Sanctorum wrote 860k is not an "outdated CPU" by any means. It's not even a year old yet. The 860k is newer than even the 4460, which is an updated 4440. The 4440 was released over a year before the 860k. 860k is similar to i3 performance, but with 4 true cores. 860k will be fine. The 960 however, is a poor choice considering the AMD equivalent out-performs it. R9 280/285/280x/380 would be a better choice(in that order).

Thanks for the advice I also thought the 4440 was released July 2013 and that the 860K was current.

Well who cares... Athlons shouldn't ever have been made again. I don't see why AMD are so dumb, but whatever.

I would happily pay the extra for the i5 over any AMD CPU.

Haswell cores are MUCH stronger than anything AMD has to offer.

Also the 960 would be a perfect addition to any rig, and I'd happily take it over AMD's equivalent, due to the features it has and the drivers. AMD drivers are jank and should be destroyed with fire.

OP: For the games you will play, the i5 - 960 team up will be perfect. Just coz you can get better GPU performance, doesn't mean you should sacrifice in other areas.

Craig, that's just AMD hate for no reason. Single core performance of the 860k is very close to that of the 4440, for a lot less(£100+ in fact), and the 860k can be overclocked for even better results. The i5's multi-threaded work will be better because it is a better CPU, but the 860k is still a great chip, for a great price. The whole driver bs makes no sense to me. AMD's drivers have been doing much better recently and Nvidia have been tanking their older generation cards in driver updates. For £155, you can get an R9 280 which out-performs the 960, and has an extra 1GB of VRAM, which will come in handy.

Also, @OP- Yes, the 860k is more recent, but that also does not mean the i5's are "outdated" either FYI. The i5 is still a better CPU.

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
better GPU and you can easily add another 380 in XFire at any point. The 4GB VRAM will come in handy. Overclock the 860k for better performance if you want. Plus, an SSD for your OS.

Sanctyy, you know me. I don't hate on anything unless i have a reason, I used to love AMD's chips, they were a great bang for your buck chip. But after using i5's for so long, i really cannot see the point in getting pretty much any AMD chip over an i5.

I mean yes, in games they might be very similar, but it's everything else that AMD falls behind. I tried encoding movies on my AMD chips, I almost grew a beard by the time it finished.

And anyways I'm not hating on the AMD chip, I've not used it so I can't. But would I buy one... No!

I just don't like to recommend parts that i personally wouldn't buy, and i wouldn't buy the Athlon.

As for the GPU, it's personal preference, I personally prefer NVidia cards, due to the lower power outputs and usually handier features to me. But this is where OP should research into what would be better for him personally.

I wouldn't buy an 860k either, but I have a 4790k so that obviously makes sense. The i5 is still a better CPU, like I said but it's at least £100 more expensive for the same performance in gaming, and OP stated he'll only be playing CS:GO and CoD 4, the i5 will offer no improvement there. The only time the i5 will truly beat the 860k by a substantial amount is multi-threaded tasks, which CoD 4 and CS:GO are not. The 860k performs almost on par with an i3, with 4 true cores instead of 2 cores, and 4 threads.

GPU's aren't personal preference. The fact is that the 380 out-performs the 960. Just like an R9 290 or 390 out-performs the 960. The GTX 970 is an efficient card but the 380 is just as efficient as a 960, if not, more so.

Craigyy wrote Sanctyy, you know me. I don't hate on anything unless i have a reason, I used to love AMD's chips, they were a great bang for your buck chip. But after using i5's for so long, i really cannot see the point in getting pretty much any AMD chip over an i5.

I mean yes, in games they might be very similar, but it's everything else that AMD falls behind. I tried encoding movies on my AMD chips, I almost grew a beard by the time it finished.

And anyways I'm not hating on the AMD chip, I've not used it so I can't. But would I buy one... No!

I just don't like to recommend parts that i personally wouldn't buy, and i wouldn't buy the Athlon.

As for the GPU, it's personal preference, I personally prefer NVidia cards, due to the lower power outputs and usually handier features to me. But this is where OP should research into what would be better for him personally.

You both bring good points to the table. I will indeed do some more research and make a decision on which GPU I will buy however after a quick comparison view I can clearly see the R9 out-performs the 960 but I am still yet to make a decision.

If you live on benchmarks and spec sheets then GPU's aren't preference. But I would most probably take a 960 over a 280(X).

Wouldn't mind a 380 tbh, but still.

I fully understand the i5 won't offer much improvement over the Athlon in those games, but if he went to encode a video or edit a video, then the i5 will put it in it's place.

But yeah, that's me done.