Q6600 @ 3.2ghz to Ivy bridge 3570k. Fps increase 4 games? Any other benefits?

[Dratsab]

I have a Q6600 @ 3.2ghz with an Asus pk5.

a 560 ti @ 900/1800/ mem@4400mhz
a 60gb corsair force 3 SSD.

If I go from the above to a 3570k with the gpu remaining at 560ti, how much fps increase would I expect to get.

Particularly in games like BF3 and future graphically intense games.

Are there any other tangible benefits on the the z77 platform, like trim support & etc that ICH9 does not have?

 

[Dratsab]

Additional note: I tend to stick with platforms/cpus for awhile (3-4 years)

 

[Hatisherrif]

This will probably be an irrelevant post, but take my case as an example. I upgraded from a Phenom II X4 955 3.5GHz to i5 2500K 3.3GHz on an HD4890.

Crysis - nearly no improvement, the game is clearly not CPU dependent
Far Cry 2 - 10fps average increase
World in Conflict - minimum frame rates went through the roof, average fps got a mild increase (~15fps)

As for Battlefield 3, you should expect a huge difference in online matches with 32 players, as well as solid improvements in smaller matches and singleplayer.

You decide, but I wouldn't rush to upgrade too soon, your CPU can still hold its own. I can't talk about those SSD improvements though, I have no experience with that. You do get some nifty new features like USB 3.0 and other stuff I guess.

 

[Absolute0]

GPU is way more important than CPU here. A quad-core @ 3.2 should be able to power games like BF3 reasonably well.

was gonna recommend SLI with another 560 but your mobo wont support it

upgrading the whole cpu/mobo/ram is an expensive upgrade, you'd be way better off spending < that much money to get a better graphics card.

 

[nearsite]

You can look up youtube videos of the games that people post to see what you can expect.

 

[blckgrffn]

GPU is way more important than CPU here. A quad-core @ 3.2 should be able to power games like BF3 reasonably well.

was gonna recommend SLI with another 560 but your mobo wont support it

upgrading the whole cpu/mobo/ram is an expensive upgrade, you'd be way better off spending < that much money to get a better graphics card.

Hmm... I don't know.

Minimum frames might be suffering here...

What resolutions are we talking about?

To really step up, you are going to have to drop some pretty serious money on the video card.

 

[Hubb1e]

I just upgraded form a Q6600 at 3ghz to a 2500K and my main game is BF3. The improvement was HUGE. In 64 player maps I was struggling to get smooth gameplay. First I upgraded to 8GB of ram and that helped a lot. Then I upgraded my 5850 to a 7950 and nothing changed except I was able to run ultra instead of high. So, I decided to upgrade my CPU to a 2500K (I'm stock freq right now) and the game plays much better. I was skeptical about how much improvement there would be after seeing little change from a 5850 to a 7950, but let me tell you it is worth it to upgrade. The Q6600 at 3ghz is not enough for smooth 64 player BF3 gaming.

 

[Dratsab]

Hmm... I don't know.

Minimum frames might be suffering here...

What resolutions are we talking about?

To really step up, you are going to have to drop some pretty serious money on the video card.

I am using a 22inch 1680x1050 non-ips panel. I am a bit wary of upgrading my monitor as I suffer from ignorance is bliss syndrome.

As in the moment I upgrade to anything and I start noticing the difference, I get annoyed at the instances where I have to deal with the not-as-good stuff.
But if I just read about the awesomeness of new or better tech and not actually live with it, I have no issues with my current stuff.

Example- SSDs. I recently bought a corsair force 3 60gb and I loved the speed bump!
Now when I deal with my work laptop I can annoyed at the slow boot times and other responsiveness issues that I had no qualms about before I bought the SSD.

The thing is , my work laptop is a D430 , a core 2 duo 1.2ghz ulv based thing with a 1.8inch ZIF harddrive. Unbelievably slow in the hard drive responsiveness department. SSD upgrades for that spec are almost non existent but I love my ssd in my desktop so much, that I debate with myself pretty often about getting a new laptop with a 2.5inch hard drive so I can put an SSD in there. Even though my laptop is currently fine for the work I do.

 

[rageofthepeon]

I have a Phenom II x4 955 and I'm seriously considering going with a 3770K/3570K just to improve minimum frame rates on certain games. Feels like I'm not unleashing the full potential of my 7970 in comparison to other people with SandyBridge(E).

 

[davel]

not sure how much this help.

I currently have an e8400 I know it only a dual core compared to quad core, but other then that not much major difference is it?

Well I had a gtx 260 and recently got a gtx 680 (plan to get IB next week), and I saw no difference in FPS. That gtx 680 is really bottlenecked.

I am expecting to see some major differences after IB.


Then again maybe an e8400 is not as good as q6600, but most games don't use quad core do they?

 

[toyota]

not sure how much this help.

I currently have an e8400 I know it only a dual core compared to quad core, but other then that not much major difference is it?

Well I had a gtx 260 and recently got a gtx 680 (plan to get IB next week), and I saw no difference in FPS. That gtx 680 is really bottlenecked.

I am expecting to see some major differences after IB.


Then again maybe an e8400 is not as good as q6600, but most games don't use quad core do they?

that is nonsense unless you play games at 800x600 or you are only playing GTA 4 and BF 3 multi player. while an E8400 is a massive bottleneck for gtx680 there is no way that you did not get an improvement in most games coming from a gtx260. heck you would have more than doubled your performance in games like Just Cause 2, Metro 2033 and Alien vs Predator.

 

[blckgrffn]

that is nonsense unless you play games at 800x600 or you are only playing GTA 4 and BF 3 multi player. while an E8400 is a massive bottleneck for gtx680 there is no way that you did not get an improvement in most games coming from a gtx260. heck you would have more than doubled your performance in games like Just Cause 2, Metro 2033 and Alien vs Predator.

Those games are all old... probably not huge user bases for them compared to BF3. People are building/upgrading PCs just to play that one game. Also, this is the game that the OP specifically mentioned, and thus is the most pertinent to the conversation.

Just saying those aren't very good examples. I've no doubt your point is true for other, more played games that are GPU bound, generally.

I am using a 22inch 1680x1050 non-ips panel. I am a bit wary of upgrading my monitor as I suffer from ignorance is bliss syndrome.

At that resolution, I think that a beefier CPU is going to pay much better dividends in improving minimum frame rates. The 560 Ti is plenty of card for that resolution (IMHO, you could still drive it into the ground by being aggressive with AA modes, etc.)

 

[toyota]

Those games are all old... probably not huge user bases for them compared to BF3. People are building/upgrading PCs just to play that one game. Also, this is the game that the OP specifically mentioned, and thus is the most pertinent to the conversation.

Just saying those aren't very good examples. I've no doubt your point is true for other, more played games that are GPU bound, generally.



At that resolution, I think that a beefier CPU is going to pay much better dividends in improving minimum frame rates. The 560 Ti is plenty of card for that resolution (IMHO, you could still drive it into the ground by being aggressive with AA modes, etc.)

you missed part of what I was saying. he claimed framerates did not change at all. I simply listed 3 games for examples where he would have at least doubled his performance in. there are plenty of other games where he would have doubled performance or at least had a massive improvement. he may have tried out BF 3 multi but he clearly did not actually test multiple games before making his claim.

 

[blckgrffn]

you missed part of what I was saying. he claimed framerates did not change at all. I simply listed 3 games for examples where he would have at least doubled his performance in. there are plenty of other games where he would have doubled performance or at least had a massive improvement. he may have tried out BF 3 multi but he clearly did not actually test multiple games before making his claim.

Hah, well, he wasn't making a post like BFG's awesome mini-review, either, so I personally was cool with the broad generalization.

I can appreciate that you weren't.

 

[davel]

that is nonsense unless you play games at 800x600 or you are only playing GTA 4 and BF 3 multi player. while an E8400 is a massive bottleneck for gtx680 there is no way that you did not get an improvement in most games coming from a gtx260. heck you would have more than doubled your performance in games like Just Cause 2, Metro 2033 and Alien vs Predator.

Well to be honest I did not try those games. Right now I only play BF3 and SWTOR.

I literally saw no difference in SWTOR ( that game is horribly optimized so can be a lot factors I guess) and in BF3 I saw maybe 5 fps increase, this is at 1080p, but it still was not smooth to me and this was at all medium settings and did not feel any different then on gtx 260.


I did run 3d mark vantage before I upgraded:

with gtx 260 - 8106
with gtx 680 - 13137


I don't really know how 3dmark equates to real games, but wanted to run something to get a comparison

 

[Absolute0]

Wolfdale core is super bottleneck compared to a quad core for games like BF3. I upgraded to my 7970 before I upgraded to Sandy Bridge (So i had a wolfdale at 4.2 and a 7970) and I was able to run BF3 on higher settings but no matter what I did, i was CPU limited and had major FPS dips that just felt like horrid lag.

I was assuming a quadcore could power a 560 a bit better through BF3. If you are planning on overclocking the new processor though, would probably be a big difference... But again, GPU is usually more important than CPU. And the CPU upgrade will cost you around 450$ I think (CPU/mobo/ram = 220/150/80) and its hard to sell old cpu/mobo/ram parts whereas its easy to sell your 560 and pay out 230$ to get a 7950 or something. Then upgrade to Ivy Bridge once they release a revision that overclocks worth a damn, lol...

 

[Dratsab]

Just to see if I am interpreting the general consensus right.

"For games, I should be able to holdout till haswell".

This is awesome news, I should be able to save up for a better gpu next year when haswell comes out.

Any thoughts on significant platform advantages of the z77 platform over my current p35,Ich9 (besides usb3.0)

Also does Ich 9 support trim?

 

[Hubb1e]

Just to see if I am interpreting the general consensus right.

"For games, I should be able to holdout till haswell".

This is awesome news, I should be able to save up for a better gpu next year when haswell comes out.

Any thoughts on significant platform advantages of the z77 platform over my current p35,Ich9 (besides usb3.0)

Also does Ich 9 support trim?

That wasn't the consensus at all. For most games you can hold out. For BF3 the upgrade is warranted. And you can pretty much guarantee that more games will come out that will press the Q6600 before Haswell drops. I keep my CPUs until something comes along that requires an upgrade and in BF3 multi I was CPU limited with a Q6600 at 3ghz so I upgraded.

And guys, you are never GPU limited unless you are already at the lowest graphics settings. Yes, you can set the settings high enough to be GPU limited, but there is always a way out of that by lowering settings. If you are CPU limited there is only one thing to do and that is upgrade.

 

[blckgrffn]

That wasn't the consensus at all. For most games you can hold out. For BF3 the upgrade is warranted. And you can pretty much guarantee that more games will come out that will press the Q6600 before Haswell drops. I keep my CPUs until something comes along that requires an upgrade and in BF3 multi I was CPU limited with a Q6600 at 3ghz so I upgraded.

And guys, you are never GPU limited unless you are already at the lowest graphics settings. Yes, you can set the settings high enough to be GPU limited, but there is always a way out of that by lowering settings. If you are CPU limited there is only one thing to do and that is upgrade.

This is my impression on the thread as well...

 

[Dratsab]

That wasn't the consensus at all. For most games you can hold out. For BF3 the upgrade is warranted. And you can pretty much guarantee that more games will come out that will press the Q6600 before Haswell drops. I keep my CPUs until something comes along that requires an upgrade and in BF3 multi I was CPU limited with a Q6600 at 3ghz so I upgraded.

And guys, you are never GPU limited unless you are already at the lowest graphics settings. Yes, you can set the settings high enough to be GPU limited, but there is always a way out of that by lowering settings. If you are CPU limited there is only one thing to do and that is upgrade.

Thank you for the clarification. About the games coming out that will stress the q6600, I do agree with you that, in a map of more than 40 players I do get frequent "lags", which i have frequently interpreted as just ping related. Sometimes it gets annoying to the point of me just limiting my self to death matches and rush maps due to the smaller number of players.

However will the only game that improves by a significant margin be BF3?

Coz what I have been reading around the web is that games are created for the console market, thus in the majority of the cases, my q6600 should be fine. At least until the next gen consoles drop.

If next gen consoles drop at end of the year , I would still be able to upgrade to a more overclock friendly ivy then. Else Haswell being the next tick for Intel should yield a greater increase in ipc.

Its pretty hard to justify spending usd $480(where I live) just for 1 game.

That is why I have been asking about the other benefits of the z77 platform.(other than usb3)

Does my reasoning make sense? Anyone cares to weigh in on the other aspects of the z77 platform?

 

[Endymion FRS]

Wolfdale core is super bottleneck compared to a quad core for games like BF3. I upgraded to my 7970 before I upgraded to Sandy Bridge (So i had a wolfdale at 4.2 and a 7970) and I was able to run BF3 on higher settings but no matter what I did, i was CPU limited and had major FPS dips that just felt like horrid lag.

I was assuming a quadcore could power a 560 a bit better through BF3. If you are planning on overclocking the new processor though, would probably be a big difference... But again, GPU is usually more important than CPU. And the CPU upgrade will cost you around 450$ I think (CPU/mobo/ram = 220/150/80) and its hard to sell old cpu/mobo/ram parts whereas its easy to sell your 560 and pay out 230$ to get a 7950 or something. Then upgrade to Ivy Bridge once they release a revision that overclocks worth a damn, lol...

Oh, would being on a Yorkfield Q9400 be bottlenecking me in BF3 then? I was wondering what kind of performance increase I'd see on top of already running a Radeon 6950 when I buy an IVB next week.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

I went from a e7200 to q9550 and didn't saw much of a performance increase. But going from a q9550 to i7 860 with a 5850 that too was a big upgrade. Going from a Oced 860 to stock 2600k was an okayish upgrade as well. So any non I series to ivy is like the biggest upgrade ever regardless of what anybody says. And the difference is more in smoothness and no lag and to lesser but significant extent in fps as well

I would rather have ivy plus 560 ti both Oced than q6600 plus 7970 or 680

 

[davel]

I went from a e7200 to q9550 and didn't saw much of a performance increase. But going from a q9550 to i7 860 with a 5850 that too was a big upgrade. Going from a Oced 860 to stock 2600k was an okayish upgrade as well. So any non I series to ivy is like the biggest upgrade ever regardless of what anybody says. And the difference is more in smoothness and no lag and to lesser but significant extent in fps as well

I would rather have ivy plus 560 ti both Oced than q6600 plus 7970 or 680

I really cannot wait to see what kind of upgrade I get going from e8400 to ivy i5.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

You will get a huge upgrade dude,

 

[Hubb1e]

The Q6600 overclocked is equivalent to an Athlon II which is still tested with modern games and if it isn't just check the Phenon II stats and figure your chip is slightly slower clock for clock. So go check the results of the benchmarks to find out if you are held back in any games. Other games will benefit also like starcraft II, Civ 5, etc but some won't. Figure out what you like to play and check the benches. One thing I'm confident in is that a Sandy / Ivy overclocked to 4.5ghz will be a long lasting chip just like your Q6600 was so I think the upgrade is justified. Especially since my upgrade only cost me $270 for the CPU, board, and RAM.