Help me to build a new gaming rig under 70k/75k

[vickybat]

@ $$lionking$$

I really don't understand one thing that you are trying to say or prove here. Above, you said that the real world performance difference between x16-x16 vs x8-x8 is huge which i denied and actually its not that much even negligible for most dual multigpu setup.

Now you give a screenshot showing a 5750cfx faster than 5870/5850.What exactly you're trying to imply friend? Nowhere its mentioned in that screenshot that its x16-x16 or x8-x8. You are simply comparing 5750cfx with 58xx series single cards and offcourse a 6850cfx setup will trounce the above across all tests. The point to mention all these is what i don't understand. So can you explain why u bothered to put up all these?

What i'm trying to say is if you put up two 6850 cards in cfx in a Mobo A having x8-x8 and Mobo B having x16-x16, then at fullhd, the performance difference between the two setups will be negligible. I hope you comprehend this clearly. NF200 chipset is not in question here.

And in gaming, it has been tested that 8120 falls behind 2500k in most new titles at fullhd. Here's a quote for its big brother fx8150 in multigpu gaming setup from HARDOCP.

In every game we played so far between the AMD FX-8150 and Intel 2500K, not once did the AMD FX-8150 come out on top with a dual or triple-GPU configuration. Even when performance was "similar," the Intel CPU still held a certain percentage of performance advantage, over the AMD CPU. Given these results, we saw no need to include the i7 2600K. When we look at pricing, things all start to fall in place. Currently, the Intel i5 2500K can be had for $214.99 online. The AMD FX-8150 is currently more expensive at $279.99 online. That extra $65 will get you twice the cores, but it won't make up for Bulldozers low gameplay performance. Save your money, get an Intel i5 and overclock it for a better experience.

The 2500K only has 4 threads/cores, while the FX-8150 has 8, yet it is certainly not core count holding back performance in games. There was a 200MHz difference between the CPUs, but that just can't account for the level of difference we are seeing here. There are core (forgive the pun) differences between Bulldozer and Sandy Bridge that are just too far and wide apart, and it is clear Sandy Bridge is the better performer.

Check the link here.

Read the whole review and tell me why the 990fx with its extra lanes was not able to beat the z68 with half the lane count in all games that too in dual and triple powerful gpu setups. Bulldozer offers inconsistent performance now and that's why its not recommended at all. Forget the platform its on, the processor is not worth spending your money on now.

 

[devx]

@LIONKING >> Calm down yaar., Thanks for the time & CFX suggestion., but i would like to stick with:-

-2500k as it beats 8120 in most gaming performance., overall 2500K is wise against 8120 & even 8150.,

-Alienware OPTX AW2210 that's ofcourse a beast., but MEGAMIND bought it for a stealing price., and i don't think so that i can get a deal like that.

-If i do CFX in Intel machine., with MSI board x8-x8 doesn't seems to be bad or performance is lacking as per the batman & ., and 2 Msi 6850 seems good than 1 single 6950., but lil. overpriced for me as 4k + 1k more for compatible PSU,

-NZXT case mentioned are good., but i need performance + looks., carbide 400R or HAF 912 advanced.
--------------
Hey everyone., please try CFX with compatible PSU(+1K) within the budget better than 6950 or 7870 and secondly under 20K for GFX + PSU is more better choice than i can think to drop speaker too(4.7k) for a while and don't forget to suggest Monitor too., and this thread is getting little valuable for others too

 

[Tenida]

@OP-Coolermaster 690 II Advanced USB 3.0 version@5.5K is available at smcinternational.in

Cheers

 

[$$Lionking$$]

@vickybat Holy crapp thats long...!!!

I really don't understand one thing that you are trying to say or prove here. Above, you said that the real world performance difference between x16-x16 vs x8-x8 is huge which i denied and actually its not that much even negligible for most dual multigpu setup.

I thought you wud search and read that 57xx CFX review! Anyways - Test system was X58 so x16+x16 it is.

Now you give a screenshot showing a 5750cfx faster than 5870/5850.What exactly you're trying to imply friend? Nowhere its mentioned in that screenshot that its x16-x16 or x8-x8. You are simply comparing 5750cfx with 58xx series single cards and offcourse a 6850cfx setup will trounce the above across all tests. The point to mention all these is what i don't understand. So can you explain why u bothered to put up all these?

What i'm trying to say is if you put up two 6850 cards in cfx in a Mobo A having x8-x8 and Mobo B having x16-x16, then at fullhd, the performance difference between the two setups will be negligible. I hope you comprehend this clearly. NF200 chipset is not in question here. Long explanation, so ill just agree with you here - Right on man! I totally agree with you!! (Not mocking you but trying to cut short and trying to stick to point.)

And in gaming, it has been tested that 8120 falls behind 2500k in most new titles at fullhd. Here's a quote for its big brother fx8150 in multigpu gaming setup from HARDOCP.

Anyways -> You're only partly right about Bulldozer.. and this is why!! (AND BTW I DID MENTION BD WILL GIVE SB LIKE FPS IN SUPER HIGH SETTINGS.. coz in tht situation GPU is bottlenecked.. )

Benchmark Results: Crysis 2 : AMD Bulldozer Review: FX-8150 Gets Tested

HOCP review took GTX 580 in SLI - in that case the bottleneck were the CPUs. But in a 75k budget you cant buy even 1 GTX580 unless youre then pairing it with Athlon dual core.. hehe.. (I wonder how wud that work out?? )

Anyways, when you CFX 2x6850 your GPUs would probably be the bottleneck under the highest quality settings in most games..

Heres what toms has to say...

Crysis 2, our first-person shooter, is indicative of the most visually-engaging GPU-bound titles currently compelling gamers to spend lots of cash on multi-card CrossFire and SLI setups. This is the sort of app AMD would most like you to associate with FX. It’s not going to matter if you buy a $250 processor or a $1000 chip—graphics potential is what determines overall performance. and hey they do mention FX too lol.. I did not see that!

@OP - Dude, Only a Sith deals in absolutes!! as Obi-Wan Kenobi said.. so dont look at how FX does with a CFX/SLI of 20k+ cards... look at how it is going to perform with what you're buying!!