Replace CPU or GPU first?

I have a Phenom II X4 965, OC to 3,8Ghz, and big fights are 30-35 FPS. CPU load is around 90%. Medium fights I get 50-60FPS.
AMD Phenom II X4 965 4,257 "points"
AMD FX-6300 Six-Core 6,346 "points"

AMD is still working on their new architecture, which will presumably go with the switch to DDR4, from what I understand.

I would agree that intel probably is better (and always has been) as far as top end performance right now, but at $99 for the six cores that can be easily overclocked to +4.1 ghz with stock equipment, to me it's a throwaway. Since I have the same proc on two setups, I can speak at least to that being reliable with both single and multi-gpu, varying levels of ram. Both machines run smoothly on 1080p or 19x12 in one instance.

You can take the splurge/future proof argument either way.

I could build two $8-900 machines over the span of four years and probably outlast the $15-1800 machine while spending the same or less, but it's really a matter of preference.

I will tend to build in smaller chunks based on when the new gen gives a marked improvement over the last. For instance, PCIe 3.0 seems to be worthless, but I wouldn't go so far to say I'm an expert in working video performance. I have the 3.0 cards, but I didn't see any gain worth giving a **** about.

Also - AMD is going hard for the switch to display port over HDMI. The big issue is that there are only a handful of freesync monitors right now and they're not the cheapies. Gsync looks to be competing but I think they're both too early to be mainstream.

Yea, I have the i5-4670K OC'd to 4.0GH'z while playing games. Makes a huge difference.