Question Can an i7 2600K support a modern high end graphics cards?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Sunburn74

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2009
5,025
2,593
136
Hello,

I'm running a rig with an i7 2600K (sandybridge still kicking) and a radeon R9-290.
I'm no longer able to run modern games at recommended settings. I've been thinking about either building an entirely new rig once AMD releases their next line of CPUs vs just doing a smaller move like buying a modern GPU. However I am concerned that my CPU won't be able to actually fully support a modern high end graphics card (say something that costs 300-350 dollars). I mostly game at 1080P and I have no high end CPU needs (mostly office stuff and some gaming and rarely using some statistical software which doesn't need a lot of horsepower behind it) overall though it would be nice at some point to do an upgrade.

What would you guys recommend? Wait till december/early jan for AMDs next line of CPUs and do a total overhaul or is my current CPU powerful enough to support a modern GPU now?
 

Deegan000

Member
Jun 18, 2020
34
3
41
My son as of right now is using a overclocked 2500K with a GTX 1070 and it works great. GTAV and his other games run very nice. I played with it for an hour or so and i didnt notice any sort of hindrance from using a older intel cpu whatsoever. Do you overclock the 2600 at all?
 

beginner99

Diamond Member
Jun 2, 2009
5,208
1,580
136
I'm running a rig with an i7 2600K (sandybridge still kicking) and a radeon R9-290.

I don't think it's worth it especially at 1080p. Currently your PC is somewhat balanced. If you but in a better GPU, you will simply run into a CPU bottleneck. Also GPU market is pretty bad right now in terms of performance/$. You will need to spent at least $250, better >$300 to get a meaningful upgrade over your current one and then not being able to fully use it due to CPU bottleneck. (OK the new one will use less power and generate less heat which can be a plus)

In your case I would simply hold on for another half a year. Then we should have new AMD Zen3 based CPU and new GPUs from both camps available and hoepfully better prices especially regarding GPUs.
 

blckgrffn

Diamond Member
May 1, 2003
9,110
3,028
136
www.teamjuchems.com
Ok, I just replaced my SB 3930k (4.2 ghz 2 core, 4.0 ghz all core, very conservative) and 290x setup - I was paranoid about part shortages from international supply chains and was playing a lot of Borderlands 3 at the time and based on my own "wait for Zen 3" mantra I prematurely pulled the trigger.

It was "60" fps but not a very satisfying experience, really. My rig had cut through so many games for so long I wasn't thrilled.

First I put in a 5700 vanilla, replacing the 290x in my 3930k rig, and while mostly things were a lot better (thermals, acoustics, avg framerate) the game was not "smooth". The 5700 was my dad's card that I was "testing" before installing into his rig (I was really curious).

It was enough for me to justify $300, personally. I installed it into his PC and bought a 5700xt for myself because I was able to get the XT for about $20 more at the time and I never regretted spending extra on the "X" on my 290.

But pairing the 5700xt with the rig in my sig made a huge difference - loading times, UI pop in, minimum frames. I really didn't think it would matter that much.

Now...

My 5700xt was defective. I had to RMA it and I put the 290x into my new rig. I was floored at how much slower it was. I mean, its about 40% the speed and just a roaster. BUT, I had no problem with medium settings @ 1080p settings in any game. I am sure Hawaii has aged better than Kepler.

My experience tells me don't bother unless you are OK with an uneven (and perhaps unsatisfying) return on your investment.

Frustrating as it is, I don't see an AMD alternative between the 290 and the 5600xt at a minimum. I really missed a midlevel Vega option on the AMD side. A nice RX580 would be faster, I guess, but not revolutionary and IMO not worth the ~$100 it would take to get there (buying new card, flipping old card). If you wanted to wait things out to Q1 next year though, I think a 1070 or a good deal on a 5600xt type card would be pretty reasonable way to go. Those cards are likely to lose minimal value over that stretch of time as well, imo.

Or you know, buy a 3600/10400 *and* a nice video card now and just enjoy it for a while. There are likely to be some big improvements in the next couple years, but it's going to take a while for the software to catch up. Getting onboard a few generations in is going to be OK in terms of performance for the dollar on those features.

Your 2600k and 290 have had a great run. In the decade prior to this one, you'd have to have upgraded like three times by now to keep up ;)
 

Guru

Senior member
May 5, 2017
830
361
106
There is no point in buying a high end GPU with an ancient cpu like that, plus I think you are way out of the loop at $350 is NOT a high end segment these days, though it does get you in the enthusiast market, for $400 you can get the best value GPU in the 5700xt.

But since Zen 3 cpu's are coming out later this year, so is big navi, I suggest you wait and in December when there are christmas offerings, but yourself a new system.
 

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
14,000
3,357
136
I don't think it's worth it especially at 1080p. Currently your PC is somewhat balanced. If you but in a better GPU, you will simply run into a CPU bottleneck. Also GPU market is pretty bad right now in terms of performance/$. You will need to spent at least $250, better >$300 to get a meaningful upgrade over your current one and then not being able to fully use it due to CPU bottleneck. (OK the new one will use less power and generate less heat which can be a plus)

In your case I would simply hold on for another half a year. Then we should have new AMD Zen3 based CPU and new GPUs from both camps available and hoepfully better prices especially regarding GPUs.

There are lots of new games that will gain substantially from upgrading the GPU using the Core i7 2600K/2700K even at 1080p.

Assuming that R9 290X is as fast as RX480/580 (see bellow Game benchmarks), then by just upgrading to RX5700XT/RTX2060 Super/RTX2070 Super you can get huge performance uplift in latest games, especially in games that support DX-12 and Vulkan.

of course there are other games that will be bottleneck with the 2600K so it depends on what games you play. Mostly AAA latest games are more GPU limited even at 1080p so its perfectly worth it to upgrade the GPU if you play those games.

Ghost-Recon-Vulkan.png


Gear-Tactics.png


Bordelands-DX-12.png


Call-of-Duty-2019.png


RDR2-Vulkan.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Magic Carpet

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,226
9,990
126
My 3770K @ 4.2GHz + RX 570 4GB can play all games at 1080p/1440p custom settings. I can even play games at 1440p 144Hz though with lower IQ settings. Most of the time this system is GPU limited.
Core i7 2600K at 4.0 to 4.5GHz could easily use up to RX5700/RTX2060.
Friend has a Sandy Bridge quad-core Dell MT rig that I built him like maybe 3, maybe 4 years ago. It was a cheap build, refurb tower, throw in GPU (GTX 1050 2GB), throw in small SSD for OS, came with a refurbished server 2TB SATA HDD, with some bad sectors that had to be mapped out with a partition. Added some RAM to bring it to 16GB of DDR3.

Anyways, he has suggested, that if I give him the Haswell quad SFF Gaming PC that I put together, with a GTX 1650 4GB D5 LP card, that he would want me to "refurbish" his old Gaming PC, and replace / fix the GPU, and re-format the drives, and put on a fresh copy of Windows 10. (I think possibly, I put 7 on there originally, as I think it came with a COA for 7.)

Anyways, I was planning on replacing the GPU, because said friend claimed that the bearings were going, and he was getting "kernel errors", although I'm not certain that's the GPU's fault, it could be more bad sectors showing up on the HDD, or the SSD, or the mobo or CPU or RAM or PSU going out.

So, my plan was to put in one of these cards:
1) EVGA 2GB GDDR5 GT 1030 LP-ready (HDMI, DVI)
2) factory-refurb GTX 1650 4GB D5 Ventus (DVI, HDMI, DP)
3) replace the PSU, and put in a used factory-refurb Sapphire Nitro+ RX 580 4GB GDDR5 card. I think that the Sandy Bridge Dell MT series used standard ATX PSU connections.

And then remove the SSD and HDD, and put in fresh ones, and install Win10 64-bit 2004. If there's a COA on the box, I'll match the edition to the COA, so it can be used to activate.

Replacing the PSU might not be a bad idea anyways, considering the age of the system, and giving the CPU heatsink / fan assembly a good cleaning / blow-off, would help too, I think.

So I guess my question is, which of those three GPUs would be most appropriate, for an i5-2500 or i5-2400 (non-K, no OC on Dell mobo anyways) CPU? The RX 580 seems almost too powerful, and I'm leaning on the GT 1030 2GB, if I don't change the PSU.

The refurb Ventus GTX 1650 D5 card doesn't require supplemental power connectors either.

My friend tells me that I'll get paid back for the parts I put into it, plus some for my labor. (I told him I charge $50 for installing Windows.)
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
28,270
19,907
146
The 1030 is a big downgrade from the 1050 he had, I cannot see how he will not notice the difference. I'd go with the 1650 since there is no point in replacing a working PSU, or finding out if the Dell can handle the heat the 580 produces. If the PSU is suspect, the 1650 can let you spec a less expensive unit too.
 

Shmee

Memory & Storage, Graphics Cards Mod Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 13, 2008
7,381
2,414
146
Ok, I just replaced my SB 3930k (4.2 ghz 2 core, 4.0 ghz all core, very conservative) and 290x setup - I was paranoid about part shortages from international supply chains and was playing a lot of Borderlands 3 at the time and based on my own "wait for Zen 3" mantra I prematurely pulled the trigger.

It was "60" fps but not a very satisfying experience, really. My rig had cut through so many games for so long I wasn't thrilled.

First I put in a 5700 vanilla, replacing the 290x in my 3930k rig, and while mostly things were a lot better (thermals, acoustics, avg framerate) the game was not "smooth". The 5700 was my dad's card that I was "testing" before installing into his rig (I was really curious).

It was enough for me to justify $300, personally. I installed it into his PC and bought a 5700xt for myself because I was able to get the XT for about $20 more at the time and I never regretted spending extra on the "X" on my 290.

But pairing the 5700xt with the rig in my sig made a huge difference - loading times, UI pop in, minimum frames. I really didn't think it would matter that much.

Now...

My 5700xt was defective. I had to RMA it and I put the 290x into my new rig. I was floored at how much slower it was. I mean, its about 40% the speed and just a roaster. BUT, I had no problem with medium settings @ 1080p settings in any game. I am sure Hawaii has aged better than Kepler.

My experience tells me don't bother unless you are OK with an uneven (and perhaps unsatisfying) return on your investment.

Frustrating as it is, I don't see an AMD alternative between the 290 and the 5600xt at a minimum. I really missed a midlevel Vega option on the AMD side. A nice RX580 would be faster, I guess, but not revolutionary and IMO not worth the ~$100 it would take to get there (buying new card, flipping old card). If you wanted to wait things out to Q1 next year though, I think a 1070 or a good deal on a 5600xt type card would be pretty reasonable way to go. Those cards are likely to lose minimal value over that stretch of time as well, imo.

Or you know, buy a 3600/10400 *and* a nice video card now and just enjoy it for a while. There are likely to be some big improvements in the next couple years, but it's going to take a while for the software to catch up. Getting onboard a few generations in is going to be OK in terms of performance for the dollar on those features.

Your 2600k and 290 have had a great run. In the decade prior to this one, you'd have to have upgraded like three times by now to keep up ;)
For your rig, depending on your motherboard, you could always upgrade the CPU to a Xeon E5 1680 V2 for under $200. This would give you Ivybridge-EP, with 8 cores instead of 6, PCIe gen 3 support, and they often overclock to 4.4+.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,226
9,990
126
The 1030 is a big downgrade from the 1050 he had, I cannot see how he will not notice the difference. I'd go with the 1650 since there is no point in replacing a working PSU, or finding out if the Dell can handle the heat the 580 produces. If the PSU is suspect, the 1650 can let you spec a less expensive unit too.
The thing is, the friend would be selling/renting the gaming PC that I refurbish, to a co-worker of theirs, as a sort of "my first gaming PC". Hence my idea of putting in the 1030. I originally picked up the Ventus GTX 1650 D5 card with that rig in mind though.
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
28,270
19,907
146
The thing is, the friend would be selling/renting the gaming PC that I refurbish, to a co-worker of theirs, as a sort of "my first gaming PC". Hence my idea of putting in the 1030. I originally picked up the Ventus GTX 1650 D5 card with that rig in mind though.
If you don't want it to be their last gaming PC, skip the 1030 :p Vega 11 APU level performance is no way to win them over to the PC master race.
 

blckgrffn

Diamond Member
May 1, 2003
9,110
3,028
136
www.teamjuchems.com
For your rig, depending on your motherboard, you could always upgrade the CPU to a Xeon E5 1680 V2 for under $200. This would give you Ivybridge-EP, with 8 cores instead of 6, PCIe gen 3 support, and they often overclock to 4.4+.

That's fair... the biggest missing link was the lack of NVME boot support :(

I had bought a E12 based TLC 2TB NVME drive as forecasts for solid TLC drives indicated they would become scarce and expensive. I wanted to put it to work. It is incredibly quick.

If I keep this backup x79 rig around long enough, you can be sure that I'll look for deals on that CPU :D
 

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
14,000
3,357
136
So I guess my question is, which of those three GPUs would be most appropriate, for an i5-2500 or i5-2400 (non-K, no OC on Dell mobo anyways) CPU? The RX 580 seems almost too powerful, and I'm leaning on the GT 1030 2GB, if I don't change the PSU.

The refurb Ventus GTX 1650 D5 card doesn't require supplemental power connectors either.

My friend tells me that I'll get paid back for the parts I put into it, plus some for my labor. (I told him I charge $50 for installing Windows.)

As DAPUNISHER said, anything else than the GT1030.

GTX1650 is slower than the RX580 but it doesnt need bigger PSU. Both cards will be fine for gaming with those CPUs.
There will be some games that will be CPU limited but noting to worry too much as those games will get more than 60fps anyway.
 

Magic Carpet

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2011
3,477
231
106
of course there are other games that will be bottleneck with the 2600K so it depends on what games you play. Mostly AAA latest games are more GPU limited even at 1080p so its perfectly worth it to upgrade the GPU if you play those games.
Really, depends what you play, for example, DX12 in Borderlands 3 works quite a bit more efficient, I just tested it with my own Haswell quad and there is significantly less CPU load for the same FPS versus DX11. Another recent game that runs extremely well is Doom Eternal. IMO, DX12/Vulkan is going to extend the usable life for those older quad CPUs for quite a bit. No point to invest in a new build if you intend to run gpu the likes of 1650 or similar.

1593711482031.png1593711627381.png


This is how my Pitcairn was doing (Fine wine, circa 2012).

1593712392525.png

PS. That's Chrome eating most of ram.
 
Last edited:

alcoholbob

Diamond Member
May 24, 2005
6,271
323
126
For 60 fps on a VRR display it should be fine. Just don't expect the CPU to hold up if you are trying high framerate ~100fps twitch gaming.
 

Martimus

Diamond Member
Apr 24, 2007
4,488
152
106
Here is a new video that shows how Devils Canyon (4770K,4790K) in modern games. You should be able to extrapolate how your processor will work with this.
 

loki1944

Member
Apr 23, 2020
99
35
51
Hello,

I'm running a rig with an i7 2600K (sandybridge still kicking) and a radeon R9-290.
I'm no longer able to run modern games at recommended settings. I've been thinking about either building an entirely new rig once AMD releases their next line of CPUs vs just doing a smaller move like buying a modern GPU. However I am concerned that my CPU won't be able to actually fully support a modern high end graphics card (say something that costs 300-350 dollars). I mostly game at 1080P and I have no high end CPU needs (mostly office stuff and some gaming and rarely using some statistical software which doesn't need a lot of horsepower behind it) overall though it would be nice at some point to do an upgrade.

What would you guys recommend? Wait till december/early jan for AMDs next line of CPUs and do a total overhaul or is my current CPU powerful enough to support a modern GPU now?

Even an i7 920 from 2008 can give great performance up to 1070Ti level GPUs @1080p Very High/Ultra in anything except the DRM heavy last 2 AC Games (GRW, GRB Vulkan, RDR2 etc run fine); so for 1080p you're fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Magic Carpet

singe_101

Junior Member
Aug 14, 2020
3
4
51
Here is new testing of the 2600k with 1650 Super up to 2080 Ti. For 1080p.

DDR3-2400 CL11 amazing RAM. But he still mentions memory bandwidth still being better with the Ryzen processors

 
  • Like
Reactions: Martimus

Martimus

Diamond Member
Apr 24, 2007
4,488
152
106
Here is new testing of the 2600k with 1650 Super up to 2080 Ti. For 1080p.

DDR3-2400 CL11 amazing RAM. But he still mentions memory bandwidth still being better with the Ryzen processors

Yeah, that showed that the RTX2060 is bottlenecked by the 2600K in pretty much every test. The RTX1650 is the best you can do without majorly bottlenecking your system with Sandy Bridge.
 

Red Hawk

Diamond Member
Jan 1, 2011
3,266
169
106
Yeah, that showed that the RTX2060 is bottlenecked by the 2600K in pretty much every test. The RTX1650 is the best you can do without majorly bottlenecking your system with Sandy Bridge.
Bear in mind they tested at stock speeds. Sandy Bridge K chips have about 1 GHz of overclocking head room. Any 2500K/2600K user with a lick of sense should be overclocking their CPU.

What I find interesting though was that one or two games actually ran better on the 2500K than the 2600K. I had thought that modern games were multithreaded enough that any quad core would benefit from SMT providing more threads, but not in every game apparently.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shmee