Which processor to go with a 280x?

[Jamie_19]

Im buying a 280x for my gaming PC, and was wondering what processor would go well with this card. I dont want any "bottlenecks" (i hate that word.)

basically i dont want to be boundby my CPU. Im also on a budet of about 200-300 dollars (CAN) for the processor.

 

thanks if you can help me out!

[miyabwah]

4670k or 4570S

[defunkt]

8350.

[Piggy]

if you're willing to go 30 bucks over your 300 dollar budget get a 4770k

[Ferguson]

I have ordered a i5 4670k and plan to get a 280x good luck finding a 280x in stock some orders in the UK will take till January :[ plus a 8350 is pretty darn good if you want the build cost to be cheaper 

[Jack.EXE]

8350

[chaozbandit]

FX8320 or the 4670K. Remember to take into account the cost of the motherboards and any supporting hardware.

[WoodenMarker]

What about the mobo? Why just the cpu?

If you're planning a new build, plan it as a whole and not part by part.

[Jamie_19]

What about the mobo? Why just the cpu?

If you're planning a new build, plan it as a whole and not part by part.

oh of course im getting a new motherboard, its just not really relevant to the question im asking! Im buying a new mobo, cpu, gpu, and psu. Sticking with the same case and ram.

[Recon-UK]

4670k for best all round performance.

 

8320 for a budget build.

 

 

Here is a video i did on best for the money stuff.

 

I am sure you can work around this.

[WoodenMarker]

oh of course im getting a new motherboard, its just not really relevant to the question im asking! Im buying a new mobo, cpu, gpu, and psu. Sticking with the same case and ram.

Trust me, it's relevant considering the cpu doesn't work on it's own and works with other parts.

I recommend you head over the New Builds and Planning section to plan the build as a whole working from a total budget. 

 

Do read this before posting: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/3061-build-plan-thread-recommendations-please-read-before-posting/

[CoolBeans]

8320/8350/4670k

[Jamie_19]

Trust me, it's relevant considering the cpu doesn't work on it's own and works with other parts.

I recommend you head over the New Builds and Planning section to plan the build as a whole working from a total budget. 

 

Do read this before posting: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/3061-build-plan-thread-recommendations-please-read-before-posting/

oh thanks! Im new here, so i havent heard of this yet.

Thanks for pointing it out

[TimGOAT]

4670k

[PC_Master99]

4770k you will get Hyper threading and its reasonably priced, but if you want to save a bit of money you could go AMD but their version of hyper-threading absolutely sucks

[WoodenMarker]

4770k you will get Hyper threading and its reasonably priced, but if you want to save a bit of money you could go AMD but their version of hyper-threading absolutely sucks

AMD doesn't use hyperthreading. What they do is much better than Intel's HT...

[Recon-UK]

AMD doesn't use hyperthreading. What they do is much better than Intel's HT...

It is until you talk about latency.

[Guest]

Im buying a 280x for my gaming PC, and was wondering what processor would go well with this card. I dont want any "bottlenecks" (i hate that word.)

basically i dont want to be boundby my CPU. Im also on a budet of about 200-300 dollars (CAN) for the processor.

 

thanks if you can help me out!

8350

[WoodenMarker]

It is until you talk about latency.

? What latency?

[Recon-UK]

? What latency?

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8350-vishera-review,3328-3.html

One of the main reasons FX isn't as fast as it can be is because the cache latency is higher than Intel's (L1 and L2, not sure about L3); a smaller, faster L1 is much preferable to a larger, higher latency L1 given the same percentage of cache hits in a given application.

[WoodenMarker]

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8350-vishera-review,3328-3.html

I don't see how that makes enough of a difference to say that Intel's Hyperthreading is better than AMD's modules. 

[Recon-UK]

I don't see how that makes enough of a difference to say that Intel's Hyperthreading is better than AMD's modules. 

Read again, i never said HT is, the architecture as a whole in FX is just holding it back, on paper it should wipe i7's off the face of the earth, but it can barely keep up, but is a good value chip dependent on ones wants.

[WoodenMarker]

Read again, i never said HT is, the architecture as a whole in FX is just holding it back, on paper it should wipe i7's off the face of the earth, but it can barely keep up, but is a good value chip dependent on ones wants.

you could go AMD but their version of hyper-threading absolutely sucks

I don't see how FX would flat out beat the i7 on paper. They perform differently for different tasks.

[Recon-UK]

I don't see how FX would flat out beat the i7 on paper. They perform differently for different tasks.

I don't think you understand processor design, i don't fully, but i understand most of it.

 

There was a reason why AMD advertised FX like this in the first place.

 

Exhibit A:

 

On paper, it really does look much better, but in real world? nope.

[WoodenMarker]

I don't think you understand processor design, i don't fully, but i understand most of it.

There was a reason why AMD advertised FX like this in the first place.

 

On paper, it really does look much better, but in real world? nope.

It's an advertisement. 

Take a look at Intel's commercials. It's usually happy-go-lucky people to imply Intel will make your life better and has little to do with the actual Intel technology. 

 

On paper? Many things still don't take advantage of the 8 cores.