Will amd fx 6300 bottleneck geforce gtx 660(non ti)?

[konak26]

So as the title says will amd fx 6300 bottleneck geforce gtx 660(non ti)?

 

[Brett928S2]

no

 

[masterman467]

i3 is the same if not better, and quite a bit cheeper, uses less power, and unless you want to OC then is overall a better choice. you need a LGA 1155 mobo for i3, and AM3+ for the amd cpu.

 

[bwathke]

i3 is the same if not better, and quite a bit cheeper, uses less power, and unless you want to OC then is overall a better choice. you need a LGA 1155 mobo for i3, and AM3+ for the amd cpu.

There is no i3 that is as good as the FX-6300. Any that come close cost MORE then a 6300. Not to mention the 6300 is six core and i3 is dual-core.

 

[lazyboy947]

There is no i3 that is as good as the FX-6300. Any that come close cost MORE then a 6300. Not to mention the 6300 is six core and i3 is dual-core.

Straight forward a little harsh lol Id say the fx is better or on par with an i3, amd may have messed with their core design and performance but piledriver at least can compete with intel better than wat bulldozer did. I dont like an i3 as its a dual core with HT lol come on. Anywho Fx6300 since its similar performance to a i3 which wont bottleneck a 7850/7870, which is similar to a 660, you should be fine.

In terms of price fx quad and six cores are similar to most i3s, and the fx 8 cores are similar to the i5s, and the 3570k and 8350 fx are like literally the same cost lol

 

[masterman467]

There is no i3 that is as good as the FX-6300. Any that come close cost MORE then a 6300. Not to mention the 6300 is six core and i3 is dual-core.

Straight forward a little harsh lol Id say the fx is better or on par with an i3, amd may have messed with their core design and performance but piledriver at least can compete with intel better than wat bulldozer did. I dont like an i3 as its a dual core with HT lol come on. Anywho Fx6300 since its similar performance to a i3 which wont bottleneck a 7850/7870, which is similar to a 660, you should be fine.

In terms of price fx quad and six cores are similar to most i3s, and the fx 8 cores are similar to the i5s, and the 3570k and 8350 fx are like literally the same cost lol

cough cough, cough cough. hack, cough.

god, do i love stomping on AMD fanboys, or what?
go ahead and pay 90 bucks more for a FX-8350 CPU with 4 times the cores, and uses twice the power, then gets STOMPED on by a little i3.

 

[lazyboy947]

So anyone who has a amd cpu, and tries to give some credit to fx cpu line gets called a fanboy? I enjoy my x6, and im just hating on the i3s, if i had the money to go intel well i would but i currently dont see a need to do so.

Also ur kind of a hypocrite lol amd fanboy? i know obviously intel is better but way to be a intel fanboy.... oh burn!!! u hear that sarcasm?

 

[stanistheman]

lga 1155 socket is dead unless you can wait for haswell i reccmoned you the amd 6300

I paried the 6300 with a 7970ghz No bottlenecks getting 98% gpu usage. so you will be 100% fine with the 660

 

[xa376]

cough cough, cough cough. hack, cough.

http://media.bestofmicro.com/9/G/364516/original/CPU-scaling.png
god, do i love stomping on AMD fanboys, or what?
go ahead and pay 90 bucks more for a FX-8350 CPU with 4 times the cores, and uses twice the power, then gets STOMPED on by a little i3.

So according to your chart, I should just buy an i3-2100 because it makes a ~1fps difference in gaming performance to an i5-3550? If this chart were 100% accurate then the i3-2100 would be the best value CPU of 2012. Why not save $90 and get the i3 instead of the i5, or the i7 for another $950? If this is the performance increase for a CPU worth $950 more, then Intels price to performance is terrible.

Also in this chart the fx-8350 and i5-3550 are less than 3 fps apart, which is within margin of error.

Don't you just love stomping on Intel fanboys, or what?
Go ahead and pay $950 more for a i7-3960X with 3 times the cores, using twice the power, and gain .6 FPS in games.

Oh and sorry to hijack the thread, konak26. Your answer is exactly as Brett replied. No

 

[iam2thecrowe]

it really depends on the game. Something like Skyrim would show a cpu bottleneck, as its very cpu dependant, and doesnt scale well after 4 cores. You would get more performance with a high clocked i3. I think its a well balanced setup that should give you good oveall performance. I would probably take the 6300 over an i3, but then again, i would just spend a little extra again and get an i5 3xxx.

 

[amuffin]

lga 1155 socket is dead unless you can wait for haswell i reccmoned you the amd 6300

I paried the 6300 with a 7970ghz No bottlenecks getting 98% gpu usage. so you will be 100% fine with the 660

So is AM3+.

 

[kovzone]

another amd and intel fight :lol:

I think the answer is no, I don't know wether the OP wants to change the processor or not eventhough if not OC, i think i3 3220 is better

 

[stanistheman]

So is AM3+.

WRONG
proof?:

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2208525/amd-sticks-with-socket-am3-for-steamroller

 

[ToKiiNz]

actaully rumors are the next amd cpu line will be using the outdated AM3+ so techincally its not dead just as a stalemate. since a new line of AMD cpus just came out also the answer to the thread is no i'd trust a fx 6300 with up to a 7950 then i'd move up to a 8 core for a 7970 or GTX 670

 

[sarinaide]

i3 is the same if not better, and quite a bit cheeper, uses less power, and unless you want to OC then is overall a better choice. you need a LGA 1155 mobo for i3, and AM3+ for the amd cpu.

That will be wrong, i3 3225 costs the same as a FX6300 and honestly I know which one I will prefer whether or not I prefer AMD or not.

OP if you really try super hard you will bottleneck the 660, but you have more chance melting the sun.

 

[noob2222]

cough cough, cough cough. hack, cough.

http://media.bestofmicro.com/9/G/364516/original/CPU-scaling.png
god, do i love stomping on AMD fanboys, or what?
go ahead and pay 90 bucks more for a FX-8350 CPU with 4 times the cores, and uses twice the power, then gets STOMPED on by a little i3.

so you found one benchmark, good for you.

And some non-image ownage of the I3. http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/3314/10/amd-fx-8350--8320--6300-vishera-review-finally-good-enough-benchmarks-cpu-crysis-2

What now fanboy stomper? you showed 1 for the I3, I showed 9 where the 6300 either wins or ties. and we aren't talking about the +$90 8350, this is the lowly 6300

 

[kovzone]

what does that means? Is it means that on some games, i3 3220 is better, on other 6300 is better isn't it?
(btw, has the OP got the answer? I'd love to hear this, but I don't know, could we still discussing while the comments are no related anymore to OP?)

 

[lazyboy947]

how about stop posting i think the OP has his answer lol its not like this argument isnt happening on other threads

 

[stantheman123]

OP flip a coin. in the end you will be happy i can guarantee that.

 

[noob2222]

this is the problem with asking a question. first this is a month old, someone decided to dig it up. 2nd he never asked anything about the I3.

Any time someone mentions AMD, automatically people come rushing in to recommend the I3, even if it wasn't a topic of discussion.

 

[kovzone]

LOL
we don't even know where the OP is.. :lol:

 

[kovzone]

LOL
we don't even know where the OP is.. :lol:

 

[masterman467]

So according to your chart, I should just buy an i3-2100 because it makes a ~1fps difference in gaming performance to an i5-3550? If this chart were 100% accurate then the i3-2100 would be the best value CPU of 2012. Why not save $90 and get the i3 instead of the i5, or the i7 for another $950? If this is the performance increase for a CPU worth $950 more, then Intels price to performance is terrible.

Also in this chart the fx-8350 and i5-3550 are less than 3 fps apart, which is within margin of error.

Don't you just love stomping on Intel fanboys, or what?
Go ahead and pay $950 more for a i7-3960X with 3 times the cores, using twice the power, and gain .6 FPS in games.

Oh and sorry to hijack the thread, konak26. Your answer is exactly as Brett replied. No

gpu bottleneck... your not the brightest bulb on the tree, are you?

 

[xa376]

gpu bottleneck... your not the brightest bulb on the tree, are you?

Not the brightest, but at least i'm lit.

 

[lazyboy947]

Does anyone get that this is over a month old and the OP prob doesnt read this???????????????????