Intel Core i5-3330 3.00GHz , Runs The Game On High ?

Hey guys ,
I need someone expert to answer me on this question please , it's very very important to me .
I am about to buy expensive and good GPU which will take all the money i have especially for ps2 .
(Gigabyte R9 280X OC 3GB GDDR5 ) or (Gigabyte GeForce GTX 760 OC 4GB )
The Question Is:
Will my CPU cause any problems ? , like low fps , or bottle neck as i hear ?
My CPU is ( Intel Core i5-3330 3.00GHz , 6 Cache , 4 cores )
http://ark.intel.com/products/65509
If i run the game on high would i face any fps drop in big fights .
More Spec:
8 GB Ram Hyper X
500W PSU
P8B75-M ASUS Motherboard

First off, It depends on the GPU you have.
Secondly, a 500W PSU isn't going to support a "good expensive gpu" especially with a kick*** CPU.
But yes, the i5 is plenty good and will not fail you, I suspect at least 35 fps with a good GPU.

Edit: And everyone gets fps drops on high with big fights -_-

In high and big battles, I am suggesting 30 to 40 fps...

What GPU?

What brand and model is your PSU?

https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2...e-can-i-run-it-upgrade-advice-threads.170564/

i am gonna buy
(Gigabyte R9 280X OC 3GB GDDR5) or( Gigabyte GeForce GTX 760 OC 4GB GDDR5 Windforce 3X )
both of them same price and didn't decided yet
and here is my psu ( http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3338#kf )

as long as it's above 35 i am happy , you have no idea how crazy my fps get on the gpu i am running now

The 760. The 280x is a rebranded 7970 and its ancient now. Get a 2GB 770 instead of either though. Id youre using a single 1920x1080 monitor you wont use more than 2GB of RAM and the extra FLOPS will be more important than framebuffer size.

If you can wait a little longer youd be best off with an 860. If the GM architecture GPUs scale likr GF to GK did an 860should be about 5-7TFLOPS.

http://www.realhardtechx.com/index_archivos/Page1906.htm your PSU is a CWT rebrand too so id be careful. Those are pretty cheaply made usually.

I have the same CPU and a GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2gb and I get 50 frames and 30-40 frames in huge fights.

Why do you always only mention FLOPS in your GPU comparisions? I mean, if you buy a GPU for gaming then you won't care about theoretical performance.

Also it doesn't make sense to keep hating on a manufacturer like CWT when there are already detailed tests on every single PSU. There may be bad PSUs somewhere in their rows. But what I have seen yet is absolutely solid and worth a recommendation.

R9 280X is fine but don't pick the 760 since the 770 is in a similar price range of the 280X.

I use both the 280X and 770, they're both good in just about every game so you can't go wrong with either, but the 770 should be easier on that 500W PSU than the 280X (which can be a power hog).

PS- also... lol FLOPS, nobody cares about that.

lol i can see a lot of hate against FLOPS xD
and btw my monitor is 1600x900

Anyone who says FLOPS aren't important for gaming, clearly knows nothing about how GPU's work. Also, awesome work on the can I run it thread
I'm sure it'll come in handy when I work on my new build this summer.

Ty but if you plan on building soon seriously consider waiting for Broadwell with the GT3e GPU. Those have a 128MB L4 cache for the GPU but its used as a victim cache for the CPU cores. That allows the socket 1150 Broadwell(and a few of the current Haswell mobile) CPUs to have 76.8GB/s memory bandwidth vs 25GB/s with dual channel DDR3 1600. Thats also 50% more than the quad channel on socket 2011. Broadwell should work woth the new 9 series motherboards too.

And wait for a GM architecture GPU as well. They have said theyll be 3x the GFLOPS/W of GK GPUs. Doesnt matter if theyre 28nm.

One of those Broadwells with an 860 will probably perform as well as an i7 Extreme Edition and a 780ti.

Oh yeah? Titan has more TFLOP than GTX780, which card do you think is better for gaming? GTX780.

Do you mean the 780ti?

Because the Titan outperforms a 780 in games simply because it has more cores and therefore more SP FLOPS as a 780. The Titan is basically the same GK110 but with different features enabled. More cores being one of them.

The Titan, Titan Black and Titan Z all have full DP enabled where as the 780 and other gaming GPUs dont. The Titan and Titan Black are both a good value to certain customers who need DP floating point for things like CAD etc. Theyre a lot cheaper than a $5,000 Quadro K6000 and the main difference is that the Titans dont have ECC SGRAM framebuffers. Some people need the K6000's and a few K40's to go with it however.

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...3GB-Review-Full-GK110-Crashes-Hawaii/Crysis-3

Titan outperforms a 780 in games. 780ti outperforms Titan and is about even with Titan Black. In applications that use DP the Titans and Quadros destroy the Geforce cards. Thats why they cost more: full DP and in the case of Quadro full DP and ECC.

No, I'm referring to non-Ti 780, a $500 780 is a better buy for gaming over a $1000 Titan that only gains ~5fps in games over the 780. If you're doing computing, production and rendering then the Titan is better.

Originally you made the claim that a 780 is "better for gaming" than a Titan. You never said it was a better value. I was the one who said that in the post above yours.

And since you just said that Titan gets more FPS than a 780 then you just said yourself that the TITAN is better for gaming than a 780!

SP FLOPS and memory bandwidth determine how many GT/s or GP/s your GPU is capable of in games and therefore directly determines your GPUs "gaming performance".

Since playing a videogame is just your CPU and GPU doing math, and FLOPS is the kind of math required for rendering graphics its kind of important. Architectural details like cache bandwidth are important as well but i didnt think gettimg into the details of streaming multiprocessor design in detail was required for this thread.

You may want to check out my extensive, constructive hardware guide where i discuss single precision and double precision FLOPS.

The Geforce cards have reduced DP performance as i said earlier. The fully enabled DP on the Titan is what you pay for and at the time of their releases, the Titan was one of the cheapest ways to get 1.3TFLOPS double precision.

A Xeon Phi, K6000 or K40 are between $3500 and $5000 for around the same DP performance. They cost that much because they have full DP and ECC RAM. Check out Knights Landing if you think FLOPS are unimportant as well.

I dont only mention FLOPS. I also explain memory bandwidth, GP/s, GT/s and frametime variance. Did you actually read it or the post above? I explained it pretty clearly.

DP FLOPS arent important for games since no games use double precision floating point.

And CWT is known for making cheap PSUs that use cheap capacitors and other components. Theres no reason to buy a cheaply made PSU for a nice computer.

Perhaps you should check out some reviews that involve disassembly and actual tests like ripple and transient handling. Why buy cheaply made junk when you can buy something nice for about the same price?

What I meant was that you claim in your guide that FLOPS are most important. There are examples out there that this simply isn't true. You will agree that the HD 6970 for example performs better than the HD 5870 in games despite the fact that the HD 5870 offers more FLOPS.

The same goes for the comparison between the 780 ti and the 290x:
http://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2460/radeon-r9-290x.html
http://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2512/geforce-gtx-780-ti.html

And regarding CWT: I only have reliable German sources that can confirm that their recent PSUs aren't bad. Example: Corsair CX Series Modular CX500M

The diagramms should speak for themselves:
http://www.computerbase.de/2014-04/.../4/#diagramm-spannungsregulation-plus-12-volt
http://www.computerbase.de/2014-04/...-restwelligkeit-plus-12-volt-100-prozent-last

Again, I don't know which English sources are credible enough. Only viewing Google results won't give me a source but it gives a direction of what I should expect:
https://www.google.com/search?q=cwt...d=chrome&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8#q=cwt psu quality

In my guide i stated that FLOPS AND memory bandwidth are the two most inportant factors and put (on paper) to clarify that i mean theoretical performance.

But i didnt get into architectural differences or manufacturing issues like dark silicon and power budgets because those change constantly. I should add a section about it and link to this as well.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/semiconductors/devices/the-status-of-moores-law-its-complicated

People can always post questions or comments in the thread or add information about streaming multiprocessor design if they want.

Yes the streaming multiprocessor design of AMDs GPUs sucks and their theoretical performance doesnt translate to real world. But saying FLOPS is unimportant is incorrect.

FLOPS, memory bandwidth and the actual architecture determine performance. So ignoring them and relying solely on often unscientific game benchmarks that can be done in different conditions based on the testers methodology isnt good either. Youd need to do all of them: check theoretical performance, analyze the architecture and check multiple benchmarks.

As for CWT there are way worse OEMs than them and they have improved. I just mentioned CWT and Seasonic because i used Corsair as an example. Some people might not realize that they rebrand from both and think a CWT Corsair is the just as good as a Seasonic one.

I didnt bring up the really horrible OEMs that make horrible PSUs because there are several good ones to pick from like Seasonic, Delta and Enhance that make PSUs in all desktop price categories.

http://www.realhardtechx.com/index_archivos/Page541.htm has links to reviews for a lot of models. Jonnyguru, PC Perspective disassemble and thoroughly test the PSUs they review.