FX-8320 w/ GTX970 2-way SLI. Will there be bottlenecks?

[strawberrymaker]

I would say you get an difference between 5-10 fps in comparison the fx-8320 and i7-4770k. but the fx is also cheaper

 

~Straw 

[s3ns3]

http://cpuboss.com/cpu/AMD-FX-8320

Provides a comparison between a FX-8320, 3770K and 3570K

do you seriously posted a link to cpu boss ??? 

 

guys don`t use that crap. same for gpu boss

[Faceman]

An 8320 overclocked to 4.8Ghz already bottlenecks a single 780/290.  Of course it will bottleneck a 970.

 

Will the bottleneck be noticeable?  I'm not sure because the bottleneck occurs on the higher end of the spectrum.

 

If you are gaming on anything above a 60Hz monitor, chances are you will notice the bottleneck.  If you are gaming on a 60Hz monitor, you probably wont notice it.

 

Overall smoothness of gameplay will not be the best, because FPS is not the only metric for performance, frame times is very important also, and Intel flat out dominates this metric, often providing double the speeds of AMD in a wide variety of games.

 

Speaking of games, it is going to depend on which types of games you play.  MMOs, Starcraft, RTS, MOBA, Assassin's Creed, DayZ, ARMA2/3, Skyrim, indies, etc.. are all going to be severely limited on an AMD processor.

 

Games like Crysis3, BF4, Metro:Last Light, you won't notice a difference.

 

Your best course of action is to buy an i5 because it won't bottleneck a single 970, and it won't bottleneck dual 970s.

[Faceman]

CPUboss, GPUboss, CPUPassmark, etc...

All of those websites need to be abolished from the internet because they propagate misinformation and cause more harm than good.  They see an FX scoring higher than an i5 and think, oh, it must be better than an i5 for gaming, when it couldn't be further from the truth.

 

An two examples of an 8320 bottlenecking high end cards are Cinebench and Firestrike

 

An 8320 OC'd to 4.8Ghz paired with an R9 290X only scores 98fps in Cinebench.  An i5-4670k at stock 3.4Ghz paired with an R9 290X scores 128fps.

 

Firestrike, an 8320 OC'd to 4.8Ghz with an R9 290X scores a flat 9,000, meanwhile an i5-4670k @ 3.4Ghz paired with the same R9 290X scores 11,000.

 

This is the "achievement" given to the FX processor in Firestrike:

"

Brawn

Your GPU is ready to rumble, but your CPU doesn't want to play."

[dizmo]

I'm just upgrading and keeping the 8320. Going to buy a single 970 then maybe buy the other 970 if I've already save up some money for an i5. Sounds good?

 

That being said do you think even with only one 970, will it be bottlenecked?

I think you'll be fine with one for sure, see how it goes from there.

Your motherboard supports SLI? IIRC a lot of the cheaper AMD boards only support Crossfire.

 

Cause it got slow cores. Even haswell i3 can overkill it in some games. For GTX 970 it's terrible choice.

Get i5 if you're on budget, if not get i7, which is superior to i5 & any AMD CPU, & which gonna please you in everything starting from games finishing to renderings.

 

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-4340-4330-4130_5.html#sect0

That's not really the best thing to link. AMD comes out on top in a few, and honestly, 1-2 fps difference is not "overkilling" it.

 

Here, post of @Faa clears everything very easily with those videos:

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/150288-fx-8320-or-i5-4570-help/page-4

Now I might be wrong, since they're using different measurement reading programs, but the person with the 8230 looks to have 1 gpu, and the second video looks to have 2.

Also that's not comparing an i5 to an FX, it's comparing a Sandy Bridge E to an FX; vastly different chips from a cost perspective.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

 

OP the FX would bottleneck the cards badly at 1080P but if you go with such a display setup NO they will be totaly maxed out so your CPU will be fine...but you will get nowhere near 60FPS on medium settings with three 1440P panels...a single 970 can't drive a single of these at 60FPS...970's SLI will give you good performance on a single 1440P around 60FPS in most games with your current CPU.

 

three panels at 1440P means 6 times the pixel pushing required for a standard 1080P display...each 1440P panels as twice the pixel count of a 1080P...

He pretty clearly stated on 1440p panel, not three.

[i_build_nanosuits]

He pretty clearly stated on 1440p panel, not three.

yeah you quoted while i was editing my post..

[vern021]

I think you'll be fine with one for sure, see how it goes from there.

Your motherboard supports SLI? IIRC a lot of the cheaper AMD boards only support Crossfire.

Yes it does support SLI. My main concern is if it will bottleneck 2-way SLI to a point where I can't play at 1440p 60+fps, I'll stick to a 1080p monitor and have a single card instead.

[DIV1D3]

Here, post of @Faa clears everything very easily with those videos:

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/150288-fx-8320-or-i5-4570-help/page-4

O_O

Wow, didn't know that there was such a huge difference in fps compared to the 3930K (though it is a $600 hexa core CPU). 

 

do you seriously posted a link to cpu boss ??? 

 

guys don`t use that crap. same for gpu boss

Thought they were a decent source of information. 

 

I'm feeling dumber and dumber by every post 

[vern021]

O_O

Wow, didn't know that there was such a huge difference in fps compared to the 3930K (though it is a $600 hexa core CPU). 

 

Thought they were a decent source of information. 

 

I'm feeling dumber and dumber by every post 

I think this is a learning exprience for us both. Hahahaha

[dizmo]

O_O

Wow, didn't know that there was such a huge difference in fps compared to the 3930K (though it is a $600 hexa core CPU). 

 

Thought they were a decent source of information. 

 

I'm feeling dumber and dumber by every post 

When you watched the video's, did you notice that the 3930k has 2 gpu's? The 8320 only had one listed, if I'm not mistaken.

Just want to see if I'm completely missing something there.

[Faceman]

When you watched the video's, did you notice that the 3930k has 2 gpu's? The 8320 only had one listed, if I'm not mistaken.

Just want to see if I'm completely missing something there.

He disabled cores and one of the GPUs I think... let me check to confirm or deny.

 

EDIT*  Ok, so one of the GPUs is definitely disabled.  I am not sure if some cores are disabled though.

 

As a point of reference, he is using a single 780.  When I used a single 780 with my i5-4670k OC'd to 4.5Ghz I was getting 120-150fps in BF4 single player campaign.

 

I think the point that he is trying to illustrate in the video is that more cores doesn't always mean more performance.  It is also 9am, I've been up all night playing ArcheAge and my reasoning and deduction skills are not where they should be, so hopefully @Faa can clear it up for us.

[DIV1D3]

When you watched the video's, did you notice that the 3930k has 2 gpu's? The 8320 only had one listed, if I'm not mistaken.

Just want to see if I'm completely missing something there.

Well then, that shuffles the cards up aye?

With the 3930K it has GPU0 and GPU1, but the percentages and temps of the second GPU indicates that it wasn't doing anything.

[vern021]

So conclusion time. What do you guys advise? Get a single 970 then buy the other one after getting an i5 or buy 2 970s immediately? @DIV1D3 @ALXAndy @Toddwjp @strawberrymaker @i_build_nanosuits @Faceman @Katsu-K1L @nokturrduk84 @Fulgrim @Archangel1994 @Oshino Shinobu

[nokturrduk84]

When you watched the video's, did you notice that the 3930k has 2 gpu's? The 8320 only had one listed, if I'm not mistaken.

Just want to see if I'm completely missing something there.

As you see in video, secong GPU is disabled. You can notice it with30 celsius & with usage of 0%.

[nokturrduk84]

So conclusion time. What do you guys advise? Get a single 970 then buy the other one after getting an i5 or buy 2 970s immediately? @DIV1D3 @ALXAndy @Toddwjp @strawberrymaker @i_build_nanosuits @Faceman @Katsu-K1L @nokturrduk84 @Fulgrim @archangel1994 @oshino shinobu

Buy single GTX 970, then get i5 & suitable motherboard & buy another 970 after that.

[Faceman]

So conclusion time. What do you guys advise? Get a single 970 then buy the other one after getting an i5 or buy 2 970s immediately? @DIV1D3 @ALXAndy @Toddwjp @strawberrymaker @i_build_nanosuits @Faceman @Katsu-K1L @nokturrduk84 @Fulgrim @Archangel1994 @Oshino Shinobu

Well, what games do you play?

 

I personally think it makes more sense to buy an i5 + single 970 first.  Two 970s is going to be a waste unless you are gaming at 1440p, and it all boils down to what games are you playing?

[vern021]

Well, what games do you play?

 

I personally think it makes more sense to buy an i5 + single 970 first.

Currently playing Battlefield 3, AC: Black Flag, Far Cry 3, DoTA 2(sometimes), LoL(sometimes), HoN, Starcraft II, Skyrim, CoD MW MW2.

[Faceman]

Currently playing Battlefield 3, AC: Black Flag, Far Cry 3, DoTA 2(sometimes), LoL(sometimes), HoN, Starcraft II, Skyrim, CoD MW MW2.

You need an Intel processor for about half of those games. EDIT*  Need is too strong of a word.  You will experience much better gameplay with an intel processor is what I should have said.

 

Buy an i5 + 970, and let everything else fall into play after that.

[vern021]

Buy single GTX 970, then get i5 & suitable motherboard & buy another 970 after that.

 

Will do!

You need an Intel processor for about half of those games. EDIT*  Need is too strong of a word.  You will experience much better gameplay with an intel processor is what I should have said.

 

Buy an i5 + 970, and let everything else fall into play after that.

Currently playing at a 900p monitor and will be buying the 970 next month or two. I'm locked at 60Hz anyway so getting the 970 1st will be a nice experience. I'm planning to buy the second 970, i5 w/ mobo and a 1440p monitor on January or March depending on my salary

[ALXAndy]

So conclusion time. What do you guys advise? Get a single 970 then buy the other one after getting an i5 or buy 2 970s immediately? @DIV1D3 @ALXAndy @Toddwjp @strawberrymaker @i_build_nanosuits @Faceman @Katsu-K1L @nokturrduk84 @Fulgrim @Archangel1994 @Oshino Shinobu

 

FFS the I5 is no faster than the 8320. Stop letting the Intel fanboys brainwash you !

 

Your 8 core AMD can easily keep up with any I5. Benchmarks usually all favour the AMD (810 Cinebench R15, 10,000 Firestrike Physics).

 

Just get the GPUs and then see how you get on. I command you to spot any difference at all between the 8320 and the I5 in game.

 

Honestly replacing your CPU is a waste of money and a waste of time. You won't see any noticeable difference unless you go for a hex core E chip, and even then you won't 'see' it any way you'll just see higher numbers coming back from your benchmarks.

[ALXAndy]

You need an Intel processor for about half of those games. EDIT*  Need is too strong of a word.  You will experience much better gameplay with an intel processor is what I should have said.

 

Buy an i5 + 970, and let everything else fall into play after that.

 

 My 4.9ghz 8320 and 7990 totally disagree with you.

 

99% of games either don't care about the CPU *or* the game is crap any way or old and not worth playing.

 

Mantle (and DX12 as M$ have been scared into doing the same) aims to totally and completely eliminate the CPU from the equation. In a couple of years you will be able to use some crappy £30 CPU and high end GPU with no ills.

 

Flat out balls to the wall the FX 8 is a faster and more powerful chip. It doesn't  have the IPC of the Intel but that's not important when you have two X86 consoles, both using a crap 1.7ghz 8 core Jaguar. IE - that CPU is crap, meaning every game coded for those consoles will need to lean on the graphics subsystem as hard as it can and then BINGO BONGO ! that sort of coding slops its way over to the PC.

 

Man, what a way to completely wank money.

[Suika]

GTX970 came out and made me thinking of buying two GTX970 instead of 780Ti since they're at the same price. I'm wondering if my 8320 will bottleneck the GPUs even when the 8320 will be overclocked to 4.5-4.7GHz?

My single GTX 780 is bottlenecked by an FX-8350 at 4.8GHz.

Remember, an i3 from Sandy Bridge has better single threaded performance than a FX-9590.

[Altecice]

What's the real answer guys? Can you give some supporting reasons from a reliable source?

There will be NO Bottlenecks. The issue is the new I5/I7's have higher IPC per core than AMD's current FX core.

It is NOT A BOTTLENECK its just performance lacking (because fx is 8 processor but not all games will use all 8 vs Intels HT cores they are better utilized). But in reality the fps difference is like 2fps and id imagine you would be pushing much more than 60fps anyway so who cares right?

 

I run two 290x's with my 8350 @ 5Ghz and I cant report any bottlenecks at all, Ignore the fanboys.

[vern021]

FFS the I5 is no faster than the 8320. Stop letting the Intel fanboys brainwash you !

 

Your 8 core AMD can easily keep up with any I5. Benchmarks usually all favour the AMD (810 Cinebench R15, 10,000 Firestrike Physics).

 

Just get the GPUs and then see how you get on. I command you to spot any difference at all between the 8320 and the I5 in game.

 

Honestly replacing your CPU is a waste of money and a waste of time. You won't see any noticeable difference unless you go for a hex core E chip, and even then you won't 'see' it any way you'll just see higher numbers coming back from your benchmarks.

uhmm.... Calm down. Hate to say it but they're actually right. I know that 8350 bottlenecks the 780 and even the 290X in some cases. FX is a very good CPU tbh but in terms of gaming higher single thread/core performance= higher fps and that's what the FX-8320 or 8350 lacks. It's not that very significant performance difference tho 

[Faa]

I run two 290x's with my 8350 @ 5Ghz and I cant report any bottlenecks at all, Ignore the fanboys.

Hmm BF4 full 64 operation locker server show me the GPU loads before you lie. Go record it with that amazing streaming cpu. It's a bottleneck end of it. A 8350 is equal to a 4300/6300 in terms of gaming performance think again if those low-end CPU's aren't slower than a modern quad core like a i5.