R9 270x solves bottleneck only in some games that use more CPU.
-
Man, an unlocked Phenom 2 is not a serial Phenom 4, even if the former is a limited edition of the latter, you can have the cores activated, but this does not mean that they will perform at 100%, let's say it's a Phenom 2 "plus".
To take advantage of the graphics capability of that GPU you do need a more efficient processor (the FX6300 seems adequate to me), and also add at least 2GB of RAM, making sure that they must match in latency with the one you already have. -
Many people tell me that Intel is better but it is more expensive for me to go for cpu and Mother Intel..
For example, an i5 4440 which is one of the cheapest in that series costs more than 50% than an fx 6300..
I don't know if those games that I don't see changes or graphic gain use more a single core and don't perform that way. (I give an example again ac3 and Nfs the rivals), and if the single core power of the fx 6300 is not enough I wouldn't see a change in the fx with respect to those games since the others run well.This is all a dilemma I would go for Intel to be safe but it is very expensive and doesn't give me an fx 6300 and mother 970 could buy faster…and it is more within my reach..
That's right the fx 8350 comes out almost the same as the i5 4440 but I would have to sacrifice a mother type 970 mid-range for a low-end one to compensate for a micro more expensive than the fx 6300..Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk
-
Many people tell me that Intel is better but it is more expensive for me to go for CPU and Intel Mother..
For example, an i5 4440 which is one of the cheapest in that series costs more than 50% than an fx 6300..
I don't know if those games that I don't see changes or graphic gain use more a single core and don't perform that way. (I give an example again of new ac3 and Nfs the rivals), and if the single core power of the fx 6300 is not enough I wouldn't see a change in the fx with respect to those games since the others run well.This is all a dilemma, I would go for Intel to be safe but it is very expensive and doesn't give me an fx 6300 and a mother 970 I could buy faster…and it is more within my reach..
That's right, the fx 8350 comes out almost the same as the i5 4440 but I would have to sacrifice a mother type 970 mid-range for a low-end one to compensate for a micro more expensive than the fx 6300..Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk
Let's see if it's going to be the fault of the Assasind, I certainly wouldn't put an fx6300, I would try to put an 8320, or look for a second-hand one if your board supports it, anyway they say that some Assasind doesn't go very well with AMD graphics, I don't know if it's already better, but when it comes out there is usually complaints.
Especially of the 3 and 4, if the others go well for you it would only be to put a better micro, but you can look for forums of second-hand that maybe you find something interesting, I see an i5 4570 and a z87 Sabertooth 230€
Although you could find an FX cheap.
To me the Assasind 3 goes well, but the 4 also has problems if you put the Vsync of the game, and in places of PhysX, like chimneys or bonfires, I improved by turning off Vsync and putting it from the driver, also activating HT, that game is not a prodigy of optimization and I have played it with an i7 920 at 4200mhz with HT and with a 4770K also with HT, I can maintain stable 60Fps if I lower PhysX, that with a 780, the 3 goes well for me with everything activated, but I would first look if that game has problems with graphics or AMD equipment, maybe they know how to disable some option that improves you quite a bit.
greetings
-
I am considering the possibility of switching to Intel to an i5 4440 since it is one of 4th generation but it is one of the cheapest i5 along with a basic mobo for 1050..
Until that I reached in intel with my budget..otherwise I am left with fx more mobo 970.
Which of these options is better for me or is more productive both are kind of there in the total price..
The intel Mother that I say are:Gigabyte ga-h87m-d3h
Gigabyte ga-h85m-d3h
Asus h87m-e
Asus h87m-gSent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk
-
Look, do what you want, but with such a tight budget, maybe a more powerful AMD would be more convenient than a basic Intel. For example, for the same price as the 4440, you can buy an FX8350 8X Black Edition.
My recommendation: don't start with the "for a little more you get something more powerful" because when you realize it, you have doubled the budget you initially had.
And so you can see what you are thinking of doing, regarding the 4440 instead of the fx6300, here I leave you a comparison between both.Regards.
-
Look, do whatever you want, but with such a tight budget, maybe it would be more convenient to have a more powerful AMD than a basic Intel. To give an example, for the same price as the 4440, you can buy an FX8350 8X Black Edition.
My recommendation: don't start with the "for a little more you get something more powerful" because when you realize it, you have doubled the budget you initially had.
And so you can see what you are thinking of doing, regarding the 4440 instead of the fx6300, here I leave you a comparison between both.Best regards.
If I take as a reference to go for the fx 6300 instead of the i5 4440 according to that comparison, the i5 is better for gaming which is what I'm looking for.
But if the fx 8350 wins in that area against the i5 4440, then the fx is better for me.
..Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk
-
If I take as a reference to go for the fx 6300 instead of the i5 4440 according to that comparison it is better the i5 for games which is what I am looking for..
But if the fx 8350 wins in that area against the i5 4440 then the fx suits me then..Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk
Intel are more advanced, AMD can be better than Intel in CPU tasks for certain jobs but games are their weakness, it doesn't have Pcie3, it still controls the Pcie through the Chipset, Intel has the Pcie3 controller inside the CPU and for games it is better.
For a 270x it may give you the same because there should not be much difference between one and the other, but if in a couple of years you try to put for example a graphics card of that mid-range segment, possibly the difference will be greater in favor of Intel.
If your motherboard supports AM3+ I wouldn't change, I would just put a better CPU and overclock it, you are not interested in spending a lot, your motherboard supports Fx I think with updating the bios.
I would spend the minimum that is just the CPU to spend more I would look at Intel, a better platform for games and especially if one day you decide to put a more powerful graphics card or do SLI and CF.
It seems that a price drop is announced for some FX, the 6300 seems that they are going to lower soon
http://www.muycomputer.com/2014/08/16/amd-precio-cpus-fx-septiembreregards
-
The Intels are more advanced, AMD may be better than Intel in CPU tasks for certain jobs but gaming is their weakness, it doesn't have Pcie3, it still controls Pcie through the Chipset, Intel has the Pcie3 controller inside the CPU and for gaming it's better.
For a 270x it may give you the same result because there shouldn't be much difference between one and the other, but if in a couple of years you try to put in a graphics card of that mid-range segment, for example, the difference may be greater in favor of Intel.
If your motherboard supports AM3+ I wouldn't change, I would just put a better CPU and overclock it, you don't want to spend much, your motherboard supports Fx I think with updating the bios.
I would spend the minimum, that is, only the CPU, to spend more I would look at Intel, a better platform for gaming and especially if one day you decide to put a more powerful graphics card or do SLI and CF.
It seems that a price drop is announced for some FX, the 6300 seems that they are going to lower soon
AMD will lower the price of its FX CPUs in Septemberregards
It doesn't support it's an old revision it has bios f4 and the update of that bios isn't for 6300 it goes up to fx 4xxx..
So if I have to I'll have to invest in a mobo too..
If you say that with an intel i5 plus the 270x you wouldn't see a difference then there's not much sense in going for intel..Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk
-
No soporta es una revisión vieja tiene bios f4 y la actualización de ese bios no es para 6300 llega hasta fx 4xxx..
Asi que si o si igual tengo que invertir en mobo tbn..
Si dices que con un intel i5 mas la 270x no veria diferencia entonces no tiene mucho sentido irme por intel..Enviado desde mi GT-N7100 mediante Tapatalk
La diferencia la tendras dentro de un par de años si quieres cambiar tarjeta, con AMD sin Pcie3 es posible que te toque cambiar otra vez equipo, mientras que con Intel podrias meter otra grafica mas potente que una 780Ti i R9 290x, no se como se llamaran quizá una R9 470x, y Nvidia quizá pase otra ver a 160gtx, ya que ahora sale la 860, la siguiente 960 y ya no se como las llamaran.
Pero si la diferencia de precio no es grande yo preferiría Intel, al final creo que sale rentable si dura mas, AMD aunque tenga mas nucleos no va a servir pues las graficas contra mas potentes necesitan ancho de banda y Pcie2 no lo va a dar, por eso te iran a baja carga y perderan mas contra mas potente la tarjeta.
También con la 270x dependerá del juego, la diferencia en fps no será importante pero en algunos juegos quizá si se note la estabilidad pues la grafica debería trabajar a plena carga siempre, en GTA IV y episodios yo noto bastante que con un 4770K a frecuencia de serie osea 3900 con turbo va claramente mas estable una 780 que con un i7 920 a 4200, mientras que en el primero raro es que baje de 50 fps en el segundo a veces baja de 40 fps. me refiero a frames minimos.
saludos
-
Let's rewind.
It was about solving a possible bottleneck when there were performance discrepancies between CPU and GPU.
The FX6300 solves the problem, I'm not going to get into a discussion about whether Intel or AMD is better, simply because I consider that it is not relevant.
If from there you want a more powerful micro, then we say how much the budget is and we continue in the branch of "Complete configurations", simply because it no longer has to do with the topic being discussed.;D
-
Let's rewind.
It was about solving a possible bottleneck due to performance discrepancies between CPU and GPU.
The FX6300 solves the problem, I'm not going to get into whether Intel or AMD is better, simply because I think it's not relevant.
If from there you want a more powerful micro, then we say how much the budget is and we continue in the "Complete configurations" branch, simply because it's no longer related to the topic being discussed.;D
Excuse me if I went off on a tangent and if I'm being too nosey je je.
The topic was also what solution gets the most out of my 270x.
And I said that I can go for an fx 8350 plus 979 mobo or Intel i5 4440 or 4460 plus a basic mobo that up to now in Intel is around the same price as the other solution in AMD, that would be the summary and from there I listen to all the opinions of going for Intel or AMD... and there the topic ends or in any case I put it in another place whatever is better.
Thanks in advance for your opinions or experiences, they serve to not go in blind and make a bad purchase.
.Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk
-
Sorry it was mobo 970 on amd..
Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk
-
No man, it was just a suggestion, do what you think is best.
-
Let's rewind.
It was about solving a possible bottleneck when there were performance discrepancies between CPU and GPU.
With the FX6300 the problem is solved, I'm not going to get into a discussion about whether Intel or AMD is better, simply because I consider that it's not relevant.
If from there you want a more powerful micro, then we say how much the budget is and we continue in the "Complete configurations" branch, simply because it's no longer related to the topic being discussed.;D
Haha it's not that I do what I think is best but that it performs better because I'm not a fan of amd or intel..
But surely more than one will have one. An fx or an i5 I only see their opinions.
Because it's not an investment that I will make every now and then once I buy it for a long time I will haveSent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk
-
I'm being honest with you, and this thought, whether wrong or not, I had when I went for the 270x, was because it's cheaper than the 280x and because that way I didn't have to also buy a power supply of more than 450w and because my monitor is 1360x768...
From there I thought, well, I can't afford a 280x and a new power supply right now, but the 270x will give me more performance because I don't play in full HD..
But I forgot that maybe I would need more powerful CPU to compensate, especially in some games more than others, because I don't complain about Crysis or Metro and several others that run very well for me...
What is true in this, I made a big mistake in thinking that the 270x would give me more performance at my resolution than if I played at 1080p..
In summary, I thought, well, I didn't get the 280x, but at least at low resolution I'll get extra performance from the 270x..
I messed up in everything or in something I thought was right...
What do you think, because I'm sure I'm not the only one to think this way and out of ignorance one assumes things wrong sometimes...
Sorry if I went off-topic, maybe this topic is for another branch, but I don't know what you guys think...Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk
