Hey, PC gaming isn't so complicated or expensive

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Powermoloch

Lifer
Jul 5, 2005
10,084
4
76
if you're gonna spend that amount of money, why not a 6950 or a 570.

You're gonna get:
- up to date gear
- better power management
- driver support
- did i mention that it was new :)
 

endlessmike133

Senior member
Jan 2, 2011
444
0
0
Especially if you can find the 5870 for cheap.
Seriously, are these guys on crack or something?

just because its new doesnt automatically mean its better, every single benchmark out there shows the 5870 outperforming its successors by a good amount. cant believe theyre trying to convince me to not spend 240$ on a 5870..
 

Davidh373

Platinum Member
Jun 20, 2009
2,428
0
71
Wow... do what you want, but the 6950 is obviously 10 fps (or around 25% faster) on most games... so the question is... "Did you read my link"?
 

endlessmike133

Senior member
Jan 2, 2011
444
0
0
what do you guys think

AMD Athlon II X4 640 + 6950 with a CPU upgrade in a year (most likely an enthusiast sandy bridge)

OR

2500k + GTX 460/560 with a GPU upgrade in a year (whatever high end card I can get)

the AMD + 6950 would be cheaper and honestly perform better (for gaming) wouldnt it?
 
Last edited:

mfenn

Elite Member
Jan 17, 2010
22,400
5
71
www.mfenn.com
what do you guys think

AMD Athlon II X4 640 + 6950 with a CPU upgrade in a year (most likely an enthusiast sandy bridge)

OR

2500k + GTX 460/560 with a GPU upgrade in a year (whatever high end card I can get)

the AMD + 6950 would be cheaper and honestly perform better (for gaming) wouldnt it?

Depends on the resolution. The Athlon II will be a bottleneck at anything lower than 1080P and will sometimes be one even at 1080P.
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
Depends on the resolution. The Athlon II will be a bottleneck at anything lower than 1080P and will sometimes be one even at 1080P.
it doesn't matter too much what the resolution is because the Athlon X4 would be a stupid choice for building a gaming pc. the 2500k option makes much more sense since that will easily be viable for 3 years of high end gaming wheres the Athlon X4 is already well behind i5 even in current cpu intensive games. the gpu is a simple and easy upgrade to make when the time comes. so bottom line IMO is the 2500k/gtx560 option makes MUCH more sense.
 
Last edited:

mfenn

Elite Member
Jan 17, 2010
22,400
5
71
www.mfenn.com
it doesn't matter too much what the resolution is because the Athlon X4 would be a stupid choice for building a gaming pc. the 2500k option makes much more sense since that will easily be viable for 3 years of high end gaming wheres the Athlon X4 is already well behind i5 even in current cpu intensive games. the gpu is a simple and easy upgrade to make when the times comes. so bottom line IMO is the 2500k/gtx560 option makes MUCH more sense.

I am in agreement with you that Sandy Bridge would be better in the long run. The OP was wondering how they would perform today; though I probably should have mentioned the longevity issue.
 

Davidh373

Platinum Member
Jun 20, 2009
2,428
0
71
it doesn't matter too much what the resolution is because the Athlon X4 would be a stupid choice for building a gaming pc. the 2500k option makes much more sense since that will easily be viable for 3 years of high end gaming wheres the Athlon X4 is already well behind i5 even in current cpu intensive games. the gpu is a simple and easy upgrade to make when the time comes. so bottom line IMO is the 2500k/gtx560 option makes MUCH more sense.

Agreed. Get SB + 560 (releases the 25th apparently!)
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
Is the 560 better than the 570? I thought a higher number meant the card was more advanced?
where did anybody say the 560 was better than a 570? the 560 will certainly be slower but its looking to be a MUCH better bang for buck card.