• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

build advice

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
A 4GB 270X? They make those?

No I don't think that's a good idea, 4GB is really only needed for multi monitor resolutions (or 4K). You shouldn't run into issues with 2GB on 1080p.
 
does 3 gb do anything over 2 gb?

apparantly the way they have the memory modules put on they can not do 3 gb so they went with 4 gb instead.
 
what about with productivity software?

if i was running a lot of mods and it had enough vram would the 270x be enough? i think i listed some of the mods i use before. which mods would be useless with enb and hi res textures. do you know anything about this texture combiner? can it be used on a 270x?
 
norseamd said:
what about with productivity software?
Click to expand...
No difference.

if i was running a lot of mods and it had enough vram would the 270x be enough? i think i listed some of the mods i use before. which mods would be useless with enb and hi res textures. do you know anything about this texture combiner? can it be used on a 270x?
Click to expand...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814125496

That is the only card I was able to find (in stock, anyway) that wouldn't push your budget too much. It also has nearly the same RAM speed, so you shouldn't find performance to be a problem outside of high-VRAM scenarios. But, either go with the regular 2GB models, or increase your budget a bit for 4GB. Don't skimp on CPU, PSU, or RAM for it--better to live with slightly lower detail textures than to do that.
 
Cerb said:
That is the only card I was able to find (in stock, anyway) that wouldn't push your budget too much.
Click to expand...

thanks. i already saw that one. i might buy or just wait and see if the other ones come back in stock.

would i need 16 gb ram at all for productivity sofware?
 
also the kaveri is coming out soon. the future of hsa looks interesting if it becomes used more. the only problem is i do not know how fast the a10 7850k will be, and i might need to go with the 8350 to run autocad and such fast enough. the question is would the kaveri come at all close to the visheras in a wide range of tasks? do you think productiviy software will tart using hsa and compute any time soon.
 
norseamd said:
would i need 16 gb ram at all for productivity sofware?
Click to expand...
Need, no. Benefit from, maybe. If you get 8GB, learn to use Task Manager to check your typical RAM usage, so that you ca have an idea of whether 16GB will net you much of anything, or not (particularly used v. available v. cached, and current commit). Include provisions for that in your parts selection, like using standard speed and timing RAM (like 1600MHz 9-9-9 1.5V), and make sure to have enough RAM slots for the upgrade (2 for 1x8GB now, 4 for 2x4GB now).
and i might need to go with the 8350 to run autocad and such fast enough.
Click to expand...
If you want a faster CPU for AutoCAD, get an Intel Core i5-4570. More cores will not get you anywhere with AutoCAD. Some games can already benefit from >4 cores, if not use them on their own, making the 6300 and 6350 good bets for the future. But AutoCAD will always be limited by its main thread's speed, where the 8350 will be an astounding 2.5% faster than a 6300, the same as a 6350, and 2.4% slower than a 4350.

Now, with AutoCAD, if you're not dealing with complex machines, and simulations, we have generally reached a point of, "good enough," so long as you have a video card or good IGP (Haswell IGP is there, now). You can still push the latest and greatest hardware with the right work, but you won't be dead in the water with a run of the mill computer.
 
Last edited:
Cerb said:
Need, no. Benefit from, maybe. If you get 8GB, learn to use Task Manager to check your typical RAM usage, so that you ca have an idea of whether 16GB will net you much of anything, or not (particularly used v. available v. cached, and current commit). Include provisions for that in your parts selection, like using standard speed and timing RAM (like 1600MHz 9-9-9 1.5V), and make sure to have enough RAM slots for the upgrade (2 for 1x8GB now, 4 for 2x4GB now).
Click to expand...

the only time i ever looked at resource usage was either at idle or maybe just recently after the planetside 2 optimization patch. either way 8 gb is usually enough for gaming. i have not really used much productivity software before. i tried blender (on a different computer, did very little) and punch home design. i am more wondering about a wide range of productivity software for learning and enthusiast use. programs include autocad, solidworks, inventor, blender, and some architectural software.

Cerb said:
If you want a faster CPU for AutoCAD, get an Intel Core i5-4570. More cores will not get you anywhere with AutoCAD. Some games can already benefit from >4 cores, if not use them on their own, making the 6300 and 6350 good bets for the future. But AutoCAD will always be limited by its main thread's speed, where the 8350 will be an astounding 2.5% faster than a 6300, the same as a 6350, and 2.4% slower than a 4350.

Now, with AutoCAD, if you're not dealing with complex machines, and simulations, we have generally reached a point of, "good enough," so long as you have a video card or good IGP (Haswell IGP is there, now). You can still push the latest and greatest hardware with the right work, but you won't be dead in the water with a run of the mill computer.
Click to expand...

i prefer amd. i know autocad works fastest on single thread performance but this computer will be used for a wide range of applications. so a mix of single thread and multi thread performance works for me.
 
norseamd said:
i prefer amd.
Click to expand...
That's fine, and it fits your budget well.
i know autocad works fastest on single thread performance but this computer will be used for a wide range of applications. so a mix of single thread and multi thread performance works for me.
Click to expand...
Right, but that's 2 more threads, 1 more FPU, more power to handle, and you won't make much, if any, use of those added threads. By increasing your budget for an FX-8350, you could afford an i5, and a cheaper i5 than the FX-8350 would still be faster for 99% of what you'll do. The FX-6300 makes sense, and will offer you good multitasking and gaming bang/buck. Past the FX-6350, it would not make sense to stay with AMD. With a fairly limited budget, it makes a lot more sense, IMO, to put more money into the GPU, unless your main focus is MMOs.

If your productivity software will mostly be for architectural use, landscape, or civil engineering, RAM capacity and GPU drivers will be the only limiting factors worth worrying about, with all but the lowest-end CPUs available. Quadros and FirePros cost a lot more, for a bit of interface smoothness, so are not worth it for a budget box that also needs to handle gaming, so that one you just accept. For school courses, as well, keep in mind that the course work will need to be possible to work on with 2+ year old cheap notebooks, much less a current budget gaming box, so I really don't think you have anything to worry about, there.
 
Cerb said:
so that one you just accept
Click to expand...

no problem.

Cerb said:
RAM capacity
Click to expand...

so given what i said above does it make any sense to upgrade to 16 gb of ram? given i am thinking about buying a ddr4 domputer during 2015 to 2017 i do not know if i might spend a whole lot on this computer. that said i could always buy more ram later. do you know if buy a second set of memory with the same size speed and timings will work with dual channel?

do you know anything about adapting proffesional drivers to consumer cards? is it worth it? is it stable or safe?
 
Plan to be have room to upgrade RAM, such as by getting a 4-slot board and buying a single 8GB stick with standard settings (like 1.5V and 9-9-9 or 10-10-10 main timings). With an add-on video card, single channel v. dual-channel, and RAM speed, are not worth worrying about. Then, see if you use that 8GB. If you start getting to where you don't have 1+GB of available (cached) RAM, more RAM would help out. It's all what you're doing. If you can use more, and have room to add more, then upgrade.
 
norseamd said:
so given what i said above does it make any sense to upgrade to 16 gb of ram? given i am thinking about buying a ddr4 domputer during 2015 to 2017 i do not know if i might spend a whole lot on this computer.
Click to expand...

DDR4 is not going to be a reason to buy a computer. Sure, it'll increase performance (marginally) and increase density, but it'll also cost a lot more in the beginning. You'll only go DDR4 when you are forced to for a CPU upgrade.

norseamd said:
do you know anything about adapting proffesional drivers to consumer cards? is it worth it? is it stable or safe?
Click to expand...

It's possible to do so by messing around with INF files to change PCI IDs or whatever. But doing so kind of defeats the purpose of professional drivers: they are validated to be stable and work well with a particular set of cards. Once you start hacking on them, that validation goes out the window.
 
thinking about the 280x

at shopblt they have them at near stock price. is it worth the money over the 270x?

what could i run on it? i might buy arma 3 if i get one of these cards. would arma 3 run well o a 270x?
 
A 270X or 280X will run anything out there today, in a playable fashion, including competitive FPS, at around 1080P. It's just a question of detail settings and framerates. A 280X will be faster, can be made to look better, and will have a bit better min FPS. It will also cost more. It's entirely a question of whether you want to spend more for more performance, or less for good enough performance.

Definitely get one with a good non-reference cooler, though, regardless of model.
 
Cerb said:
A 270X or 280X will run anything out there today, in a playable fashion, including competitive FPS, at around 1080P. It's just a question of detail settings and framerates. A 280X will be faster, can be made to look better, and will have a bit better min FPS. It will also cost more. It's entirely a question of whether you want to spend more for more performance, or less for good enough performance.

Definitely get one with a good non-reference cooler, though, regardless of model.
Click to expand...
already know that i guess. i was just wondering exactly what performace i could expect. a 6850 can already run a few games at high detail so if the 270x has a fairly decent upgrade over it i was just wondering if a 280x is needed at all.
 
norseamd said:
already know that i guess. i was just wondering exactly what performace i could expect. a 6850 can already run a few games at high detail so if the 270x has a fairly decent upgrade over it i was just wondering if a 280x is needed at all.
Click to expand...

Here are the charts:

6850 vs R9 270X
6860 vs R9 280X
R9 270X vs R9 280X

Either one is a huge jump from a 6850. The R9 280X is a significant (20-40%) jump from the R9 270X. Right now the 280X it's not a good deal in an absolute sense because Litecoin miners had bumped its price to ~$420, roughly twice as much as the R9 270X.
 
😱 And here I was holding off because they were around $330 for non-reference models just a bit ago...that's insane.
 
since the next gen consoles have come out do you think that the gpu required will increase in the next few years? at least for high settings?
 
Definitely. GPU requirements increase even if you don't get a new console generation... just think of the increase in requirements during the last eight years of the Xbox 360 era.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top