Beta drive 337.50 is NVIDIA's version of mantle. It cuts a lot of the CPU usage. Id think you'd be fine with a C2Q with that GPU.
Well once you install AVG it disables Windows Defender. I just keep windows Defender and ditch AVG.
FYI MSE is Windows Defender that's defaulted in windows 8. So you are using MSE AKA Windows Defender. And yes thats fine for home use but for a company id recommend something better. No reason people should be paying for a virus protection for home use unless you are running FTP or some type of cloud base software.
Yeah i hear ya. I was just saying the FX-6300 is a very nice gaming CPU that doesnt really have much of a setback. Where as a APU, anything above a 7870 or 270 you will see a setback in FPS vs a FX-6300. Personally if i was you id look at a 270 but if you can front a little more cash a GTX 760 is a way better deal then a 270x.
Yeah the fx 6300 won't bottleneck a r9-280x, gtx 770, but I'm not sure about R9-290 or above.
A fx 6300 and a r9-270 will play bf4 on high.
Im not sure what your question really is? Mantle hasnt been anything to really give two s***s about. With DirectX 12 to be released (Probably end of 2014 or beginning of 2015) for windows 7 and 8, Mantle will probably be left in the dust. Second, the 8320 walks all over the A10's for CPU performance. The only reason why you should think about a A10 is if you want to have a iGPU. If you dont then dont even bother. Third, PCI-E 2.0 vs 3.0 is pointless. Nothing even uses the full potential of 2.0 yet so i wouldn't even sweat about it.
Depends on the monitor you will be using. If its a 1080p or 1200p the 770 2gb will give you well over 60fps. If you are using 3 monitors or a 1440p then the 780 will be worth it.
I have a 28" 1200p monitor with a gigabyte gtx 770 2gb gpu and it only dips down to around 50 fps on one map in a certain spot in BF4. Other then that its well above 60fps and closer to 80-90 fps. Dont froget that everything is maxed out including AA which i dont see the point past 2x but what the hell why not.
Probably not since that cooler is maybe just a little better then the stock cooler. Get a Cooler Master h212 evo.
You help build customers computers and never built a AMD build? Where have you been? Ever since the core series was released it was actually better to build with AMD.
You can have a p4 and the nas would work without lag. It comes down to network not cpu. So I'd get the cheapest cpu you can find.
Nice budget build.
Its better then the gtx 750TI and is just a little worst then the gtx 760. The only thing that the gtx 750ti has is the power consumption. If thats a main priority then get the 750ti. the 270 isnt that bad as well but not as good. A 500 watt psu would be more then enough to power everything in the computer. Even a 430 would be fine.
GTX 750Ti 60 watts
270 150 watts
Difference of around 50+/- watts for just GPU's. This is of course without HDD, SDD, CPU and whatever else you throw in it. So the price difference between a corsair 430 to 500 is $5 american dollars.
Yeah that Austin build will work fine.
Since you want a mini itx build a APU could be another option. Maybe a Antlon 750k could be the CPU of choice and get a better GPU like a R7-265, r9-270 or 7870. I'm sure you're price wouldn't be that much different but have a better gaming experience.
Sorry to throw AMD at you as i do prefer Intel over AMD, but for the price you cant beat AMD. For the 750TI its a really nice card but i think its to expensive for the price/performance.
If a R9-270x needs a 750watt GPU and a R9-290x doesn't then i think that would be a miss print. I would assume a 500 watt would be more than enough and a 650 would power Crossfire 270X.
No the i3 would be able to do that just fine. My media center PC has a core 2 duo E7400 non overclocked at 2.8 ghz and i can do everything you just said. My only concern is that the FX-6300 does perform similar to the i3 but has more of a upside with more cores and its cheaper.
But yeah the i3 are very nice low TDP CPU's that are great for what you just said except for gaming.
No you don't need 2133 ram, but the price isn't any different then 1600. Only reason why I'm suggesting that ram is because apus really benefit with faster ram. The igpu performs a lot better with it.
FYI you will have the set the ram speed as 2133 in the bios if you decide to get this ram and take advantage of it. If you don't it will be defaulted to I think 1333 or 1600.
No you don't need the cooler either.
4670K/4770K OR 8350/8320
Xeon E3-1230 V3 is also a really nice chip
How about this? I changed the CPU, Memory and SSD. I didnt feel like you need a SSD as 120gb fills up really fast. I own a SSD and they are great but not so for storage. A 7200 RPM HDD will be fine and give you lots of space.
Gives support to the new AMD Kaveri CPU's. They are APU's as well but cost more then the 5800k. Yes the Kaveri CPU's are better but for what you will be doing you wont notice much. Oh and they also have PCI express 3.0 instead of just 2.0.
Kaveri CPU's are the A10-7700K and A10-7850K. Honestly the 7700k isn't a bad buy if you find the budgit. Also APU's really benefit with high speed ram. Anything over 1600 is worth it!!!
First I'd ask you "what is your main priority of use on the PC?"
The FX-6300 is a very nice budget CPU for gaming and rendering that doesn't have an iGPU (integrated graphic processing unit), but has 6 cores. That being said, you will need to buy a motherboard that has an iGPU or a dedicated GPU which will increase the price of you PC.
The APU 5800k or 6800k are a quad core CPU that has a very budget minded iGPU (They will run games at 720p). Yes, for pure rendering and compression tasks the FX-6300 will beat an APU, but for gaming unless you plan to buy a GTX 760 or above GPU, they both will perform the same.
So if you plan to game and also want to buy a GPU with your build id look at a FX-6300. If you want to game but use the iGPU on a APU and save up for a GPU later down the road. Then an APU is a better option.
Word on the street is that the AM3+ socket is dead and no new CPU’s will be made for it. (this may or may not be true)
FM2+ is the newest CPU socket that AMD has made and is to be support for a while. So you do have options if you plan to ever upgrade in years to come.
The 7950 can only CF with 280; 280x; 7970; and the another 7950. Best scenario is to CF with the same manufacturer and model.
Redbull, Cigarettes, Daft Punk and a over priced Titan (I assume you got this a long time ago?). That's cancer waiting to happen.
That build you have there is way overkill for fsx. Do you plan to do anything else with this pc?
Sandy vs Ivy just come down to overclocking. A 4.8 ghz sandy is like a 4.6 ivy. They essentially are the same. This can still be used for haswell as sandy ivy and haswell are so close to each other that it doesn't make sense to not go for haswell.
sandy 4.8 +/- Ivy 4.6 +/- Haswell 4.4
So if you get a haswell that runs at 4.5 you will have the faster CPU.
Oh how i loved Tomb Raider!!! That game was so much fun that you forget how single player modes should be. I'm looking at you BF4, you felt like homework!!!! I feel like Tomb Raider didn't get hyped enough.
Best overclocker was the i5-2500k or i7-2600k (They will OC to 4.8-5.0 on air and max around 5.2 on water). For performance the i7-4960x will walk all over both at stock.
Nice! Awesome build.
How does 3 gpus perform vs 2 gpus?
Nice choice on the Xeon!!
For straight performance the sli 770. For a hassle free experience 780.
Yes it does. Just because it's not on this site doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Google i7 4771 and a newegg link will show up.
well the clock speed says it all. Yes, the 8350 will perform better than a stock 8320, but once overclocked they pretty much are the exact same CPU. So the question is, do you plan to overclock? If so then the 8320 probably is the better buy. This is of course if the extra 35 euros helps you buy a better GPU. If it doesnt than just get a 8350.
You can overclock a 4670k to 4.5 and still have the same fps if the cpu was stock. For multitasking a overclocked 4670k at 4.5 will perform the same as a stock E3-1230 v3 processor. So really the xeon is the better buy, but it sure is fun overclocking.
He's talking about the non k i7. Igpu has nothing to do with fps if you have a dedicated gpu. Overclocking cpus now a days don't increase fps.
Well they will perform the same. The xeon doesn't have a igpu, that's why the price is cheaper.
What processors are you even comparing?
4670k vs e3-1230v3?
Yes its worth it. A 7850 performs similar to it and cost about 140 used.
PS4 is suppose to be similar to a 7870 but I disagree. Its probably somewhere around a 7850 or a little less. Basically a PS4 can run games at 1080p but on low to medium details witout AA on.
A gtx 770 will run pretty much every game fully maxed out at 1080p with AA on and get you 60+ FPS. Pretty much a GTX 770 PC is like a PS10.
A similar PC to a PS4 would have a Athlon 760k; 8 gigs of ram; 7850 or R7-265; 7200 RPM 500gb HDD. As you can see its really not anything special and the pricies are actually really similar. You could probably build that PC for at $450-500 (Yes without a OS). Consoles have lost a lot of the best bang for your buck.
Might be hard to stay at a constant 30 mph in those cars :)
Something is weird with releasing the Maxwell products as gtx 750/TI. They probably knew about the upcoming release of DirectX 12 and will release the 800 series closer to the release of that? Right now they are sitting high and pretty with very little in the way of competition from AMD. To me it seems kind of pointless (as a business standpoint) to release 800 series GPU's when AMD just kind of released their r7/r9 GPU's.
265 is 7850; 270 is between the 7850 and 7870; 270x is 7870; 280 is 7950; 280x is 7970.
For gaming yes. Video editing no.
I personally 780TI would be my choice. The r9-290 is overpriced at the moment. when they first were released they were $400. Now cause of all the miners the priced jumped up way too much.
Ive had a Crossfire setup and the heat they produce isnt worth the extra FPS sometimes. Those cards are designed to run close to 90 degrees Celsius and having 2 now might be too much heat.
GTX 780's would be a really nice setup.
Really no way to answer this question sorry. Pretty much whatever you are going to do is pretty expensive and will give great performance. Much more than the average gamer would have.
Well ill answer this question for you.
BOTH AREN'T BETTER THAN EACH OTHER!!!!
They both run the exact same in games and totally depend on the GPU you buy. So, sorry but you wont find a answer as both are good.
Question for you.
Why CF 290 when you are buying only 1 1080p monitor? You do realize that is a massive overkill unless you plan to run 3 or 4k monitors right?
You also dont need 16gb of ram. 8gb is plenty for gaming unless you plan to do anything with video editing, but still its overkill.
So honestly if you dropped your GPU down to a gtx 770/280x and only 8 gb of ram. It would perform the exact same as this system you have on the AMD side as your monitor is only 60 hz.
So the real question is not the CPU being a bottleneck its your Monitor. Upgrade it to like a 1440p and you'd have a very nice gaming system.
What monitor do you have and what resolution are you playing at?
Except that its one of the least informative sites to get a real answer. If you really want a good answer its best to use multiple sites and not just one that gives the least amount of info.
That's a even more pointless card. Its basically a poor mans Titan.
Yep that will work great. It's basically a i7 3770 non k cpu
For sure. It games just as good as my 3570k.