This is my current set-up. I'm able to get 65fps (avg, I think the CPU may be limiting potentially higher results) in Skyrim, Tomb Raider, Battlefield 3, all on ultra/ultimate with a 1920x1080 HD resolution. There's no over clocking done on my rig (yet), so keep that in mind as well.
I'm hoping that this can help some of you guys out that are looking to build for around this price and get a whole ton of performance!
Cheers
Part List: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/Rn3GnQ
I would pick up the R9 270 over that 660 if I were you(Guys in the future.... looking for a PC) From what I understand they are very similar, but the MSI 270 is much cheaper atm. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127769
Also I do not think that CPU will "Bottle neck" your games. I suggest looking at this vid, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAgpvWc4VBM
and this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWans5FU4cU
I trust Jay quite a bit here, and also consider the parts he uses because overall he picks good parts. Also your cooler should allow some overclocking from the looks of it.
To the OP, this is not directed at you, I actually think your build is extremely balanced and is one of the better ~$700 combo's I've seen! People in your budget should definitely consider a similar build. The following comments are basically directed at these videos.
That being said, these were not good benchmarks to judge cpu bottle-necking. Unigine valley is a gpu benchmark (no ai etc), and battlefield 4 will run on anything with 4 cores. He should have tested known cpu hogs like metro, skyrim, watch dogs, splinter cell, thief (though mantle probably helps, the results would be interesting), hitman and others.
When determining if a cpu will be a bottleneck you should pick the games/benchmarks that would show the biggest difference, not the ones that hide it. This was very poor testing methodology. I mean the valley benchmark was about as useful for testing the cpu as testing your graphics card with prime95. Obviously people are always going to be limited to some kind of budget, but too many people honestly think the cpu barely matters in gaming. This isn't true at all. I've even seen a couple of threads around here where people were at least considering pairing an APU with a $1000+ graphics card. I can't blame them because videos like these are made where they are picking games/benchmarks that are known not to be affected by the cpu. Computers need to be built with balance. I think the OP actually did a good job of building a balanced system.
Thanks for assembling those benchmarks you linked to. What I noticed is they show the i5-3470 (currently $190) performing near the top almost every time. This price point seems about right for (high end) game playing.
BF4 runs well even on the i3 and just seems to do well on weak CPUs. Chris Angelini recently did a review of the G3258, which showed the same thing.
I personally liked my 6100 on a 970 with 7870 gpu. Pretty decent running platform. Recommend getting a 970 board for it. Using mine for my linux build.
The 3470 does well because it has great per core performance and most games (if any) don't utilize more than 4 cores. So it makes sense that it performs similar to other ivybridge processors with 4 cores and similar clock speeds. It would lose pretty badly to the fx 8350 in heavily threaded applications though. The fx 8350 tends to fall behind the i5's in some games because it has relatively poor per core performance. If a game only utilizes 4 threads, the 8350 often loses its advantage over an i5.
http://pcpartpicker.com/user/Freaksamcker/saved/b866Mp You may consider grabbing a 280? While its kind of okay that 760 mb is holding that rig back. I wanna see some benchmarks. I had a 6100 in 78 asus mb so i call BS. The upgrade to just 970 mb was so immediately dramatic.
I figure parts could be newer and balanced a bit better, but it is indeed not a bad build.
But can it beat this?
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/Z33JmG
yup, that what i would do. +1 Noob
The four core limit would explain why the 8350 and 6350 are so close in performance on Metro. The 4130 does less well... maybe because it has half the cache of the others.
nice list +1
Yea, this will smoke everything in that price point.