If you're going to run something like FRAPS at the same time as your game, the 8350 is a good shout- the extra cores mean you can offload the recording program and still have plenty of cores for your game.
But would the performance with an i5-4670k be better overall?
If I get only a small gain, I'll keep my 8350 for awhile but if there is a major (15+ fps) gain to do, I will change.
But would the performance with an i5-4670k be better overall?
I am in the process of refreshing my system, I replace my GPU with a new r9 290x and I wanted to know if my FX-8350 will bottleneck it..
The sole purpose of this computer is to play BF4/fraps and other demanding games.
I plan to expand to CF in 4-6months.
^this. We can help you find data, but you have to make your own decision.Judge yourself
Considering you want to dump $1100 into video cards, and the 8350 is slower with one in pretty much every benchmark on the web the addition of a second card is going to further increase that deficit.
If you sold your current cpu and board the cost to switch won't be that great, and since you're planning to spend $1100 on your graphics cards don't you think it would be a bit silly not to go for maximum performance and not be held back by your processor?
As far as recording goes, the i5 comes with an iGPU which can offload the job from the CPU to the iGPU which directly reduces the FPS impact recording has on your gaming experience.
Top Center is FPS without recording, left is QuickSync with the video playback below it, right is FRAPS with its huge file playing below it as well.
Nvidia has similar tech with ShadowPlay, AMD does not however for their graphics cards.
What motherboard and CPU cooler do you use ??? You could OC the FX8350 to 4.6GHz (turbo off) and you will not be bothered about CPU bottlenecks even with a CF 290X.
Not to mention that in BF4 MP, the Core i5 has worse gameplay than FX8350 even if they have the same fps.
I thought that Raptr could do that?
The videos I snipped were 104MB for QuickSync vs 6GB for FRAPS...