Login or register
Login or register
Stay logged in
Log in/Sign up using Facebook.
Log in/Sign up using Gmail/Google+.
CREATE A NEW ACCOUNT
Email is optional and is used for password recovery purposes.
Have the FunnyJunk newsletter e-mailed to you
Rank #11731 on Comments
Level 234 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz
Send mail to JariWeis
Invite JariWeis to be your friend
Last status update:
Date Signed Up:
Highest Content Rank:
Highest Comment Rank:
Content Level Progress:
Level 114 Content: Funny Junkie → Level 115 Content: Funny Junkie
Comment Level Progress:
Level 234 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz → Level 235 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz
Times Content Favorited:
Total Comments Made:
Meelo is a r00dboi who edited my info.
What people say about JariWeis
latest user's comments
- And I thought that Holland was expensive compared to US, goddamn...
- The performance increase isn't worth the cost. Spendi…
I do intend on selling my old parts so I'm getting back about half to 3/5s of what I spent in the end.
You could wait until Z170 and skylake drops a bit in price, or until/if AMD releases some new CPUs that actually don't have donkey shit single core performance.
I'd still wait for the next generation because of two reasons:
1. Intel AND AMD will have new line-ups.
2. DDR4 will be cheaper.
What? Do you mean between the 8350 aned 4690K?
It's not about framerates, and that is an extremely vague measurement because the CPU alone doesn't decide what your framerate is going to be. It HUGELY depends on the game, what settings, and what video card is being used along the CPU.
But you don't want a CPU with weak single thread performance along a high end GPU like the 970. Sure it'll work fine for most games, but it's just not future proof if you're gonna upgrade the GPU in a few years.
I've said this so many times on this board, and I'll say it again. A CPU with weak single core performance for a gaming rig is shooting yourself in the foot for future upgrades.
The point here isn't about the CPU as of right now.
The performance he's getting is fine, especially since games are more and more multi-core efficient because of the consoles.
Given this fact, spending $400 right now isn't worth it. It's smarter to wait for the next generation of AMD AND Intel to see what and how.
I just now saw that he already has an 8350. Yes in that case it's not worth switching out the motherboard and CPU yet. But if he had something older and were to choose between either the 8350 or 4690K, it's a no brainer.
But here's the thing... CPUs are often way too underestimated in how they affect performance and bottlenecks.
Even with the new consoles being out for 2 years already, games are far from efficient on multi core CPUs, it's a lot worse than you'd think. Even new blockbuster games like Far Cry 4 bottlenecks at 100% usage on one CPU thread with only 10-30% usage on other cores, and a whooping 30-60% GPU usage which is absolutely terrible.
Even if games do USE multiple cores to an extent, the load is very unevenly balanced and it will bottleneck in some cases even on overclocked i7's (also to dispell the old "i7 is overkill for gaming" myth). Even my laptop's GPU is bottlenecked by the CPU in some games (i7-4700MQ + GTX 780M). Just to put that to perspective, the 4700MQ is almost as strong as a 4690K, yet it manages to bottleneck a mobile GPU (and those are a lot weaker than their desktop counterparts).
But yes, he should probably wait longer before upgrading. The FX-8350 is decent, but it's very unlikely that a 970 will be fully utilized in CPU heavy games like GTA 5, or any game that has it's multi core usage severely unbalanced such as Far Cry 3 and 4.
GTA5 utilizes all my 8 cores quite efficiently (not one gets capped at 100% all the time), it's just a matter of the game.
I'm just hoping AMD's Zen architecture will be strong at a multicore and singlecore level.
Even when it does, there's likely a bottleneck somewhere else.
Even my 5820K (6-core, OC'd to 4.2Ghz) bottlenecks me in some games.
But generally I'd much rather take fewer stronger cores, at least down to 4 cores. Anything less and several new games don't run well. For instance the Pentium G3258 has the strongest single core performance of any Haswell CPU, but because it's a dual core, and some newer games are optimized for 4 cores and up, they won't run well. But wherever that's not the case, it actually outperforms the 4790K in some gaming benchmarks.
What's really exciting is that Skylake might have a feature called inverse hyperthreading, which is basically the opposite. Two or more cores are combined to work as one thread, theoretically doubling single thread performance. If it works as good as it says on paper, I'd really like to see it take on Far Cry 3 with a high end SLI setup. Cause I only get like 30% GPU usage along with 100% on one CPU thread in a LOT of areas in the game.
- I found these: Medium-end boards with DDR3 …
Shit, that's a bargain. Here in Norway they cost at least like 140 euros equivalent.
And I thought that Holland was expensive compared to US, goddamn...
- Well, as of now, the performance boost you will recieve is not…
- An Intel motherboard also requires an Intel CPU, you can't jus…
Another question, I currently have the FX-8350 and an MSI 970A-G43 Motherboard. Is the Z97 and a 4690K a lot better than that or just a little?
Well, as of now, the performance boost you will recieve is not worth the money you're spending. I have the FX-8350 with a GTX770, I can still max-out games and get 50-60fps (given I dont taxe 8x heavy AA).
If I were you I'd wait until the next generation, since DDR4 will probably be quite a bit cheaper as well by then.
I know about needing both Intel CPU and motherboard, I already know what CPU I want but I have no knowledge on motherboards. Thanks btw.
- It's 10:40AM you twit
Why are you not asleep?
- Hey guys, I was wondering if someone could help me ou…
- I'm 6'1" / 6'2" Admin must be proud
- Anyone know what the song is?
Music - Live Music/DJ's -...
- This is about GPU's, not CPU's.
Difference In GPU's
Show Comments (667)