AMD's counterpart of i5-4590

[dialgarocksful]

Thanks for answering my poll question earlier, my next question is what would be the AMD counterpart of i5-4590 since I'll be building an Oculus-supported rig next year.

 

PS: Seeing GameDebate's site, FX-6300 is a bit better than 4690K but I'm not sure if it is accurate.

[ZetZet]

in games probably 9590 would almost keep up, not quite though.

[Bogica]

in games probably 9590 would almost keep up, not quite though.

That with the keyword being: ALMOST! It can't keep up in reality, in some cases, it can.

[flibberdipper]

No. 8350999 is more accurate.

[dialgarocksful]

in games probably 9590 would almost keep up, not quite though.

 

That with the keyword being: ALMOST! It can't keep up in reality, in some cases, it can.

At most, I'll be using the Rift as probably my highest-CPU/GPU using app. But most of the time, I'll be using it for MOBAs (and I know 970/R290 is overkill for a 1080p MOBA)

[Guest]

 

PS: Seeing GameDebate's site, FX-6300 is a bit better than 4690K but I'm not sure if it is accurate.

[mrswagbhinav]

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-4670K-vs-AMD-FX-6300

[Bogica]

At most, I'll be using the Rift as probably my highest-CPU/GPU using app. But most of the time, I'll be using it for MOBAs (and I know 970/R290 is overkill for a 1080p MOBA)

Go i5, you can't go wrong with an i5 for gaming. Maybe even get a nice cooler and OC some time later. It will handle Oculus easily, however get 8-16GB RAM just to be on the safe side, the requirements list 8GB RAM for the Oculus. Sure, go for either of those GPU's, whatever you can afford.

[rmac52]

Your info is way off. A 8350 was competitive with a 3570k. Even then it lost out in games that relied more on single core performance.

A 6300 would get destroyed by a modern i5.

[NeatSquidYT]

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-4670K-vs-AMD-FX-6300

CPUBoss is awful. As is Passmark, GPUBoss and so on.

[SkilledRebuilds]

You need a CONSTANT 75FPS AT ALL TIMES for the Oculus 75hz refresh.

AMDFX has dips in many games when chasing higher fps values the cpu cannot always provide that optimal experience.

I see many Oculus threads with "Amd IPC" issues not allowing an enjoyable experience with higher end gpu's not being fed enough that is needed to provide that 75fps CONSTANT.

Even if the machine is fully capable ie: 2x 970 does not mean the cpu can feed a constant 75fps as a minimum.

The most important value for gaming is the minimums followed by averages.

Many games will suffer using an Oculus on an AMDFX subsystem, in particular having minfps of 75fps always.

[Swndlr]

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-4670K-vs-AMD-FX-6300

not tryna hate here, but for future reference just dont use CPUboss/gpuboss because theyre just ridiculously intel/nvidia biased

although this comparison makes sense, but still dont trust them

[dialgarocksful]

Go i5, you can't go wrong with an i5 for gaming. Maybe even get a nice cooler and OC some time later. It will handle Oculus easily, however get 8-16GB RAM just to be on the safe side, the requirements list 8GB RAM for the Oculus. Sure, go for either of those GPU's, whatever you can afford.

I plan of having a 2x4GB kit.

 

 

You need a CONSTANT 75FPS AT ALL TIMES for the Oculus 75hz refresh.

AMDFX has dips in many games when chasing higher fps values the cpu cannot always provide that optimal experience.

I see many Oculus threads with "Amd IPC" issues not allowing an enjoyable experience with higher end gpu's not being fed enough that is needed to provide that 75fps CONSTANT.

Even if the machine is fully capable ie: 2x 970 does not mean the cpu can feed a constant 75fps as a minimum.

It's either a 970 or R290 is my only viable option. The price difference of 290X and 980 is way off for the minimal budget.. (Trying to go below $800)

[vorticalbox]

by counter part to you mean performs the same or at the same price point?

[ZetZet]

CPUBoss is awful. As is Passmark, GPUBoss and so on.

 

not tryna hate here, but for future reference just dont use CPUboss/gpuboss because theyre just ridiculously intel/nvidia biased

although this comparison makes sense, but still dont trust them

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-4690K-vs-AMD-FX-6300/2432vs1555This one is slighlty more reasonable for comparisons.

[NeatSquidYT]

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-4690K-vs-AMD-FX-6300/2432vs1555This one is slighlty more reasonable for comparisons.

mm. I still prefer looking up benchmarks in games or using Cinebench results.

[bobthedog8412]

I would go with an 8320 and overclock the living shit out of it

[mrswagbhinav]

not tryna hate here, but for future reference just dont use CPUboss/gpuboss because theyre just ridiculously intel/nvidia biased

although this comparison makes sense, but still dont trust them

holy shit I actually thought they were reliable, thank god I didn't make any purchases based on that yet. What site should I use then for comparison

[Swndlr]

holy shit I actually thought they were reliable, thank god I didn't make any purchases based on that yet. What site should I use then for comparison

use actual benchmarks

[mrswagbhinav]

use actual benchmarks

game benchmarks or benchmarks like Valley

[Swndlr]

game benchmarks or benchmarks like Valley

depends on what

for a gpu, game performance and actual performance from benchmarks are both helpful when deciding on what to purchase

for a cpu, as long as its something that wont bottleneck the gpu (and recent i5 or better wont be an issue) you will be fine

[ICantThinkOfAnyGoodName]

game benchmarks or benchmarks like Valley

Valley is actually pretty much useless for judging how good a CPU is, because it's a GPU benchmark. The best way to judge performance of CPUs in games is game benchmarks.

[SkilledRebuilds]

Thanks, I'll be building an Oculus-supported rig next year.

 

BOLDED FOR MAXIMUM IMPORTANCE - IE: Your GAMING EXPERIENCE

 

 

If your using this with OCULUS you need to KNOW MORE about it... the fact that it REQUIRES a MINIMUM CONSTANT of 75fps to match its 75HZ refresh...

 

REQUIRING 75FPS AT ALL TIMES for it to be immersive at all..... anything under 75fps, and it stutters like a bitch. (Worse than your used to in normal gaming)

 

Better hope your CPU can provide the most MINFPS you can. I know for a fact many titles have a really fucked up MINFPS for FX CPU's.

This is something I'd be worrying about.. not wasting a shitload of cash on something that will need to be replaced anyway.

[SteveGrabowski0]

Thanks for answering my poll question earlier, my next question is what would be the AMD counterpart of i5-4590 since I'll be building an Oculus-supported rig next year.

 

Maybe Zen in 2016?

[Nena Trinity]

Honestly this AMD vs Intel crap going again? I still say it depends on the game end of that.

BF4 good multi core support & PS2 not so much you need a i7 to get good FPS or a Pentium G3258...