• 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.

Going from HD3870 to HD6850

Raduque

Raduque

Lifer
Right now I have an HD3870 backed by an overclocked E6300 @ 2.8ghz. If I upgrade to an HD6850, is the CPU going to become a major bottleneck for 1680x1050?

Thanks
 
If you are happy with the system as is except the GPU, I'd say it would be fine. You wouldn't see a big difference except in the newest titles that make full use of extra cores.

Don't forget you can get the GPU now and upgrade the core (CPU/Mobo/RAM) at another time with no issues!
 
Yes, the CPU will limit you. You'll still see improvement, but there are few modern games that would be able to utilize the full potential of the HD6850. You'll either be cpu-limited due to your clock speed or CPU-limited due to having only 2 cores. You'd probably be just as well off with an HD5770, which can be had for much less, e.g. $100 after rebate: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814161338.
 
I think you will gain a lot more performance from the move to the 6950 than you will be missing out on due to bottleneck. Let's not forget a C2D isn't a bad CPU; it's just not as good as current i7s. I'm still using a C2Q in my main rig and an E6750 at stock (2.6 iirc) in my other rig.

Though I do have to agree on the point that if you have no intention of upgrading anything or changing your prefered resolution then you can save some cash and pick up something cheaper. Personally, I'd say GPU now, the rest later. Can you say 4GHz+ Sandy Bridge core for under $500? (2500K, P67, 2x2GB DDR3)
 
I was looking at the 5770, but I figured the 6850 would be more future-proof, considering it's better GPU core and higher memory bandwidth.

Also, it's the one upgrade from a new system that I could apply to my current system.
 
I wrote a review on my findings going from the 4830 to a 6870. I jumped from a 3850 to the 4830 and saw a really big increase in gaming performance. The 4830 is about 50-75% faster than the 3870, and the 6870 is about 10-20% faster than the 6850, so you can go by the numbers like that. I also used a 2.8ghz Core2 for the review, but it is 45nm, and a quad core.

2.8ghz you probably wont be too cpu limited in games that use one or two cores, but Battlefield Bad Company 2 or DiRT2 might suffer. Source games like CS:S, HL2 or TF2 should be fine. L4D 1/2 use 3+ cores at times, so that's a tricky one.
 
Last edited:
You'll see gains from the upgrade, but you will be held back. A 5770 is the more appropriate and balanced choice; unless you plan to upgrade the processor at some point and carry over the 6850 then I think you should go with a 5770. The 6850 is only future proof if you plan to upgrade the rest of your system and/or upgrade your monitor.

You'll get see good gains if you use AA, because the 3800 series performance chokes with AA. Plus the brute speed is getting long in the tooth for some games anyway.

Blitz KriegeR said:
I think you will gain a lot more performance from the move to the 6950 than you will be missing out on due to bottleneck. Let's not forget a C2D isn't a bad CPU; it's just not as good as current i7s. I'm still using a C2Q in my main rig and an E6750 at stock (2.6 iirc) in my other rig.
Click to expand...

His E6300 is not an E6750 (nor a quad core). It has half the L2 cache. It's not that great for gaming.
 
Yes, the CPU will be a bottleneck but it won't be a major bottleneck by any stretch. Your C2D is still perfectly acceptable for most (if not all) dual threaded games and there are still countless games where the added power of the 6850 can be felt on your CPU. Whether it's worth the extra cash over a 5770 is up to your budget but you can't really go wrong either way.

It also depends if you're the type who mails in for the rebate. If you aren't then you're looking at a much lower price differential. If it's only 50$ extra (rather than 80$) then I'd say the 6850 is worth it. And, yes, it will be a good bit more future proof.
 
Last edited:
Not all Core 2 Duos are created equally. His E6300 is not an E8400. In fact a stock E8400 is probably 35% faster than his overclocked processor; an overclocked E8400 even moreso. 35% is good enough to alleviate a CPU bottleneck, such that if you assume a 5770 is a good match for an overclocked E6300 then a 6850 is a good match for an E8400.
 
^ That's a good point but it's worth noting that this performance differential doesn't always translate to gaming. And, even then, 5770 vs 6850 can mean the difference between no AA and 4xAA or higher graphics settings and so on.
 
Depends on the game. But really his 3870 should handle a lot of games without AA and higher settings. So the difference between a 3870 and a 5770 is that he can use AA (because the 3870 chokes) and turn up a few settings. I'm not sure he'll see that same thing between a 5770 and 6850 with his rig. To recommend anything faster than a 5770 we should know what games he will be playing.
 
^ I agree and disagree. I recently upgraded the 4850 in my HTPC to a 6850 and there was a big difference despite the 2.66ghz C2D in the system. It's admittedly the 4mb L2 chip but the 4850 is also significantly faster than his 3870 and not much slower than the 5770 (once you factor out the framebuffer difference).

But, really, the OP can't go wrong with either. The added cost of a 6850 will pay off in the future while a 5770 will also bring big gains today.
 
It will be a huge difference positively, upgrading your gpu. You wont notice anything but massive framerate increases
 
Last edited:
Mr. President said:
^ I agree and disagree. I recently upgraded the 4850 in my HTPC to a 6850 and there was a big difference despite the 2.66ghz C2D in the system. It's admittedly the 4mb L2 chip but the 4850 is also significantly faster than his 3870 and not much slower than the 5770 (once you factor out the framebuffer difference).

But, really, the OP can't go wrong with either. The added cost of a 6850 will pay off in the future while a 5770 will also bring big gains today.
Click to expand...

No doubt there should be an improvement, but all these little things add up to make your situation different:

1) Your extra cache certainly helps. C2D loves cache for gaming. So his system is a tad worse by a few percentage points.

2) The 5770 is probably faster than the 4850 than you think: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/177?vs=172 In the more GPU-intensive situations (Crysis, HAWX, Wolfenstein) it's about 30% faster.

3) You were probably gaming at 1080p for your HTPC, weren't you? If so then I'd say that is yet another situation that is more conducive to let the 6850 shine, at least moreso than 1680x1050.

He can get the 6850, it's a fine card, but I think he should only get it if he plans to migrate it over to a new system or if he gets a bigger monitor. That's my advice. Just to clarify I don't think he can go wrong by grabbing the 6850, as there are some games where it should make a difference, but I think the 5770 is just a better fit. Start saving up for a processor or system upgrade.
 
I would probably say go for the 6850 if you were at 1920x1080/1200. at 1680x1050 though its going to be even more performance that will go untapped with your older lower end Core 2 duo. your old E6300 oced to 2.8 would only be about like me putting my E8500 at 2.1 or 2.2. at that speed I would lose about 50% of what I get in cpu intensive games at 1680x1050 and that's with just a gtx260. now in gpu intensive games it would not be that much. but of course a 6850 is faster so it will certainly be bottlenecked quite a bit more. overall a 5770 is much more appropriate IMO but a 6850 would be faster in some cases.
 
Last edited:
Just go for 6850, though CPU may be the bottleneck
But if the games you're playing are GPU-Bounded, CPU's performane won't be too important.
 
Hold out for a few weeks and grab the gts/gtx550 or whatever they are gonna call it.
It should be faster then a 5770 and slower then a 6850, it might be just what you looking for at your resolution.

Quote:
"The GTX550 Ti on the other hand is placed very smartly. The sub-10k market is pretty big, and the card that has so far ruled the roost there is the Radeon HD5770. The GTX550 Ti reportedly performs around 30% faster than the 5770, and with AMD not planning on releasing a successor (the HD6770 will only be a rebranding of the 5770 in order to get AMD’s name onto it), it looks the GTX550 Ti is going to take that segment over"

http://tech2.in.com/india/news/graphics-pc-addon-cards/nvidia-gtx590-and-gtx550-ti-incoming/194312/0

Just my 2 cents. 🙂

edit: why not a gtx460 768mb for about 130$? Thats not a bad choice either.
 
Last edited:
happy medium said:
Hold out for a few weeks and grab the gts/gtx550 or whatever they are gonna call it.
It should be faster then a 5770 and slower then a 6850, it might be just what you looking for at your resolution.

Quote:
"The GTX550 Ti on the other hand is placed very smartly. The sub-10k market is pretty big, and the card that has so far ruled the roost there is the Radeon HD5770. The GTX550 Ti reportedly performs around 30% faster than the 5770, and with AMD not planning on releasing a successor (the HD6770 will only be a rebranding of the 5770 in order to get AMD’s name onto it), it looks the GTX550 Ti is going to take that segment over"

http://tech2.in.com/india/news/graphics-pc-addon-cards/nvidia-gtx590-and-gtx550-ti-incoming/194312/0

Just my 2 cents. 🙂

edit: why not a gtx460 768mb for about 130$? Thats not a bad choice either.
Click to expand...

That would mean it would have to be 50% faster than the GTS450, if they are going to use a chip similar to the GF106, i have a hard time seeing that happening.
 
happy medium said:
Quote:
"The GTX550 Ti on the other hand is placed very smartly. The sub-10k market is pretty big, and the card that has so far ruled the roost there is the Radeon HD5770. The GTX550 Ti reportedly performs around 30% faster than the 5770, and with AMD not planning on releasing a successor (the HD6770 will only be a rebranding of the 5770 in order to get AMD’s name onto it), it looks the GTX550 Ti is going to take that segment over"

edit: why not a gtx460 768mb for about 130$? Thats not a bad choice either.
Click to expand...

Skurge said:
That would mean it would have to be 50% faster than the GTS450, if they are going to use a chip similar to the GF106, i have a hard time seeing that happening.
Click to expand...

Not hard to believe, actually. The GTX460-768 itself is about 30% faster than an HD5770, and I assume the GTX550 will slot in at the same price as the GTX460-768. With the tweaks they've been doing with each round of releases, I'm sure they can coax that out of the GTX450 design, and sell it more profitably as well. The GTX460-768 at $130 is probably not a big money-maker for nVidia.

As for why the OP doesn't just buy a GTX460-768, the first thing we'd to know would be what is his power supply. Anything below a reputable 400-450w PSU wouldn't cut it. Based on the age of his system, that is doubtful.
 
Termie said:
As for why the OP doesn't just buy a GTX460-768, the first thing we'd to know would be what is his power supply. Anything below a reputable 400-450w PSU wouldn't cut it. Based on the age of his system, that is doubtful.
Click to expand...

I have a SeaSonic S12II 500w PSU. I've generally tried to stay away from nVidia due to both power and heat output concerns. My computer is in my bedroom, and it can get very hot in here while gaming.

Games I'm currently playing:
Fallout New Vegas
Ghostbusters
Batman:AA
Mafia II
Kane and Lynch 1/2

If I get a new gpu, I'll probably reinstall the STALKER games (SoC/CS, I don't have CoP yet), Crysis Warhead and Cryostasis.

And yes, I'm going to upgrade to something new, eventually. Hopefully before the year is out.

Edit: Forgot to mention I'm still slowly playing through Dragon Age, and want to play Dragon Age II also.
 
Last edited:
no way are you playing Ghostbusters smoothly on decent settings. I can tell you for sure you will have no improvement in that game until you get a faster cpu. even with my E8500 at 3.8 my framerate would become very sluggish in spots where lots of physics were being done. you would have to OC your cpu past 4.5 just to get the same ho hum performance I was getting in that game.
 
toyota, never said I was. I was seeing lots of slowdowns in GB, so I figured it was my GPU - never thought it has that much physics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top