bottleneck?

[neo678123]

i want to buy a pc do i get a bottleneck with:
a
AMD FX-8120 eight core
and
a
Nvidia GTX590

thanks
neo

[bissa]

you shouldn't since they are both current gen tech. chances are the bottleneck you will run into is the hard drive you use.

[rommelrommel]

Not really, you might be CPU bound in games that can't use 8 threads well but it won't bottleneck per se.

[Phill]

no to the bottleneck but I would also seriously suggest you have a look at a 2500K instead. IMO better for gaming and it looks like that is what you intend to do.

[Phill]

also what kind of res you gaming at? IMO I would go for a 7970 over a 590 ATM.

[neo678123]

thanks the 2500k is more expansvie but i thinks it suit better

[Bond007]

amd cpu often give lower frame rates than intel (currently atleast...hopefully it will change at some point). IMO go with a 2500k or if you will not OC then a 2400 to save a few bucks.

[Dragonstongue]

Radeon 7970 and Phenom IIx4 955 and overclock it, you will not suffer any performance issues.

My 6870 OC and 955 even at stock speeds gets very good performance.

So to act as if Intel is so much faster, and AMD is "slow" is a flat out lie.

Radeon 6870 965 core and 1135 memory
955BE at 4.0-4.2 1.41v
8gb ddr3 1866 running 1333 7,7,7,20,25 or 1740 9,10,9,24,28

BF3 medium/high 1920x1080 AA2x AF4x HBAO off, blur off.

My average FPS is around 55 high FPS is 85-92

If you want to talk, junk, its not the bulldozer CPU its the 590. Bulldozer are not the greatest, but, 590s most certainly are not either.

2 560Ti or 2 560448 core, or single 5803gb or a 7950/7970 would be a FAR FAR better choice.

2500k/2600k are faster yes, but MOST games at 1920x1080 for single/dual card use, show little to no difference with Phenom IIx4/x6 or FX8, most games are getting very similar frame rates, the ones that are faster for Intel, are generally WAY beyond usuable frame rates for both Intel and AMD.

Believe me, I know many folks that use Intel i7 900 series, Sandy, sandy E as well as Phenom, Phenom II x4 and x6 as well as a few now getting Bulldozers and very very few folks see a direct advantage, the only exception is folks using quad sli or crossfire x example 2 590s or 2 6990s, then yes, it would make more sence to go with Sandy-E.

Anyways, take it as you will. AMD chips have more then enough performance to feed a single card, X2 card, even some tri card setups, even without overclocking.

You want to go Intel, it should be a choice in regards to what you will be doing, not based on some bologney "they are just faster" line.

[Phill]

whoa... I could be wrong but I detect a hint of disdain or hostility? Seems logical that for around the same price one would buy the better cpu... --------> 2500K > 8120

I am not splitting hairs here either. If he wants to go AMD he has my blessing but it makes sense to get more for ones money.

[Bond007]

Originally Posted by Phill

whoa... I could be wrong but I detect a hint of disdain or hostility? Seems logical that for around the same price one would buy the better cpu... --------> 2500K > 8120

I am not splitting hairs here either. If he wants to go AMD he has my blessing but it makes sense to get more for ones money.

Agreed. Its not that there is anything wrong with a 955...its still a good cpu, but its not at the top anymore. And the post wasn't about a 955...it was an 8120. Bottom line is a 2500k will outperform an 8120 in almost everything for a similar amount of $. I have only ever had amd in my main computer (and still do), but if I was replacing it right now it would be intel...AMD is not the game anymore (hopefully that gets sorted out soon, but I have my doubts).