What is the highest grade GPU that a FX-8350 will not bottleneck?

[Luxpin_]

I have a 8350 and I need to know what the highest possibility I can upgrade before it will bottleneck

[Swndlr]

Well depending on your budget, it may just be worth it in the long run to chuck the FX8 and get a new CPU and GPU.

[Clyne]

280X/770

You will see some "bottlenecks" but some of the time it "should" be okay.

Provided if the 8350 is OC'd.

[Agazed]

Probably a 770 or a 960 would be the max I would use with that card.

[EMENCII]

[byalexandr]

With a really f*cking high OC you can (in most cases) get away with a GTX 970/R9 390. Otherwise a GTX 960/R9 380 is the most you can get.

[Clyne]

With a really f*cking high OC you can (in most cases) get away with a GTX 970/R9 390. Otherwise a GTX 960/R9 380 is the most you can get.

What's the point of a high OC when it would cost more money to buy parts to overclock the 8350 at a high clock speed(5GHZ) than buying a Z97+4690K alone.......

[Agazed]

 

He tests with an Intel chip.

 

You have no fucking clue how horrible AMD cards are at bottlenecking. 

[byalexandr]

What's the point of a high OC when it would cost more money to buy parts to overclock the 8350 at a high clock speed(5GHZ) than buying a Z97+4690K alone.......

It was his question, I was answering. I wouldn't recommend it, I didn't say I would, I'm just saying you could get away with it if you OC really high.

 

Also, 'I have an 8350' is what he said. For the price of a Hyper 212 EVO he can OC pretty high.

[Valkyrie Lenneth]

With a really f*cking high OC you can (in most cases) get away with a GTX 970/R9 390. Otherwise a GTX 960/R9 380 is the most you can get.

i had a 8350 5ghz and it was bottlenecking me in every game where the cpu gets used even a little huge fps drops ect and gpu usage drops ( aka bottlenecking the gpu ) on my 970 to gpu usage even 30-40%*

 

GAMING = ALL SINGLETHREAD PERFORMANCE

 

if u do nothing but gaming go for intel

 

if u do nothing but browse web and some adobe stuff go amd if u need budget ( intel still better coz better in general and lower watts )

[byalexandr]

i had a 8350 5ghz and it was bottlenecking me in every game where the cpu gets used even a little huge fps drops ect and gpu usage drops ( aka bottlenecking the gpu ) on my 970 to gpu usage even 30-40%*

Yeesh, suppose I was wrong. My FX 6300 @4.2GHz did fine with a GTX 760, I suppose that was the highest it could go.

[Valkyrie Lenneth]

Yeesh, suppose I was wrong. My FX 6300 @4.2GHz did fine with a GTX 760, I suppose that was the highest it could go.

760 is pretty damn weak compared to a 970,   as single thread performance of a 6300 is like equal to a 8350, 760 would be the max for a 8350 aswell then ( if u really didnt bottleneck wich i doubt coz i havent got anything else than bottleneck from amd, in like all cpu games... only games like dirt and bf ran fine coz their not rly cpu games )

 

going from amd to intel gave me like double/triple the minfps in most games and aswell average fps went from like 80 in bf4 to like 110 with intel ( that was in multiplayer btw ), single player would be a smaller difference coz less cpu intensive ( tho bf4 aint really intensive on the cpu at all ;x , sure it uses cores but cpu intensive... nah that goes all to the mmos like ffxiv and skyrim heavily modded... where my 4690k even drops my gpu usage on stock and requires atleast a 4ghz oc to maintain 99% gpu usage )

[byalexandr]

760 is pretty damn weak compared to a 970,   as single thread performance of a 6300 is like equal to a 8350, 760 would be the max for a 8350 aswell then ( if u really didnt bottleneck wich i doubt coz i havent got anything else than bottleneck from amd, in like all cpu games... only games like dirt and bf ran fine coz their not rly cpu games )

 

going from amd to intel gave me like double/triple the minfps in most games and aswell average fps went from like 80 in bf4 to like 110 with intel

I know but the CPU wasn't even hitting 100% while the GPU was hustlin' at 100%+ (it was pretty heavily OCed).

[Valkyrie Lenneth]

I know but the CPU wasn't even hitting 100% while the GPU was hustlin' at 100%+ (it was pretty heavily OCed).

thats where everyone gets it wrong, CPU UTILIZATION = NOT A SIGN OF BOTTLENECK AND IT NEVER WILL BE... a sign of a real bottleneck is where ur cpu usage is only 30% and ur fps is dropping hugely and GPU USAGE goes from 99% to like 40-50% or so... at that point u have a huge bottleneck ( same scenario could be at cpu usage 10% or 90% )... utilization doesnt really matter coz its all singlethread performance that causes bottlenecks

 

aswell gpu usage caps on 99%

[xTrekStorex]

R9 280X and thats already getting capped there. I guess GTX770. My 290s are getting bottlenecked really hard. load jumps between 94 and 3% and the 2nd one is getting barely used (70% load at max and that is rare already).

[byalexandr]

thats where everyone gets it wrong, CPU UTILIZATION = NOT A SIGN OF BOTTLENECK AND IT NEVER WILL BE... a sign of a real bottleneck is where ur cpu usage is only 30% and ur fps is dropping hugely and GPU USAGE goes from 99% to like 40-50% or so... at that point u have a huge bottleneck ( same scenario could be at cpu usage 10% or 90% )... utilization doesnt really matter coz its all singlethread performance that causes bottlenecks

 

aswell gpu usage caps on 99%

But wait, CPU usage at 100% means the CPU is working hard, but if at the same time the GPU is at 40 or 50% or whatever, doesn't that mean the GPU is slowing down for the CPU to keep up, meaning a bottleneck? I'm a little confused at what you're trying to say here.

[Valkyrie Lenneth]

But wait, CPU usage at 100% means the CPU is working hard, but if at the same time the GPU is at 40 or 50% or whatever, doesn't that mean the GPU is slowing down for the CPU to keep up, meaning a bottleneck? I'm a little confused at what you're trying to say here.

the bottleneck is where the cpu cannot keep up with the gpu anymore causing gpu usage drops, wether that is at 10% load or 100% load in 100% load it means its a multithreaded bottleneck(and it cant even keep up with all the cores) and anything else like 70%  30% or 10%   means its a singlethreaded bottleneck ( if ofc the gpu usage drops )

[xTrekStorex]

But wait, CPU usage at 100% means the CPU is working hard, but if at the same time the GPU is at 40 or 50% or whatever, doesn't that mean the GPU is slowing down for the CPU to keep up, meaning a bottleneck? I'm a little confused at what you're trying to say here.

not really. the CPU feeds the GPU with tasks to calculate. that doesnt create a lot of load on ther CPU. it rather depends on the speed of the CPU transfering it's tasks to the GPU so cache, hypertransport (or quickpath interconnect on Intel side), ipc and the internal pipeline are factors here. not the clockspeed. your CPU can even be 1% load and still bottleneck your GPU.

[byalexandr]

the bottleneck is where the cpu cannot keep up with the gpu anymore causing gpu usage drops, wether that is at 10% load or 100% load in 100% load it means its a multithreaded bottleneck(and it cant even keep up with all the cores) and anything else like 70%  30% or 10%   means its a singlethreaded bottleneck ( if ofc the gpu usage drops )

Yes, GPU usage drops but CPU remains pinned at 100% because it's doing all it can to keep up but it's not fast enough, so the GPU slows down.

[itachipirate]

GTX 960/R9 280(x)/R9 380(x)

[byalexandr]

not really. the CPU feeds the GPU with tasks to calculate. that doesnt create a lot of load on ther CPU. it rather depends on the speed of the CPU transfering it's tasks to the GPU so cache, hypertransport (or quickpath interconnect on Intel side), ipc and the internal pipeline are factors here. not the clockspeed. your CPU can even be 1% load and still bottleneck your GPU.

Yes, the CPU is too slow to keep feeding the GPU tasks, so the GPU slows down and waits for the CPU to give it more tasks, so a bottleneck would look something like CPU at 100%, GPU at 60% or whatever else.

[Rynell]

I'm a tad bit lost on how the FX-8350 would bottleneck a GTX 970, lol. 

[Clyne]

It was his question, I was answering. I wouldn't recommend it, I didn't say I would, I'm just saying you could get away with it if you OC really high.

 

Also, 'I have an 8350' is what he said. For the price of a Hyper 212 EVO he can OC pretty high.

212 Evo OC on a 8350?

You bet.

For all we know, he could have some random 970 board with shitty mosfets and vrms that couldn't handle a OC well.

Just to give a comparison.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

 

CPU Cooler: Corsair H100i GTX 70.7 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler  ($111.99 @ Amazon) 

Motherboard: Asus M5A99FX PRO R2.0 ATX AM3+ Motherboard  ($108.99 @ SuperBiiz) 

Total: $220.98

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-08-07 04:14 EDT-0400

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

 

CPU: Intel Core i5-4690K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor  ($224.99 @ SuperBiiz) 

Motherboard: Asus Z87-Pro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard  ($86.98 @ Newegg) 

Total: $311.97

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-08-07 04:16 EDT-0400

A near 80-100 dollar difference for better performance.....and luck with silicon lottery may not always happen.

Nowadays 8350s are binned lower as AMD took the higher binned "8350" and OC'd them to 5GHZ and renamed to a 9590.

[byalexandr]

 

212 Evo OC on a 8350?

You bet.

For all we know, he could have some random 970 board with shitty mosfets and vrms that couldn't handle a OC well.

Just to give a comparison.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

 

CPU Cooler: Corsair H100i GTX 70.7 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler  ($111.99 @ Amazon) 

Motherboard: Asus M5A99FX PRO R2.0 ATX AM3+ Motherboard  ($108.99 @ SuperBiiz) 

Total: $220.98

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-08-07 04:14 EDT-0400

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

 

CPU: Intel Core i5-4690K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor  ($224.99 @ SuperBiiz) 

Motherboard: Asus Z87-Pro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard  ($86.98 @ Newegg) 

Total: $311.97

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-08-07 04:16 EDT-0400

A near 80-100 dollar difference for better performance.....and luck with silicon lottery may not always happen.

Nowadays 8350s are binned lower as AMD took the higher binned "8350" and OC'd them to 5GHZ and renamed to a 9590.

 

970 board with shitty mosfets? That was me like a week ago, and I had a 4.2GHz OC on my FX 6300 (SUPER stable, could've gone farther) with a Seidon 120V (comparable to the Hyper 212 EVO) and a 970M Pro3 from AsRock. That board had 4+1 VRMs on it, and it ran like a charm, no issues. I am totally agreeing you though, OP should consider selling his board and FX 8350 for an i5 and a cheap board.

[Clyne]

970 board with shitty mosfets? That was me like a week ago, and I had a 4.2GHz OC on my FX 6300 (SUPER stable, could've gone farther) with a Seidon 120V (comparable to the Hyper 212 EVO) and a 970M Pro3 from AsRock. That board had 4+1 VRMs on it, and it ran like a charm, no issues. I am totally agreeing you though, OP should consider selling his board and FX 8350 for an i5 and a cheap board.