Hey, getting my new computer parts tomorrow and wanted to ask what performance i might get out of this game at different settings. Specs: CPU: AMD FX-9590 8 Core 4,7GHz GPU: Gigabyte Radeon R9 270x OC 2gb Its with a decent motherboard from Asus (Sabertooth 990FX), and gonna be ran on a 750w Corsair PSU. CPU is going to get cooled down by a Corsair H105 water cooler, and i have a good ventilated cabinet (NZXT Phantom) so the temperature should be no problem!
This is maxed out at 1080p, its playable.. But wish i could have passed like 60 at these maps! On the Grid map i had about 70-80 stable at same settings! Will it help if i bought one more of the GPU's and ran them in Crossfire?
Well, if you want. But more resolution and a second card would be better, but then it is CPU limited.
should've gotten a 8350 and gone with a 280x instead. The 9590 is a huge waste of money, but the 270x is fine.
I can only say one thing: You fool. An AMD FX 9590 is $320. For $350, you could've bought an Intel i7 4770K, which in numbers seems weaker but performs better, cooler and with less power. Still, your build would be a high-end CPU limited by a mid-end graphics card. For that amount of money, you could've built a nice balanced rig, such as: AMD 8350, Radeon R9 280 AMD 8350, Nvidia 770 Intel i5 4670K, Radeon R9 280 (I'd go for this one) Still, if you save up a bit and change your GPU to a 290X, you're gonna have a hell of a PC. And because it's a 9590 you can get 5 GHz out of it without any real overclocking. Intel can't do that, eh? A bit of a waste with the water cooling too. A good air cooler is cheaper and just as good. BTW, why did you buy the 9590 over a 4770K? I'd like to know someone's reasons for getting one.
I am quite the AMD fanboy myself, being honest, and there is no reason to get one. Any AMD CPU over the 8320 is a massive waste of money. Why 8320 and not 8350? Because they 8350 is literally an overclocked 8320. Unless you're on a CPU budget for a more powerful GPU or really need multiple cores for some applicatons, Intel is the best option for higher end processors.
Exactly. Basically it's an AMD priced as Intel. AMD is not as great for budget as you'd think though. You'll need a cooler if you buy a high-end AMD, and Intel socket motherboards are usually cheaper. The difference between an 8350 with a good mobo and a cooler, and a 4670K plus a good board is less than $20. And while AMD has better numbers all around, Intel performs much better in benchmarks. It has half the cores though, but they're much more powerful.
sorry: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-9590-9370_5.html#sect0 http://us.hardware.info/reviews/513...et-benchmarks-hd-7970-crysis-3-1920x1080-high I seriously don't know why anyone would even consider this CPU.
I'm not a fan of these Corsair quasi-watercoolers as well but I get a distinctive feeling that your opinion concerns water cooling in general, not just this particular cooling solution. Have you ever had a decent watercooling setup so you could justify your statement? Oh, and there's a simple reason for getting a FX 9590. Not every investment people make has to be reasonable. People buy lots of stuff that doesn't make sense just because it makes them happy for no apparent reason. Having a 5 GHz CPU might just be that thing. Hey, muscle cars had 7-litre engines and still were pretty much all show and no go but it didn't stop them to satisfy their owners. right? I understand him, I'd get a 9590 too if I had some money to waste .
I like AMD, thats why i dont buy Intel! And i got the 9590 for just over the market price of the 8350 so it was kinda easy choice. The GPU is probably going to be changed out with 290x in some time! Why should this graph make me want not to get a 9590? I dont want to refund it! I got everything rather cheap, and thats why i bought the "top of the AMD FX line"!
If you didnt notice, the graph states that a lower score is better and yet you get the highest score of them all
I've never had water cooling myself, but some friends have. I find it a waste of money, a good air setup is much cheaper, just as effective, and who cares about the noise? Engines and gunfire are much louder anyway The point is, the numbers don't really matter. A 4770K is way more powerful than a 9590, plus runs cooler and uses less power. I don't like Intel at all, their CPUs are overpriced, but I have to admit they're better. And if you're comparing them with the only overpriced AMD... You can easily compare the 9590 with muscle cars. It's true, its main purpose is to show off. And if I had "some" money to waste I'd get a 4960X. It's nearly £800 though so I don't think I'll ever get that. If you got it for just a bit more than the 8350 I understand. Still, you shouldn't discard Intel CPUs. A 4670K is more powerful than an 8350. (Not a 9590 though)
The lower end FX processors, especially the FX 6300/6350, are incredible for budget builds. The 8320 is too, but pushing it a bit. When it comes to normal gaming, the only advantage AMD has in pretty much all cases is the fact that they're not priced like Intel.
I care about the noise, my setup makes a massive racket and can be heard in other rooms. Its a poor setup though (but keeps everything cool at least)
Power consumption is something i dont really care about tho! I wasnt out after building a budget pc, tbh this build was quite spontanious at around 3 at night due to a ragequit for lag spikes with my old computer x) And my pc runs now with the watercooling and the amd at 5GHz at around 30-35 degrees Celsius! On full load for about 1 hour it raised to 45-47 degrees Celsius! Its all about air flow and cable management! See what i wrote at the quote above§ ^.^
