Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > Video Cards and Graphics

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
· Home and Garden
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-02-2013, 07:42 PM   #1
FalseChristian
Diamond Member
 
FalseChristian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Oshawa, ON, CA
Posts: 3,305
Default Should I get a GTX 670?

I've found that a GTX 670 is about 2x as fast as my GTX 460 1GB. Would my i5 2500K at 4.5GHz be a bottleneck? Do you think that 2x performance is worth it or should I wait for the GTX 770?

The resolution I game at is 1680x1050.
__________________
Core i5 2500K @ 4.5GHz (45x100) 1.350v-Asus P8Z68-V/Gen3 (BIOS 3402)-16GB Kingston VR DDR3-1333Mhz @ 1600MHz 1.65v-2 EVGA GTX 760 2GB (1212/7600) ACX-750w Cooler Master GXII-RealTek on-board sound-Intel Onboard 1Gb Ethernet-Rogers Cable Internet 6.6MB/second-2TB Seagate 7200 SATA 6 HD-3TB SeaGate USB 3.0 EHD-22" Samsung SyncMaster 2253BW 1680x1050 67Htz-Windows 7 HP 64-bit SP1
FalseChristian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 07:57 PM   #2
thebigbolgna
Diamond Member
 
thebigbolgna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: In da woods
Posts: 5,285
Default

2500k @ 4.5 Can run two in SLI just fine.

7950's are hard to ignore right now in that range.
__________________
HTPC: Intel G3258 @ 4.3GHz | MSI H81M-P33 | MSI 7790 1GB | 8GB DDR3-1333 | Intel 320 120GB | WD Black 2TB | LG 60" 1080p Plasma |
Notebook: Dell E6330 | i7-3540M | 16GB DDR3 | Intel 530 480GB |
Tablets: Galaxy Tab S 8.4 + Nexus 7 2013
Phone: iPhone 5s 64GB
Console: PS4
thebigbolgna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 08:06 PM   #3
ElFenix
Elite Member
Super Moderator
Off Topic
 
ElFenix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 94,220
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FalseChristian View Post
I've found that a GTX 670 is about 2x as fast as my GTX 460 1GB. Would my i5 2500K at 4.5GHz be a bottleneck? Do you think that 2x performance is worth it or should I wait for the GTX 770?

The resolution I game at is 1680x1050.
Are you having any noticeable slowdown in the games you are playing at 1680x1050?
__________________
I killed and ate the Fun Mod with some jellybeans and a little Chianti.

AnandTech Mean Moderator
ElFenix is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 08:06 PM   #4
FalseChristian
Diamond Member
 
FalseChristian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Oshawa, ON, CA
Posts: 3,305
Default

I really like ATI but I'm not sure if my mobo supports Crossfire. If it does and runs Quake HD I might just go for 2 HD 7950s.
__________________
Core i5 2500K @ 4.5GHz (45x100) 1.350v-Asus P8Z68-V/Gen3 (BIOS 3402)-16GB Kingston VR DDR3-1333Mhz @ 1600MHz 1.65v-2 EVGA GTX 760 2GB (1212/7600) ACX-750w Cooler Master GXII-RealTek on-board sound-Intel Onboard 1Gb Ethernet-Rogers Cable Internet 6.6MB/second-2TB Seagate 7200 SATA 6 HD-3TB SeaGate USB 3.0 EHD-22" Samsung SyncMaster 2253BW 1680x1050 67Htz-Windows 7 HP 64-bit SP1
FalseChristian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 08:09 PM   #5
FalseChristian
Diamond Member
 
FalseChristian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Oshawa, ON, CA
Posts: 3,305
Default

No but I know that 1GB of vRAM is a limitation even at 1680x1050. It sucks because my 2 GTX 460s are still plenty fast.
__________________
Core i5 2500K @ 4.5GHz (45x100) 1.350v-Asus P8Z68-V/Gen3 (BIOS 3402)-16GB Kingston VR DDR3-1333Mhz @ 1600MHz 1.65v-2 EVGA GTX 760 2GB (1212/7600) ACX-750w Cooler Master GXII-RealTek on-board sound-Intel Onboard 1Gb Ethernet-Rogers Cable Internet 6.6MB/second-2TB Seagate 7200 SATA 6 HD-3TB SeaGate USB 3.0 EHD-22" Samsung SyncMaster 2253BW 1680x1050 67Htz-Windows 7 HP 64-bit SP1
FalseChristian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 08:14 PM   #6
VulgarDisplay
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,926
Default

How long are you going to be playing at 1680x1050? A gtx670 is what I would regard as massive overkill at that resolution. Gtx660 or 7870 would offer a pretty substantial performance gain and save you some money if you plan to stay at that resolution for a while.
VulgarDisplay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 09:17 PM   #7
FalseChristian
Diamond Member
 
FalseChristian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Oshawa, ON, CA
Posts: 3,305
Default

Yes, you are right. I think a coupla GTX 660s in SLI would do me well. I'm quite happy with my 2.5 year old 22" Samsung 2253BW. I paid $259.99 for it. I paid a bit more than a regular 22" because I wanted quality and I have not been disappointed.
__________________
Core i5 2500K @ 4.5GHz (45x100) 1.350v-Asus P8Z68-V/Gen3 (BIOS 3402)-16GB Kingston VR DDR3-1333Mhz @ 1600MHz 1.65v-2 EVGA GTX 760 2GB (1212/7600) ACX-750w Cooler Master GXII-RealTek on-board sound-Intel Onboard 1Gb Ethernet-Rogers Cable Internet 6.6MB/second-2TB Seagate 7200 SATA 6 HD-3TB SeaGate USB 3.0 EHD-22" Samsung SyncMaster 2253BW 1680x1050 67Htz-Windows 7 HP 64-bit SP1
FalseChristian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 09:44 PM   #8
VulgarDisplay
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,926
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FalseChristian View Post
Yes, you are right. I think a coupla GTX 660s in SLI would do me well. I'm quite happy with my 2.5 year old 22" Samsung 2253BW. I paid $259.99 for it. I paid a bit more than a regular 22" because I wanted quality and I have not been disappointed.
I was thinking more along the lines of a single gtx660 or single 7870 at that resolution. If you were going to go for SLi 660's I would tell you to just get a gtx670.
VulgarDisplay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 10:03 PM   #9
Termie
Diamond Member
 
Termie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 7,150
Default

OP - you haven't really said whether you are experiencing any problems. All you've said is "I know that 1GB of vRAM is a limitation even at 1680x1050." First of all, how do you know that? Second of all, I'm almost positive that's wrong.

Unless you have a strong reason to upgrade, I'd probably hold out for now. You've already waited this long. If anything, I'd look into spending some money on upgrading that monitor first.
__________________
Work: 3770K | Hyper 212+ | Asus Max V Gene | 290 Tri-X | 16GB | 830 256GB | TJ08B-E | x650 | U2713HM
Gaming: 4770K@4.5 | H100i | ASRock Z97 Ex4 | 780 Ti SLI | 16GB | MX100 512GB | 500R | EVGA G2 850W | Asus VG248QE
HTPC: 4690K@4.0 | CM S524 | ASRock Z97E | HD7870 | 8GB | 1TB SSHD | SG08 | CX500M | Samsung 55" 4K
Looking for holiday tech gifts? Check out The 2014 Holiday Buyer's Guide at The Tech Buyer's Guru!
Looking for Black Friday Deals? See TBG's Hot Deals Blog!
Termie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 10:19 PM   #10
Yukmouth
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 461
Default

No, 79xx is faster and sli is pointless on that screen.
Yukmouth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2013, 04:05 AM   #11
psolord
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 452
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FalseChristian View Post
No but I know that 1GB of vRAM is a limitation even at 1680x1050. It sucks because my 2 GTX 460s are still plenty fast.
I am pretty sure your 460s are still plenty fast as well. You only need to make very little sacrifices in order to play all current games. I believe that by keeping MSAA at check your framebuffer will be fine.

I'd wait until the 700 series comes out, to see what's in offer. Game engines will gallop forward when the new consoles come out anyway.
psolord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2013, 06:19 AM   #12
lehtv
Diamond Member
 
lehtv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 9,959
Default

460 is for 1680x1050 what 560/560 Ti is for 1080p... and 560 Ti wasn't fast enough for 1080p, in my case. I would upgrade to 7870 or 660 Ti on that resolution.
__________________
System specs
lehtv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2013, 06:36 AM   #13
Gryz
Senior Member
 
Gryz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 450
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FalseChristian View Post
Would my i5 2500K at 4.5GHz be a bottleneck?
I've seen these questions so often. And I don't understand them.

If a 2500K@4.5GHz is not fast enough for a gtx670, then what are you supposed to buy, if you have a gtx670 ? And in particular, what are people supposed to do, who prefer to not overclock their CPUs ? A 2500K@4.5GHz is faster than a i7-3770K at stock speeds in games. And what if you have a gtx680 ? Or an overclocked 7970 ? Were those GPUs designed while the designers knew that they could not be paired with any CPU efficiently ?

And then there is the issue: when are you bottlenecked ?
Maybe a slower CPU can not reach 100 fps in a particular game. Only 40 fps. But then you can still enable lots of eyecandy on the GPU. And it won't affect the overall framerates. You can enable 8xMSAA, transparency, maybe SSSGAA even. High SSAO, high-res textures, high resolutions, etc. And always stay at that 40 fps. Is that useless ? Not if you value eyecandy more than high framerates. So you will get value out of your new videocard. And if/when you decide to upgrade your CPU later, you'll get the last part of value out of your GPU.

But again, I can't imagine a 2500K would bottleneck any GPU, even at stock speeds.
Gryz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2013, 07:01 AM   #14
poohbear
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,991
Default

i'm guessing the OP was trolling or needs his e peni stroked.... how can he start by asking if his 2500k @ 4.5 is fast enough for a vid card??

and if ure really gaming @ 1050 just buy a new monitor, otherwise stick with ur 460 @ that resolution.
__________________
Desktop: 4790k @ 4.6GHZ | Noctua NH-D14 | 16GB (2x8gb) Crucial Ballistex @ CL9 | Asrock Z97 OC Formula | Gigabyte GTX 670 SLI | 250gb Samsung 840 Evo & 240gb OCZ Vertex 3 MI & 2TB WD Black | Auzentech Forte 7.1 | Seasonic 760wt Platinum | DELL U2711 @ 1440p | Corsair 300R | Win 8.1
Ultrabook: Zenbook UX32LN | i5 4200u | 8GB RAM | Nvidia 840m | IPS Matte @ 1080p | 256GB SSD | Win8.1
poohbear is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2013, 07:42 AM   #15
lehtv
Diamond Member
 
lehtv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 9,959
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by poohbear View Post
i'm guessing the OP was trolling or needs his e peni stroked.... how can he start by asking if his 2500k @ 4.5 is fast enough for a vid card??
Not everyone knows exact limits for bottlenecks. And I would argue that 2500K @ 4.5 can in fact bottleneck a 670 on 1680x1050. In almost all games it will not bottleneck, but there are exceptions like Planetside 2, some situations in BF3, and possibly others such as the late game in larger scale games of Starcraft 2, Supreme Commander and Civilization V.

Quote:
and if ure really gaming @ 1050 just buy a new monitor, otherwise stick with ur 460 @ that resolution.
460 isn't really enough to maintain 60fps on high settings in all games... it's as valid to upgrade from 460 on that resolution as it is to upgrade from 560 or 560 Ti on 1080p.
__________________
System specs

Last edited by lehtv; 01-03-2013 at 07:45 AM.
lehtv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2013, 08:00 AM   #16
Termie
Diamond Member
 
Termie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 7,150
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lehtv View Post
...

460 isn't really enough to maintain 60fps on high settings in all games... it's as valid to upgrade from 460 on that resolution as it is to upgrade from 560 or 560 Ti on 1080p.
He has SLI. He should get a new monitor.
__________________
Work: 3770K | Hyper 212+ | Asus Max V Gene | 290 Tri-X | 16GB | 830 256GB | TJ08B-E | x650 | U2713HM
Gaming: 4770K@4.5 | H100i | ASRock Z97 Ex4 | 780 Ti SLI | 16GB | MX100 512GB | 500R | EVGA G2 850W | Asus VG248QE
HTPC: 4690K@4.0 | CM S524 | ASRock Z97E | HD7870 | 8GB | 1TB SSHD | SG08 | CX500M | Samsung 55" 4K
Looking for holiday tech gifts? Check out The 2014 Holiday Buyer's Guide at The Tech Buyer's Guru!
Looking for Black Friday Deals? See TBG's Hot Deals Blog!
Termie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2013, 08:17 AM   #17
Tweak155
Diamond Member
 
Tweak155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 9,082
Default

I game at 2560x1440 on a 560ti 448 with I7 920. No slow downs for my games and it only has 1280mb memory.
__________________
Organo Gold Coffee

Heatware 92-0-0
Tweak155 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2013, 08:27 AM   #18
lambchops511
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 659
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by poohbear View Post
i'm guessing the OP was trolling or needs his e peni stroked.... how can he start by asking if his 2500k @ 4.5 is fast enough for a vid card??

and if ure really gaming @ 1050 just buy a new monitor, otherwise stick with ur 460 @ that resolution.
I would give him the benefit of the doubt, I personally don't know either. Thing with clockspeeds as well is that you can't compare Apples-to-Apples from any generation, like a NetBurst 5 GHz is slower than Ivy Bridge 2 GHz (or is it?).

Op:
I would get a GTX 670, I went from a GTX 460 -> GTX 670 and there is a very noticeable difference.
lambchops511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2013, 08:50 AM   #19
guskline
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lebanon, PA
Posts: 3,090
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FalseChristian View Post
I've found that a GTX 670 is about 2x as fast as my GTX 460 1GB. Would my i5 2500K at 4.5GHz be a bottleneck? Do you think that 2x performance is worth it or should I wait for the GTX 770?

The resolution I game at is 1680x1050.
FalseChristian: The 2500k definitely will NOT bottleneck a GTX 670. You can see from my sig that I have 3 different rigs running gtx670 and 680. 2 of the rigs have 2500ks at 4.5Ghz (103 x 44) and the third is using an AMD 8350 at 4.6Ghz (21 x 219). So simply put the "upgrade" to a GTX 670 from the 2 GTX460s in SLI will not be a bottleneck.

What Termie suggested is a great recommendation. I would be looking for at least a 24" monitor running native 1920 x 1080. I've run one of my 2500k rigs with 2 GTX460s-768 in SLI on a 24" 1920 x 1080 and it is quite a difference from 1680x1050. Just a thought.
__________________
3930k @ 4.6 -Asus SbTh X79 - Custom WC - MO-RA3 Pro-420 + RX 360+XSPC-2 Sapphire Tri X R9-290s-CF with EK blocks/bridge -16G (4x4 quad)DDR3-2133 - Intel 530 SSD - Win 8.1 - PC P&C 1200W Silencer Mk III - BenQ BL3200PT
guskline is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2013, 09:05 AM   #20
lehtv
Diamond Member
 
lehtv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 9,959
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Termie View Post
He has SLI. He should get a new monitor.
Oh. Well in that case.

It didn't say it in the OP.
__________________
System specs
lehtv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2013, 11:24 AM   #21
moonbogg
Diamond Member
 
moonbogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5,450
Default

SLI 460'S is not good for 1080p anymore. Games require up to 1.5gig Vram and beyond in some games at 1080p. I say go for the single 670 and when you have the extra cash, get a 24" monitor and that single 670 will be good to go for 1920x1200 for a good while.
Regarding the 2500K, there is really nothing you can upgrade to right now. If anything, a 2600k would get you an extra 10% in 2 or 3 games.
__________________
3930K @ 4.3 - 16GB DDR3 @ 1600 - 2X GTX 670 SLI(2GB) - SAMSUNG 830 SSD - 1920X1080 @ 120HZ - WINDOWS 8.1
moonbogg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2013, 11:39 AM   #22
BrightCandle
Diamond Member
 
BrightCandle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,763
Default

I am in agreement. I was having issues with a 5970 over a year ago and that was due to the low VRAM. I think 2GB is completely fine today but 1GB is a bit low for a lot of games on high settings. On lower settings 1GB is still fine, but if you are considering SLI you are doing so to access higher quality graphics and there VRAM is a big issue now.
__________________
I no longer frequent these forums.
BrightCandle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2013, 12:20 PM   #23
Shmee
Moderator
Memory and Storage
Video Cards and Graphics
 
Shmee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cali
Posts: 2,226
Default

what games do you play though? I would say something like a 660ti or 78xx to be a good medium. If you want anything more, I would recommend a monitor upgrade as well.
__________________
Anandtech Moderator
4930k @ 4.2 GHz under corsair H100i
R9 290 crossfire 2x Sapphire Tri X | Seasonic 1250 Gold
16GB Corsair Vengeance on Gigabyte X79-UP4
HP ZR30W | Haf X | Logitech G110 + G500
Seagate 600 + Crucial M4 + WD black 1TB
Shmee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2013, 03:31 PM   #24
guskline
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lebanon, PA
Posts: 3,090
Default

BTW: Just got a Gigabyte 7870 OC video card (used Xmas gift cards). Used it to replace 2 5770s in CF in a rig running an 8150. Very strong video card for a great price.
__________________
3930k @ 4.6 -Asus SbTh X79 - Custom WC - MO-RA3 Pro-420 + RX 360+XSPC-2 Sapphire Tri X R9-290s-CF with EK blocks/bridge -16G (4x4 quad)DDR3-2133 - Intel 530 SSD - Win 8.1 - PC P&C 1200W Silencer Mk III - BenQ BL3200PT
guskline is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2013, 11:13 PM   #25
poohbear
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,991
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lehtv View Post
Not everyone knows exact limits for bottlenecks. And I would argue that 2500K @ 4.5 can in fact bottleneck a 670 on 1680x1050. In almost all games it will not bottleneck, but there are exceptions like Planetside 2, some situations in BF3, and possibly others such as the late game in larger scale games of Starcraft 2, Supreme Commander and Civilization V.
you would argue that huh? it's because u're totally clueless about cpus and computer hardware and shouldn't be in this thread.

Starcraft2 and BF3 get bottlenecked by a 2500k @ 4.5ghz???

u are completely clueless about computers.

show me ONE benchmark that shows a 2500k @ 4.5ghz bottlenecks starcraft2 or even BF3 (Bf3 is the most GPU dependant game out there!)
__________________
Desktop: 4790k @ 4.6GHZ | Noctua NH-D14 | 16GB (2x8gb) Crucial Ballistex @ CL9 | Asrock Z97 OC Formula | Gigabyte GTX 670 SLI | 250gb Samsung 840 Evo & 240gb OCZ Vertex 3 MI & 2TB WD Black | Auzentech Forte 7.1 | Seasonic 760wt Platinum | DELL U2711 @ 1440p | Corsair 300R | Win 8.1
Ultrabook: Zenbook UX32LN | i5 4200u | 8GB RAM | Nvidia 840m | IPS Matte @ 1080p | 256GB SSD | Win8.1
poohbear is online now   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 08:29 AM.


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