Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › Graphics Cards - General › R9 280x 3GB or 770 4GB
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

R9 280x 3GB or 770 4GB - Page 3

post #21 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc VS View Post

I also think they are closely matched. I found some benchmark results here and it seems that GTX 770 is better for Battlefield, but I guess the R9 280X should be fine too. I would choose the cheapest one, like Wirerat said...

not sure about that BI bench but my 7950 beat that 7970 . . .



and my 7970 averaged around 87 in BF3 MP 64. they prolly used old drivers.
Edited by rdr09 - 4/8/14 at 9:29am
Second Intel Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2700 4.5/ 1.28 77 290 (2) 16 / 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1000 360/240 10 64 28 2160 
PowerCase
850 540 
  hide details  
Reply
Second Intel Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2700 4.5/ 1.28 77 290 (2) 16 / 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1000 360/240 10 64 28 2160 
PowerCase
850 540 
  hide details  
Reply
post #22 of 56
Thread Starter 
http://pcpartpicker.com/user/RWPGSOP/saved/4j1a >>> 4670k
post #23 of 56
I'd go with the Intel build. You can go with a cheaper CPU cooler though. Do you not have a Micro Center nearby, or know someone who is near one? If you do you can get the 4670K for cheaper as well and bundle with the mobo for less.
Herschel
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4770K ASRock Z87M Extreme4 eVGA GTX 680 2GB 12GB G.Skill Ripjaws 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1x 60GB SSD 1x 500GB, 1x 640GB, 1x 1TB Asus something or other Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Acer H236HLbid (23" 1920x1080) 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus VE198 (19". 1440x900) Microsoft Sidewinder X4 Seasonic X650 Antec P180 Mini White 
Mouse
Logitech G500 
  hide details  
Reply
Herschel
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4770K ASRock Z87M Extreme4 eVGA GTX 680 2GB 12GB G.Skill Ripjaws 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1x 60GB SSD 1x 500GB, 1x 640GB, 1x 1TB Asus something or other Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Acer H236HLbid (23" 1920x1080) 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus VE198 (19". 1440x900) Microsoft Sidewinder X4 Seasonic X650 Antec P180 Mini White 
Mouse
Logitech G500 
  hide details  
Reply
post #24 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by -iceblade^ View Post

I'd go with the Intel build. You can go with a cheaper CPU cooler though. Do you not have a Micro Center nearby, or know someone who is near one? If you do you can get the 4670K for cheaper as well and bundle with the mobo for less.


actually no ..

i'm not in USA ..


i'm thinking AMD is very similar to intel in performance because YouTube videos for 6300 showing it very good with BF4

that's why i'm thinking for 6300 and 8350 also, the multiple cores very attractive

and also i saw the review from newegg about it, and it's real 8 cores according to vishera architecture .. except they say it less effective than intel CPUs which is true for sure ..

and i'm still thinking ..
post #25 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by itcharzherp View Post

actually no ..

i'm not in USA ..


i'm thinking AMD is very similar to intel in performance because YouTube videos for 6300 showing it very good with BF4

that's why i'm thinking for 6300 and 8350 also, the multiple cores very attractive

and also i saw the review from newegg about it, and it's real 8 cores according to vishera architecture .. except they say it less effective than intel CPUs which is true for sure ..

and i'm still thinking ..

Oh sorry, my mistake.

That's just for one game. In a lot of others, the 4670K will be faster. Core for core, the Bulldozer cores are slower than the older Deneb ones. Also the Bulldoer / Piledriver "cores" can be more likened to being half-cores. Point being the 4670K is still going to be faster, have higher single thread performance, and possibly overclock higher too. Right now most games aren't really very multicore-heavy so you don't need 6 or even 8 cores - it's mostly reliant on single thread performance, and clockspeed - again, both areas where Intel have the advantage.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/699?vs=837

I mean I'm not hating on AMD but if you can go with Intel it'd be the smarter move, assuming you can afford it.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1408955/fx-8350-vs-i5-4670k-in-terms-of-gaming/0_40
Herschel
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4770K ASRock Z87M Extreme4 eVGA GTX 680 2GB 12GB G.Skill Ripjaws 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1x 60GB SSD 1x 500GB, 1x 640GB, 1x 1TB Asus something or other Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Acer H236HLbid (23" 1920x1080) 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus VE198 (19". 1440x900) Microsoft Sidewinder X4 Seasonic X650 Antec P180 Mini White 
Mouse
Logitech G500 
  hide details  
Reply
Herschel
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4770K ASRock Z87M Extreme4 eVGA GTX 680 2GB 12GB G.Skill Ripjaws 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1x 60GB SSD 1x 500GB, 1x 640GB, 1x 1TB Asus something or other Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Acer H236HLbid (23" 1920x1080) 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus VE198 (19". 1440x900) Microsoft Sidewinder X4 Seasonic X650 Antec P180 Mini White 
Mouse
Logitech G500 
  hide details  
Reply
post #26 of 56
Well either card will be good, especially on a 60hz 1080p setup BUT here is what my gtx770 does with 1.33v (stock is 1.212v) on bf4 with the new drivers that just came out monday, which seem to have a 10fps improvement over old drivers.


new drivers 2014-04-07 1424mhz 7400mhz

asus gtx770 2gb
1080p 120hz, ultra with msaa off
64p DM BF4

2014-04-07 16:17:35 - bf4 parcel storm
Frames: 53152 - Time: 526550ms - Avg: 100.944 - Min: 73 - Max: 183

2014-04-07 17:43:10 - bf4 flood zone
Frames: 85450 - Time: 754608ms - Avg: 113.238 - Min: 79 - Max: 201

2014-04-07 18:32:20 - bf4 hainan resort
Frames: 54180 - Time: 542259ms - Avg: 99.915 - Min: 64 - Max: 175
2014 nerd box evo
(18 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD 1100T x6 4244mhz 3065cpu-nb (fx8150 at 4.9g... Asus Crosshair V Formula Asus gtx570 dcII- 890/1780/2200@1088mv corsair dominator gt 8GB 1866 @1886 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
corsair f120ssd/seagate 1TB Asus cd/dvd burner Antec Kuhler 920 semi-custom loop (2 radiators) win7 professional 64bit 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
Gateway 23" 1920x1080 corsair ax850 Rosewill blackhawk w/hdd bay mod logitech mx518 
  hide details  
Reply
2014 nerd box evo
(18 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD 1100T x6 4244mhz 3065cpu-nb (fx8150 at 4.9g... Asus Crosshair V Formula Asus gtx570 dcII- 890/1780/2200@1088mv corsair dominator gt 8GB 1866 @1886 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
corsair f120ssd/seagate 1TB Asus cd/dvd burner Antec Kuhler 920 semi-custom loop (2 radiators) win7 professional 64bit 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
Gateway 23" 1920x1080 corsair ax850 Rosewill blackhawk w/hdd bay mod logitech mx518 
  hide details  
Reply
post #27 of 56
@rdr09
Quote:
not sure about that BI bench but my 7950 beat that 7970 . . .

This is really cool! Thanks for sharing it! thumb.gif
post #28 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by -iceblade^ View Post

Oh sorry, my mistake.

That's just for one game. In a lot of others, the 4670K will be faster. Core for core, the Bulldozer cores are slower than the older Deneb ones. Also the Bulldoer / Piledriver "cores" can be more likened to being half-cores. Point being the 4670K is still going to be faster, have higher single thread performance, and possibly overclock higher too. Right now most games aren't really very multicore-heavy so you don't need 6 or even 8 cores - it's mostly reliant on single thread performance, and clockspeed - again, both areas where Intel have the advantage.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/699?vs=837

I mean I'm not hating on AMD but if you can go with Intel it'd be the smarter move, assuming you can afford it.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1408955/fx-8350-vs-i5-4670k-in-terms-of-gaming/0_40

OK .. i forgive you.

yea .. i liked the 4670k

also 6300 and 8350 have very good performance and OCing levels

the field i was focusing on was mostly gaming .. so there are multitasking apps which i think have other type of advs and feaatures
post #29 of 56
Hi guys smile.gif

So I was checking out these bi-monthly updates on price to performance, and they lead me to choose the 770. I was planning on getting this overclocked (Core Clock 1150 MHz, Boost Clock 1202 MHz, Effective Memory Clock 7200 MHz) one for $327.

Then I got a newegg email with a code that puts this 280x (Core Clock 850MHz, Boost Clock 1000MHz, Effective Memory Clock 6.0GHz) at $290. It's not overclocked though and I don't know how difficult it would be to try it myself.

Think I should go for the 280x and try to overclock it myself or will the overclocked 770 be significantly faster?
    
MonitorMonitorMouseMouse Pad
2233rz XL2411Z IE 3.0 supermat 
AudioAudio
xfi xtremegamer ATH AD-700 
  hide details  
Reply
    
MonitorMonitorMouseMouse Pad
2233rz XL2411Z IE 3.0 supermat 
AudioAudio
xfi xtremegamer ATH AD-700 
  hide details  
Reply
post #30 of 56
Thread Starter 
can't you OC an OCed card?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Graphics Cards - General
Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › Graphics Cards - General › R9 280x 3GB or 770 4GB