bottle neck yo

[Toddwjp]

Same price(or sometimes less, considering cooling): The i3-4130 is a better choice when compared to the 6300, the i5-4460 is a better choice when compared to the 8320/8350. the G3258 is a better choice when compared to the 860K (overclocking the G3258 is so easy). They all have the same multithreading performance on less cores, which meets the rule of thumb; IPC>cores, for gaming.

 

So how should you not "feel bad" if those are the facts? Please, explain me why it is not opting for a sub-optimal choice. I don't care if it "runs fine", i'm talking objectively comparing product A and B here and selecting the best option.

 

@Toddwjp @Lord Pantaloons @aidenrelkoff @AnnoyedShelf also feel free to enlighten us and help @RzeG3SG1 with his argument. I think we need to bury this, once and for all. It's getting ridiculous after almost 4 years now.

i just answered his question, he might already have the 6300

[aidenrelkoff]

 

Same price(or sometimes less, considering cooling): The i3-4130 is a better choice when compared to the 6300, the i5-4460 is a better choice when compared to the 8320/8350. the G3258 is a better choice when compared to the 860K (overclocking the G3258 is so easy). They all have the same multithreading performance on less cores, which meets the rule of thumb; IPC>cores, for gaming.

 

So how should you not "feel bad" if those are the facts? Please, explain me why it is not opting for a sub-optimal choice. I don't care if it "runs fine", i'm talking objectively comparing product A and B here and selecting the best option.

 

@Toddwjp @Lord Pantaloons @aidenrelkoff @AnnoyedShelf also feel free to enlighten us and help @RzeG3SG1 with his argument. I think we need to bury this, once and for all. It's getting ridiculous after almost 4 years now.

 

dont go all intel fan boy on us, amd and intel BOTH have there strong point. yes maybe for gaming at the $110 mark intel i3 are better, but they are only dual core... so for games like minecraft even a  top of the like dual core i3 will only run MC at medium settings if your lucky, where as my cpu can max the game out and have about 267 fps to spair.

[Sintezza]

every cpu will be a bottleneck at a certain point.

[Majestic]

every cpu will be a bottleneck at a certain point.

True, but the case is to which degree. And in this case by quite a margin, ranging from game to game ofc.

 

dont go all intel fan boy on us, amd and intel BOTH have there strong point. yes maybe for gaming at the $110 mark intel i3 are better, but they are only dual core... so for games like minecraft even a  top of the like dual core i3 will only run MC at medium settings if your lucky, where as my cpu can max the game out and have about 267 fps to spair.

 

Oh look, you start off with an Ad Hominem and proceed with a Strawman to finish off your comment. This severe lack of critical thinking and inability to formulate arguments is exactly what perpetuates this discussion. I just gave you a 2xGTX770 benchmark showing the i3 tieing the 6300 in a variaty of games, including the multithreaded game Battlefield 4. So, again I ask you; why buy the 6300 if it has no benificial effect multithreaded titles and has a severe disadvantage in less threaded titles which are still widely played and released. Also it consumes twice the power and is not able to fit into ITX cases. It also makes more noise on stockfan.

 

http://anandtech.com/bench/product/1281?vs=1197

 

i just answered his question, he might already have the 6300

 

Ok, but how would this influence the answer to the question that was asked? He did not ask "is this combo going to do X or Y", he asked will the 6300 create a limiting factor. The answer to that should not be affected by what he/she has or hasn't in his posession. That's just a simple fact, with the answer being yes or no. And you chose "no", hence I ask you why.

[Toddwjp]

Ok, but how would this influence the answer to the question that was asked? He did not ask "is this combo going to do X or Y", he asked will the 6300 create a limiting factor. The answer to that should not be affected by what he

/she has or hasn't in his posession. That's just a simple fact, with the answer being yes or no. And you chose "no", hence I ask you why.

the r9 290 will in most gaming situations hit 99% before the fx 6300 will hit 99%

[Majestic]

the r9 290 will in most gaming situations hit 99% before the fx 6300 will hit 99%

 

With which proof did you come to this conclusion, also define "most gaming situations" in a more tangible term.

 

The fx6300 does not need to reach 99% for it to be a bottleneck. I can only think of two gaming situations who have even close to that multithreading capability, being Crysis 3 and Battlefield 4 Single-Player. Multiplayer, if you have a heavy load on the mainthread, you won't reach 100% due to the rest of the cores waiting for that thread. But that core will still halt performance (which is the reason Intel does so much better on min. fps scores).

 

I'm not trying to be an ass, i'm just asking you to explain yourself.

[aidenrelkoff]

True, but the case is to which degree. And in this case by quite a margin, ranging from game to game ofc.

 

 

Oh look, you start off with an Ad Hominem and proceed with a Strawman to finish off your comment. This severe lack of critical thinking and inability to formulate arguments is exactly what perpetuates this discussion. I just gave you a 2xGTX770 benchmark showing the i3 tieing the 6300 in a variaty of games, including the multithreaded game Battlefield 4. So, again I ask you; why buy the 6300 if it has no benificial effect multithreaded titles and has a severe disadvantage in less threaded titles which are still widely played and released. Also it consumes twice the power and is not able to fit into ITX cases. It also makes more noise on stockfan.

 

http://anandtech.com/bench/product/1281?vs=1197

 

 

Ok, but how would this influence the answer to the question that was asked? He did not ask "is this combo going to do X or Y", he asked will the 6300 create a limiting factor. The answer to that should not be affected by what he/she has or hasn't in his posession. That's just a simple fact, with the answer being yes or no. And you chose "no", hence I ask you why.

how are you so blind.... gaming aside... RENDERING!!! the 6 core amd will destroy the i3 hand down

[Majestic]

how are you so blind.... gaming aside... RENDERING!!! the 6 core amd will destroy the i3 hand down

 

What does that have to do with the question "will the fx6300 bottleneck the 290". 

 

And for the quick 'n dirty render, Intel has Quicksync. Also, i don't see the i3 getting destroyed in any of the productivity benchmarks on ; http://anandtech.com/bench/product/1281?vs=1197 Trading blows is how i'd describe it...

 

 

 

offtopic;

Who the hell renders shit anyway. Most capture software (ODB, Shadowplay) encodes on the fly using h.264 hardware encoders. I bet not even 1% of the audience of this website has ever remotely used a significant amount of their time rendering for it to be a factor, yet it continuously gets brought up during recommendations. I'm an avid computer user and i think i've only rendered 2/3 movies on moviemaker in my life.

[Lord Pantaloons]

 

Same price(or sometimes less, considering cooling): The i3-4130 is a better choice when compared to the 6300, the i5-4460 is a better choice when compared to the 8320/8350. the G3258 is a better choice when compared to the 860K (overclocking the G3258 is so easy). They all have the same multithreading performance on less cores, which meets the rule of thumb; IPC>cores, for gaming.

 

So how should you not "feel bad" if those are the facts? Please, explain me why it is not opting for a sub-optimal choice. I don't care if it "runs fine", i'm talking objectively comparing product A and B here and selecting the best option.

 

@Toddwjp @Lord Pantaloons @aidenrelkoff @AnnoyedShelf also feel free to enlighten us and help @RzeG3SG1 with his argument. I think we need to bury this, once and for all. It's getting ridiculous after almost 4 years now.

 

This is impossible to bury and you know it.

[AnnoyedShelf]

 

Same price(or sometimes less, considering cooling): The i3-4130 is a better choice when compared to the 6300, the i5-4460 is a better choice when compared to the 8320/8350. the G3258 is a better choice when compared to the 860K (overclocking the G3258 is so easy). They all have the same multithreading performance on less cores, which meets the rule of thumb; IPC>cores, for gaming.

 

So how should you not "feel bad" if those are the facts? Please, explain me why it is not opting for a sub-optimal choice. I don't care if it "runs fine", i'm talking objectively comparing product A and B here and selecting the best option.

 

@Toddwjp @Lord Pantaloons @aidenrelkoff @AnnoyedShelf also feel free to enlighten us and help @RzeG3SG1 with his argument. I think we need to bury this, once and for all. It's getting ridiculous after almost 4 years now.

 

The G3258 is not better than the 860k in every way.  For example, in heavily threaded games like Battlefield 4, you will get better performance.  However, for everything else, PLEASE listen to @Majestic.  He knows what he's talking about, and in terms of gaming, Intel is the way to go right now.  If you were mostly video rendering and you needed a cheap solution, fine go with an 8350, but don't argue about how AMD is the cheaper solution for everything.

[Majestic]

The G3258 is not better than the 860k in every way.  For example, in heavily threaded games like Battlefield 4, you will get better performance.  However, for everything else, PLEASE listen to @Majestic.  He knows what he's talking about, and in terms of gaming, Intel is the way to go right now.  If you were mostly video rendering and you needed a cheap solution, fine go with an 8350, but don't argue about how AMD is the cheaper solution for everything.

 

Well, you can basicly get any G3258 and a cheap B85 board and overclock it to 4.2ghz on the stockcooler, more if you're lucky. That's a 30% OC, which you can't get on a 860K, budgetboard and stockcooler.

Then combine it with these results;

http://anandtech.com/bench/product/1200?vs=1265 (1x770 benchmark, nog the 1280x1024 igpu tests!)

 

You can see in the BF4 benchmark they're not that far apart and the Intel wins by margin in 3 out of 4 min.-fps tests. The 30% OC will tip the balance in Intel's favor. More so in titles less properly multithreaded, because IPC > cores for all gaming systems. As evident by the Cinebench R10 results, you can see in raw performance the lower clocked quadcore doesn't trail far behind on stock. At 4.2-4.4ghz, which as i said is an out-of-the-box guarantee, it will shame it.

[Priller]

What does that have to do with the question "will the fx6300 bottleneck the 290". 

 

And for the quick 'n dirty render, Intel has Quicksync. Also, i don't see the i3 getting destroyed in any of the productivity benchmarks on ; http://anandtech.com/bench/product/1281?vs=1197 Trading blows is how i'd describe it...

 

 

 

offtopic;

Who the hell renders shit anyway. Most capture software (ODB, Shadowplay) encodes on the fly using h.264 hardware encoders. I bet not even 1% of the audience of this website has ever remotely used a significant amount of their time rendering for it to be a factor, yet it continuously gets brought up during recommendations. I'm an avid computer user and i think i've only rendered 2/3 movies on moviemaker in my life.

 

The APUs have a stronger onboard GPU then Intel. It's just a matter of software using it. But with a powerful GPU there is no reason to use any onboard solution that isnt on the GPU.

 

 

For your offtopic part. 

 

If only you saw my media collection. LOL

[Majestic]

The APUs have a stronger onboard GPU then Intel. It's just a matter of software using it. But with a powerful GPU there is no reason to use any onboard solution that isnt on the GPU.

 

 

For your offtopic part. 

 

If only you saw my media collection. LOL

 

Again, taking stuff out of context or comparing them apples to oranges. For the price of an APU + FM2 board you can have a G3258 + Budget card outperforming both the CPU and GPU part of that APU. 

THE ONLY reason you'd want that APU is if you wanted to build that in an extremely small formfactor like an ANTEC ISK 110. But then you run into power supply issues, so that's also not viable. And we're already talking a very application.

 

Offtopic part;

so you're the 1%

[Priller]

Again, taking stuff out of context or comparing them apples to oranges. For the price of an APU + FM2 board you can have a G3258 + Budget card outperforming both the CPU and GPU part of that APU. 

THE ONLY reason you'd want that APU is if you wanted to build that in an extremely small formfactor like an ANTEC ISK 110. But then you run into power supply issues, so that's also not viable. And we're already talking a very application.

 

Offtopic part;

so you're the 1%

 

You would still need a board with the G3258 and AMD cut its prices on the APU stuff. The only thing I would use an APU for would be that small form factor HTPC but I would use the small AM1 stuff because they are dirt cheap and it would be buried behind a TV. Although a cheap Xbox360 could fill the same role for Netflix, Plex, and WMC extender.

 

 

OTP: 

Yes that 1%. Transcoding on the fly, video conversion on the fly, as well as serving media, and running a cablecard setup all at the same time is my "typical use case".

[Majestic]

You would still need a board with the G3258 and AMD cut its prices on the APU stuff. 

 

B85 boards are not more expensive than FM2 boards. B85 boards allow up to 1.2V, which is enough for 4.2-4.4ghz (depending on luck) and so is the stock cooler.

 

More offtopic; what's up with the sig, exactly what are you suggesting there, that something to do with LTT's overclocking group or..?

[Priller]

B85 boards are not more expensive than FM2 boards. B85 boards allow up to 1.2V, which is enough for 4.2-4.4ghz (depending on luck) and so is the stock cooler.

 

More offtopic; what's up with the sig, exactly what are you suggesting there, that something to do with LTT's overclocking group or..?

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/62476-post-your-cinebench-r15r115-scores-and-new-2003-now-included/

 

I dont think LTT has an overclocking group but I am part of the Benching Team on overclockers.