Will my PS handle new GPU?

[CandyCake]

Hi all, last time I asked if new GPU, "MSi R9 390" would have enough power to run on my PC. Now I have to ask: Will "MSi R9 390X" work with my PC? I know they are only a bit different, but what about the power consumption? I did some budget savings and I can afford 390X now, but I don't consider to buy any Nvidia card.

My PC specs:
- MSI 970 gaming motherboard
- CPU AMD FX-8350
- 8GB RAM 1866Mhz DDR3 Kingston HyperX
- DVD Player
- HDD WD Green WD10EZRX 1.0TB
- 3 x 15cm PC case fans
- Cooler: Asus Silent Knight AL
- Power Supply : TACENS RADIX VI 750 (Total 750W)

[Castdeath97]

Your CPU will bottleneck the R9 390X so better get the r9 390 or even a R9 380.

[vK 3 1 RON]

I'm lost, are you asking for compatibility? Yes, it's fine. But as the previous poster said, your CPU may bottleneck the GPU. So be careful

[Morgan MLGman]

That Power Supply might not be good enough. It's low quality, I wouldn't recommend using it.
 

 

Your CPU will bottleneck the R9 390X so better get the r9 390 or even a R9 380.

Meh, if he overclocks the 8350 it's fine. I have R9 290X with 8350@4,5 and I can overclock it beyond stock R9 390X clocks so it's faster and there's no bottleneck in games (new, AAA titles obviously)

[CandyCake]

That Power Supply might not be good enough. It's low quality, I wouldn't recommend using it.

 

 

Meh, if he overclocks the 8350 it's fine. I have R9 290X with 8350@4,5 and I can overclock it beyond stock R9 390X clocks so it's faster and there's no bottleneck in games (new, AAA titles obviously)

Soooo, PS will handle 390 but not 390X? How about EVEGA GTX970?

[Castdeath97]

Soooo, PS will handle 390 but not 390X? How about EVEGA GTX970?

It's your CPU not your PS, AMD CPUs don't have a great single core IPC. It will work with the R9 390X, but won't as fast as it could as the CPU single core performance is too weak.

 

That Power Supply might not be good enough. It's low quality, I wouldn't recommend using it.

 

 

Meh, if he overclocks the 8350 it's fine. I have R9 290X with 8350@4,5 and I can overclock it beyond stock R9 390X clocks so it's faster and there's no bottleneck in games (new, AAA titles obviously)

 

In games like GTA 5 and the Witcher 3 they will be a bottleneck from the CPU.

[Morgan MLGman]

Soooo, PS will handle 390 but not 390X? How about EVEGA GTX970?

I mean the wattage is enough, but the PSU itself is low quality and might damage your components if it breaks. You just need to change it cause you don't want it near a high-end graphics card.

[Morgan MLGman]

In games like GTA 5 and the Witcher 3 they will be a bottleneck from the CPU.

On the contrary, those games have one of the best multithreaded utilization. My R9 290X with 1150mhz core runs @100% all the time when playing The Witcher 3.

[Castdeath97]

On the contrary, those games have one of the best multithreaded utilization. My R9 290X with 1150mhz core runs @100% all the time when playing The Witcher 3.

They make a better showing than other games, but still beaten by their intel counterparts sadly

 

https://youtu.be/Rutk9ErhKG4?t=2m15s

[Morgan MLGman]

They make a better showing than other games, but still beaten by their intel counterparts sadly

 

https://youtu.be/Rutk9ErhKG4?t=2m15s

There are moments in Novigrad where the 8350 beats the 4690k cause it's so CPU heavy. Overall 4 FPS average difference for the price difference is definitely worth it.

Either way, while you can gain some frames per second when switching to Intel, it's usually not worth the money if you already have the 8350.

JayzTwoCents went from FX-8350 @4,8 to i7-3770k @4,8 and said that it was his worst money spent on an upgrade cause there's barely any noticeable difference, in some cases there's none besides benchmarks which don't matter.

People underestimate these CPUs, they are perfectly capable of gaming and don't bottleneck GPUs up to GTX 980 level in a majority of 2013+ AAA titles , some of Intel bias, some of misinformation, and some are just too lazy to check it for real.

[legoset0]

that power supply is probably not very good and most likely not actually 750 watts. it might work but would be best to upgrade to a decent psu

 

looked it up and isn't as bad as I thought but not great

Edited December 13, 2015 by legoset0

[CandyCake]

So I guess GPU will be fine, just to replace PS. I will not OC CPU or GPU so for now PS should be fine no matter how bad it is.

[Castdeath97]

So I guess GPU will be fine, just to replace PS. I will not OC CPU or GPU so for now PS should be fine no matter how bad it is.

Your PS seems sketchy so you never know, might break all your components or it may just work, it's a gamble.

 

There are moments in Novigrad where the 8350 beats the 4690k cause it's so CPU heavy. Overall 4 FPS average difference for the price difference is definitely worth it.

Either way, while you can gain some frames per second when switching to Intel, it's usually not worth the money if you already have the 8350.

JayzTwoCents went from FX-8350 @4,8 to i7-3770k @4,8 and said that it was his worst money spent on an upgrade cause there's barely any noticeable difference, in some cases there's none besides benchmarks which don't matter.

People underestimate these CPUs, they are perfectly capable of gaming and don't bottleneck GPUs up to GTX 980 level in a majority of 2013+ AAA titles , some of Intel bias, some of misinformation, and some are just too lazy to check it for real.

 

I guess you are right with this one. But the R9 390 should offer better performance per dollar.

[Morgan MLGman]

Your PS seems sketchy so you never know, might break all your components or it may just work, it's a gamble.

 

 

I guess you are right with this one. But the R9 390 should offer better performance per dollar.

Yeah. In fact the R9 200 series offers the best value for money. He might even get R9 290X for less or the same price than R9 390, and the 290X is faster... If he can afford a R9 390X, he might as well just grab a 290X and buy a better power supply, amirite? I got my for less than a 390/970 price and it's faster than a 970 (I owned one)

[CandyCake]

Yeah. In fact the R9 200 series offers the best value for money. He might even get R9 290X for less or the same price than R9 390, and the 290X is faster... If he can afford a R9 390X, he might as well just grab a 290X and buy a better power supply, amirite? I got my for less than a 390/970 price and it's faster than a 970 (I owned one)

I want to buy as great GPU as possible because I want to keep it for the next 4-5 years, so imma just wait to buy r9 390 to be available in my shop or r9 390X right away, and the next thing I will replace will be PS.

[Morgan MLGman]

I want to buy as great GPU as possible because I want to keep it for the next 4-5 years, so imma just wait to buy r9 390 to be available in my shop or r9 390X right away, and the next thing I will replace will be PS.

Any R9 290X's available?

[CandyCake]

Any R9 290X's available?

Yes, but 4gb of Vram will be enough for the next years? At this speed of improving techology im afraid it will not be enaugh

[CandyCake]

If I would have to give up on r9 390 i would rather buy GTX 970 than r9 290X because it needs less power

[Morgan MLGman]

Yes, but 4gb of Vram will be enough for the next years? At this speed of improving techology im afraid it will not be enaugh

It should be. For 1080p it should be sufficient. GTX 980 has 4GB for instance and nobody complains.

 

 

If I would have to give up on r9 390 i would rather buy GTX 970 than r9 290X because it needs less power

R9 290X is faster than a GTX 970, I had both and I can tell you that first-hand. In Tomb Raider benchmark for example there's 30 FPS average difference. Max FPS of a GTX 970 is lower than average FPS of R9 290X.