A quick question

[FishFiend]

so i am still working out my new pc because i am indecisive but i wanted to ask how many FPS would i get from this rig in skyrim in the middle of a warzone from the War zones mod?

on ultra default settings?

AMD CPU

AMD A8-5600K Quad Core APU Black Editton Socket FM2 3.4GHz, 4MB Cache AMD A8-5600K Quad Core APU Black Editton Socket FM2 3.4GHz, 4MB Cache

Memory

16GB DDR3 Corsair CMV16GX3M2A1600C11 1600MHz CL11-11-11-30 (2x8GB) 16GB DDR3 Corsair CMV16GX3M2A1600C11 1600MHz CL11-11-11-30 (2x8GB)

Motherboard

Gigabyte GA-78LMT-USB3 AMD 4xDDR3, PCIE, Int. Graphic, USB3.0, RAID, mATX Gigabyte GA-78LMT-USB3 AMD 4xDDR3, PCIE, Int. Graphic, USB3.0, RAID, mATX

Video Card

Powercolor PCIE 3.0 ATI HD7950 V2 3GB 384-bit DDR5, DVI, HDMI, 2xMini DisplayPort Powercolor PCIE 3.0 ATI HD7950 V2 3GB 384-bit DDR5, DVI, HDMI, 2xMini DisplayPort

Hard disk

1TB 1000GB Western Digital Caviar Green WD10EZRX SATA III 6 Gb/s 64MB Cache 1TB 1000GB Western Digital Caviar Green WD10EZRX SATA III 6 Gb/s 64MB Cache

 

Solid State Disk

128GB 2.5" Samsung 830 Series II SATA III 6.0 Gb/s Solid State Disk (SSD) 128GB 2.5" Samsung 830 Series II SATA III 6.0 Gb/s Solid State Disk (SSD)

Power Supply

550W GreatWall Power Supply with 120mm Fan 550W GreatWall Power Supply with 120mm Fan

[FMod]

so i am still working out my new pc because i am indecisive but i wanted to ask how many FPS would i get from this rig in skyrim in the middle of a warzone from the War zones mod?

Only the Usenet Oracle can answer that with certainty.

Or yourself, building it and testing.

All we can tell you is how fast it is in general and maybe in Skyrim overall.

 

AMD A8-5600K Quad Core APU Black Editton Socket FM2 3.4GHz, 4MB Cache

2 modules, 4 cores. This isn't among the fastest CPU, but Skyrim only uses 2 threads and hopefully Win8 can put them on separate modules. Win7, not sure.

 

Powercolor PCIE 3.0 ATI HD7950 V2 3GB 384-bit DDR5, DVI, HDMI, 2xMini DisplayPort

One of the fastest graphics cards, behind only 7970 and 680, especially if overclocked.

 

Here is 5600K CPU-bound: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6347/amd-a10-5800k-a8-5600k-review-trinity-on-the-desktop-part-2/6

With o/c it should match 3220 and 3220 does: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-4170-core-i3-3220-benchmarks,3314-7.html

 

Good SSD, good HDD, OK mobo, OK memory.

 

550W GreatWall Power Supply with 120mm Fan 550W GreatWall Power Supply with 120mm Fan

I know Great Wall makes some very good PSU, but I have no idea if this is one of them or one of the much lower quality models. For a low price I'd be more sure about Corsair TX650V2.

 

Overall this rig would benefit from a faster CPU. If you only play Skyrim and other Bethesda games, esp. with heavy mods, you would need to get 3570K or 2500K. If your needs are more diverse (various games, non-gaming software, etc) and you want to stick with AMD, one of the new Piledriver or 8300 series is an option.

8350 crosses the 60fps mark in most all games, including Skyrim: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8350-vishera-review,3328-14.html

 

5600K just isn't up to speed with the rest of your build. You don't need the internal GPU and the little extra money a 8350 build will cost (the mobos are cheaper) will be money well spent. To max out Skyrim performance with heavy mods, 2500K or 3570K would be needed.

[kalikka]

Uhh... The mobo you have picked is AM3+, the CPU you have picked is FM2. Nononononono!

Pick a FM2 mobo if you are going for FM2 CPU.

 

1. You dont need 16gb RAM, 8gb is semi-overkill for games.

2. CPU is not that great for gaming. The main point of FM2 CPUs is the good iGPU. 3570k or fx-8350 is the way to go for gaming.

3. If 7950 windforce doesnt cost much more than powercolor, take wf instead. And preferably with never settle bundle.

 

OC'd 7950wf can run anything in ultra. Even 3D skyrim isnt a problem (hard to get the ENB mods work with tridef >.<).

Edited November 26, 2012 by kalikka

[hoofhearted4]

also any reason youre getting an mATX board? doesnt really matter, just curious if you know youre getting it.

[Dan3345]

If your looking to get a constant 60 fps on high settings in skyrim I can guarantee you aren't going to get it with an AMD CPU. Well at least not that AMD CPU.

 

The 7950 is fine, but for the price you would be better off with a 7970. And if money is no object and you really want to ensure high fps in intensive scenes I would strongly recommend a 680. But once you get into the 680 or 7970 range, really its up to you and your wallet. The price of the 680 is a bit exaggerated at the moment, and for the performance the 7970 is a great deal.

[kalikka]

7970 is the fastest gpu in the market atm, not 680.

 

There are 0 games that OC'd 7950 cant run with ultra@+60fps. The never settle drivers really gave a massive boost to performance.

r7950WF @1150/1500mhz OC, and 1920x1080p 120hz monitor. BF3 ultra runs ~70fps easy.

The graphs ^ there have the r7950@800mhz clocks, so the performance is a lot higher after OC (+45% to core clocks...).

 

But 7950 really needs an equal CPU, I doubt that the AMD APU has enough power for some games = bottlenecking the 7950.

Edited November 26, 2012 by kalikka

[Dan3345]

7970 is the fastest gpu in the market atm, not 680.

 

There are 0 games that OC'd 7950 cant run with ultra@+60fps. The never settle drivers really gave a massive boost to performance.

r7950WF @1150/1500mhz OC, and 1920x1080p 120hz monitor. BF3 ultra runs ~70fps easy.

The graphs ^ there have the r7950@800mhz clocks, so the performance is a lot higher after OC (+45% to core clocks...).

 

But 7950 really needs an equal CPU, I doubt that the AMD APU has enough power for some games = bottlenecking the 7950.

Yeah AMD really stepped up their drivers support. Which is a shame because when I had my two 6950's they were hugely lacking.

 

Oh well, I'm satisfied with my 680 :thumbsup:

[FMod]

7970 had considerably better theoreticals from the start (theoreticals means absolute performance if used to 100%; very few programs get to 80%+). The less popular maker will always lag behind in driver support, so, let's say, AMD drivers used 42% of their maximum performance at the start, while NV drivers used 48%. Now AMD drivers are at say 52% and NV at 54%. Eventually both will top out at maybe 60%, it doesn't go further for games.

 

Right now there's little reason to buy top of the line NVs for single-GPU setups; for SLI they are still better - less power draw. 660Ti is relatively competitive, 660 normal isn't, 670 was undercut by 7950 price cuts. Plus 7950 and 7970 o/c further. NV has locked 600 series at +100mv voltage rise, and, combined with poor silicon design and high starting clocks, it results in very little overclocking headroom.

 

I have 2x680 Lightnings ATM (BTW, the first 5,000 Lightnings with LN2 switch on and ES or PR cards are the only 680s with unlocked voltage; sadly, low-level design flaws are still there), but if picking right now I'd probably go for a pair of 7970 to wait out till the next gen.

690 wasn't available and it's too difficult to sell (I'll start listing mine close to the 8970 announcement); two 7970 mean a lot of heat and CF support is only now at OK level. But you can run 2x680 on air with a good enough case, not 2x7970 unless you enjoy turbine noise. OTOH 7970 can fold, generate bitcoin, run complex GPGPU.