Considering 7970 to replace dead GTX 460 but worried about CPU limits

[hotarri]

The GTX 460 on my HTPC is starting to exhibit artifacts and I've done all I could to fix it (various driver versions and underclocking), I decided now to replace the card and upgrade.

The AMD 7970 results look really promising, but I'm not concerned with my CPU bottlenecking it.

I have a Phenom II X4 965 at stock 3.4GHz. I run it 24/7 and would therefore rather not overclock.

The maximum resolution I will ever run on this is 1920x1080.

The GTX 460 is definitely not limited by my CPU, but I think I may need to worry if upgrading to a 7970.

I'd rather go with a 6970 or 6950 if the CPU is going to significantly limit the performance of the 7970. I'm willing to wait a week for the 7970, but would rather not wait more than a month for the other 7000 series cards unless it is really worth it.

Here are my system specs:
Phenom II X4 965 @ 3.4GHz
4GB DDR3 1600
Biostar TA785G3 uATX MB
OCZ Fata1ity 550W PSU
Mitsubishi 73" DLP @ 1824x1026

Let me know which of the following options would be your preference for this setup:
1. AMD 7970
2. AMD 6970
3. AMD 6950
4. Wait for the other ATI 7000 series cards

Thanks in advance.

 

[GaiaHunter]

This review doesn't have a Phenom II there but the BD shouldn't be much different.

So you will lose a few percentage points here and there.

On the other hand at your resolution the 7970 is, with some exceptions, an overkill.

If my card died I wouldn't wait a month or 2 to replace it (unless you have some card that can keep you afloat in the meantime).

A 6950 should be a decent jump over your GTX460 and once you consider the obscene price of the 7970 there is no rational justification for it. There can be emotional reasons though.

 

[hdfxst]

http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-7970-cpu-scaling-performance-review/1

 

[Concillian]

If your card is done I'd choose one of these options, depending on your budget / desired performance levels. I think your issues mean that waiting for a 78xx card is not a good option, but if considering the 7970, you may as well wait for the 7950, which should be a better value, especially for your CPU.

That leaves you with:

1) buy 6870. Cheap and still a performance improvement
2) buy a 6950 or GTX 570 depending on desired performance / price.
3) Deal with it another couple weeks and go for a 7950.

7970 is an option, but how many people are seriously considering a flagship card like that? With your CPU, I certainly wouldn't be considering the 7970... 7950 maybe, but most likely I'd stick with something more balanced, like a 570 or 6950.

I don't even see a huge need for a 7970 or even a 7950 at 1920x1080 on ANY CPU. There are a very few games that see a significant performance benefit. Most games are already well above where someone will actually be able to tell a difference in FPS when playing with a 570 or 6950. And if you have to move down to "only 4xAA" instead of 8xAA by using a 570 or 6950 instead of a 7970, well, the quality difference is really, ,truly not THAT huge between the two modes. You can get plenty pretty at 1080p with a card half the cost of the 7970.

 

[hotarri]

Thanks for all the input The Guru3D link was particularly helpful.

What I gather from the data in their test is that in the games where the frame rates actually drop below 60FPS at 1920x1200 are GPU limited and there is very little difference between the CPUs.

In the cases where there is a significant improvement with the newer Intel processors the frame rates are already greater than 60 FPS, so I think the perceived differences would be subtle.

Based on this I think my setup is at the lower end of what is acceptable for use with the 7970.

Having said that I think I'll wait until the 7950 is released and decide then based on the price/performance since I think I've been sold on the 28nm process, just not sure that I need the top of the line model. If it was being released at the same time I'm almost certain I would be going for the 7950.

For the time being I'll be switching to integrated graphics and won't be doing any PC gaming on the couch Not sure if I'll be able to resist ordering the 7970 once it is widely available, but I'll do my best.

Thanks again for all the help.

 

[Leyawiin]

If your current card is dead and you have games to play there are some very good options that will cost much less than the upcoming HD 7000 high end cards. GTX 560 Ti or 448, HD 6950, HD 6970, GTX 570. There's no way I'd wait on my daily gaming for AMD to get around to sending the new cards to retailers.

 

[hotarri]

Fortunately it is not the only gaming PC in the house. Just the one hooked up to the big screen. I've got a healthy 5850 with an i5-750, but some games just don't feel right sitting at a desk (I'll have Dirt 3 withdrawls).

 

[boxleitnerb]

You can always increase graphics quality to avoid CPU bottlenecks. You could:

1. use SGSSAA in DX9
2. use the (OG)SSAA-tool from Tommti Systems in DX10/11
3. use graphics mods like ENB which add SSAO and other effects
4. use a 3D monitor/Eyefinity

CPU bottlenecks can be avoided quite easily actually. You just have to know how.
If you're after pure fps however, for example if you play fast shooters and always need 100+ or even 120+ (120Hz LCD) fps, then you're screwed. Depending on the game, not even a 2600K@5GHz would be enough to sustain these framerates.

 

[amenx]

Best CPU bottleneck remover: 2560x1600 screen.

 

[Crap Daddy]

So you want to make the jump from spending 150$ on card to 550$? Why not settle inbetween? For 350$ you can get 2500k/mobo, use all the rest of your parts and get a 6950/560Ti for 250$.

 

[hotarri]

Thanks for the info on third party apps that will help the GPU break a sweat.

This PC will end up living next to a TV, so it's going to be stuck at 1080p.

I'm not really interested in buying anymore Intel products (not a fanboy, but I work with both companies professionally and based on my dealings would rather not buy Intel products)

I may just bite the bullet and order the 7970 next week.

 

[Concillian]

Best CPU bottleneck remover: 2560x1600 screen.

If they made one in the 20" range, I'd be all over it.

30"? too freaking large. I want resolution improvement, not just a bigger screen at the same resolution with more pixels.

 

[wahdangun]

If they made one in the 20" range, I'd be all over it.

30"? too freaking large. I want resolution improvement, not just a bigger screen at the same resolution with more pixels.

yeah, its a freakin frustrating that iPhone have more ppi than my monitor and after the fact that apple want to release a retina display for Ipad really add salt to my injury

 

[MrK6]

If they made one in the 20" range, I'd be all over it.

30"? too freaking large. I want resolution improvement, not just a bigger screen at the same resolution with more pixels.

Actually, the pixel density on a 30" 2560x1600 is better than most monitors available. For those that want a bit tighter dot pitch, 27" 2560x1440 are top notch.

 

[BFG10K]

I’d have no hesitation to upgrade with that CPU, especially if you use AA in games. Processor bottlenecks are far overblown in most cases, and the 7970 will still offer a massive performance gain overall.

 

[T_Yamamoto]

So you want to make the jump from spending 150$ on card to 550$? Why not settle inbetween? For 350$ you can get 2500k/mobo, use all the rest of your parts and get a 6950/560Ti for 250$.

I agree!

 

[hotarri]

I ended up going a little nuts and built a new system with an SB processor and a 7970. The Phenom II 965 system with the bad video card is going to be a dedicated media server.

Here's what I ordered:

i5 2500k
Visiontek 7970
Gigabyte Z68X-UD3H-B3
16GB Corsair Vengeance PC12800
128GB Crucial M4
Cooler Master Silent Pro M850
Cooler Master HAF 922 mid-tower
Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO
ASUS Bluray Burner

Hard disks are way too expensive right now so I'll deal with my external 1.5TB and the 128GB SSD until prices go back to normal.