which gives more fps, cpu or gpu?

[bexmxe]

I wonder which is the one who work for more fps... if gpu gives more fps, that means I will go for a cheap cpu?

 

will FX-4100 bottleneck R7-265?

[mr.skyrim_pc]

GPU effects fps more.

[mlbguy4life]

gpu, but you need a " decent cpu " as well

[Lord Pantaloons]

The GPU will but that is assuming you have a CPU with acceptable performance.

[typographie]

I wonder which is the one who work for more fps... if gpu gives more fps, that means I will go for a cheap cpu?

 

will FX-4100 bottleneck R7-265?

 

Strictly speaking, FPS comes only from the video card. But a CPU may limit the framerate if it's slow enough and you're playing a game that has a heavy CPU workload. I would say that in general, it's better to err on the side of an overpowered GPU. Your CPU only needs to be fast enough to allow for your target framerate, commonly 60 FPS, in the games you play.

 

You can't really make generalizations about whether a CPU or GPU would be a bigger performance gain without specifying the game.

[sherwind2010]

I did a post awhile back... on a i3 CPU & one R9 280X & a GTX 760

 

With the 2600K CPU, Top is R9 280X Crossfire, Mid is the GTX 760, Low is the GTX 550 Ti

 

 

Now with the i3 4330 CPU! GTX 760 & the R9 280X non-CF  . Drum roll... HA, just kidding.

 

 

 

 

Green Team & Red Team... Blue is the super cool Intel HD Graphics 4600

 

 

 

....

 

For some reason Crossfire is not working, worked on the 2600K CPU. GPUz says Crossfire enabled. Yes, Crossfire is enabled in Catalyst Control Center. I tried installing drivers with one card, then 2 cards with no CF bridge & with CF bridge. Both cards are working independently like they don't want anything to do with each other.

[Humbug]

In General a gamer should spend more money on GPU. It's What does the rendering, But the CPU needs to be just fast enough to feed the GPU.

[sherwind2010]

In General a gamer should spend more money on GPU. It's What does the rendering, But the CPU needs to be just fast enough to feed the GPU.

 

That i3 4330 CPU wasn't maxing out. 60%~70% tops. Why spent $300 when a $109 CPU would do the same. Talking the newer i3-4150 from CA-NCIX

[LabRat]

I wonder which is the one who work for more fps... if gpu gives more fps, that means I will go for a cheap cpu?

 

will FX-4100 bottleneck R7-265?

they will work pretty good together...( cpu or gpu bottleneck") depends on the game, game settings and monitor resolution... I would say you'd be more cpu dependant mostly at higher settings.

[SteveGrabowski]

For higher budgets it's better to spend significantly more on the GPU than the CPU. For instance, a $330 GTX 970 and a $200 i5-4590 is a way better combination for gaming than is a $330 i7-4790k and a $200 R9 285. Of course if you're not on a budget then a $330 i7-4790k with a $330 GTX 970 is an incredible combination.

 

At $450 I'd defintely go i5-4440 for $170 and R9 290 for $270.

 

For a midrange budget of $400 or so I think I'd go i5-4590 at $200 and R9 285 at $200 over say, i3-4160 for $120 and R9 290 for $270 though. You could certainly make a case for the second, but I'd prefer the more balanced split here.

 

 

For a lower end budget you definitely don't want to cheap out on the CPU, since a decent CPU should last you 3+ years. So if your budget is $250 best to spend $120 on an i3-4160 and then $130 on an R9 270. Any less than $250 for CPU+GPU and you should probably just buy a PS4 instead.

[WoodenMarker]

Depends on what you're doing. Somethings are more cpu bound and others by the gpu.

The 265 pairs well with the fx4100 and you should be fine.

[7850OC]

I wonder which is the one who work for more fps... if gpu gives more fps, that means I will go for a cheap cpu?

 

will FX-4100 bottleneck R7-265?

yes, gpu is the king  (cpu are just backups for the gpu)

 

is an FX 6300 + R9 270 out of your range friend ? :rolleyes: (the 6300 is a great cpu for any gpu)

 

and welcome to the best place in the world  :lol:

[IMPERIUS]

Mostly the gpu, but it depends on the game. You also need a good cpu. E.g. bf4, you need a good gpu AND a good cpu for keeping track of all the 64 players at once

[Najuno]

yes, gpu is the king  (cpu are just backups for the gpu)

 

is an FX 6300 + R9 270 out of your range friend ? :rolleyes: (the 6300 is a great cpu for any gpu)

 

and welcome to the best place in the world  :lol:

 

Since when is a CPU a 'backup' for a GPU?

 

You either have a CPU that is powerful enough for all required processing with a strong enough single and multicore or thread performance to NOT bottleneck the GPU or you will create heavy bottlenecks.

 

The combo with the FX4100 + 265 is fine because that is hardware out of the same segment.

 

Pair that FX6300 with a R9 290 or a GTX 980 and you create bottlenecks that it´s not even funny anymore.

[i_build_nanosuits]

I wonder which is the one who work for more fps... if gpu gives more fps, that means I will go for a cheap cpu?

 

will FX-4100 bottleneck R7-265?

That's not how this works, build a balanced build, and yes an FX-4100 and R7 265 are a good match.

[applesuxD]

gpu, but you need a " decent cpu " as well

Yes you will need a decent CPU to run the games smoothly

[applesuxD]

I wonder which is the one who work for more fps... if gpu gives more fps, that means I will go for a cheap cpu?

will FX-4100 bottleneck R7-265?

It wont

[GuruMeditationError]

The graphics card is the most important part of a gaming PC.

 

Having said that you need a powerful enough processor and enough RAM (and fast enough RAM) to support the graphics card.

 

If all you're building it for is gaming and nothing else then if you get processor and RAM that only just has enough overhead to support the graphics card then you're looking at a build that's only going to last you for the useful (gaming) life of the graphics card. That kind of upgrade path can cost an absolute fortune over time.

 

If money is no object the ideal approach would be to start with the image you want to output and then work backwards...

 

...e.g. what game are you trying to render and at what resolution do you want to run at? do you want g-synch, do you want something with stereoscopic 3D capabilities, do you want multi-monitor support. Do you want something that'll drive Occulus efficiently etc.

 

From there look at what graphics card best does the job. Having determined that, look at what processor, RAM & motherboard you'll need to optimally support that graphics card.

 

This is definitely not the most cost-effective approach, basically because, as I wrote above, if all you want it for is gaming and absolutely nothing else besides, it'll only be useful for the useful (gaming) life of the graphics card and the newer games are capable of utilising almost anything you can throw at them in terms of graphical processing hardware, so you could end up spending thousands just to have a few more plants in your video game etc. but it should give you a reference point to start from.

 

Personally I've got tons of overhead. More overhead than I can currently afford to fill given the price of today's top flight graphics cards (check out my P.C. spec. in my sig. as an example), but the cost of filling that overhead will come down over time. Had I taken the money out of my processor, RAM and motherboard and put all of my money into a super-expensive graphics card I'd already be looking at a P.C. that was getting towards the peak of its capabilities, and updating it all and buying a new super expensive graphics card within a year or so is just not within my budget. 

[Majestic]

yes, gpu is the king  (cpu are just backups for the gpu)

 

is an FX 6300 + R9 270 out of your range friend ? :rolleyes: (the 6300 is a great cpu for any gpu)

 

and welcome to the best place in the world  :lol:

 

You have no idea what you're talking about, and as such you're not doing anyone a service by providing the wrong information.

The CPU isn't a "backup", and the FX6300 isn't a good CPU for "any" GPU.

[7850OC]

You have no idea what you're talking about, and as such you're not doing anyone a service by providing the wrong information.

The CPU isn't a "backup", and the FX6300 isn't a good CPU for "any" GPU.

and you are not a intel fanboy :lol: is it ? 

 

FX 6300 is a great cpu friend

 

and if you want denied that

 

 

you have no idea what you're talking about

[Najuno]

and you are not a intel fanboy :lol: is it ? 

 

FX 6300 is a great cpu friend

 

and if you want denied that

 

 

you have no idea what you're talking about

And if you can show me 1 single application where this CPU is of any good use other than cheap ass budget gaming PCs I will be tempted not to call you an AMD fanboy .

 

Lately in the HoF of 3D Mark was... oh wait... there´s nobody with an FX CPU...

[Majestic]

and you are not a intel fanboy is it ? 

 

And you're just projecting right now. You said "any" GPU, it's not my fault your choice of words is poor. You're basically saying a Titan-Z will not get bottlenecked by a FX-6300, which is ludicrous.

[gilang01]

if you're playing massive online games like Planetside 2, then yes,your  CPU will give you more FPS than your GPU.

 

 

And if you can show me 1 single application where this CPU is of any good use other than cheap ass budget gaming PCs I will be tempted not to call you an AMD fanboy .

 

Lately in the HoF of 3D Mark was... oh wait... there´s nobody with an FX CPU...

 AMD makes good budget CPUs, but they are now getting crushed by the likes of i3 4150 (ever since that cpu came out, I can't recommend the 6300 to anyone)

 

people need to face the fact hat AMD is years behind in high performance CPUs. Sad really

[7850OC]

And you're just projecting right now. You said "any" GPU, it's not my fault your choice of words is poor. 

You're basically saying a Titan-Z will not get bottlenecked by a FX-6300,

which is ludicrous.

 

i am not saying that x cpu will bottleneck x card (check it)

 

i am saing that the 6300 is a great cpu (this is not the same as you can see)

 

and yes, a 6300 can run a Titan and any card (see how i don't use the word "bottleneck" ?) 

 

one more time, is a great cpu (deal with that)

 

and yes  :lol: i am 100% AMD fanboy

 

 

read what i say friend, and not put words in my mouth

[Majestic]

text

 

Is there a reason you obnoxiously write everything on a new scentence with an extra spacing between it? The fact you leave out bottlenecking only perpetuates/compounds my original remark on you; the fact you provide false/incomplete information.

The FX-6300 is something you use with a R9-270(x)/GTX-760, nothing more. It's not a "great" CPU for just about every GPU.

 

I am reading what you're saying, I don't think you realise just how biased your own words are though.