What is my PCs bottleneck ?

[stconquest]

"reasonable" why would he want to spend $400 (at least) on an i5 and a new MOBO, when he can get an FX-8350 or FX-8370, for half the price, it would get rid of the bottleneck for much cheaper and he only really needs it for gaming

 

In order to get an FX processor to even BEGIN to compete with a current Intel, you need a motherboard that has a good VRM... 8+2 usually.  Even then, the i5 will win in almost every game.  ... and you can go for a cheaper board, than the one I picked, on the Intel build.

 

Here: 

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-4690K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor  ($219.95 @ SuperBiiz)

Motherboard: ASRock Z97 Extreme3 ATX LGA1150 Motherboard  ($104.99 @ Newegg)

Total: $324.94

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-01-30 10:36 EST-0500

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD FX-8350 4.0GHz 8-Core Processor  ($164.98 @ OutletPC)

Motherboard: MSI 970 GAMING ATX AM3+ Motherboard  ($99.89 @ Newegg)

Total: $264.87

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-01-30 10:34 EST-0500

[Dreckssackblase]

Firstly I wan't to thank anyone helping/ trying to help.

secondly, I guess I have to upgrade the CPU then. Is it might worth waiting for the new AMD processors that are rumored ? Because i really don't want to buy/ can't really afford to upgrade both.

[Johntheawesomeguy]

In order to get an FX processor to even BEGIN to compete with a current Intel, you need a motherboard that has a good VRM... 8+2 usually.  Even then, the i5 will win in almost every game.  ... and you can go for a cheaper board, than the one I picked, on the Intel build.

 

Here: 

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-4690K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor  ($219.95 @ SuperBiiz)

Motherboard: ASRock Z97 Extreme3 ATX LGA1150 Motherboard  ($104.99 @ Newegg)

Total: $324.94

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-01-30 10:36 EST-0500

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD FX-8350 4.0GHz 8-Core Processor  ($164.98 @ OutletPC)

Motherboard: MSI 970 GAMING ATX AM3+ Motherboard  ($99.89 @ Newegg)

Total: $264.87

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-01-30 10:34 EST-0500

maybe in high end cpu's AMD needs to catch up, but when it comes to a $400-$700 budget you can't Intel simply can't beat AMD

[stconquest]

Firstly I wan't to thank anyone helping/ trying to help.

secondly, I guess I have to upgrade the CPU then. Is it might worth waiting for the new AMD processors that are rumored ? Because i really don't want to buy/ can't really afford to upgrade both.

 

Hold on.  If you want the improvement to your gaming, the 290 is NOT your problem.

 

AMD CPUs hit a performance peak over 5 years ago.  Intel has been steadily improving their CPU design in that time.  The 775 socket Intel builds (i7 920) are better than current FX CPUs.

 

For an improvement in gaming, you can do this:

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-4590 3.3GHz Quad-Core Processor  ($186.88 @ OutletPC)

Motherboard: ASRock H97 Anniversary ATX LGA1150 Motherboard  ($71.99 @ SuperBiiz)

Total: $258.87

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-01-30 10:56 EST-0500

 

But don't buy until you are sure you can't game well enough on your current system.  Research ways to make you experience pleasant WITH your current system before you spend money.

[stconquest]

maybe in high end cpu's AMD needs to catch up, but when it comes to a $400-$700 budget you can't Intel simply can't beat AMD

Wow, don't listen to this guy.

 

@Dreckssackblase

[Johntheawesomeguy]

Wow, don't listen to this guy.

 

@Dreckssackblase

I smell another fanboy, name one good intel cpu that is $100 that can beat a $100 AMD cpu

[stconquest]

I smell another fanboy, name one good intel cpu that is $100 that can beat a $100 AMD cpu

 

Listen, if this member was actually going to spend money, you are gonna hurt him with your terrible recommendations.  Seriously.  Please pedal you opinions elsewhere, thank you.

[Johntheawesomeguy]

Listen, if this member was actually going to spend money, you are gonna hurt him with your terrible recommendations.  Seriously.  Please pedal you opinions elsewhere, thank you

it depends on how much he is willing to spend. if he has a lot of money intel makes more sense, if he doesn't AMD makes more sense. TRY and find a good $100 Intel cpu that can beat the AMD corresponding price range

[stconquest]

it depends on how much he is willing to spend. if he has a lot of money intel makes more sense, if he doesn't AMD makes more sense. TRY and find a good $100 Intel cpu that can beat the AMD corresponding price range

No.

[Johntheawesomeguy]

No.

well I guess this is a victory for me!

[Abakan]

Firstly I wan't to thank anyone helping/ trying to help.

secondly, I guess I have to upgrade the CPU then. Is it might worth waiting for the new AMD processors that are rumored ? Because i really don't want to buy/ can't really afford to upgrade both.

 

The variance is an issue for me, although it may just be certain areas and times in the game where physics are intense, still I think it's worth having a look. First thing, in battlelog, go into your profile(the drop-down menu where your name is) and click settings, the last option, un-check, you'll want the video background disabled. On my wife's PC it uses 15-18% Cpu resources, very similar Cpu. Now this I doubt is your cause, but it may help with the min frame rates.

 

Anyway, my main tip would be to open windows task manager, leave it running while you're playing, track not just BF4, but other processes, and just make sure nothing else is competing for resources. Varying from 120-20fps seems completely ridiculous, even for that Cpu. It's worth making sure software isn't a factor.

 

Though I would second some here in recommending an upgrade. The FX8xxx series Cpu's do well in BF4 (it's well optimized, they're a hardware partner) but that's about it... I'd second a i5 4440 or better as a few others have said.

 

For example my office rig runs an i5 4440, 16GB Vengeance, and GTX 770, and BF4 on Ultra (no filters) averages across all maps about 90-105fps, minimums 'never' fall below 60. Some food for thought.

[Suika]

I smell intel fanboy

I have personal experience and I'll tell you right now that an FX-8350, or any FX chip, will bottleneck any GPU above a GTX 660 Ti/R9 285. AMD's CPUs are just a burden to high end gaming, it's pretty much fact.

[stconquest]

The variance is an issue for me, although it may just be certain areas and times in the game where physics are intense, still I think it's worth having a look. First thing, in battlelog, go into your profile(the drop-down menu where your name is) and click settings, the last option, un-check, you'll want the video background disabled. On my wife's PC it uses 15-18% Cpu resources, very similar Cpu. Now this I doubt is your cause, but it may help with the min frame rates.

 

Anyway, my main tip would be to open windows task manager, leave it running while you're playing, track not just BF4, but other processes, and just make sure nothing else is competing for resources. Varying from 120-20fps seems completely ridiculous, even for that Cpu. It's worth making sure software isn't a factor.

 

Though I would second some here in recommending an upgrade. The FX8xxx series Cpu's do well in BF4 (it's well optimized, they're a hardware partner) but that's about it... I'd second a i5 4440 or better as a few others have said.

 

For example my office rig runs an i5 4440, 16GB Vengeance, and GTX 770, and BF4 on Ultra (no filters) averages across all maps about 90-105fps, minimums 'never' fall below 60. Some food for thought.

 

 

@Dreckssackblase

 

This is the kind of testing you want to do.  Open Task Manager and view the "Performance" tab, now leave it open and play.  When you notice the fps spiking (downward), tab out and look at the Perfomance tab again.  Is CPU usage going to 100%?  If it is, you can try turning down settings... this can you gain some fps.  Other than lowering settings, or finding optimization fixes for any particular game, a change in CPU is your last option.

[Birdhunter]

I have personal experience and I'll tell you right now that an FX-8350, or any FX chip, will bottleneck any GPU above a GTX 660 Ti/R9 285. AMD's CPUs are just a burden to high end gaming, it's pretty much fact.

Dito, I have the same experience (actually, my Friends system running a 8370). The 8350/8370 was good price/performance for a long time, but with amds 2xx-Series getting cheaper and Nvidia bringing the 9xx-series, we passed the point, were (at least I) can no longer recommend it. AMDs focus on APUs the past few years has left the Performance-Sector to Intel, which leaves us no other choice anymore as recommendations for Gaming go - especially with games like Battlefield, were it's very likely that he'll get the latest iteration of it in the future, which is going to be more demanding.

TL;DR:

Go for an i5. If your cooler fits the socket and you wanna Overclock, go for a Devils Canyon (i5-4690K, good OCer, but a little pricier). Otherwise, the i5-4440 is the bang-for-the-buck choice.

Edit: And I agree with Stconquest: Try to sqeeze some more power out of it or reduce the load (background programms, lower settings and such).

If you don't want to alt-tab, heres a guide that lets you see cpu, fps, etc in game:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1229915/how-to-cpu-and-gpu-usage-along-with-fps-in-game