Best CPU under $300 and Gaming?

yomamasfatllamas

Reputable
Apr 8, 2014
59
0
4,630
GPU: GTX 970
MB: Gigabyte H81M-HD3
RAM: HyperX FURY 8GB 1600 MHz DDR3

Looking for a CPU under $300 that will be great for all games, especially CPU intensive games. I'm going to be playing Arma 3, DayZ Standalone, BF4, BF1. I also want to get one with a nice stock cooler and one that does not need a BIOS update.
 

lodders

Admirable
^^ Both Very good suggestions

I have the same motherboard as you, and so I would recommend the 4690k. See my signature for details.

One word of warning, your motherboard does not have VRM heatsinks, so to keep them cool you need a CPU cooler which blows air toward the motherboard. The stock cooler is fine, but tower coolers like a Hyper 212 are not such a good idea.
 
Your board should work with any 1150 CPU. The i7 4790K is the highest stock-clocked CPU for that board, but is probably just a bit above your budget. Some good choices:

i5 4690
i7 4790
i7 4790K

You might also look into socket 1150 Xeons, but I feel one of the above CPUs would suit your needs best.
 

lodders

Admirable


Ecky, the H81 HD3 motherboard has only a 3 phase power supply and no heat sink on the VRM. Therefore if you try running a fast i7, the motherboard power supply will be under a lot of stress. A 4690k at between 4.0 and 4.2Ghz or a Xeon E3 1231v3 at 3.8Ghz are probably the sensible maximum for that mobo
 

lodders

Admirable


Yeah, I know 4790k is listed as supported, and I bet that it would work too, but not sure for how long....
Most people would pair a 4790k with a much more expensive motherboard.
There must be some reason for expensive gamer motherboards with 8 phase VRM supplies with fancy heatsinks right?
 


The 4790K comes with a higher stock clock than the non-K.

I've never heard of an Intel motherboard having power delivery problems, or dying young because of excess power draw, but I suppose it could happen.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

Four well-designed phases will serve a non-overclocked CPU every bit as good as an 8+ phases (that really are only 3-4 phases with two or more pairs of FETs each) contraption. More phases aren't necessarily more efficient since you are trading on-losses for switching and driver losses. (That's assuming you don't end up using cheaper FETs due to having more phases to split the extra losses with.)