• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

2x r9 290x with AMD FX 9590 Possible bottleneck?

dalik11

dalik11

dalik11

Associate
Joined
30 Oct 2014
Posts
44
Hi!

Im just wondering will AMD FX 9590 Bottleneck 2x 290x in crossfire 1080p ?

I know that FX 8320 4,5Ghz does bottleneck 2x 780s 1080p
 
dalik11 said:
Hi!

Im just wondering will AMD FX 9590 Bottleneck 2x 290x in crossfire 1080p ?

I know that FX 8320 4,5Ghz does bottleneck 2x 780s 1080p
Click to expand...

To some degree, yes. Best to post your heaven, 3dmark firestrike scores and a few game benchmark scores once you get your new cards. Then we can compare with someone using the same cards but with an Intel CPU etc.

Eitherway, best to test it first with your current CPU. Maybe you'll be perfectly satisfied with it's performance, even if it is bottlenecked a little.
 
Yes I'm sure. Your FPS will be very good and you'll get a smooth play experience.

I recently put a 8 core 2ghz Xeon in my rig and was amazed at how playable games were.

Don't get caught up in BS and benchmarks just game.
 
Dave2150 said:
To some degree, yes. Best to post your heaven, 3dmark firestrike scores and a few game benchmark scores once you get your new cards. Then we can compare with someone using the same cards but with an Intel CPU etc.

Eitherway, best to test it first with your current CPU. Maybe you'll be perfectly satisfied with it's performance, even if it is bottlenecked a little.
Click to expand...

No see now that's exactly what you don't want to do. Of course there's going to be some one out there with a faster rig than yours but yours will be more than good enough.
 
I just took these screenshots for someone in another thread, but may as well post them here as well. I have been running a pair of 290Xs with an [email protected] up until this weekend, when I upgraded to a 4790k. As long as you're at 1440p or above, then you will be fine. The only game I've tested so far in which the 4790k makes a noticeable difference at 1440p/60Hz is GTAV. For all other games, the FX was great for 1440p/60Hz.

Firestrike Extreme [email protected]
aSmVT4T.png

Firestrike Extreme 4790k@stock
7O7IWg0.png
 
ALXAndy said:
No see now that's exactly what you don't want to do. Of course there's going to be some one out there with a faster rig than yours but yours will be more than good enough.
Click to expand...

Maybe you missed the rest of my quote?

Dave2150 said:
Eitherway, best to test it first with your current CPU. Maybe you'll be perfectly satisfied with it's performance, even if it is bottlenecked a little.
Click to expand...

Now you have me off ignore, you'll find it's best to read the whole post before quoting it.
 
Synthetics like Firestrike are poor indicators.
And you'll bottleneck at 1080p. Maybe not in every game on the planet (Since there's like.. Thousands) but you'll certainly bottleneck a lot. There's differences in FPS figures with 1 290X and an FX95 versus an i5/i7. Two 290X's will be an obvious bottleneck.

If it didn't bottleneck, we'd all be running AMD CPU's since they'd be "good enough" but they're not meant for this type of set up.
 
Martini1991 said:
Synthetics like Firestrike are poor indicators.
And you'll bottleneck at 1080p. Maybe not in every game on the planet (Since there's like.. Thousands) but you'll certainly bottleneck a lot. There's differences in FPS figures with 1 290X and an FX95 versus an i5/i7. Two 290X's will be an obvious bottleneck.

If it didn't bottleneck, we'd all be running AMD CPU's since they'd be "good enough" but they're not meant for this type of set up.
Click to expand...

Surprisingly lots of people use AMD CPUs because they are affordable. And the world still spins. Maybe at lower speed than a full speed high spec Intel but it still spins along fine.

I was told when I bought my 7990 that my 8320 would be a bottle neck. I also couldn't touch the 4790k benchmarks with the same card.

However my gaming experience was absolutely fine.

Having a decent gaming experience is what matters, not that you can replicate chart leading benchmark scores.
 
The FX 9590 is not a bottleneck regardless of your GPUs. Of course, an Intel setup would get you more fps, but that's a different matter.
 
dalik11 said:
Hi!

Im just wondering will AMD FX 9590 Bottleneck 2x 290x in crossfire 1080p ?

I know that FX 8320 4,5Ghz does bottleneck 2x 780s 1080p
Click to expand...

Yes it will, but so what? :D go spend £350 on an i7 setup and be less bottlenecked. :p
 
Your FX will be bottleneck in CPU limited games/scenarios. IPC is pretty weak on those CPUs so let's hope that Zen will put AMD back in the game for us enthusiasts and AMD fans.
 
290 CF will for sure be bottle necked by CPU at 1080p. Up the res and the balance will be redressed.
 
Even if it is bottlenecked in less intensive games, does it really matter if the difference is between having a minimum fps of 60 vs 100?

In the gpu intensive games where you've put the settings/resolution up so that you are running at below 60fps, I doubt the bottleneck will be much.

As humbug put it, do you really want to spend £350 for little to no visual benefit?
 
muon said:
Even if it is bottlenecked in less intensive games, does it really matter if the difference is between having a minimum fps of 60 vs 100?

In the gpu intensive games where you've put the settings/resolution up so that you are running at below 60fps, I doubt the bottleneck will be much.

As humbug put it, do you really want to spend £350 for little to no visual benefit?
Click to expand...

AMD CPU's, even if clocked at 5Ghz, suffer from bad minimum frame rates in many games. They can't manage 60 fps minimum, no way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom