Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD - General › First gaming build , around $1,000 budget.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

First gaming build , around $1,000 budget. - Page 4

post #31 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdocod View Post

Neither will Vsync when they both drop way below 60FPS in busy areas. The "difference" is not important when it is 100 vs 60, but the differential still applies when the load changes, and forces FPS DOWN.
The problem is that, you're approaching this from the perspective that because there is a test that shows the game to be GPU bound under the test condition, that it must always be GPU bound at those "over Vsync" levels. The GPU bound test condition, does not include real world transitions to CPU bound performance caused by high unit counts in game.
For an MMO build, the balancing act of CPU vs GPU will effect the minimum vs maximum FPS characteristics. Every review site I am aware of always states that minimum FPS characteristics are more important to play-ability than maximums. For an MMO build, the CPU/GPU investment should be similar in order to get the best balance of minimum/maximum FPS behavior. Taking a 30% FPS cut on the maximums (where as you have said, it doesn't matter, because 100+FPS is pointless for this type of game anyway), in order to afford a 30-70% gain on the minimums (where it does matter, and is noticeable) is a very worthwhile trade-off IMO. A ~$250 investment in an Intel CPU combined with a ~$250 investment in a GPU will offer much more Vsynced game-play and less painful FPS dips in MMOs, than a $150 CPU paired with a $350 GPU.
The important thing to me, is not to convince someone to build an Intel rig, the important thing to me, is that they are aware of the performance they are getting for their money. If they still choose to purchase a system configuration that I believe is not the best value for their needs then I am not bothered by that at all. I have PERSONALLY chosen computer hardware for myself that does not make sense from the performance/$ perspective because I wanted to own it for other reasons (I have a soft spot for underdogs and love to tinker, and as such tend to buy AMD CPUs for myself, but that doesn't mean I will go out of my way to act as a shill for them by misrepresenting their performance to others.) When I build machines for friends/family they tend to be Intel rigs lately. Since the launch of SandyBridge, Intel has maintained a lead on compute efficiency and IPCC characteristics that translates to better real world performance/stability with less thermal dissipation for most peoples needs. There were many years there where AMD offered the better compute efficiency, and the result was that their products offered better performance/stability under real world conditions for most peoples needs, and as such, I used to build only AMD machines. In the last 3-4 years, AMD lost their foothold here. It's a natural ebb and flow. There's no reason AMD can't make a comeback on CPU side performance sometime in the next decade. Just look at how successful their GPU division has been lately.

If "good enough" were the end of the road, then this forum wouldn't even exists and nobody would be asking for build advice. We are here out of a passion for extremes. We overclock, we tinker, we often try to eek out the best performance for the lowest cost, we debate value and performance. This is what OCN is all about. What's the point of even having a forum to debate the performance of a piece of computer hardware, if we are expected to sit on the sidelines and go passive mode, accepting "good enough" and masked performance differences under brand preferences? I have no intention of sitting passively on the sideline and offering the "AMD is good enough" argument to anyone. When AMD CPUs offer solid competition for a particular build, I'll happily suggest it, this isn't that build.

People speak often, very often about the merits of staring at minimum FPS as some sort of gold standard, but as a former WoW/SWTOR/Rift addict, I can tell you, the minimum was not the norm by a longshot. I know you aren't saying that, but when push comes to shove, and this fella is running his 24" monitor at 1080p on ultra, he wont flinch at all if it dips off of 60 and down to 45. So it is an irrelevant detail that the other would run 55 instead of 45 or 50. He will be running AA, I can guarantee it. And one of my points is, if the bottleneck ends up on the GPU, CPU performance doesn't matter. And an increased unit count, as an experienced WoW player, isn't where you see dips. It's just on ordinary stuff, like flying through Deepholm when the Temple pops up, because of all the reflective rock (GPU again), and places like that. So again it falls to the GPU to keep up with the CPU. It is also worth mentioning that min fps can spike for a ton of different reasons. I'm sure HDDs can cause a slight min fps spike if they freak at the right second, same with RAM, etc.

Yes, there will be times of really low load, when the CPU and GPU just FLY... but when push comes to shove, if the bottleneck falls to the GPU, I believe that is where you stack power. And the $80 difference in a 4670k and an 8320 I believe would be better spent in the GPU department. I mean, that's 1/2 the price difference of a 770 4gb and a 780. Not even mentioning the un-inflated R9 290's (non-x) price, the 780 would be great.

Either way, I thought you should know, your stoic approach to enlightenment comes off as somewhat dismissive and brash, almost like YOU are the shill. NOT TRYING TO BE INSULTING, but... you do know what that word means? The things YOU say match a shill pretty darn well. Pejoratively speaking, it makes sense that you would call us that, but it's not very nice to ever speak pejoratively, now is it?

Also, another interesting test would be to push the Vishera and the Haswell to MAX OC, and bench. I see OC Haswell gaining ~10% in CPU tests, and Vishera gaining something like ~15%, more in some. That might be a tight standoff.
Edited by hathornd - 1/6/14 at 2:03am
Black Sunshine
(14 items)
 
Trinity
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
AMD A10-5800k MSI FM2-A75IA-E53 Corsair Vengeance 1866mhz DDR3 Seagate Barracuda 2TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
LG DVD Burner DLF-91D Windows 2008 R2 40" Samsung LED HDTV 
KeyboardCaseAudio
Logitech K400 CoolerMaster Elite 120 Sony Home Theatre 5.1 System 
  hide details  
Reply
Black Sunshine
(14 items)
 
Trinity
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
AMD A10-5800k MSI FM2-A75IA-E53 Corsair Vengeance 1866mhz DDR3 Seagate Barracuda 2TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
LG DVD Burner DLF-91D Windows 2008 R2 40" Samsung LED HDTV 
KeyboardCaseAudio
Logitech K400 CoolerMaster Elite 120 Sony Home Theatre 5.1 System 
  hide details  
Reply
post #32 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdocod View Post

It's an MMO build, unless there is a brand preference, why not do it best?

I just saw this... You are a huge goober. He posted in the AMD section! Probably wants to go AMD...

Duh!

Also the italics-part make you sound like a Intel fanboy. "Intel is the BESTEST EVER!" biggrin.gif
Black Sunshine
(14 items)
 
Trinity
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
AMD A10-5800k MSI FM2-A75IA-E53 Corsair Vengeance 1866mhz DDR3 Seagate Barracuda 2TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
LG DVD Burner DLF-91D Windows 2008 R2 40" Samsung LED HDTV 
KeyboardCaseAudio
Logitech K400 CoolerMaster Elite 120 Sony Home Theatre 5.1 System 
  hide details  
Reply
Black Sunshine
(14 items)
 
Trinity
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
AMD A10-5800k MSI FM2-A75IA-E53 Corsair Vengeance 1866mhz DDR3 Seagate Barracuda 2TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
LG DVD Burner DLF-91D Windows 2008 R2 40" Samsung LED HDTV 
KeyboardCaseAudio
Logitech K400 CoolerMaster Elite 120 Sony Home Theatre 5.1 System 
  hide details  
Reply
post #33 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durquavian View Post

But then best is a term not asked here but rather a budget build.

Reminder: "for the gtx 770, should I go for the 4GB or the 2? I heard is best if I get the 4GB since I play a lot of MMO."

"I hear it's best" in this quote from the OP implies to me, that the OP IS in fact interested in trying to get the "best."
Quote:
And I never tried it under the good enough that is how you make it sound when it does perform. I said I never have had the issues you and the reviews claim I should have.

What? Yes, you've repeatedly made the case for the FX-8350 being a "good enough" solution. By your standards it has been a wonderful CPU. Thankyou for sharing your experience with us. I don't believe that experience should be extended to the whole of the MMO category as there are plenty of examples of MMOs that are more IPCCC bound.
Quote:
I gave factual basis for my claims in experience not on the word of someone else.

Thankyou for sharing your experience with the FX-8350 with us. Do you believe that there is any possible performance advantage to an i5 for MMO's or not? Be honest. It sounds to me like you are saying that the FX-8350 is "good enough, in your experience, so there's no reason not to use it." I am of the belief that there is an option that would perform better. Unfortunately, I feel as though you are trying to "sell" what you have bought, in order to justify your own purchasing decision, morose than offer the best hardware solutions to the OP.
Quote:
I have built many a computer as well and understand better than most the difference between benchmarks and actual daily performance.

So as an experienced computer builder, you understand that one doesn't necessarily need to own a specific piece of hardware in order to extrapolate and gather performance data for it? I'm sure you've had to do this for your own research purposes when building computers, otherwise, you would not have been able to decide what to purchase.
Quote:
I state exactly where AMD would be in the afore mentioned scenarios you have given second hand hear-say.

The internet is filled with dozens, if not hundreds of benchmarks for MMOs. I've never seen a single lightly threaded CPU bound scenario in any of them show that the AMD FX-8350 performed better clock for clock than an i5-4670K under the type of workloads that MMOs present (lightly threaded). It's not "hear-say" when it's a broad sweeping consensus. There simply is not data to support otherwise.
Quote:
Do you have the 8350 you claim is performance inefficient?

I do not understand how owning a CPU is somehow a requirement to speak about its performance. Did you buy the FX-8350 before or after looking up performance data for it? The "implication" I feel you are making here, is that I am not qualified to know anything about the FX-8350 performance, because I do not own it. As if there is a layer of mysticism surrounding the chip, preventing any "real" performance information from being possible to ascertain without owning it and "experiencing" it. I don't believe that is a reasonable standard to hold me to. I own a PD based chip clocked at 4.6ghz on which to perform tests. In lightly threaded workloads it still bottlenecks CPU bound games and forces slowed game-play in RTS games when the unit count gets high, in the same room, a 3.8ghz (turbo) Haswell has no problems maintaining real-time play in the same game titles with 4000 units.
Quote:
I didn't see it in the list of not even close to an 8350 CPUs you gave. I only spoke for the 8350 and I guess to a degree the 8320. I did not speak to the plethora of Intels. So in regards to our arguments yours are far more one sided and biased way over mine.

I don't even understand what you are trying to say here. My only bias, has only ever been towards what is the best performance for a given application at a given price point. I am biased towards suggesting the best solutions to problems. If you do not believe that my suggestion represents the best solution to the problem, then simply say so, and provide a reference to a benchmark or some sort of data to make your case. Your experience with the chip in MMOs is very useful, thankyou for sharing. I believe that while your experience has been overall very positive with the FX-8350, I believe the experience with the i5 would be even slightly better for MMOs. This is the point I intend to make. You can disagree with it. I don't mind.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hathornd View Post

People speak often, very often about the merits of staring at minimum FPS as some sort of gold standard, but as a former WoW/SWTOR/Rift addict, I can tell you, the minimum was not the norm by a longshot.

Your experience has been, that minimum FPS issues have not been a problem for you. Gotcha. I believe that in a wider consideration of MMOs, FPS minimums cause by CPU bound conditions would be more of a problem than your specific experience may lead one to believe.
Quote:
I know you aren't saying that, but when push comes to shove, and this fella is running his 24" monitor at 1080p on ultra, he wont flinch at all if it dips off of 60 and down to 45. So it is an irrelevant detail that the other would run 55 instead of 45 or 50. He will be running AA, I can guarantee it. And one of my points is, if the bottleneck ends up on the GPU, CPU performance doesn't matter. And an increased unit count, as an experienced WoW player, isn't where you see dips. It's just on ordinary stuff, like flying through Deepholm when the Temple pops up, because of all the reflective rock (GPU again), and places like that. So again it falls to the GPU to keep up with the CPU. It is also worth mentioning that min fps can spike for a ton of different reasons. I'm sure HDDs can cause a slight min fps spike if they freak at the right second, same with RAM, etc.

So you're saying, that FPS dips in WoW and other MMO's, are not often caused by CPU bound situations? This is not inline with what the research I have done would suggest, and general trending of other hear-say on the matter, but I'm willing to entertain the idea. More extensive MMO bench-marking would be required to expose where the truth lies here.
Quote:
Yes, there will be times of really low load, when the CPU and GPU just FLY... but when push comes to shove, if the bottleneck falls to the GPU, I believe that is where you stack power. And the $80 difference in a 4670k and an 8320 I believe would be better spent in the GPU department. I mean, that's 1/2 the price difference of a 770 4gb and a 780. Not even mentioning the un-inflated R9 290's (non-x) price, the 780 would be great.

If it's true, that on average, FPS dips in MMOs are still GPU bound, then yes, it would make sense that more of the budget towards a GPU would be better, but this is not the general consensus I have seen. Most MMO forums that discuss "hardware" performance lean towards the CPU as being more important to maintain smooth play performance than the GPU.
Quote:
Either way, I thought you should know, your stoic approach to enlightenment comes off as somewhat dismissive and brash, almost like YOU are the shill. NOT TRYING TO BE INSULTING, but... you do know what that word means? The things YOU say match a shill pretty darn well. Pejoratively speaking, it makes sense that you would call us that, but it's not very nice to ever speak pejoratively, now is it?

I do not take any insult to that at all. I am by nature, like a cross between a blunt, rude, arrogant Simon Cowell and a Vulcan, who will explode with rage every once and awhile. I maintain that it is my interest to suggest what I believe to be the best hardware for the problem at hand, and share my research findings. From my perspective, with the vast majority of easily obtainable information on the matter pointing to Intel as being the better MMO chip, I can only assume that the few trying to convince otherwise would have alterior motives. I am a shill for the best solution to problems, not for any brand.
Quote:
Also, another interesting test would be to push the Vishera and the Haswell to MAX OC, and bench. I see OC Haswell gaining ~10% in CPU tests, and Vishera gaining something like ~15%, more in some. That might be a tight standoff.

I am not aware of any CPU that does not scale CPU performance proportionally to clock speed when test conditions are configured properly to place the bottleneck on the CPU and not some other piece of hardware. A lot of gaming benchmarks for CPU's have a transition zone where the bottleneck transitions off of the CPU's being tested, onto the GPU in the test system. The result is that, higher performing CPUs can "appear" not to scale as well when overclocked, but this is only an illusion created by that specific workload, and will not hold true across all other workloads.

With that said, Haswell "K" chips are 3.4-3.5ghz base clocks, and have a high success rate clocking to 4.5ghz. A steady decline in maximum stable clocks above that, with the best results topping out around 5ghz for a lucky few chips. The FX-8320 is the most "equal" in overclocking headroom to Haswell, as it starts around the same clocks, and tends to find practical maximums around the same upper limits as well. FX-8350/9370/9590 all seem to be hit and miss on a few lucky chips that can do 5.2-5.3ghz for daily drivers.

Realistically speaking, as far as "practical overclocks" are concerned, PD and Haswell are more similar than different, with 4.5ghz being a pretty standard high success rate "easy" overclock on either, with falling success rates above that. Which is why I have been saying "clock for clock" in those performance comparisons I have been making, as realistically speaking, if both are overclocked, they are going to be within 5% of each-other on clock speed, so a clock for clock performance comparison is very relevant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hathornd View Post

I just saw this... You are a huge goober. He posted in the AMD section! Probably wants to go AMD...

Duh!

Perhaps a reminder of how this thread started would be useful to you...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuanie 
This is my first build.... .... for the gtx 770, should I go for the 4GB or the 2? I heard is best if I get the 4GB since I play a lot of MMO.

Oh yea, sounds like someone who has a major AMD preference to me. Beings that this is their first build, and are considering an Nvidia GPU. Your position on the matter appears to be more in favor of AMD than the OPs needs. DUH!
Quote:
Also the italics-part make you sound like a Intel fanboy. "Intel is the BESTEST EVER!" biggrin.gif

The italics are there to emphasize those words. I am a fanboy of whatever the best solution to the problem is. This budget has room to do a CPU that performs better in MMOs.



More evidense to support that an MMO machine would benefit from a Haswell CPU:

Here, the GW2 game developers are admitting to the fact that their game is poorly CPU optimized and heavily CPU bound, replies indicate that performance on AMD is far behind Intel:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/11yc9a/nvidia_gw2_is_heavily_cpuboundthe_biggest/
Solutions supposedly coming, not sure if they ever did, until these updates to the client are made, Intel performs much better here.

Here, a GW2 user reporting performance with an FX-8350, claiming FPS dips to 15-20FPS on a GTX670:
https://forum-en.guildwars2.com/forum/support/tech/CPU-optimization
User is asking where those client side performance updates are. If this were a Haswell at equal clocks, performance dips would not be as severe.

Here, an Nvidia Representative on the subject of GW2:
http://i.imgur.com/M4YgV.png
"GW2 is heavily CPU bound."

Here, more evidence to suggest that GW2 is highly CPU bound.... Numerous recommendations for Intel Ivy or better here to run this game:
https://forum-en.guildwars2.com/forum/support/tech/Anet-what-is-the-ideal-CPU-for-WvW
One user with an HD6970 reports FPS dips to 5FPS on an FX-6300, a problem that is apparently common on FX chips in this title.


Back to WoW:
http://www.logicalincrements.com/games/wow/
A logical approach to hardware balancing for this game.
The match they recommend for a ~$1000 rig, is a GTX760 + i5-4670/k. Hmmmm, where have I heard this before? oh right, I came to the same conclusion before even finding this.

Bumping up to a GTX770 or more is only beneficial for this game title if you want to run ultra settings with higher than necessary AA settings at 1080P, or for resolutions in excess of 1080P. 3rd party testing suggests that a GTX760/670 should average ~90FPS @ultra+4AA settings in this game title, which is ample overhead for Vsynced game-play. I maintain my claim that an FX83XX+GTX770 would dip below Vsync more often than an i5-4570K+GTX760/670 would. The evidence I have seen in benches around the net and user feedback supports this position.


FFXIV:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1389117/contest-final-fantasy-xiv-benchmark-utility-post-your-scores-win-dead-island-riptide-pc/0_100#post_19957061
User reports CPU bottlenecking on 2500K+HD7950 but not by much, suggesting that this is very close to an ideal match for CPU/GPU performance levels in this game. An i5-4670K + GTX760 (or similar), again, would be a very well matched hardware solution for this MMO, with no hardware going heavily underutilized. This is a poorly threaded game, and as such, an FX-8320+GTX770 type combination would result in less performance here.


Planetside 2: Notoriously CPU bound MMO

http://thelonegamers.com/complete-guide-better-planetside-2-performance/

"CPU usage skyrockets as battle intensity increases. You may get 60 frame per second at the warp gate but as soon as you Instant Action onto that mega battle on an Amp station, your framerate might drop to 10.

Planetside 2 appears to be optimized for Intel-based CPUs. AMD-based CPUs seem to fair poorly currently."


Though, a fix is supposed to be in the works to improve performance on high core count, low clocked, low IPCC CPUs. Not sure if that is done or what, no clue.



Regards,
Eric
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 990X EVO R2.0 Sparkle GTX460 768MB ballistix tactical 2 x 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Toshiiba THNSNH 256GB Enterprise RE3 1TB Asus BD combo drive Artic A30 
OSMonitorMonitorMonitor
Manjaro Linux Samsung 21.5" LCD E2009WFP E2009WFP 
PowerCase
Seasonic G 550W Modular Fractal Design Core 3500 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-6300, 4.7 GHZ@1.43V GA-970A-UD3P GTX 460 768MB Mixed DIMMs. 2x4GB + 2x8GB @ 1600-8-8-8 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Toshiba THNSNH 19nm 256GB 1TB Spinpoint F3 WD RE3 1TB WD RE3 1TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSOS
yes CM Seidon 120V SolydK OpenSuse 13.1 
OSOSMonitorMonitor
Linux Mint 9-32 bit // Linux Mint 17-64 bit  Manjaro Xfce Samsung 21.5" HannsG 21.5" sideways! 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Sticky ATNG Rosewill Green 630W NZXT Gamma Basic Microsoft corded 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10-6800k 4.8GHZ @ 1.375V, 1.2GHZ iGPU Gigabyte GA-F2A85XN-WIFI HD8670D Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate ST1000DM003 Asus BC-12B1ST/BLK/B/AS Zalman CNPS5X Linux Mint 15 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG IPS224V-PN Logitec K360 FSP 400W Aurum S 80+ gold Prodigy 
Mouse
logitec M235 
  hide details  
Reply
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 990X EVO R2.0 Sparkle GTX460 768MB ballistix tactical 2 x 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Toshiiba THNSNH 256GB Enterprise RE3 1TB Asus BD combo drive Artic A30 
OSMonitorMonitorMonitor
Manjaro Linux Samsung 21.5" LCD E2009WFP E2009WFP 
PowerCase
Seasonic G 550W Modular Fractal Design Core 3500 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-6300, 4.7 GHZ@1.43V GA-970A-UD3P GTX 460 768MB Mixed DIMMs. 2x4GB + 2x8GB @ 1600-8-8-8 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Toshiba THNSNH 19nm 256GB 1TB Spinpoint F3 WD RE3 1TB WD RE3 1TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSOS
yes CM Seidon 120V SolydK OpenSuse 13.1 
OSOSMonitorMonitor
Linux Mint 9-32 bit // Linux Mint 17-64 bit  Manjaro Xfce Samsung 21.5" HannsG 21.5" sideways! 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Sticky ATNG Rosewill Green 630W NZXT Gamma Basic Microsoft corded 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10-6800k 4.8GHZ @ 1.375V, 1.2GHZ iGPU Gigabyte GA-F2A85XN-WIFI HD8670D Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate ST1000DM003 Asus BC-12B1ST/BLK/B/AS Zalman CNPS5X Linux Mint 15 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG IPS224V-PN Logitec K360 FSP 400W Aurum S 80+ gold Prodigy 
Mouse
logitec M235 
  hide details  
Reply
post #34 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdocod View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Reminder: "for the gtx 770, should I go for the 4GB or the 2? I heard is best if I get the 4GB since I play a lot of MMO."

"I hear it's best" in this quote from the OP implies to me, that the OP IS in fact interested in trying to get the "best."
What? Yes, you've repeatedly made the case for the FX-8350 being a "good enough" solution. By your standards it has been a wonderful CPU. Thankyou for sharing your experience with us. I don't believe that experience should be extended to the whole of the MMO category as there are plenty of examples of MMOs that are more IPCCC bound.
Thankyou for sharing your experience with the FX-8350 with us. Do you believe that there is any possible performance advantage to an i5 for MMO's or not? Be honest. It sounds to me like you are saying that the FX-8350 is "good enough, in your experience, so there's no reason not to use it." I am of the belief that there is an option that would perform better. Unfortunately, I feel as though you are trying to "sell" what you have bought, in order to justify your own purchasing decision, morose than offer the best hardware solutions to the OP.
So as an experienced computer builder, you understand that one doesn't necessarily need to own a specific piece of hardware in order to extrapolate and gather performance data for it? I'm sure you've had to do this for your own research purposes when building computers, otherwise, you would not have been able to decide what to purchase.
The internet is filled with dozens, if not hundreds of benchmarks for MMOs. I've never seen a single lightly threaded CPU bound scenario in any of them show that the AMD FX-8350 performed better clock for clock than an i5-4670K under the type of workloads that MMOs present (lightly threaded). It's not "hear-say" when it's a broad sweeping consensus. There simply is not data to support otherwise.
I do not understand how owning a CPU is somehow a requirement to speak about its performance. Did you buy the FX-8350 before or after looking up performance data for it? The "implication" I feel you are making here, is that I am not qualified to know anything about the FX-8350 performance, because I do not own it. As if there is a layer of mysticism surrounding the chip, preventing any "real" performance information from being possible to ascertain without owning it and "experiencing" it. I don't believe that is a reasonable standard to hold me to. I own a PD based chip clocked at 4.6ghz on which to perform tests. In lightly threaded workloads it still bottlenecks CPU bound games and forces slowed game-play in RTS games when the unit count gets high, in the same room, a 3.8ghz (turbo) Haswell has no problems maintaining real-time play in the same game titles with 4000 units.
I don't even understand what you are trying to say here. My only bias, has only ever been towards what is the best performance for a given application at a given price point. I am biased towards suggesting the best solutions to problems. If you do not believe that my suggestion represents the best solution to the problem, then simply say so, and provide a reference to a benchmark or some sort of data to make your case. Your experience with the chip in MMOs is very useful, thankyou for sharing. I believe that while your experience has been overall very positive with the FX-8350, I believe the experience with the i5 would be even slightly better for MMOs. This is the point I intend to make. You can disagree with it. I don't mind.

Your experience has been, that minimum FPS issues have not been a problem for you. Gotcha. I believe that in a wider consideration of MMOs, FPS minimums cause by CPU bound conditions would be more of a problem than your specific experience may lead one to believe.
So you're saying, that FPS dips in WoW and other MMO's, are not often caused by CPU bound situations? This is not inline with what the research I have done would suggest, and general trending of other hear-say on the matter, but I'm willing to entertain the idea. More extensive MMO bench-marking would be required to expose where the truth lies here.
If it's true, that on average, FPS dips in MMOs are still GPU bound, then yes, it would make sense that more of the budget towards a GPU would be better, but this is not the general consensus I have seen. Most MMO forums that discuss "hardware" performance lean towards the CPU as being more important to maintain smooth play performance than the GPU.
I do not take any insult to that at all. I am by nature, like a cross between a blunt, rude, arrogant Simon Cowell and a Vulcan, who will explode with rage every once and awhile. I maintain that it is my interest to suggest what I believe to be the best hardware for the problem at hand, and share my research findings. From my perspective, with the vast majority of easily obtainable information on the matter pointing to Intel as being the better MMO chip, I can only assume that the few trying to convince otherwise would have alterior motives. I am a shill for the best solution to problems, not for any brand.
I am not aware of any CPU that does not scale CPU performance proportionally to clock speed when test conditions are configured properly to place the bottleneck on the CPU and not some other piece of hardware. A lot of gaming benchmarks for CPU's have a transition zone where the bottleneck transitions off of the CPU's being tested, onto the GPU in the test system. The result is that, higher performing CPUs can "appear" not to scale as well when overclocked, but this is only an illusion created by that specific workload, and will not hold true across all other workloads.

With that said, Haswell "K" chips are 3.4-3.5ghz base clocks, and have a high success rate clocking to 4.5ghz. A steady decline in maximum stable clocks above that, with the best results topping out around 5ghz for a lucky few chips. The FX-8320 is the most "equal" in overclocking headroom to Haswell, as it starts around the same clocks, and tends to find practical maximums around the same upper limits as well. FX-8350/9370/9590 all seem to be hit and miss on a few lucky chips that can do 5.2-5.3ghz for daily drivers.

Realistically speaking, as far as "practical overclocks" are concerned, PD and Haswell are more similar than different, with 4.5ghz being a pretty standard high success rate "easy" overclock on either, with falling success rates above that. Which is why I have been saying "clock for clock" in those performance comparisons I have been making, as realistically speaking, if both are overclocked, they are going to be within 5% of each-other on clock speed, so a clock for clock performance comparison is very relevant.

Perhaps a reminder of how this thread started would be useful to you...
Oh yea, sounds like someone who has a major AMD preference to me. Beings that this is their first build, and are considering an Nvidia GPU. Your position on the matter appears to be more in favor of AMD than the OPs needs. DUH!
The italics are there to emphasize those words. I am a fanboy of whatever the best solution to the problem is. This budget has room to do a CPU that performs better in MMOs.



More evidense to support that an MMO machine would benefit from a Haswell CPU:

Here, the GW2 game developers are admitting to the fact that their game is poorly CPU optimized and heavily CPU bound, replies indicate that performance on AMD is far behind Intel:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/11yc9a/nvidia_gw2_is_heavily_cpuboundthe_biggest/
Solutions supposedly coming, not sure if they ever did, until these updates to the client are made, Intel performs much better here.

Here, a GW2 user reporting performance with an FX-8350, claiming FPS dips to 15-20FPS on a GTX670:
https://forum-en.guildwars2.com/forum/support/tech/CPU-optimization
User is asking where those client side performance updates are. If this were a Haswell at equal clocks, performance dips would not be as severe.

Here, an Nvidia Representative on the subject of GW2:
http://i.imgur.com/M4YgV.png
"GW2 is heavily CPU bound."

Here, more evidence to suggest that GW2 is highly CPU bound.... Numerous recommendations for Intel Ivy or better here to run this game:
https://forum-en.guildwars2.com/forum/support/tech/Anet-what-is-the-ideal-CPU-for-WvW
One user with an HD6970 reports FPS dips to 5FPS on an FX-6300, a problem that is apparently common on FX chips in this title.


Back to WoW:
http://www.logicalincrements.com/games/wow/
A logical approach to hardware balancing for this game.
The match they recommend for a ~$1000 rig, is a GTX760 + i5-4670/k. Hmmmm, where have I heard this before? oh right, I came to the same conclusion before even finding this.

Bumping up to a GTX770 or more is only beneficial for this game title if you want to run ultra settings with higher than necessary AA settings at 1080P, or for resolutions in excess of 1080P. 3rd party testing suggests that a GTX760/670 should average ~90FPS @ultra+4AA settings in this game title, which is ample overhead for Vsynced game-play. I maintain my claim that an FX83XX+GTX770 would dip below Vsync more often than an i5-4570K+GTX760/670 would. The evidence I have seen in benches around the net and user feedback supports this position.


FFXIV:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1389117/contest-final-fantasy-xiv-benchmark-utility-post-your-scores-win-dead-island-riptide-pc/0_100#post_19957061
User reports CPU bottlenecking on 2500K+HD7950 but not by much, suggesting that this is very close to an ideal match for CPU/GPU performance levels in this game. An i5-4670K + GTX760 (or similar), again, would be a very well matched hardware solution for this MMO, with no hardware going heavily underutilized. This is a poorly threaded game, and as such, an FX-8320+GTX770 type combination would result in less performance here.


Planetside 2: Notoriously CPU bound MMO

http://thelonegamers.com/complete-guide-better-planetside-2-performance/

"CPU usage skyrockets as battle intensity increases. You may get 60 frame per second at the warp gate but as soon as you Instant Action onto that mega battle on an Amp station, your framerate might drop to 10.

Planetside 2 appears to be optimized for Intel-based CPUs. AMD-based CPUs seem to fair poorly currently."


Though, a fix is supposed to be in the works to improve performance on high core count, low clocked, low IPCC CPUs. Not sure if that is done or what, no clue.



Regards,
Eric
And winner for the longest post ever... Don't feel the need to respond to all of your babbling and rehashing every inane statement you have made thus far. Truths:

1. You don't own nor have you ever owned an 8350, therefore you can not speak to its performance. I have and my word on the subject of the 8350 has more weight because of that ownership. GW2 and WoW for me ran flawlessly on a 7770 single, a worse GPU than most of the ones you post and yet I had absolutely none of the issues you claim I should. But again your ignorance on the subject of the performance of the 8350 is all because you never owned one. Tell you what, go to the FX 8350/8320 thread and ask there. I am sure there are many others like myself that will tell you the same. Even many with Intel rigs as well. Got a member now benching the two and giving his take on how HE sees it. You may learn something.

2. Most of your game posts for proof end in NOT SURE. Doesn't sound like resounding proof.

3. Unlike you, I have not spoken a single word on anything I can not speak to as fact nor personal experience. I don't live off the word of others or single occurrences.

I have said all to fact and your infantile attempts to sound knowledgeable without experience is laughable and no longer warrants my time to correct you. In other words it is a waste of my time.
post #35 of 43
Eric:

I am a performance-as-seen kind of guy, and you take a by-the-numbers approach to hardware decisions. This is OK.

Also: Simon Cowell & Vulcan... I knew I'd get a laugh out of your response to my opinion of your conversational personality (mainly because I figured you'd take it as a light poke instead of inflammatory), but I wasn't expecting that. Well played indeed.

But while I have understood (honestly) your point the whole time, I hope you understand mine. We are OCN. We push hardware. I know that Intel is a more play-it-safe approach to gaming and just about everything else you'd like to do with a PC, but we don't always play it safe. We run $400 GPUs in Core 2 Quad systems, and push FPS that rivals the most modern hardware because we can, and it WORKS! I know that seems asinine to say out loud, but it's true. A great number of people run 700 and R9 200 cards in Deneb/Thuban or Lynnfield/Bloomfield systems. It's just what we do, because for the majority of gaming that I personally have done, I bottleneck GPUs first with gaming across the board and if I get FPS drops, I don't kick myself because I didn't get a 8350 or an i7, I overclock EVERYTHING that I can. The WoW benchmark I posted, though it does as you aptly describe "hide" the CPU IPCC performance deficit, highlights the deficit as less important when the setting sliders start moving up.

I have seen tests completely trashing this GPU, or that CPU, because of a minimum fps downspike. And I mean, one that lasts for a split-second. And the reviewers spend the rest of the time berating the manufacturer because when a numbers sheet is printed out, one says 42 and the other says 35. This is the hardware-world-equivalent of telling perfectly good raiders in WoW that they can't raid ICC Blood Wing in your PUG group because they have a 4200 gear-score, where they wanted 5200. They both will work adequately, with one outperforming the other, while they both can get the job done right. And in a budget system, I'd put my money on a GPU with a higher gear-score any day of the week, as would a lot of people I imagine.

thumb.gif
Black Sunshine
(14 items)
 
Trinity
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
AMD A10-5800k MSI FM2-A75IA-E53 Corsair Vengeance 1866mhz DDR3 Seagate Barracuda 2TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
LG DVD Burner DLF-91D Windows 2008 R2 40" Samsung LED HDTV 
KeyboardCaseAudio
Logitech K400 CoolerMaster Elite 120 Sony Home Theatre 5.1 System 
  hide details  
Reply
Black Sunshine
(14 items)
 
Trinity
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
AMD A10-5800k MSI FM2-A75IA-E53 Corsair Vengeance 1866mhz DDR3 Seagate Barracuda 2TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
LG DVD Burner DLF-91D Windows 2008 R2 40" Samsung LED HDTV 
KeyboardCaseAudio
Logitech K400 CoolerMaster Elite 120 Sony Home Theatre 5.1 System 
  hide details  
Reply
post #36 of 43
its well known the the intel chips put up better numbers while gaming. Not a huge gap like some think. It all depends on how much 5-10 frames are worth to you!
The Black Hole
(24 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel® Core™ i7-5820K (4.5ghz @ 1.270v) Msi x99a Krait SLI Asus Strix 1080Ti OC Version  GeIL Super Luce 16gb DDR4 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Seagate 3TB Vertex 4 256GB SSD Samsung EVO 960 500GB M2 Sata (OS Drive)  Corsair H110i GT 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 10 pro  Asus pb278q 2560 x 1440p 80hz LG 34UC87C 3440 x 1440 60hz (amazing) Corsair K70 Blue Switch  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair RM1000 NZXT H440 White  Logitech G502 Razer Vespula (none better) 
AudioAudioAudioAudio
Hifiman He400i  Klipsch Pro Media 2.1  Schiit Modi 2 Uber  Schiit Magni 2 Uber  
AudioAudioAudioOther
Phillips SHP9500 Antlion Mod Mic  AKG 7XX  Logitech G13 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4650U 1.7GHZ to 3.3ghz Turbo  A1465 (EMC 2631) HD 5000 8GB of LPDDR3 SDRAM 
Hard DriveOSMonitor
128GB SSD El Capitan 11.6" 1366x768 
  hide details  
Reply
The Black Hole
(24 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel® Core™ i7-5820K (4.5ghz @ 1.270v) Msi x99a Krait SLI Asus Strix 1080Ti OC Version  GeIL Super Luce 16gb DDR4 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Seagate 3TB Vertex 4 256GB SSD Samsung EVO 960 500GB M2 Sata (OS Drive)  Corsair H110i GT 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 10 pro  Asus pb278q 2560 x 1440p 80hz LG 34UC87C 3440 x 1440 60hz (amazing) Corsair K70 Blue Switch  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair RM1000 NZXT H440 White  Logitech G502 Razer Vespula (none better) 
AudioAudioAudioAudio
Hifiman He400i  Klipsch Pro Media 2.1  Schiit Modi 2 Uber  Schiit Magni 2 Uber  
AudioAudioAudioOther
Phillips SHP9500 Antlion Mod Mic  AKG 7XX  Logitech G13 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4650U 1.7GHZ to 3.3ghz Turbo  A1465 (EMC 2631) HD 5000 8GB of LPDDR3 SDRAM 
Hard DriveOSMonitor
128GB SSD El Capitan 11.6" 1366x768 
  hide details  
Reply
post #37 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooby Boostin View Post

its well known the the intel chips put up better numbers while gaming. Not a huge gap like some think. It all depends on how much 5-10 frames are worth to you!
I never debated that, just the facts of how the 8350 performs.
post #38 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durquavian View Post

And winner for the longest post ever... Don't feel the need to respond to all of your babbling and rehashing every inane statement you have made thus far. Truths:

A good sign that I must be on the right track....
Quote:
1. You don't own nor have you ever owned an 8350, therefore you can not speak to its performance.

Okay, lets run with this idea..
Quote:
I have and my word on the subject of the 8350 has more weight because of that ownership.

I believe that your ownership of the product in question, is actually just as likely to make your word about the product more biased, and less reliable, because ownership has been historically demonstrated to effect the way that humans value things. If you are like most people (which your steadily rising emotional, and steadily declining rational behavior in the face of a losing debate would suggest), then you are far more likely to misrepresent and defend a product that you own, than one which you do not.
Quote:
GW2 and WoW for me ran flawlessly on a 7770 single, a worse GPU than most of the ones you post and yet I had absolutely none of the issues you claim I should.

An FX-8320+HD7770 is actually a very rationally balanced hardware choice for an MMO build. It represents a good level of investment in CPU vs GPU, and as such, allows you to run game settings that make good use of each of these components. In a ~$1000 MMO build, there's room for more powerful CPU and GPU. I believe it would be beneficial to the performance of the machine in question here (the OPs build) to opt for both a CPU and GPU that perform better in these types of games, in a balanced fashion.
Quote:
But again your ignorance on the subject of the performance of the 8350 is all because you never owned one. Tell you what, go to the FX 8350/8320 thread and ask there. I am sure there are many others like myself that will tell you the same. Even many with Intel rigs as well. Got a member now benching the two and giving his take on how HE sees it. You may learn something.

In the same "breath", you are telling me that my ignorance is because I don't have ownership of this product, yet encourage me to learn from others about this product, something I have already done, for which you have criticized me for doing (I chose the "wrong" reviews to look at, or the "wrong" benchmarks to look at, and obviously, the "wrong" here-say from other internet posts). This is a double standard. I have already done research about the AMD chips in question and how they perform in MMO's. You don't like the results of my research, and are pointing me to look at different "here-say/posts/benchmarks" all while saying that I can not speak on the matter without ownership. This is a convoluted, tangled mess of double standards and contradictions you have woven here.
Quote:
2. Most of your game posts for proof end in NOT SURE. Doesn't sound like resounding proof.

Out of 4 games listed, 2 supposedly have "fixes" for CPU performance issues in the works. We've all heard this story before, very few of the games that supposedly have major engine overhauls coming ever actually get it done.
Quote:
3. Unlike you, I have not spoken a single word on anything I can not speak to as fact nor personal experience. I don't live off the word of others or single occurrences.

Then why are you encouraging me to learn about the FX-8350 in another breath? By your standard here, I shouldn't "live" off the words of others or single occurrences.
Quote:
I have said all to fact and your infantile attempts to sound knowledgeable without experience is laughable and no longer warrants my time to correct you. In other words it is a waste of my time.

I encourage you to stop wasting your time.


Quote:
Originally Posted by hathornd View Post

Eric:

I am a performance-as-seen kind of guy, and you take a by-the-numbers approach to hardware decisions. This is OK.

Also: Simon Cowell & Vulcan... I knew I'd get a laugh out of your response to my opinion of your conversational personality (mainly because I figured you'd take it as a light poke instead of inflammatory), but I wasn't expecting that. Well played indeed.

Taking ownership of an honest criticism is an opportunity to learn something about oneself. The best kind of insult or humor or criticism are those that are TRUE wink.gif
Quote:
But while I have understood (honestly) your point the whole time, I hope you understand mine. We are OCN. We push hardware. I know that Intel is a more play-it-safe approach to gaming and just about everything else you'd like to do with a PC, but we don't always play it safe. We run $400 GPUs in Core 2 Quad systems, and push FPS that rivals the most modern hardware because we can, and it WORKS! I know that seems asinine to say out loud, but it's true. A great number of people run 700 and R9 200 cards in Deneb/Thuban or Lynnfield/Bloomfield systems. It's just what we do, because for the majority of gaming that I personally have done, I bottleneck GPUs first with gaming across the board and if I get FPS drops, I don't kick myself because I didn't get a 8350 or an i7, I overclock EVERYTHING that I can. The WoW benchmark I posted, though it does as you aptly describe "hide" the CPU IPCC performance deficit, highlights the deficit as less important when the setting sliders start moving up.

I prefer to attempt to maintain a disparity between what I would recommend doing, and what I actually do, because I, like you, am more apt to take one thing to an extreme in a system, just for the silly pants fun nature of tinkering with it, than following my own good advice to build something balanced. I have been known to make radically out of balanced recommendations in a "prior" time period here. I used to love the idea of putting a GTX480 in a system with a Rana X3 and used to share that sort of recommendation with others. I'd like to believe that I have "matured" my approach to system builds. So, while "we" have our fun. I like to maintain a professionally balanced approach to system recommendations for others now, and they can then use that information to take it wherever they want. Knowing where the "middle" of the road is, can be a useful starting point. If someone ultimately decides to match an R9 290 to an Athlon X4 760K, or a GTX650Ti to an i7-4770k, then I'd like to hope that I can find it within myself to find the positive in it, and embrace the reality that even if it does not appear to be the most optimized configuration to me, that perhaps, like me, when it comes down to it, I probably wouldn't really want to own optimum anyway, because that would be boring, like driving a 4 year old Honda Accord with 36,731 miles on it. There is something exciting about the old clunker with umpteen billion miles, mods, and potential for catastrophic failure around every corner. (ever had one of those, "wow, glad I wasn't on the highway for that one! whew!" moments?)

Eric
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 990X EVO R2.0 Sparkle GTX460 768MB ballistix tactical 2 x 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Toshiiba THNSNH 256GB Enterprise RE3 1TB Asus BD combo drive Artic A30 
OSMonitorMonitorMonitor
Manjaro Linux Samsung 21.5" LCD E2009WFP E2009WFP 
PowerCase
Seasonic G 550W Modular Fractal Design Core 3500 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-6300, 4.7 GHZ@1.43V GA-970A-UD3P GTX 460 768MB Mixed DIMMs. 2x4GB + 2x8GB @ 1600-8-8-8 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Toshiba THNSNH 19nm 256GB 1TB Spinpoint F3 WD RE3 1TB WD RE3 1TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSOS
yes CM Seidon 120V SolydK OpenSuse 13.1 
OSOSMonitorMonitor
Linux Mint 9-32 bit // Linux Mint 17-64 bit  Manjaro Xfce Samsung 21.5" HannsG 21.5" sideways! 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Sticky ATNG Rosewill Green 630W NZXT Gamma Basic Microsoft corded 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10-6800k 4.8GHZ @ 1.375V, 1.2GHZ iGPU Gigabyte GA-F2A85XN-WIFI HD8670D Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate ST1000DM003 Asus BC-12B1ST/BLK/B/AS Zalman CNPS5X Linux Mint 15 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG IPS224V-PN Logitec K360 FSP 400W Aurum S 80+ gold Prodigy 
Mouse
logitec M235 
  hide details  
Reply
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 990X EVO R2.0 Sparkle GTX460 768MB ballistix tactical 2 x 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Toshiiba THNSNH 256GB Enterprise RE3 1TB Asus BD combo drive Artic A30 
OSMonitorMonitorMonitor
Manjaro Linux Samsung 21.5" LCD E2009WFP E2009WFP 
PowerCase
Seasonic G 550W Modular Fractal Design Core 3500 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-6300, 4.7 GHZ@1.43V GA-970A-UD3P GTX 460 768MB Mixed DIMMs. 2x4GB + 2x8GB @ 1600-8-8-8 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Toshiba THNSNH 19nm 256GB 1TB Spinpoint F3 WD RE3 1TB WD RE3 1TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSOS
yes CM Seidon 120V SolydK OpenSuse 13.1 
OSOSMonitorMonitor
Linux Mint 9-32 bit // Linux Mint 17-64 bit  Manjaro Xfce Samsung 21.5" HannsG 21.5" sideways! 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Sticky ATNG Rosewill Green 630W NZXT Gamma Basic Microsoft corded 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10-6800k 4.8GHZ @ 1.375V, 1.2GHZ iGPU Gigabyte GA-F2A85XN-WIFI HD8670D Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate ST1000DM003 Asus BC-12B1ST/BLK/B/AS Zalman CNPS5X Linux Mint 15 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG IPS224V-PN Logitec K360 FSP 400W Aurum S 80+ gold Prodigy 
Mouse
logitec M235 
  hide details  
Reply
post #39 of 43
I'm running a 770 2gb at 1440p, and not really having memory problems with anything. Someday when costs drop, I'm gonna switch to a 4gb, I'll have to be gpu-less for a while while ebay or whatever goes through biggrin.gif. I just couldn't find the extra cash around Christmas :/
Aqua 2013
(15 items)
 
Lenovo Y410p
(7 items)
 
Thinkpad X120e
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel i7 4700mq Lenovo VIQY0Y1 GT 755M Intel 4600 
RAMHard DriveMonitor
8 gb ddr3 1 tb 5400 rpm SLOW 1600x900 14" 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD E-350 LENOVO 05962RU Radeon HD 6310 4gb DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveOSMonitorMouse
320gb Arch Linux 11.6" 1366x768 Razer Oorichi 
  hide details  
Reply
Aqua 2013
(15 items)
 
Lenovo Y410p
(7 items)
 
Thinkpad X120e
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel i7 4700mq Lenovo VIQY0Y1 GT 755M Intel 4600 
RAMHard DriveMonitor
8 gb ddr3 1 tb 5400 rpm SLOW 1600x900 14" 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD E-350 LENOVO 05962RU Radeon HD 6310 4gb DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveOSMonitorMouse
320gb Arch Linux 11.6" 1366x768 Razer Oorichi 
  hide details  
Reply
post #40 of 43
Thread Starter 
wow I totally forgot about this thread. By what i've have read there is a lot of amd/intel fanboy in here. I went with AMD for a reason, it was cheaper and my friend gave me his MOBO for free so I had to go with AMD. I want to thank you all for your input. I actually had a good time reading all of your posts and actually learn a few stuff.

This is the build I end up with,
I got a free Mobo from a friend, the ram was also free,

here is what i end up with,
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/2H0EE

thanks again for everyone's input!
This is my first build, and if AMD wont run as well as I like, I will build an intel next time smile.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD - General
Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD - General › First gaming build , around $1,000 budget.