Would a FX-6300 limit a GTX 970 in any way?

Hardware Build a PC
21

It's getting that time where these long-winded AMD vs Intel debates are getting ridiculous... when AMD releases a new chip, then we can start them back up... NO, the 2 year old 8350 on a dead socket doesn't compete well in every day tasks for a gamer as compared to the 6 month old a 4690k... and yes, your professional applications will pretty much always be better optimized for Intel... it's also been rebinned lower and lower since releases of the same chip with different stock overclocks attached to them... so it's highly unlikely if you buy a new 8350 you'll be hitting anything close to 5 GHz... the 2600k was the better processor a year before the 8350 got released, and that was 2-1/2 generations ago... the new i7 is ~30% faster than the processor that was already mildly better to begin with... 

If you want performance... AMD CPUs are for budget PCs that can't fit an i5 into the budget... plz stop with the price/performance nonsense... it gives me a headache every time I read one of these things now...

and for the people that say "but it has EIGHT cores"... sure... it does (well, technically it has 4 modules that read as 8 cores instead of utilizing SMT)... but you don't need EIGHT cores... that's why the i5 is so much more recommended to the i7... very few things the avg consumer does on a computer utilize 8 threads...

If it is required for the budget to fit in a decent GPU, AMD chips aren't terrible options... but no, they don't have the computing power of Haswell refresh... the new i5's actually hold their own streaming against a 8350 with half the cores if that says anything... and regardless... if you have a 970, you have shadowplay... so even if you stream it won't be an issue

Sorry for the rant... it just needed to be said...

As to OP's question... it would depend on the game... but yes it does bottleneck the GPU under certain circumstances... 

22

If you are building an entirely new system don't do it with an FX 6300, its old and comparatively slow to other options, like an i3 or even an 8320.

If it is an existing system, sure its possible it will "bottleneck" in games like BF4. But that doesn't mean if you have a slower card ou shouldn't upgrade. You will still see most of the performance increase in your games, you will just have some lower minimum frame-rates  which may or may not even be a problem. 

23

i can only agree with this for the most part.

Haswell i5´s are just better for gaming, there is realy not much more to say about it.

The rest i allready explained in a post above. ☺

24

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/vishera_review?page=0,3

I mean these are "video encoding" benches that are multi-threaded.... and the ivy bridge i5 wins... in Adobe Premier Pro (which is what everybody uses) it's massive... and that's ivy bridge... and an i5... while they were comparable at the price point at the time (so at that time there was price/performance consideration)... that's one thing... but if you shove even a Sandy Bridge i7 (which is really the fair comparison since both have 8 threads and all they test are multi-threaded benches for the most part) vs 8350 there's few things even in the multithreaded stuff that match up... basically you can zip huge files faster... and that's benches before Haswell and Z97 which has better throughput... I know you're tired of talking about it, not trying to shove stuff down your throat...

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-4790K-vs-AMD-FX-8350/2384vs1489

and this site isn't awesome and doesn't explain anything... but it's ridiculous to compare a current i7 to an 8350 on even the core basis of what the CPU is...

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/697?vs=1261

I don't know who wants a CPU specifically for WinRAR other than software pirates... but the 4690k pretty well beats it in every bench... and a lot of them with significant grace... the i7 kills it in EVERYTHING... this is also my experience using my work computer that has an 8320 (which I bought before all the rebinning happened, got a good one that overclocked very stable to 4.7GHz on a D14)... for the things I do (the occasional video with Premier Pro, Photoshop rendering, music encoding, Solidworks modeling, Mastercam 3D programming), my home 2500k @ 4.5GHz is faster to a good degree than the 8320 I have at work (I don't do a lot of music encoding at work, admittedly)... and I just built a system with an Xeon 1231 v3 that blows both of them out of the water (~10-60% faster than both depending on the specific application)... of course I don't game at work, but a CPU for gaming just needs to have the right instructions, core speed, and optimization to be able to perform... the 8350 might actually be much more capable but nobody encodes for AMD since they don't care about the market and Intel absolutely dominates office PCs...

The whole AMD vs Intel thing just really needs to be stickied and retired until they release a new chip and software developers encode programs to use them... really they shouldn't "go in a different direction"... they should take Intel's lead and produce something that directly competes with the CPU provider that's active in the market... so there's actually a competition in the marketplace... which would drive down actual prices for actual performance.... instead of people saying old, outdated chips are better price/performance when really they mean an 8350 can outzip a 4690k and run virtualization better... the fact a 8-threaded chip is "competing" with a 4 threaded chip is ridiculous in and of itself... especially when the 4 threaded chip outdoes the 8-threaded one in the vast majority of benches... 

The bottom line is you can call people that say Intel is better than AMD fanboys to degrade the truth of whatever statement you like (because AMD is... less publicized, doesn't scam companies to optimize for them, the underground choice, runs better on Linux (which isn't supported "but has the equivalent" of all the programs we use)... or whatever argument you could conjure)... but they flat-out, hands down, produce faster, more capable, more well-rounded CPUs, and that's hardware-wise... and nobody can argue anything but the price of them because they have had no competition in 2 years...

Would I absolutely love if Linux got supported by every major software manufacturer? OF COURSE! It's WAY better than Windows... I HATE WINDOWS... however, everything I use only comes on the windows or god-forbid OSX platform (not that OSX is that bad I prefer it to windows but if there's one thing I hate more than Microsoft it's Apple and their ridiculous pricing for under-powered computers)...

And I'm not speaking to you specifically Angel, obviously... I just wanted to speak my peace <3

25

I know that you are not speaking to me lol.

I agree with allot of things you are saying, simply because i researched this my self as well for a very long time. Every reliable benchmark source out there tell the same story.

You simply cannot compair an 3 year old FX cpu with a current haswell cpu anymore. i totaly agree with this. ☺