Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > CPUs and Overclocking

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals
· Free Stuff
· Contests and Sweepstakes
· Black Friday 2013
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-02-2012, 11:50 PM   #1
obZen
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 3
Default AMD Phenom II x4 965 and GTX 670

Hi, I'm planning on upgrading my ATI 5870 to a GTX 670 and I am wondering whether I will experience a noticeable bottleneck with my Phenom II x4 965 at 3.8ghz. I play at 1920x1080 resolution and I'll mainly be playing BF3. What kind of fps should I expect in BF3 with Ultra settings and 4xmsaa?

Thanks
obZen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 12:03 AM   #2
AtenRa
Diamond Member
 
AtenRa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Athens Greece
Posts: 5,199
Default

Depends of the map and the player count, but i believe you will get 60fps most of the time.
__________________
Thief : Mantle CPU Scaling and Power evaluation
(10 CPUs at default and Overclock, including Power Consumption)
AtenRa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 12:13 AM   #3
Greenlepricon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 392
Default

BF3 will mostly be gpu limited and the fps should be about 60 with that setup. If you're locked at that frame rate then you shouldn't really have a problem.
Greenlepricon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 03:38 AM   #4
lehtv
Diamond Member
 
lehtv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 9,619
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenlepricon View Post
BF3 will mostly be gpu limited and the fps should be about 60 with that setup. If you're locked at that frame rate then you shouldn't really have a problem.
Not true. Online play is very CPU heavy. For reference, my i7-920 was bottlenecking GTX 560 Ti in 64-player Conquest which is probably the most popular game mode. FPS would be 60 most of the time but it would drop to 45 on occasion and GPU-Z would report much less than full GPU load during those moments.

Phenom II X4 is a good 30-50% slower than i7-920, and GTX 670 is 70% faster than 560 Ti. There will be bottlenecking pretty much all the time during online play, and it will be severe on the larger servers.
__________________
System specs
lehtv is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 09:02 AM   #5
nurturedhate
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 295
Default

I concur with lehtv. I have an i5-2400 at 3.7 and it bottlenecks my overclocked 580 on 64 player maps. In heavy fights i see dips into the high 40s. Maintaining 60+ fps on 64 player maps is VERY cpu heavy.
nurturedhate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 09:30 AM   #6
Idontcare
Administrator
Elite Member
 
Idontcare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: 臺北市
Posts: 20,101
Default

Welcome to the forums obZen

Quote:
Originally Posted by obZen View Post
Hi, I'm planning on upgrading my ATI 5870 to a GTX 670 and I am wondering whether I will experience a noticeable bottleneck with my Phenom II x4 965 at 3.8ghz. I play at 1920x1080 resolution and I'll mainly be playing BF3. What kind of fps should I expect in BF3 with Ultra settings and 4xmsaa?

Thanks
Any particular reason you are prioritizing a GPU upgrade versus upgrading the CPU instead?
Idontcare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 10:18 AM   #7
AtenRa
Diamond Member
 
AtenRa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Athens Greece
Posts: 5,199
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Idontcare View Post
Welcome to the forums obZen



Any particular reason you are prioritizing a GPU upgrade versus upgrading the CPU instead?
BF3 is very GPU depended, HD5870 is too slow for that game unless you dont care playing at lower IQ settings. But doing so you get a handicap vs other players playing with High or Ultra settings. (View distance etc)
__________________
Thief : Mantle CPU Scaling and Power evaluation
(10 CPUs at default and Overclock, including Power Consumption)
AtenRa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 10:22 AM   #8
guskline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lebanon, PA
Posts: 2,633
Default

How much does the speed and type of Internet Service provider affect play? I ask because I notice the mention of how this or that cpu affects multiplayer performance and I wonder what service provider the poster is using. Just curious. For example, lehtv, I follow your posts and they make sense. What ISP do you use? I wonder how much affect it has on different cpus being used? BTW I use Comcast but opted for a higher service than standard.
__________________
3930k @ 4.5 - SaberTh X79 - 780Classy EVGA Hydro Copper block
16G DDR3-1600 - Intel 530 SSD - 2560x1440 Achieva Shimian
Win 8.1 - PC P&C 950W - CM HAF 932 Adv - Custom WC

Last edited by guskline; 12-03-2012 at 10:25 AM.
guskline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 10:35 AM   #9
AtenRa
Diamond Member
 
AtenRa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Athens Greece
Posts: 5,199
Default

Low/High Ping plays the biggest difference in Online First Person Shooters.

I CANNOT play competitive in the US servers and US players will have hard time Play in EU servers due to high Ping.
__________________
Thief : Mantle CPU Scaling and Power evaluation
(10 CPUs at default and Overclock, including Power Consumption)
AtenRa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 11:06 AM   #10
Torn Mind
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Maryland
Posts: 2,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Idontcare View Post
Welcome to the forums obZen



Any particular reason you are prioritizing a GPU upgrade versus upgrading the CPU instead?
Would a Piledriver really help him out that much? Or do you mean scrapping the CPU+Mobo and going with Intel i5+Z77? I'm just curious.
__________________
SR061| Asrock H77M | 2x2GB G.Skill 1333Mhz NS RAM | PowerSpec TX-606 Case| 500GB 7200RPM Seagate Drive| Antec Eartwatts EA-500 (2006) | Asus DVD Burner | parallell and COM port header | Old Dell Keyboard
http://www.heatware.com/eval.php?id=93090
Torn Mind is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 11:12 AM   #11
inf64
Platinum Member
 
inf64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,001
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Torn Mind View Post
Would a Piledriver really help him out that much? Or do you mean scrapping the CPU+Mobo and going with Intel i5+Z77? I'm just curious.
In most games ,yes. OCed Vishera is very close to OCed 3570K in BF3 MP (7970 used).
__________________
ShintaiDK:"There will be no APU in PS4 and Xbox720."
ShintaiDK:"No quadchannel either.[in Kaveri]"
CHADBOGA:"Because he[OBR] is a great man."
inf64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 11:53 AM   #12
Torn Mind
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Maryland
Posts: 2,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by inf64 View Post
That's pretty good So he stands to gain about 21-23 fps with overclocking for BF3. Hopefully, his setup can handle the OC'd FX-8350 and the electricity it demands. Now, all that is left is figuring out the discrepancy in performance between the 7970 and 5870 and the resulting framerate.
__________________
SR061| Asrock H77M | 2x2GB G.Skill 1333Mhz NS RAM | PowerSpec TX-606 Case| 500GB 7200RPM Seagate Drive| Antec Eartwatts EA-500 (2006) | Asus DVD Burner | parallell and COM port header | Old Dell Keyboard
http://www.heatware.com/eval.php?id=93090
Torn Mind is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 12:56 PM   #13
Hubb1e
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 393
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Torn Mind View Post
That's pretty good So he stands to gain about 21-23 fps with overclocking for BF3. Hopefully, his setup can handle the OC'd FX-8350 and the electricity it demands. Now, all that is left is figuring out the discrepancy in performance between the 7970 and 5870 and the resulting framerate.
I went from a 5850 to a 7950 and got pretty much the same framerate.

Why? Because you can adjust the resolution, AA, and texture quality so you can always be CPU limited or limited by the refresh rate of the monitor. If you move from a 5870 to a 7970 you'll get a better looking game with the same framerate. BF3 multiplayer is CPU limited even on an overclocked i5 so you'll get better performance out of a new CPU and in this case AMD's chips are competitive. Can a 3.8ghz PhII give you decent framerates, yes, but you can do better with more CPU. Set your graphics settings to low and see what your framerates are. Then, you can see if you are happy with the performance. I'd say you'll be dropping into the 30s with that CPU on some scenes. When I went from a 3ghz Q6600 to a 4.4ghz i5 the difference in framerate was substantial. When I went from a stock 5850 to a OC 7950 the difference was only visual. It looked better but ultimately I was a little disappointed since I was still CPU limited so I upgraded to that i5.
Hubb1e is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 02:12 PM   #14
Termie
Diamond Member
 
Termie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 6,832
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by inf64 View Post
Great information there. First, a heavily overclocked Phenom II is a serious bottleneck to a 7970 (and hence a 670). Second, a hugely overclocked Vishera (5GHz!?!) is almost as fast as the slowest Ivy quad sold, the i5-3330.

Honestly, I'd get the 3330 before upgrading to Vishera. Better yet, I'd get the 3570k, and I'd do it before upgrading the 5870, which is actually quite fast in BF3. It can average close to 50fps at 1080p/high, which is better than the OP's Phenom can achieve.
__________________
Gaming (56W idle): i7-3770K@4.5 | CM Hyper 212+ | Asus Max V Gene | EVGA GTX 780 Ti | 16GB DDR3@1866
Samsung 830 256GB | Corsair PP 256GB | Samsung F4 2TB | Silverstone TJ08B-E | Seasonic X-650 | Dell U2713HM
Bench (42W idle): i7-4770K@4.4 | Asus Gryphon | HD 7870 | 16GB DDR3@1866 | Crucial M4 256GB | Win8.1
Is Windows 8.1 good for gamers? Get The Tech Buyer's Guru take: Windows 7 vs. Windows 8.1 in Games
Upgrading?
Browse the TBG Hot Deals Blog!
Termie is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 02:56 PM   #15
AtenRa
Diamond Member
 
AtenRa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Athens Greece
Posts: 5,199
Default

Heh, GPU bottlenecked even in Close Quarters. How many players and what Driver did they used ??

http://translate.googleusercontent.c...i1GsNMwwRwqebA

Core i5 3570K @ 3400MHz + Turbo gets 72,4fps


Core i5 3570K @ 4500MHz gets 74,3fps
__________________
Thief : Mantle CPU Scaling and Power evaluation
(10 CPUs at default and Overclock, including Power Consumption)
AtenRa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 03:32 PM   #16
Torn Mind
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Maryland
Posts: 2,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hubb1e View Post
I went from a 5850 to a 7950 and got pretty much the same framerate.

Why? Because you can adjust the resolution, AA, and texture quality so you can always be CPU limited or limited by the refresh rate of the monitor. If you move from a 5870 to a 7970 you'll get a better looking game with the same framerate. BF3 multiplayer is CPU limited even on an overclocked i5 so you'll get better performance out of a new CPU and in this case AMD's chips are competitive. Can a 3.8ghz PhII give you decent framerates, yes, but you can do better with more CPU. Set your graphics settings to low and see what your framerates are. Then, you can see if you are happy with the performance. I'd say you'll be dropping into the 30s with that CPU on some scenes. When I went from a 3ghz Q6600 to a 4.4ghz i5 the difference in framerate was substantial. When I went from a stock 5850 to a OC 7950 the difference was only visual. It looked better but ultimately I was a little disappointed since I was still CPU limited so I upgraded to that i5.
I ask these questions because I get to learn something--I'm myself am ignorant on these matters--and I think the OP would be well-served with good information.

This guy does have a hard requirement for resolution; he mentioned it in the opening post, but he can adjust those other settings you mentioned.
__________________
SR061| Asrock H77M | 2x2GB G.Skill 1333Mhz NS RAM | PowerSpec TX-606 Case| 500GB 7200RPM Seagate Drive| Antec Eartwatts EA-500 (2006) | Asus DVD Burner | parallell and COM port header | Old Dell Keyboard
http://www.heatware.com/eval.php?id=93090
Torn Mind is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 03:43 PM   #17
frozentundra123456
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,664
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AtenRa View Post
Heh, GPU bottlenecked even in Close Quarters. How many players and what Driver did they used ??

http://translate.googleusercontent.c...i1GsNMwwRwqebA

Core i5 3570K @ 3400MHz + Turbo gets 72,4fps


Core i5 3570K @ 4500MHz gets 74,3fps
At stock the FX is not GPU bottlenecked. It is slower than the i5. When overclocked to 5 ghz the FX reaches the same performance as the i5 overclocked or stock, i.e. both are then GPU bottlenecked.
frozentundra123456 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 03:49 PM   #18
sm625
Diamond Member
 
sm625's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 4,321
Default

What that graph tells me is that ANY i5 would be fine. Right? There is hardly any difference between a stock 3330 and a 3570k @ 4500MHz! It would be nice to know how many players there were.
__________________
I am looking for a cheap upgrade to my 3 year old computer.
AT forum member #1: Buy a 4770k

I am looking for a way to get 10 more fps in TF2.
AT forum member #2: Buy a 4770k
sm625 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 04:10 PM   #19
inf64
Platinum Member
 
inf64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,001
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Termie View Post
Great information there. First, a heavily overclocked Phenom II is a serious bottleneck to a 7970 (and hence a 670). Second, a hugely overclocked Vishera (5GHz!?!) is almost as fast as the slowest Ivy quad sold, the i5-3330.

Honestly, I'd get the 3330 before upgrading to Vishera. Better yet, I'd get the 3570k, and I'd do it before upgrading the 5870, which is actually quite fast in BF3. It can average close to 50fps at 1080p/high, which is better than the OP's Phenom can achieve.
That "slowest IB quad" is running OCed to ~3.6Ghz + Turbo on top of that. Also that "slowest IB quad" is 1-2% slower than fastest IB quad in that chart (3570K @ 4.5Ghz).
Obviously the 7970 is being a bottleneck in BF3 for all OCed CPUs in top half of the chart.
__________________
ShintaiDK:"There will be no APU in PS4 and Xbox720."
ShintaiDK:"No quadchannel either.[in Kaveri]"
CHADBOGA:"Because he[OBR] is a great man."
inf64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 04:36 PM   #20
Termie
Diamond Member
 
Termie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 6,832
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by inf64 View Post
That "slowest IB quad" is running OCed to ~3.6Ghz + Turbo on top of that. Also that "slowest IB quad" is 1-2% slower than fastest IB quad in that chart (3570K @ 4.5Ghz).
Obviously the 7970 is being a bottleneck in BF3 for all OCed CPUs in top half of the chart.
That's still slow by overclocked IVB standards, and it's actually pretty clear it's still bottlenecking the 7970. 72.2 is not equal to 74.3. That's a 3% difference, and given the number of CPUs tested, I would not just chalk that up to testing error.

Point being, the OP's Phenom II is going to hold back a 7970/670.
__________________
Gaming (56W idle): i7-3770K@4.5 | CM Hyper 212+ | Asus Max V Gene | EVGA GTX 780 Ti | 16GB DDR3@1866
Samsung 830 256GB | Corsair PP 256GB | Samsung F4 2TB | Silverstone TJ08B-E | Seasonic X-650 | Dell U2713HM
Bench (42W idle): i7-4770K@4.4 | Asus Gryphon | HD 7870 | 16GB DDR3@1866 | Crucial M4 256GB | Win8.1
Is Windows 8.1 good for gamers? Get The Tech Buyer's Guru take: Windows 7 vs. Windows 8.1 in Games
Upgrading?
Browse the TBG Hot Deals Blog!
Termie is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 04:51 PM   #21
hondaf17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 638
Default

Would it hold back a 6950?
__________________
My Rig:
i5 3570k @ 4.4 Ghz | Cooler Master Hyper 212+ HSF
8GB (4x2gb) DDR3 1600 RAM | MSI Twin Frozr II 2GB 6950
AuzenTech X-plosion DTS Sound Card
1 TB WD Caviar Black HDD | Corsair 650tx PSU
hondaf17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 04:57 PM   #22
frozentundra123456
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,664
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by inf64 View Post
That "slowest IB quad" is running OCed to ~3.6Ghz + Turbo on top of that. Also that "slowest IB quad" is 1-2% slower than fastest IB quad in that chart (3570K @ 4.5Ghz).
Obviously the 7970 is being a bottleneck in BF3 for all OCed CPUs in top half of the chart.
You are correct about the second chart. Overclocked FX and all the overclocked Intel CPUs are basically GPU limited.

But look at the first graph, the i5 3330 is running at 3ghz and is faster than the stock FX.
Overclocked to 5ghz the Fx is only very slightly faster than the stock 3330, but the overclocked FX and most of the intel cpus overclocked or not are becoming GPU limited.

Actually, I am surprised that the FX did not do better in this test, since it is the best case scenario for Vishera. With both at stock, I would have thought the FX would have been very close to the 3570, but in fact it was more than 20% slower.
frozentundra123456 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 05:59 PM   #23
Icecold
Senior Member
 
Icecold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Akron, Ohio
Posts: 273
Default

I don't have any graphs or benchmarks to post here, but can give my own experience. I pretty much exclusively play BF3. I run a Phenom II X6 1090t overclocked to 3.8GHz and an EVGA 460 2win(essentially SLI'd GTX 460 1GB cards). If I play on a 32 person or lower server I am *usually* gpu bottlenecked(not always, but almost always). Any higher player count than that and I am certainly cpu bottlenecked. I can turn my resolution to 800x640 or whatever the lowest bf3 allows is, turn all the graphics settings to low(at that resolution it almost looks like Goldeneye on the n64 lol), and my frame rate does not change. I am usually at around 40fps. It's playable, but I intentionally usually avoid 64 person servers because of it.

Interestingly enough, despite how much I hear 'multiplayer bf3 likes threads', I do not see much of a difference in min, max or average fps between having my affinity set to use all 6 threads, or setting it to only use 4. The main difference I see is that with 4 threads, all are around 100%, where with 6 none run that close to 100%. In my experience(which is very specifically my experience, could be the maps I play, some other bottleneck, etc. etc.) it doesn't usually utilize more than 4 threads. Also, this may be a difference because all my cores are physical cores and not hyperthreading. Regardless, I would benefit more from a CPU upgrade than a GPU upgrade at this point for multiplayer BF3. I would suggest the same to you if trying to play on 64 player servers. For me the decision on what to do is a bit tougher because I primarily use my machine for highly multithreaded work that the Phenom X6 does pretty good on, and gaming is a second priority. Maybe I'll pick up a Piledriver to hold me off until Haswell or Haswell-E.

Also, I intentionally run on US servers that I have a low ping to, and have 50/5 cable service, so I don't think my connection to the multiplayer servers is what's responsible for what I've seen.
__________________
My heatware, username icecold
Icecold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 06:09 PM   #24
inf64
Platinum Member
 
inf64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,001
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frozentundra123456 View Post
You are correct about the second chart. Overclocked FX and all the overclocked Intel CPUs are basically GPU limited.

But look at the first graph, the i5 3330 is running at 3ghz and is faster than the stock FX.
Overclocked to 5ghz the Fx is only very slightly faster than the stock 3330, but the overclocked FX and most of the intel cpus overclocked or not are becoming GPU limited.

Actually, I am surprised that the FX did not do better in this test, since it is the best case scenario for Vishera. With both at stock, I would have thought the FX would have been very close to the 3570, but in fact it was more than 20% slower.
Obviously it's game dependent. Some games run better on intel hardware , that's all. It may be better IPC intel CPUs have, better compiler optimization or both.
__________________
ShintaiDK:"There will be no APU in PS4 and Xbox720."
ShintaiDK:"No quadchannel either.[in Kaveri]"
CHADBOGA:"Because he[OBR] is a great man."
inf64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 06:45 PM   #25
obZen
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 3
Default

How many avg fps do you guys think I could expect on a 32 player Caspian Border at Ultra settings, 4xmsaa, 1080p? Thanks for all the great info guys.
obZen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.