• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Am I CPU limited enough that the HD4770 would be a waste of time?

W

wchang99

Member
With the HD4770 out, I'm tempted to get it as a relatively cheap way to max out my system that has just a 305w PSU, but, my CPU is an Athlon 64x2 4400+, which is just older enough than most websites' systems used to test the 4770 that I wonder if my numbers would be drastically different than theirs.

Are there any ways to estimate or guesstimate how close my numbers would be? Any mathematical rules of thumb maybe?

I don't do a lot of gaming, but might check out GRID if I have a fast enough rig.

My alternatives would be HD4650, and HD4670 (I had considered the HD4350 as well, but realized it didn't have s-video out, which I need).

(This is a continuation of an earlier thread in a way: I had ordered a Geforce 9400GT, but found out that TV-out support was crippled by nVidia since the 7xxx, or 8xxx series, so, the 9400GT is going back. From what I understand, this may have been done in hardware and not just the drivers in 8xxx and 9xxx series.)

Thanks!

edited to add: my resolution is 1680x1050 (AA is optional).
 
Your CPU will bottleneck it to some degree. You'll still see a vast improvement over your onboard video. The websites that review hardware generally use a pretty top of the line CPU, so unless you're willing to cough up the money for a high powered new system I doubt you'll ever match their figures.

The thing about "bottlenecking" is you'll never notice unless you pop your GPU in a more capable system. Again, it'll still be head and shoulders above what came with the motherboard. TBH, since you're not really a gamer you might want to save the money and just get an HD 4670. Very capable card and a good $35-40 dollars less than an HD 4770 (and probably all the GPU your system can handle). Plus they are very thrifty on power usage - gets all the power it needs through the PCI-E slot. Your Dell PS would be fine.

 
^ I say HD4670 as well. Mostly because of the psu you have and you're not really gaming much anyways. But, it'll still play GRID, maybe on some lowered settings.
 
Here are some accurate power consumption numbers of the HD4670 versus the HD4770.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...on-hd4770_5.html#sect0

The HD4670 is much lower at Idle (but they are both really low), and they are about the same at load. The HD4770 will be more future proof, so if you do upgrade your CPU or system, you can take it with you. Your cpu isn't bad - I played through Oblivion and Half-life2 with a much slower CPU (Sempron 2600+) + X850XT, and it was fine. There are a lot of games (especially games that are only 2-3 years old) that your system could handle with a graphics card upgrade.
 
No, it's not a waste -- and the 4670 is appreciably slower. A Dell PSU should easily handle the 4770. Get it.
 
What about a 3850/9600GT/9600GSO class card? Those are $40ish, and would probably be a better value for you.
 
I have a similar CPU to you. I crank it up to 2.6 Ghz when I'm gonna play something, though. And I use the same resolution than you.

I've had several video cards in this system. A Radeon x1300, a Radeon x1950 Pro, a 7600GT, a 3870, a 8800GTX and now a 4670.

Between the 8800GTX and the 4670 there's not that much of a difference with this CPU and this resolution, in everything from Oblivion to Crysis.

So a Radeon 4770 should be pretty good in your rig. You will be CPU limited, but not so much that it will be a waste of money. Far from it.

I can play Far Cry 2 at 1680x1050, with almost everything cranked and 2xAA, with good playability. The only game that crippled my rig was GTA4,
but we all know how bad that game performs unless you've got a really fast CPU.

So overclock that CPU a bit more, get a 4770 or a 4670, and call it a day.

EDIT: vj8usa, wouldn't those cards strain his PSU too much?
 
The cpu limit card is way overplayed on these forums. For 1600 rez I wouldn't even bother with any slower card, and your cpu is fast enough for most games.
 
I agree with munky here... a 4400+ isn't exactly a screamer but getting a 4850 or 4770 isn't overkill. That is, a 4850 will still be significantly faster than a 4670 on your machine.
 
Originally posted by: Marty502
EDIT: vj8usa, wouldn't those cards strain his PSU too much?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure his PSU's got dual 18A 12V rails, which should be more than enough for a 3850/9600.

The main reason I recommended a 3850 is because the OP only mentions GRID. Unless you're an avid gamer, there's not that much of a point in spending more than double the money for less than double the performance.

On a side note, I definitely feel CPU limited in some games with my 4850 (which isn't much faster than a 4770), and my CPU is more powerful than a 4400+.

Oh, and Marty: why'd you bother going to a 4670? PSU issues? The 3870's generally faster than 4670. Even a 3850 outperforms the 4670 in some cases. The 8800GTX should be significantly faster than all of those cards. If you didn't see a drop in performance from 8800GTX->4670, it sounds like you were pretty CPU limited.
 
Originally posted by: vj8usa
Originally posted by: Marty502
EDIT: vj8usa, wouldn't those cards strain his PSU too much?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure his PSU's got dual 18A 12V rails, which should be more than enough for a 3850/9600.

The main reason I recommended a 3850 is because the OP only mentions GRID. Unless you're an avid gamer, there's not that much of a point in spending more than double the money for less than double the performance.

On a side note, I definitely feel CPU limited in some games with my 4850 (which isn't much faster than a 4770), and my CPU is more powerful than a 4400+.

Oh, and Marty: why'd you bother going to a 4670? PSU issues? The 3870's generally faster than 4670. Even a 3850 outperforms the 4670 in some cases. The 8800GTX should be significantly faster than all of those cards. If you didn't see a drop in performance from 8800GTX->4670, it sounds like you were pretty CPU limited.
Click to expand...

The 8800GTX wasn't mine. 😀

I sold the 3870 because it was either too noisy or too hot. This 4670 runs super cool and barely makes any noise. It's the PCS (Professional Cooling System, I think) version with a great fan.

And of course there was a drop in performance by going to the 4670, but it wasn't what everyone would expect. Unless I really crank the AA (which I never do) the experience is pretty much the same for me. And I got it for really cheap so...
 
I know it's not quite the same but I used a Opteron 165 @ 2.52 in my HTPC with a 9600GSO and game fairly well. My lan games all play nice maxed out at 1366x768 and those include CS:S, L4D, TF2, WiC, CoH, and RS:V2. I have not tried many graphically intense games yet as I know the gpu probably can't handle it but otherwise things work very well.

I am also tempted to go with a 4770 just to give myself a nice boost. As our CPU's are somewhat similar I would not worry, it still has some life left in it yet!
 
I'd get the 4770 anyway. Should you ever upgrade your computer in the future, at least you'll have a modern video card to bank off of.
 
I think another question to ask is whether or not Hd4770 will run without a 6 pin power connector?

The Xbit review said it only needed 47 watts at full load but then (I think it was) Rick James told me his Diamond 4770 gave an error message when he unplugged the power connector.
 
Originally posted by: Just learning
I think another question to ask is whether or not Hd4770 will run without a 6 pin power connector?

The Xbit review said it only needed 47 watts at full load but then (I think it was) Rick James told me his Diamond 4770 gave an error message when he unplugged the power connector.
Click to expand...
By current design, it has to, that's why it's on the board. They might be able to release a low power version in the future that doesn't need it (or maybe a 4750 or something), but for now you still (just barely) need the 6-pin power connector.
 
I'd get the HD4770. Even though your CPU is going to be a bit of a bottleneck, the HD4770 should at least let you crank up the settings more or, most importantly, turn up the AA settings without see much of a drop in performance. If you had an HD3800 card, using AA kills its performance. And the HD4670 isn't much better since its memory bandwidth restricts its performance too.

So if you can easily afford the HD4770 then grab it. If you can't, then any of the other cards mentioned in this thread (3850, 3870, 4670, 9600 series) will all still be good, cheaper alternatives.
 
That's an excellent article shredded. I was planning on running my opt 165 at stock 1.8 ghz for my htpc. I guess i'll have it run at 2.4ghz and add in a 4770.
 
I say get the card. It will make any game at least look better. While there are a few games that might be bottlenecked by the CPU, the majority are limited by the graphics card.
 
Yes.

Technical reason follows:
I have an HD3870. Technical reviews indicate it is nearly identical but should operate at roughly just over 80% of the speed of the HD4770.

However, using the Task Manager (CTR-ALT-DEL) during games I see that my CPU (X24800+) for many newer games uses about 75% average. I have no games except possibly NWN2 that are limited by my CPU.

It is probable that your CPU (at least one core of the X24400+) will be running just barely at 100% for some games but others will be GPU limited.

This is in effect a nearly perfectly balanced system. Getting a better card would not be worth it.

You should have between 2GB and 4GB (4GB preferred) to avoid main memory bottlenecks. Otherwise, the only other performance issue would be a hard drive which mainly affects loading times (this also depends on the RAM).

The main pieces of the puzzle are your CPU, RAM and graphics card. In your case with the X24400+, the HD4770 512MB and 4GB is optimal. Further upgrades require a completely new system.
 
This is a really late reply, so I apologize for that, but, thanks for all the responses, both humorous and analytical, and all of them thoughtful. It's kind of lame, but I've decided to put the whole thing on the back burner; the 4770 is great, but I think I will wait for prices to drop and see, and actually a 4350, if there were such an animal with s-video and hdmi/a second dvi that's cheap, would be ideal. So, I'm just kind of "wait and see". But, thanks all, for your help.

Everybody helped, but, ShreddedWheat's article (Tom's) was a HUGE help, I remember reading that sort of thing when I used to be more up on video cards (when the Riva 128 was big), and it was like getting some of the brain cells back that understood such things.

Thanks again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top