Ah okay, I run an MSI X99A SLI Plus I mean is that a good board, I didnt mean to be rude to EVGA...but what would you suggest for a good mobo?
No. Hyper 212 Evo (£25) will keep an overclocked 4690K below 65C under load. Stop telling people to waste money. And please do some research before posting advice. ASUS, MSI and Gigabyte are all good. Unless you need SLI just get one of the cheaper H170 boards. Also, some of the low end LGA1151 boards use DDR3 RAM. Make sure to get a DDR4 board for future proofing. --- Post updated --- ASUS. Best build quality all around. MSI and Gigabyte are also very good. If I had to get an X99 board I'd go for the SLI Plus. It's cheap (for X99) and it has all the features you need. Also one of the best looking motherboards I've seen.
I appreciate your help, I would have gone more expensive for my machine but for once I went cheaper on the motherboard, I can always upgrade in the future
Honestly, with enthusiast platforms like X99 anything other than the cheapest boards is overkill for all but the highest end builds (4 way SLI/CF kind of stuff).
Yeah the bottleneck eventually in my system will be my monster 5960X that only has 40 PCI Lanes and I am using 16 of them already leaving 24 left so I can go SLI if I wanted but seriously with a pc as powerful as mine as of yet why would I bother spending another £500 on another GTX980Ti I am happy with the performance as is and another graphics card would only add more heat to my system which I am trying to keep cooler...
Ah I misread. Thought it was £150-160 You might find an i5 6600 for that amount. Or an i5 6600K if you plan to overclock.
He's not. AMD CPUs are over 4 years old now. Single thread performance is rubbish. A low end i5 will get very close to the MT performance of an 8 core FX, with half as many threads. ST, a £50 Haswell Pentium is over 60% faster. Hell, my laptop's CPU - also 4 years old - has better single thread performance than an FX-8350. Also having half as many FPUs doesn't help, an FX 8-core is about as good at floating point math as a Core 2 Quad released 8 years ago.
While a 40% improvement is great. Thats basically only bringing it inline with intel again rather than overtaking XD Although it is supposed to be increasing the FPU count too.
Owning a company's product != fanboy Intel CPUs are objectively better, there's basically no point in buying AMD unless you want to be stuck with a 4 year old architecture and terrible single thread performance. Also, he owns a laptop, good luck finding a decent laptop with an AMD CPU. Spoiler alert, they don't exist, all AMD mobile chips are low-end APUs.
AMD is really good if you can find them on sale. I got a 9590 for $180, with a free $60 game I would have bought anyway, so in certain circumstances, AMD is worth it.
Nope, not even at that price. Say you get a 9590 for $180. You'll need a 990FX board, which starts at $110. You'll also need liquid cooling (even AMD themselves say this), which is at least $80 for a decent cooler. Add that up: FX-9590: $180 990FX board: $110 Liquid cooler: $80 Total: $370 An i5-6600K is $250. You can get a Z170 board for $80, and a $30 Hyper 212 Evo will keep the CPU cool even if you overclock it. So: i5-6600K: $250 Z170 board: $80 212 Evo: $30 Total: $360 You also have to keep in mind that you'll need at least a 750W PSU for the 9590, while you can easily run the 6600K overclocked on a 600W (assuming single high TDP GPU such as R9 390 or 980 Ti). So overall. A 6600K is cheaper. What about performance? Looking at benchmark results from anandtech bench: In multi thread, the 9590 has a slight advantage of about 10-20% over the 6600K. But single thread, the 6600K is about 50-60% better - at stock clocks. The i5 will easily overclock to 4.4GHz - a 10% improvement - with the Hyper 212 Evo. The 9590 is already very close to clock and voltage limits (since it's really just a well binned, overclocked 8350). So the 6600K is actually cheaper (even when the 9590 is massively discounted), it's more efficient, and it's better for gaming. And it can be overclocked more. Sorry, but there's absolutely no reason to get a 9590. Things might look better for the FX-8320, which is $150, can run on a $60 motherboard with a 212 Evo, and has room for overclocking. But it's really still not worth it - a low end i5 is a better CPU in almost every way. TL;DR: No.
