• 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.

what cpu for a 290 gpu

hthry

hthry

hthry

Associate
Joined
29 Dec 2013
Posts
66
have just installed a 290 and using it with the cpu listed in my specs but running games such as crisis and bf4 am I getting the best out of it with my current cpu or should I upgrade this , any thoughts

ray
 
Last edited:
What do you play?

Your CPU will bottleneck the GPU a fair amount depending on the game. If you plan on Crossfire, grab the 4770k and the g45 MSI board. If not, the g1 sniper and an 4670k would do the trick and save you money.

G1 sniper is a great board, with a nice on board sound chip and is built with high quality parts. UK RMA is a huge bonus too!

The MSI board has nicer pcie setup for Crossfire.

I have a 4770k with a gigabyte OC board and it is awesome but tbh the g1 sniper will probably sort you out just as well if you are not interested in hefty overclocks and multi gpu benching and give you better onboard sound.
 
For gaming single or SLI/CF then you need nothing more than a 4670K, there is really no difference in FPS between them @ 1080P, however if you have the cash for a 4770K then i would recommend it as it does do other things better and faster, just not games, and if you rather save the cash and get the 290X would yield you better gaming performance than the difference between the CPU's which is next to nothing
 
Last edited:
I'd get a 4770K and R9 290 before I got an i5 4670K and an R9 290X.

There's a VERY tiny difference in end GPU performance between the R9 290 and 290X when overclocked in gaming.

In some synthetic benchmarks there's some difference, but I don't play firestrike etc :p
 
I've got the sniper and am pleased with it, I would choose it over MSI personally but thats just me. Although I would be tempted by the Z87x-OC or the Asus hero but they are more money, hence I ended up going for the sniper, although people seem to have problems with headphones in the rear socket including myself (with the onboard sound) although through my amp I'm well happy with it, running a 4670k @ 4.5ghz.
 
In BF4 (particularly with Mantle) the CPU makes almost no difference.

1,920 x 1,080, Ultra Detail, with an i5-3570K and an R9 290X
CPU at 2.8GHz, average 75.6 FPS
CPU at 4.2GHz, average 76.7 FPS

A 50% boost in CPU power gives you... 1% improvement in FPS.

See http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2014/02/05/amd-mantle-bf4-performance/4
Similar thing here: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2013/11/27/battlefield-4-performance-analysis/8

You might say "but that's just single player!". Good point, but sadly there's only one MP benchmark I can find, however it is much the same story (but with more noise as MP is not repeatable):
http://www.hardwarepal.com/battlefield-4-benchmark-mp-cpu-gpu-w7-vs-w8-1/8/

By all accounts, the £90 FX-6 6300 or Haswell i3 do just as well as the £240+ Intel when using a single powerful GPU in BF4 at 1080p, so if it was me I'd save the £140.

If you can afford better and want peace of mind then go for something better!
 
Martini1991 said:
I'd get a 4770K and R9 290 before I got an i5 4670K and an R9 290X.

There's a VERY tiny difference in end GPU performance between the R9 290 and 290X when overclocked in gaming.

In some synthetic benchmarks there's some difference, but I don't play firestrike etc :p
Click to expand...

Really cant believe what im reading, their is 0.17% difference between the two CPU's in gaming at 1080P, when will people learn that at high res gaming its all about the GPU power, synthetic bench marks are just that, run it at extreme settings and you will see the advantage that the 4770 had at low res vanish, the only reason 4770K does better in better in 3D mark runs is simply down to physics score and nothing else, and the difference between the 290 and 290X is much more clear to see, not saying that its worth the extra money, but it sure does beat the 290 out of the box in most game, and in the game that it dont you can blame the drivers
 
Last edited:
almighty15 said:
I have a 1.25Ghz 290 and even my 2600k at 4.8Ghz causes bottlenecks...
Click to expand...

yet i have a 780ti and a 4670K and and it does not, and funny that our friend k3vst3r has more than one 290/290X and does not suffer any bottlenecks from his CPU tho that is a 4770K

Even my 2500k does not bottleneck bottleneck my gpu, i even have a Q6600 which im going to test when i get around to it when i find the time
 
Last edited:
TAZOO7 said:
Really cant believe what im reading, there is 0.17% difference between the two CPU's in gaming at 1080P, when will people learn that at high res gaming its all about the GPU power, synthetic bench marks are just that, run it at extreme settings and you will see the advantage that the 4770 had at low res vanish, the only reason 4770K does better in better in 3D mark runs is simply down to physics score and nothing else, and the difference between the 290 and 290X is much more clear to see, not saying that its worth the extra money, but it sure does beat the 290 out of the box in most game where, and in the game that it dont you can blame the drivers
Click to expand...

In gaming there's not much difference at all between the CPU's (There's some exceptions to this of course)

But there's very small gains from an R9 290 over an R9 290X, The 4770K will be better in tons of other areas (Unless you only ever game, but then I'd just get an R9 290 over the 290X with a 4670K and save)
Ran at the same clocks, even in Heaven there's a ~2% difference from the R9 290 to the 290X, in gaming, both overclocked there's pretty much nothing, except perhaps in a few select titles.
 
Last edited:
TAZOO7 said:
yet i have a 780ti and a 4670K and and it does not, and funny that our friend k3vst3r has more than one 290/290X and does not suffer any bottlenecks from his CPU tho that is a 4770K

Even my 2500k does not bottleneck bottleneck my gpu, i even have a Q6600 which im going to test when i get around to it when i find the time
Click to expand...


He's on about Crysis 1, which only uses 2 cores, so it screams for core for core performance, so if he GPU usage lowers due to the performance offered on the CPU, then it's bottlenecked, but not like an i7 etc would help that, only more core for core.

So your 4670K would be better than his 2600K for crysis.

Load RTW2 at 1080p and watch your GPU usage plummet.
 
Last edited:
TAZOO7 said:
yet i have a 780ti and a 4670K and and it does not, and funny that our friend k3vst3r has more than one 290/290X and does not suffer any bottlenecks from his CPU tho that is a 4770K

Even my 2500k does not bottleneck bottleneck my gpu, i even have a Q6600 which im going to test when i get around to it when i find the time
Click to expand...

Do you even understand what a bottleneck is?

And yes Kev does have CPU bottlenecks.... If 8Pack gets them with an LN2 cooled 4770k then he gets them.

You can't play a handful of games and declare you don't have a CPU limitation.

And as Martin has ready pointed out, you Haswell based CPU has a good chunk more IPC then my 2600k does so in lightly threaded loads you'll have higher performance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom