This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

FX-6300 and R7 260x

  • Topic Archived
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. FX-6300 and R7 260x
1 year ago#1
Planning on buying a gaming PC, and im wondering if that processor and graphics card would allow me to run most games on high with at least 30 fps? Also btw, im buying this pc from ibuypower because they seem like a good site and if i bought all the parts myself to make it, it comea to over $800 while its only $709 on ibuypower. Feel free to post cheaper alternatives that can still run games on high or ultra.
---
http://i.imgur.com/H63c5FK.gif http://i.minus.com/inadMTYYLhT3h.gif
1 year ago#2
Do you need an OS/Monitor/M+KB?
---
Currently playing : Watch_Dogs, Sniper Elite 3, and Battlefield 4.
1 year ago#3
cory1225 posted...
Do you need an OS/Monitor/M+KB?


No mouse and keyboard because i have a mouse already and it comes with a keyboard. The OS ill have handled and the monitor ill buy.
---
http://i.imgur.com/H63c5FK.gif http://i.minus.com/inadMTYYLhT3h.gif
1 year ago#4
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/FLnrRB

Well I just made this exact build with the exception of my Graphics card which is a HD 7870. You should be able to run most games on ultra-high setting on 30-60FPS, May have to turn a few settings but it will defiently do it. This build is almost 150 less then you would be paying iBuypower, and it still leaves room for you to put an OS in.


The motherboards bios also make over clocking really simple.

Also here is a guy playing battlefield hardline with most setting on high getting about 50-60 fps

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-xIb3vnOPQ Also I can't understand what he is saying lol
---
Currently playing : Left 4 Dead 2, Skyrim, Counter Strike GO
1 year ago#5
I would go with the FX-8350 if you're going AMD. It's the better bang for your buck as well. It runs at a higher clock (4 Ghz) and can run a turbo of 4.2 Ghz. Plus it wouldn't hold your GPU down as much which gives you a higher percentage of games running at 30 fps or higher on let's say medium to high settings. Plus, that way you would would be more future proof compared to the 6300.
---
AMD FX-8350 4.0Ghz | Asus M5A97 LE R2.0 | 8GB G.Skill Ares DDR3-1600 | EVGA 770 2GB SC ACX | 1TB WD Blue Caviar | CM HAF 912 |
1 year ago#6
iiFroZenHeAveNz posted...
I would go with the FX-8350 if you're going AMD. It's the better bang for your buck as well. It runs at a higher clock (4 Ghz) and can run a turbo of 4.2 Ghz. Plus it wouldn't hold your GPU down as much which gives you a higher percentage of games running at 30 fps or higher on let's say medium to high settings. Plus, that way you would would be more future proof compared to the 6300.


http://pcpartpicker.com/user/cory3612/saved/FJWBD3


I also agree with him, I'm putting that in mine this winter.
---
Currently playing : Left 4 Dead 2, Skyrim, Counter Strike GO
1 year ago#7
http://pcpartpicker.com/user/Stay-Frosty11/saved/LCn8TW

This is slightly over $800 ($812 without tax) and is fairly similar to mine. It can probably run ultra settings at least at 30 fps if not 30-40. I run the GTX 770 and get an average of 48 fps on Watch Dogs and a few dips once in a while to 35 fps during intense action. The 280x isn't too far behind and plus if you're patient a price drop on the 290 is right around the corner. I can cut down on the price of the build above too.
---
AMD FX-8350 4.0Ghz | Asus M5A97 LE R2.0 | 8GB G.Skill Ares DDR3-1600 | EVGA 770 2GB SC ACX | 1TB WD Blue Caviar | CM HAF 912 |
1 year ago#8
Unless you're looking at APUs, there's pretty much no reason to go with AMD processors in a gaming build.
---
Fan of metal? Don't mind covers? Check out my youtube and give me some feedback
http://www.youtube.com/sircaballero
1 year ago#9
reincarnator07 posted...
Unless you're looking at APUs, there's pretty much no reason to go with AMD processors in a gaming build.


I have been using AMD processors for years now starting with an Athlon 64 and working up to my current 6 core 6300 and have had no issues running games whatsoever. I really don't know where people are getting their info from that AMD cpu's are rubbish for gaming or that their GPU's have constant driver issues because the people who own them always tend to disagree.

it's almost as if intel fanboys need constant reassurance that they made the right choice in spending loads on a CPU and they do so by spreading lies about AMD and post and re-post benchmark scores time and time again (even though due to intel bias from websites, youtubers and magazines they tend to be over exaggerated or faked in Intel's favour) and that AMD CPU's don't run games or that they explode in a ball of fire just from running minesweeper.

It's like those people who actually spent loads on a monster HDMI cable they need reassurance that it was money well spent and do so by quoting the 'features' of that $100 cable such as 'oxygen free copper shielded cabling'.
---
FX 6300, HYPER 212 EVO, 16GB DDR3, 7870 GHZ 2GB, 2TB HDD, 64 GB SATA III SSD, 12X BLU RAY, 750W PSU, X-FI FATAL1TY,WINDOWS 7
1 year ago#10
Pengu1n posted...
reincarnator07 posted...
Unless you're looking at APUs, there's pretty much no reason to go with AMD processors in a gaming build.


I have been using AMD processors for years now starting with an Athlon 64 and working up to my current 6 core 6300 and have had no issues running games whatsoever. I really don't know where people are getting their info from that AMD cpu's are rubbish for gaming or that their GPU's have constant driver issues because the people who own them always tend to disagree.

it's almost as if intel fanboys need constant reassurance that they made the right choice in spending loads on a CPU and they do so by spreading lies about AMD and post and re-post benchmark scores time and time again (even though due to intel bias from websites, youtubers and magazines they tend to be over exaggerated or faked in Intel's favour) and that AMD CPU's don't run games or that they explode in a ball of fire just from running minesweeper.

It's like those people who actually spent loads on a monster HDMI cable they need reassurance that it was money well spent and do so by quoting the 'features' of that $100 cable such as 'oxygen free copper shielded cabling'.


It's not that AMD processors are useless, it's that Intel has them beat on performance at pretty much every price range, with the exception of their APUs. Unless you are limited by your motherboard, there's no reason to go with AMD. You're getting less for your money. The GPU side is a different story, unless you just need the absolute best performing GPU.

I'm not an Intel fanboy, I buy whatever offers the best deal for my needs.
---
Fan of metal? Don't mind covers? Check out my youtube and give me some feedback
http://www.youtube.com/sircaballero
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. FX-6300 and R7 260x

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived