I want to buy a GTX 1080 while using a FX 8350. Tell me

>>58054136
It'll bottleneck at less than half potential

>>58054143
In certain applications.

>>58054136
It's fine for nearly all modern games.

>>58054154
>It's fine for nearly all modern games.
The complete opposite. Nearly all modern games are very CPU heavy

Should I go with a Skylake CPU or wait for Ryzen?

>>58054166
The 8350 is a very capable CPU. Certain games will benefit from faster single core, but most are fine with the 8350. Make sure you look at benchmarks with Windows 8.1 or later, as that's when MS updated the scheduler to accommodate for the SMP layout of Bulldozer.

>>58054195
Wait for Zen if you want to save money. For performance, Skylake and Zen will be similar for single core, but Zen will have better multi-core.
When Zen is released, depending on the price points, we should see a heavy reduction in Intel's pricing on the high end.

>>58054166
>are designed for MOAR COARS and MOAR THREDZZ
FTFY

the fx line was way ahead of its time, and it shows as 4.5ghz 8350s stack up against modern i7s when gaymen

hell even the phenom II got a massive boost in performance with dx12, then you have to realize just about all games these days are shitty console ports, and all the consoles use amd and 8 threads... excluding nindendo as they are not releasing modern hardware.

>>58054195
Skylake
If you're gonna wait, wait for vega GPUs, high end CPUs aren't gonna get significantly better at all until they stop using silicon

File: image.jpg (61KB, 720x480px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 720x480px

>>58054220
>skylake and zen will have similar single core performance
DOHOHOHOHOHO

>>58054317
We haven't had a drastically new architecture since we got 14nm CPU's.
You can't say "aren't gonna get significantly better" until we have seen third party benchmarks of Zen.

File: image.png (165KB, 777x656px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 777x656px

>>58054249
And how many console ports use multicore/multithreading well?
Come on, we're all waiting

>>58054338
I'm talking about CPUs in general
Going smaller is now impractical, we need to make the jump to non-silicon or pray devs start taking architecture efficiency seriously

>>58054333
idk what's funnier the part you quoted, or the part where this fucking retard thinks jewtel will ever decrease the cost of their processors.
never happened. never will.

>>58054249
DX12 is great and all, and has a really good chance of making moar coars (up to 6 from tests) great again, but how many devs are utilizing it?

File: image.png (437KB, 541x538px) Image search: [Google]

437KB, 541x538px

>>58054364
Because really the only configuration that hasn't been beaten to death now is humongous, hot, high voltage CPUs with ridiculous core count and low clocks (Zen+? Where's those 32 cores?), and even then you can't just pop that into today's software and expect performance

File: 1439409896587.jpg (27KB, 500x387px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 500x387px

>>58054364
>pray devs start taking architecture efficiency seriously
We're fucked.
Unless we get some low level APIs with it built in.

I'll ask in this thread how will an i7 6700k pair with a gtx 1080?

>>58054918
Expensively

>>58054136
Bottleneck like fucking crazy and ancient architecture are the two big ones.

if you already know its a bad idea why are you doing it

>>58054912
Like it or not, DX12 is a step in the right direction, and if that direction continues, AMD is gonna have the best CPUs by the time non-silicon happens

>>58054932
I already have the i7 though but it's paired with a gtx 780 so it's time for an upgrade and I am afraid a 1070 would be a downgrade or a side grade

>>58054944
>I think a 780 is as good as a 1070
What are you doing with it?
CPUs "bottlenecking" GPU performance is a meme if you're talking about this decade, even ivy bridge can fully utilize a 1080. It's whether or not your usage will rely more GPU or CPU power, "not good enough" is not the same as "bottleneck"
Are you playing games? If so, your resolution and refresh rate can tell you what GPU to get (in the higher end at least). If it's just 1080p at 60hz, you do not need a 1070

File: image.jpg (257KB, 1280x1656px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 1280x1656px

>>58054944
I used to have a 750ti and my 1070 spanks it

id wait for the 1080ti and the inevitable price drop that comes with it

>>58055060
It'll price drop 1080s maybe and Titan XPs for sure, but at $800+, the 1080ti isn't gonna make a 1070 or 480 any cheaper

>>58054349
all of the ones using dx12
a large majority of dx11 use MOAR COARS
i'm not going to scour the internet for links to prove to some fanboy faggot who can't do so himself.

>>58054364
>pray devs start taking architecture efficiency seriously
they used too, but then babyboomers realized they could turn pseudo science "comp sci" (which has nothing to do with science..) into a meme and turn it into a lucrative business by scamming easily impressionable idiot millenials.

and thus here we are with a bunch of retards who think hardware needs to catchup to their content rather than making proper and full use of the shit that's out already.

stacked CPUs are the future

>>58055099
I only have 4 console ports, two use hyperthreading and only 1 efficiently uses more than one core, and even then it only uses three cores
All of them perform worse than originally cross platform games

>>58054968
>If it's just 1080p at 60hz, you do not need a 1070
1060/rx480 both run like absolute dogshit at dx12 and 1080p
you lying faggot.

>>58054249
>speed directly relates to performance
okay bud

>>58055164
My friends RX480 does fine near-maxing every game at 1080p/60fps
When I still used my 1080p monitor there wasn't a single game I could crank up enough to bring the fps below 90 using my 1070 (except beamng but the only graphical setting has some serious demands anyways, it could bring my 1070 to 10fps if I wanted)
I don't know, it just hurt using a 1070 on a normal TV and seeing that I could be getting 90, 144, 300 FPS on some games if I had a better monitor

>>58055159
>I only have 4 console ports
try playing games that weren't made for consoles from the double 0s

>>58055215
>>58055215
I WILL NOT BUY ANY AMD CARD PERIOD

>>58055176
>speed directly relates to performance
who's your gradeschool teacher? i need to bitchsmack her for allowing such a retarded fuck the ability to use the internet without first teaching you about reading comprehension.

>>58055274
His name was mr garrison

>>58054136
i have a 4.2ghz 3570k and a gtx 1070 and battlefield 1 runs at 100% cpu

>>58054136
You should have gotten the FX-8370.

>>58055769
You forgot this so I'll add it

:'(

File: image.jpg (71KB, 400x960px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 400x960px

>>58055769
>have 6600k
>Forza runs at 100% CPU
>Battlefield runs at 100% CPU
>Windows 10 runs at 100% CPU

>>58054195
Wait for Ice Lake

>>58055254
Why lol. And this is from someone who switched to nV recently. Pretty much the same driver performance

>>58054136
stop being a retard.
zen + vega

>>58054333
this guy is right. zen is faster than skykek.

>>58055899
I went Bulldozer (FX-8370 OC 4.5GHz) and Polaris (RX 470 4GB)

>>58055916
>not having a fx8320
seems like youre trying to be hipster

>>58055757
and you're mr.hat?

>>58054136

unless your playing a DX12 GPU intensive game your basically a fucking idiot

>>58055215
1070 appears to run quite well in benchmarks
but the rx 480 is dogshit at dx12.

>>58055990
t. nvidia toddler

>>58055990

RX480 has gotten better at DX12 then 1060 but the 1070 is a higher price card so of course a mid range like the 480 isnt going to match it.

I'm planning to do an unlimited budget Zen+Vega watercooled build

>>58055955
What? I got my FX-8370 almost a month ago and it's been amazing.

>>58055884
Because my first card was AMD and it was the most pathetic thing and then died miserably after about 2 years of light use I will never fall or it again

>>58056018
>480 isnt going to match it.
it's not about matching, it's about the fact that it doesn't even run 1080p at playable framerates.

>>58056031
>unlimited budget
can i have some money? we can pretend you're getting something extra from spending so much, even though you aren't

>>58056267
Don't be such a fucking faggot saying shit like that. The 480 runs great at 1080 and if you've seen any benchmarks, you'd know that.

>>58056674
not when playing dx 12 titles.

>>58056697
ESPECIALLY when playing DX12

I have an 8320 @4ghz and an r9 fury and can say in the witcher 2 at 4k the 8320 does not ever see over 60% utilization. However in gta v and metro last light I can't really get framerates any higher than i did with my r9 270x. Afterburner seems to have trouble displaying % usage in both as the gpu and cpu will both jump all over the place, most often showing 0% (dont know if that a bug or proof of cpu bottleneck) so i would figure the cpu must be bottlenecking the gpu.

Basically any game with lots of physics calculations or absolutely dog shit multicore scaling will be held back.

>>58056896
Most games have absolute dogshit multicore scaling

>buy the best hardware you can
>if you run into a game that doesnt run well, check for drivers
>if drivers are good, check for potential fixed online
>if nothing, get afterburner, track cpu usage and gpu usage
>open up game. if gpu is at like ~50 usage while a cpu core is being hit in the 90s, then your cpu is the problem. if the gpu is maxed, then you need a new gpu.
>buy the best of those you can afford after some research.
>repeat

its video games people, not advanced calculus. its not that hard to figure out.

>>58056697

1060 is fucking shit at DX12. The RX480 gets an average of 10 frames more at DX12 then DX11.

>>58057218
Shut up just shut the Fuck up and admit that

People = shit

>>58054136
At 1080p you will be severely limiting yourself (the GTX 1080 is not a 1080p card anyway) and at 1440p there will likely be a significant bottleneck as well. 4K is doable but if you're spending that much on a monitor and gfx card you want to make sure to spend another $200 to protect your "investment"

>>58057218
They're about equal, with the 480 in the lead, but the 480 is cheaper

>>58057155
You're literally retarded, get off /g/

>>58056267
>>58055990
Literally retarded

>>58055916
If you bought that platform new, you're retarded

>>58055769
Yeah, but that's because you're already getting close to 125FPS at 1080p. If you use the highest anti-aliasing options you'll see the bottleneck shift to the gfx card quickly

>>58054136
Like a dream. Best performance you can get before you go to stupid expensive levels.