Want to upgrade my computer for this game, need some advice.

[Auroro]

First if all, thank you for all of the responses.

Are any of the AMD chips worth the upgrade? Would assume that I would probably still have to change out my motherboard.

I do not have an SSD, so I'll defintely pick one up.

Im not opposed to getting a 970 or the Radeon equivalant. Just want to make sure I upgrade what will be the biggest improvement first. As it is I have to play on laptop standard and turn off a few effects to stay around 60 fps.
Even on WoW I can only get 60 fps on high, with anti-aliasing off. Not exactly a hard game to run max. Same applies to even SWTOR.

[Auroro]

Swtor I have to play on medium, with character models on high. Even then its still jumpy.

[dementiondrive]

i have a AMD 8350 CPU and a GTX 760 in my PC.

i get 45-80 frames depending where i am in the world.

that is on max DX9 as well.

since you have a 6300. that is still a FX CPU. the 8350 is right in line of the FX chipset. you just have a entry CPU in the line.

[NoahArks]

snip

It's powerful enough to run it on 30-40fps. I ran this game on a GTX660, 8gb ram and a i7 3770k till february and it ran fine. Not like this game gives you benefits playing on 60fps. also if you consider his budget being 300-500, then it's the obvious choice to not touch the gpu till later when he has more money to spend. I can pretty much vouch for saying that the gtx 960 would be able to run this game on 60fps constantly. Though, if he's going for a gpu in the 200-400 range, it's gonna be either the 380 or the 390, because those blow it out of the park. I own a 390 myself atm, and it's maybe 61 degrees in a crowded area or in void ark, lower when there isnt as much to render.

When changing systems, you actually want to work on the full system, instead of just the gpu, since those tend to cost more than most components combined. Also a 300+ costing gpu will bottleneck with the fx6300. So it's cpu/mobo > ram (if you can't reuse) > gpu. SSD is a luxery item in a gaming build. It's not a must have.

[Auroro]

Ok.

What if I upgraded to a 8350, and purchased either a r9 380 4G, or a 390? About a 100 dollar difference between cards.

[LunaSnowfield]

AMD CPUs are literally garbage.

Go with a I5 from series 3000.

If you want a GPU go with a 960/970 Nvidia (ASUS/EVGA are the best imo).

6-8GB of ram are perfect, there is no need to get a 2400mhz just normal 1333-1660mhz.

[Judge_Xero]

Ok.

What if I upgraded to a 8350, and purchased either a r9 380 4G, or a 390? About a 100 dollar difference between cards.

You wont see a significant difference without changing basically your entire system.

i5/i7 (Haswell or Skylake but Skylake also requires DDR4 Memory, where Haswell still uses DDR3) and then GPU wise you'd be looking at GTX 970 or better.

But all that will get you is probably 15-20 FPS on the low end (Crowded areas) and way over 60 FPS on the high end, which is higher than most Monitor refresh rates and is generally unusable, and at the cost of $1000+ for the whole system.

Your best bang for the buck is going to an Intel CPU i5 or better, to get an increase in those minimum frames so that your game doesn't stutter in populated areas.

You should using Maximum Settings and then check off Occlusion Culling, LOD and LOD Streaming.

Then under Other Settings you can adjust Character and Object Quantity. Go to a highly populated area and start from Minimum and wait till your FPS stabilize. If it's a reasonable level, then adjust it a bit higher, and so on.

[Krindor]

It's powerful enough to run it on 30-40fps. I ran this game on a GTX660, 8gb ram and a i7 3770k till february and it ran fine. Not like this game gives you benefits playing on 60fps. also if you consider his budget being 300-500, then it's the obvious choice to not touch the gpu till later when he has more money to spend. I can pretty much vouch for saying that the gtx 960 would be able to run this game on 60fps constantly. Though, if he's going for a gpu in the 200-400 range, it's gonnabe either the 380 or the 390, because those blow it out of the park. I own a 390 myself atm, and it's maybe 61 degrees in a crowded area or in void ark, lower when there isnt as much to render.

When changing systems, you actually want to work on the full system, instead of just the gpu, since those tend to cost more than most components combined. Also a 300+ costing gpu will bottleneck with the fx6300. So it's cpu/mobo > ram (if you can't reuse) > gpu. SSD is a luxery item in a gaming build. It's not a must have.

Personally I have noticed a big difference between running it at 40 FPS and 60 FPS, also running the HW benchmark i average at 35 FPS, this with a 3770k OCd to 4.5 ghz. The CPU isn't going to make that big of a difference except for in areas like Idyll and around hunts. Any content where a FPS drop is affecting the content itself is during raid where the GPU is the one doing most work as there aren't that many players to rend. Also just to add in, in idyll I drop to around 20 FPS. Therefore a GPU is going to be a better choice than a CPU. Also based on the 3dmark physics score the difference is about 20% between the 3770 and fx 6300. Also the difference between the 4950 and 6300 is around 3-5%. So buying a new CPU/mobo is going to cost the same as a new GPU and give him around a 20% increase in performance while a GPU is going to give around 100%-150% increase in performance.

[NoahArks]

snip

You really should learn the definition of bottleneck. His gpu can be replaced last, also I said 60 fps doesnt give you more benefits over 30-40 in THIS game. Also, 4590 vs 6300 can't even be compared. It's comparing a apple to a pear. The 4590 has 42% better single core, 52% faster quad core, 11% faster multicore, So where did you get your 3-5%? the i5 4690 is 15% faster than the i7 3770k. Him buying either the GTX970 or the R9 390 will bottle neck his PC. Even with a 960 or 380 there is a chance of bottleneck. His FPS will spike from high to low and in some cases it will give him a lower performance than he would've had with his gtx 660. This is the reason I've said he should focus on everything but the gpu.

[Krindor]

You really should learn the definition of bottleneck. His gpu can be replaced last, also I said 60 fps doesnt give you more benefits over 30-40 in THIS game. Also, 4590 vs 6300 can't even be compared. It's comparing a apple to a pear. The 4590 has 42% better single core, 52% faster quad core, 11% faster multicore, So where did you get your 3-5%? the i5 4690 is 15% faster than the i7 3770k. Him buying either the GTX970 or the R9 390 will bottle neck his PC. Even with a 960 or 380 there is a chance of bottleneck. His FPS will spike from high to low and in some cases it will give him a lower performance than he would've had with his gtx 660. This is the reason I've said he should focus on everything but the gpu.

I'm basing my numbers on the benchmarks done on 3D mark and I am talking about this game, being at 30-40 FPS is quite noticeable in the game compared to 60 FPS. http://www.futuremark.com/hardware/cpu look at the practical difference between the 4950 and 6300, you'll see that the actual difference isn't big, of course this is more favorable for the multi-core 6300. But the average performance is going to be better with a stronger GPU than with a stronger CPU. I would love to see your sources proving the difference a CPU is going to make, I have yet to see a benchmark showing the 15% between the 4690 and 3770, the average difference is about 5%. If anything going from a 6300 to 8350 and getting the 970 would still be within his budget and get him a lot better performance. This is due to it using the same socket as the 6300 yet being an upgrade that will limit the bottleneck.