit 100% usage under load (I am positive of that). However, if you see someone with an i7 getting a better FPS with the same GPU, it is because the part of the game takes use of the CPU which will result in a higher fps due to the more powerful CPU.


look, if you're GPU isn't at 99-100% in games, you ARE bottlenecked.. yes it hit it, but it didn't STAY there. If your GPU isn't staying at 100%, it's because the game is too intensivr on your GPU... Hence, a bottleneck.

I had an 8350, and have an i7 nbow... I gained FPS in EVERY GAME
Call it what you want, he will never get the performance that GPU is capable of if he pairs it with an FX processor. I'm not just talking a handful of fps, I was seeing a 20fps increase in some games (BF3, BF4, Arma) with my 290 just by swapping out the CPU/Mobo. Those are the kinds of games he will be playing too. If you have never run a 290 and 8350 on that game, do not contribute to how the combo runs the game.

honestly, I would get a cheaper Z87 and a used 4670k (I see them under $200 now). Why get a weaker i5, the 4670k will last longer since you can OC it when it gets too slow. plius, it's only like $40 more.
This mobo: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
and either a cheaper 4670k, or a 4690k. Best proce/performancve, will deliver more than the 8350 can as far as BF3/BF4 go.

If you were only playing single player games, an FX would be fine, but you want high end Multiplayer performance, you need an intel.
Here is video of my 8350 and r9 290 in BF3! a game from 2011.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aq9dSLOElX4&list=UU4WCR...
I now run this game all 100+ so...


My 8350 does not bottleneck my 970 at all, so I can't believe that your 280x was bottlenecked. And yes getting an i7 will give you an fps boost. Watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAgpvWc4VBM
m
0
l
October 15, 2014 8:21:37 PM

Look, if you aren't getting 85-110fps with your 970, you are simply wasting your money on a stronger GPU that will never be fully utilized...

In that JayZ2Cents video, they are still using the same CPU. That CPU, even using its 4 cores, can power the game better core for core than the FX line's slower single cores can.
At 18:38 in the video, if your GPU usage looks like that at anytime with your 8350, that IS a CPU bottleneck.

Look back at the video I showed you of my 8350/r9 290, the graph looked exactly like that... under 100%... it is indeed then labeled a bottleneck.
What fps does your 970 run at? Show me some video with an fps meter up and showing your settings (max them default ultra). I'd also like to see what your GPU usage is doing. If your GPU usage graph isn't a solid straight line at 99 or 100% while you are playing, your CPU is slowing you down... you should DEFINITIELY not be going under 60 ever with that card with all of your settings maxed. Prove me wrong, let your hardware speak for itself.

If it's not bottlenecking, you still wasted money on a card that will always be held down by your processor.
And I have an R9 290, and I get 70-110 with my i7 now. If you aren't getting more than me, you just wasted a beefy 970 on a slow cpu choice.
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b à CPUs
October 16, 2014 4:14:52 PM

jkteddy77 said:
Look, if you aren't getting 85-110fps with your 970, you are simply wasting your money on a stronger GPU that will never be fully utilized...

In that JayZ2Cents video, they are still using the same CPU. That CPU, even using its 4 cores, can power the game better core for core than the FX line's slower single cores can.
At 18:38 in the video, if your GPU usage looks like that at anytime with your 8350, that IS a CPU bottleneck.

Look back at the video I showed you of my 8350/r9 290, the graph looked exactly like that... under 100%... it is indeed then labeled a bottleneck.
What fps does your 970 run at? Show me some video with an fps meter up and showing your settings (max them default ultra). I'd also like to see what your GPU usage is doing. If your GPU usage graph isn't a solid straight line at 99 or 100% while you are playing, your CPU is slowing you down... you should DEFINITIELY not be going under 60 ever with that card with all of your settings maxed. Prove me wrong, let your hardware speak for itself.

If it's not bottlenecking, you still wasted money on a card that will always be held down by your processor.
And I have an R9 290, and I get 70-110 with my i7 now. If you aren't getting more than me, you just wasted a beefy 970 on a slow cpu choice.


He disabled cores and features. Clearly you didn't pay attention, and there is way too much research for you to do on processor performance for me to even explain. I will leave you be with your opinion, and let you do the research when you are ready.
m
0
l
October 16, 2014 9:04:56 PM

TheMagicalWallaby said:
jkteddy77 said:
Look, if you aren't getting 85-110fps with your 970, you are simply wasting your money on a stronger GPU that will never be fully utilized...

In that JayZ2Cents video, they are still using the same CPU. That CPU, even using its 4 cores, can power the game better core for core than the FX line's slower single cores can.
At 18:38 in the video, if your GPU usage looks like that at anytime with your 8350, that IS a CPU bottleneck.

Look back at the video I showed you of my 8350/r9 290, the graph looked exactly like that... under 100%... it is indeed then labeled a bottleneck.
What fps does your 970 run at? Show me some video with an fps meter up and showing your settings (max them default ultra). I'd also like to see what your GPU usage is doing. If your GPU usage graph isn't a solid straight line at 99 or 100% while you are playing, your CPU is slowing you down... you should DEFINITIELY not be going under 60 ever with that card with all of your settings maxed. Prove me wrong, let your hardware speak for itself.

If it's not bottlenecking, you still wasted money on a card that will always be held down by your processor.
And I have an R9 290, and I get 70-110 with my i7 now. If you aren't getting more than me, you just wasted a beefy 970 on a slow cpu choice.


He disabled cores and features. Clearly you didn't pay attention, and there is way too much research for you to do on processor performance for me to even explain. I will leave you be with your opinion, and let you do the research when you are ready.


What I'm saying is that the i7 only running 4 threads is still not a s big of a bottleneck as an 8350 running all 8 of its threads... The i7 with only 4 cores equlas an i5, and i5's don't bottleneck. The i7 only bottles it when using 2 of itscores... which is really sad...
The 8350's individual core speed is as good as phenoms... its basically 8 cores of phenom power, the core strength did not grow with what modern ames expect out of each core.

And where's your proof that you aren't bottled by your own wise guy.Don't brush me off, prove me wrong...


And to Griffey546, that 4460 would handle it, and that motherboard would be good too, but for $30 more, I'd suggest your get a k processor so in a year or two, you can just OC it and not have to entirely swap your CPU again.

But it would handle it, that's my advice, take it or leave it.

INSTEAD OF THE 780, just get the new 970, they are cheaper AND faster. The 970 is on par with the 780ti for like $340, saved you performance and $200...
Have your pick:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=E...
Good luck finding one in stock, they are going like hot cakes, but it is the best option for you.
m
0
l
!