Ok, just threw a wall of text in the new build section, but my questions are likely best for here.
[Edit:]Primary games played at this point will be: Planetside2, League of Legends, Mechwarrior Online, Borderlands 2. Primary usage will be schoolwork/the gaming to unwind from work. No video editing, compiling, or anything too crazy, that I can think of.
1.Of the FX-xxxx bulldozer chips, which is the best suited for gaming.(I assume anything that can handle gaming can handle most other things I'll throw at it, since I have been getting by with an Athlon 64xduo for 5+ years now, for everything BUT the gaming) Not just price, but performance.(for instance, if the fx-6100 and fx-4170 are going to give the same framerates etc, and the only difference is one's cheaper and the other has a higher clock speed, I'm ok with that being said)
2.Is Piledriver really going to be so much better, for gaming performance/experience, that I should hold off and then drop an extra $100+ for a "new + better" chip. I understand that with this build, we're probably parcing between 60-70fps etc, so unless it's giving handies for head shots, I doubt this is what I'll be doing.
3. Is this ram good quality-wise(reliable, won't burn out, etc.), and good enough performance-wise to handle what I'll be throwing at it without bottlenecking? Everything I've seen says that 16gb is a waste right now, and this leaves me room to upgrade in the future, while saving money now.
4.Is there a noticeable performance increase between the GTX-660 and GTX-660 ti to justify going FX-6100 build, so that I can drop an extra 70 dollars and get the Ti(and free borderlands 2 ? Is the GK104 better than the GK106, or are they essentially identical, and I should ditch them for a :
XFX Double D FX-795A-TDJC Radeon HD 7950 3GB 384-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFireX Support Video Card http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
(with sleeping dogs, a game I've never even heard of), because AMD Graphics cards and CPU's have some weird voodoo that makes them work better together/stops nvidia's from working as well.
Sweet....thought it was October 17th, not the 2nd.
Also, I didn't want to risk losing the deal, so I went ahead and got the Sabertooth 990fx(R1.0), since it saved me 40$ on memory, 20 since I didn't combo it.(but admittedly, the only viable combo was the fx6100, and found a few reviews while waiting for replies here that showed the fx4170 out performing it, enough so in games to make it worth the extra 20$, if that's the route I go.)
I think, saving a few bucks here and there, I can justify springing for the 660ti over the newer 660, since I did set a $1000 limit on myself for this. I might go over that, if I get an 8350, but I'd also be futureproofed, and could still get the 660, which is only a few fps slower than the ti from what I've seen in reviews.
Isn't BF3 one of the few games that can use more than 4 cores though?(hence why all the benchmarks I see show FX holding their own in it against the Sandies and Ivies when they get trod on a bit on other game benchmarks)
It's my opinion that eventually all games/programs will be in the vein of BF3, where more cores can be utilized, since it will open the market up and improve playability for both Intel AND AMD chips, and then AMD will suddenly be really competitive again. Not saying that Intel is stopping programmers or anything, but that AMD sorta pulled a Da Vinci, and made something that was unable to be properly utilized, but if coding catches up to it, the architecture is there to support it, and suddenly they are on top again.(mind you, I'm in school for an eventual finance degree, not computer science, so I have no basis for this, since I lack a superior understanding of the limits on the actual tech and coding)
Also, MW , from what I've "heard", is quite worth it. If you like World of Tanks, and love mechs, then you'll be at home there. Or so I've "heard"
First rule of MW Beta is there IS NO MW Beta.
Second Rule of MW Beta.....
BTW, ended up going 4170. Reason? PD isn't out yet, but the time wasted waiting compared to performance likely gained seemed not worth it. But since SR is guaranteed on am3+, I can upgrade next year for the real performance gain, where it should be truly noticeable.
To be honest, I should probably have gone FX6100, but I've never overclocked(even though I basically have a build that would allow it, at least mildly)