Selecting the best value components

[RetroPedro]

Hi guys, I just had a few general questions about a system that I'm hoping to put together after finals.  I'm pretty much sold on the GTX 970 being the best value card in my price range, but how can I tell which is the cheapest possible gaming CPU that won't cause a bottleneck?  My heart was set on the 4790k, but a lot of sites are recommending the i5-6500, which is quite a lot cheaper.  Is there a way to check different hypothetical system configs in terms of benchmarks?  Like a giant database or something?

[HPWebcamAble]

Neither of those CPUs will bottleneck the 970. Although I would recommend the 390 unless you need shadowplay or CUDA.

 

The CPU you go for depends on what you'll be using the rig for. What are your plans?

[RetroPedro]

Well, I'm keen to game on it to whatever level the 970 can handle... I mean, it's not going to be top of the range but it should do the trick in most cases, non?  So is there no point in getting the 4790k over the 6500?  I mean, I'll be doing occasional things that would benefit from additional cores, like video encoding or archiving and things, but I mainly want to be able to best games possible for my dolla.

 

Did you mean the R9 390?  Because unless I'm using GPUbenchmark wrong, I think the GTX 970 wins out - I've attached the comparison but may have the wrong 390.

 

[Bajantechnician]

3 minutes ago, RetroPedro said:

Well, I'm keen to game on it to whatever level the 970 can handle... I mean, it's not going to be top of the range but it should do the trick in most cases, non?  So is there no point in getting the 4790k over the 6500?  I mean, I'll be doing occasional things that would benefit from additional cores, like video encoding or archiving and things, but I mainly want to be able to best games possible for my dolla.

 

Did you mean the R9 390?  Because unless I'm using GPUbenchmark wrong, I think the GTX 970 wins out - I've attached the comparison but may have the wrong 390.

 

4770k would me fore than enough as well

[HPWebcamAble]

7 minutes ago, RetroPedro said:

Well, I'm keen to game on it to whatever level the 970 can handle... I mean, it's not going to be top of the range but it should do the trick in most cases, non?  So is there no point in getting the 4790k over the 6500?  I mean, I'll be doing occasional things that would benefit from additional cores, like video encoding or archiving and things, but I mainly want to be able to best games possible for my dolla.

 

Did you mean the R9 390?  Because unless I'm using GPUbenchmark wrong, I think the GTX 970 wins out - I've attached the comparison but may have the wrong 390.

Usually, the 390 wins, though not by much. For some reason, the 390 in that benchmark is clocked lower than usual.

This is the 390 I'd get, it has a core clock of only 10 MHz below the 970

It's the 8 gigs of VRAM that really makes it the winner.

 

If you can afford it, you won't gain or lose performance in most games by buying a 4790k over the 6500, but you'd get a nice boost in video editing/encoding or streaming.

[crystal6tak]

17 minutes ago, RetroPedro said:

snip*

I don't know what G3D Mark Rating is, but I can tell you that is WAY off. A 970 is not 26% faster than the 390/290.

 

Most recent performance summary I can find:

They basically perform the same. With the 390 pulling ahead at higher resolution probably due to more VRAM (3.5 vs 8)

 

That's not considering the current crazy DX12 fiasco which all points to AMD's GCN architecture stomping all over Maxwell architecture. (What happens in the future remains to be seen)

 

So, like what HPWebcamAble said, go with the 390.

 

As for the CPU.

4790K, quad core with hyperthreading, 4 Ghz base, 4.4 Ghz boost, unlocked for overclocking.

6500, quad core without hyperthreading, 3.2 Ghz base, 3.6 Ghz boost, no overclocking.

 

Even though clock for clock, skylake is ~10% faster than haswell, the 4790K will beat the 6500 in both games and general software. The gap widens when you overclock the 4790K which generally goes to around 4.7Ghz.

 

Although if you want to think about the future, 6700K will beat the 4790K.

 

Hope this helps!

[SteveGrabowski0]

Right now I'd opt for an i5-6600k and an R9 390 for best price to performance at 1080p. Skylake is a nice bump up from Haswell in IPC and you can use faster DDR4 RAM. And the 390 seems to be separating itself from the 970 lately.

[SteveGrabowski0]

But since you're building in the summer, just wait for AMD and Nvidia to release their new GPUs and jump on whichever one does better in the types of games you like. It's starting to look like late May to early June is when to expect the new cards, and in the past the kind of node shrinks being done this generation have corresponded to very large gains in performance. So if you're buying in a couple of months there is no reason not to wait for the new stuff instead of overpaying for a card at the tail end of its generation.

[Bajantechnician]

17 hours ago, Bajantechnician said:

4770k would me fore than enough as well

There's no hyperthreading. 

I'd personally pay the $50 for hyperthreadibg

[RetroPedro]

Thanks for all the advice guys!  Yeah I'm not sure why the 290/390 fares so differently to the 970 in those benchmarks.  3D mark is PassMark's own benchmark system, but it's been around for ages so maybe doesn't take full advantage of what the 390 can do?

 

It probably makes more sense to hold fire with the new stuff coming out so soon, so I guess I'll do that.  At the very least, I guess it'll make the 4790k and 390 cheaper!