9590 & SLI 780Ti

[LordMustangGT]

As much as everyone says it would "bottleneck", this thing runs fine with sli and AMD. Yeah, sure, you could pick up a little more performance going to intel, but I'm quite happy with mine still.

 

 

 

 

[zappian]

Cherry picked game.

 

Try arma 3 now.

 

Or better yet try dying light , starcraft 2 , any assasins creed game , far cry 4 .

[Lays]

Cherry picked game.

 

Try arma 3 now.

 

Or better yet try dying light , starcraft 2 , any assasins creed game , far cry 4 .

 

 

Arma 3 is optimized like crap & is mostly CPU based, it wouldn't really prove much in terms of GPU utilization.

I can almost passively cool my GPU's  whilst playing Arma 3 & Dayz @ 1440p, because it barely uses the GPU's at all, even with my 4790k @ 4.8

[Dabombinable]

You may be happy, but those CPUs draw a shitload of power for the performance they give. Which is one of the reasons I don't have an AMD CPU. Way too many high end parts needed for a stable rig.

[zappian]

Arma 3 is optimized like crap & is mostly CPU based, it wouldn't really prove much in terms of GPU utilization.

I can almost passively cool my GPU's  whilst playing Arma 3 & Dayz @ 1440p, because it barely uses the GPU's at all, even with my 4790k @ 4.8

 

I mentioned more games .

Chery picked game still.

 

[Deletive]

Can you do the same tests but with FPS and Frametimes. use the bf4 ingame one.

I mentioned more games .

Chery picked game still.

 

Pretty much this. Even with a single card I find the minimum unbearable. it was the same with my G3258 too in different games.

[Manny Calavera]

 

(btw 780ti sli ~ 980 sli )

http://gamegpu.ru/test-video-cards/igry-2014-goda-protiv-protsessorov-test-gpu.html

 

[zappian]

By the way minimum fps are bad honestly.

 

[KRImSIN]

Can it run Crysis?

[Mentalguy]

Cherry picked game.

 

Try arma 3 now.

 

Or better yet try dying light , starcraft 2 , any assasins creed game , far cry 4 .

so? maybe he is testing a game that he plays often?

 

 

If he doesn't play those games why would he test them?

 

 

 

 

Can it run Crysis?

 

Amd runs crysis pretty good, its one of the few games that are multithreaded optimized

[LordMustangGT]

I just happen to have black flag screenshots too. I don't play arma and I don't have crisis lol. It runs bf4 ultra, 5760x1080, 60-80avg and goes as high as 130 in parts. The minimums have improved so much is what I like best in all games. black flag avg 60fps now to instead of 30. BF4 was around 30-40fps avg before the sli.

[Dabombinable]

Amd runs crysis pretty good, its one of the few games that are multithreaded optimized

Which is why my E8500 gets creamed by my X5450 in Crysis 3-even though the Core 2 had significantly higher single threaded performance it just couldn't do enough at once.

[zappian]

 

so? maybe he is testing a game that he plays often?

 

 

If he doesn't play those games why would he test them?

 

Because one case doesnt make a argument.

 

Because he picked the best case scenario,

 

....

[Fate]

You're at a very high resolution (3x 1080p) and depending on what games you play, you probably don't need to upgrade. 

As the resolution goes up, CPU bottlenecks become less prevalent. 

[lani100]

I don't get it why anyone would choose this cpu but that's me

[LordMustangGT]

you can see both gpu maxed out there in this shot. AC isn't multi thread id say, but had no problem on 4 cores

[zappian]

You're at a very high resolution (3x 1080p) and depending on what games you play, you probably don't need to upgrade. 

As the resolution goes up, CPU bottlenecks become less prevalent. 

 

Very true.

 

Hadnt noticed this.

 

He also picked the best case scenario for AMD cpus.

 

This isnt definite proof of anything.

 

Its like saying a pentium k beats a 5960x on a game that only uses two cores/threads when its at 5 ghz -.-

 

Flawed logic.

[Manny Calavera]

Amd runs crysis pretty good, its one of the few games that are multithreaded optimized

 

It also depends on game. At 4.7Ghz, kinda even load on cores

it gets mutilated by high draw calls

4670 at stock is hanging in there

 

 

idk why even go amd if you buy two high end gpus with at least 1k worth...

 

just to have them bottlenecked in some games.

[SeanBond]

I don't get it why anyone would choose this cpu but that's me

There is no reason on earth, it's pricing is that of an i5 but there is almost no scenario a 9590 will perform better in games. Also you add to the motherboard and cooling expense, you are better off getting a 4790k with a cheapo motherboard and cooler and definitely blow it away in all scenarios. 

[Manny Calavera]

You're at a very high resolution (3x 1080p) and depending on what games you play, you probably don't need to upgrade. 

As the resolution goes up, CPU bottlenecks become less prevalent. 

thats because its lower fps

 

but bottleneck is still linear, so you still have lower minimum fps. but i do agree, wait for skylake i7-k to upgrade

[LordMustangGT]

I'm happy with what I got. I'm an AMD guy, said this many times before, I may end up going intel when skylake comes out, but for now, this is one hell of a machine. Planing a full waterloop next

[Majestic]

Sure thing mr. post-purchase rationalization. How are things in the land of cognitive dissonance?

 

I hear there's lots of echoing over there.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

Nuclear reactor 

Impractical 

Costly

 

But kinda cool :>

[Manny Calavera]

There is no reason on earth, it's pricing is that of an i5 but there is almost no scenario a 9590 will perform better in games. Also you add to the motherboard and cooling expense, you are better off getting a 4790k with a cheapo motherboard and cooler and definitely blow it away in all scenarios. 

 

there are scenarios that 9590 is better, because 9590 actually has better performance than stock i5  if we look at SOME benchmarks. life FPU performance is bad etc...

its just that its architecture is weird so it will fall behind in other games.

 

you dont even need i7 at 4.4, look at benchamrks i posted, if you get xeon 1231v3 you are set ! 250 bucks.

(look at i7 4770k @ stock(3.5ghz while 1231v3 is 3.4ghz), allways on top )

 

And go look at cinebench LTT results. Xeon has pretty crap result in fact it has worse result than 8350 clocked at 4.7Ghz. 

Yet still beats any fx in games. And overclocked i5 in games that arent single threaded intensive.

 

viakruzis AMD FX9590 4.7ghz 75

3 ProKoN Intel Core I5 4690K 4.804ghz 736 Pvt.

8Ball AMD FX8350 4.6ghz 736

rainbrodash666 AMD FX9590 5.016ghz 736

das affe Intel Xeon E3 1231 V3 3.6ghz 733

Ragin Asian AMD FX8320 4.62ghz 732

SteveGrabowski Intel Xeon E3 1231 V3 3.6ghz 731

harrynowl Intel Core I5 4690K 4.8ghz 730

iSuzak AMD FX8320 4.715ghz 730

Vrbas AMD FX8320 4.615ghz 729

 

 

 

 

I'm happy with what I got. I'm an AMD guy, said this many times before, I may end up going intel when skylake comes out, but for now, this is one hell of a machine. Planing a full waterloop next

oh, wait, you could just wait for zen because you allready have beastly pc.

so you support AMD, we hate intel anyway.

 

its just that right now, AMD is not viable solution for gaming.

 

[QueenDemetria]

I mentioned more games .

Chery picked game still.

 

The only thing that chart proves is that Bioshock Infinite should never be used for benchmarking. The i3 4330 beats the i3 4360 despite being a slower chip(only by 200Mhz, but still. I would expect them be the same or the 4360 showing a slight edge). Also, the i3 beats the i5's,which have 2 more cores and more Ghz, and before you say that don't mean anything, they do since they all use pretty much the same architecture. I' not really defending AMD since they still get outperformed, but I cant say that the test used was accurate(or any game for that matter).