SLI GTX280's: use a q6600 or e8500?

[mach1point9pants]

OK so I splashed out on a couple of GTX280s (XFX) and are going to drop them into my rig.

Now the best I can get the q6600 up to (with watercooling) is 3.375, despite 6 months of tinkering . I have seen articles (such as this: http://www.tweaktown.com/artic...l_thoughts/index.html) showing that a single GTX280 can be quite cpu limited. The 6600 has been fine for the 3 8800gtx's but I wonder if I will be holding myself back with the 280's. This is using the triplehead2go at 3840x1024, the same amount of pixels as a 30 inch.

So, with the e8500 being able to OC into the 4GHz region (normally always a risk) would I be better off getting one of those and OCing the hell out of it? A friend will take my q6600 and I work in IT so can afford it...wholesale prices FTW

This is for gaming only, I don't do much else with the PC. Most games seem to not really use more than 2 cores....
..Any thoughts? Anybody seen any comparisons for high end graphics with slower quads vs faster dual cores?

Cheers
M1.9P

 

[myocardia]

Welcome to anandtech. You'll definitely want an E8500. The only two games that benefit from a quad (at the moment) are Supreme Commander and M$'s FSX. Everything else is faster with a higher clocked dual, and with two GTX280's, you're going to want all of the CPU-speed you can get.

 

[aigomorla]

Hello and Welcome to Anandtech.

However im very lost in this post.
You dropped 1400 dollars on the GPU sector, and your not willing to go Yorkie on the Cpu sector?

:lost:

Originally posted by: myocardia
Welcome to anandtech. You'll definitely want an E8500. The only two games that benefit from a quad (at the moment) are Supreme Commander and M$'s FSX. Everything else is faster with a higher clocked dual, and with two GTX280's, you're going to want all of the CPU-speed you can get.

Myo im sorry, but he has 2 insane gpu cards in SLI. Those cards will outlast his dualcore. So he's best choice is grabing a yorkfield so his cpu doesnt get outdated b4 his gpu's does.

Am i making sense?

Basically here is what im saying, with your cards, and a Quad Yorkie = Gaurentee holdoff until a more affordable Neha package comes out.

With a dualcore, who knows how much longer those will last in the gaming area. But i gaurentee you'll start seeing more quad friendly games come out real soon. Like how we shifted to dualcores when they got popular.

 

[mach1point9pants]

Hey thanks for the quick replies. I have had the q6600 for a while (since the G0 stepping arrived) and it has done me proud at 3.3GHZ so far. I don't own a e8500 yet tho.

@aigomorla: maybe it is me but I don't feel that bad dropping stupid money on GPUs but when you see the step between a q9550 (650NZ) and a q9650 (1300) for a measly .17 (and the unlocked multi obviously...big selling point) it makes me baulk. twice the money for pretty much just an unlocked multi? mmmm You can OC cheaper CPUs to higher level but nothing I do OCing a GTX260 is going to give it the extra RAM and memory bandwidth! So that is why I haven't dropped the money on the better CPU. I see that you have a 9650 at 4,25, well I would hope to get the e8500 to a similar level for 1/4 the price. But I would be losing out on 2 cores. Now for gaming, using stupidly expensive GPUs , is this going to make a huge difference? I know more games will be going quad but how many before Nehalem next year?

So that is where I am at.

Glad to be postin after a long time lurking

 

[Shortass]

Originally posted by: mach1point9pants
Hey thanks for the quick replies. I have had the q6600 for a while (since the G0 stepping arrived) and it has done me proud at 3.3GHZ so far. I don't own a e8500 yet tho.

@aigomorla: maybe it is me but I don't feel that bad dropping stupid money on GPUs but when you see the step between a q9550 (650NZ) and a q9650 (1300) for a measly .17 (and the unlocked multi obviously...big selling point) it makes me baulk. twice the money for pretty much just an unlocked multi? mmmm You can OC cheaper CPUs to higher level but nothing I do OCing a GTX260 is going to give it the extra RAM and memory bandwidth! So that is why I haven't dropped the money on the better CPU. I see that you have a 9650 at 4,25, well I would hope to get the e8500 to a similar level for 1/4 the price. But I would be losing out on 2 cores. Now for gaming, using stupidly expensive GPUs , is this going to make a huge difference? I know more games will be going quad but how many before Nehalem next year?

So that is where I am at.

Glad to be postin after a long time lurking

I agree with the quad option, especially considering the very likely extreme pricing of early Nehalem parts. You don't need to get a 9650... simply get the 9550 for $550 (or, if the price drops pan out, $350 in Q3) and with the higher multi very easily reach 3.6-4.0ghz. Honestly, a dual at 4.0 or 4.2 vs a quad at 3.6 is a silly comparison; the quad will handle all games as fast as the dual and in the stated examples above (and more in the coming year) it will crush the duals. At the higher resolutions the cpu power will matter less, but for thread intensive games the quad will show definite improvement. If you have the money, go for the quad.


Edit: Actually, a 6600 at 3.3ghz is pretty darn good. I know it sucks having older tech, but the GAMING performance difference between a super high clocked dual or newer higher clocked quad will not be that significant over what you already have. The only game that will give you even a hint of difficulty is Crysis, and I don't see anything in the upcoming year that will challenge that. If I were you I'd sit on the rig and wait for the new cpu's to become mainstream in late '09.

 

[Tempered81]

i say take an e8500 or e8400

if you can fork out the cash get a qx9650 like aigo says.


both should do 4.0ghz+

 

[bunnyfubbles]

yet there's very little reason to give up 3.3GHz (although his sig says 3.5GHz) Q6600 performance as there won't be much real world difference unless he's like aigomorla and is a huge supcom nut (or perhaps FSX where you could even benefit from an 8 core Skulltrial...)

Getting to 4GHz is an e-penis check mark and little more if its only generalized gaming we're considering. The same argument could be said about getting to 4 cores, but the key difference here is that the OP already has it...that and 4 cores, even if they are slower, are going to last a LOT longer than 2 faster cores...just have to have observed all the users who opted for the single core s939 Athlon64/Opterons simply because they could hit the then e-penis checkmark of 3GHz vs. the alternative new dualcore option that would often top out at ~2.6-2.8GHz. What's the difference? Well the single core, while novel @ ~3+GHz back in the day, is now seen as inept whereas a dualcore X2/Opteron1xx @ ~2.6-2.8GHz is still a fairly potent system by even today's standards...

By the time a ~3.3-3.5GHz Q6600 is a true bottleneck for SLI'd GTX280s, a 4+GHz E8xxx is certainly going to be a bottleneck as well seeing as how the future is in parallel processing.

Also, consider the review you linked. If you're going to be running your games similarly to the stress induced by a 2560x1600 resolution, notice how the change in performance from 3 to 4GHz is almost non existent at that resolution. Also notice how the largest changes (at 1280x1024) are in already ridiculous performance realms well above the 60Hz refresh rate of LCDs...going from 118fps to 178fps is worthless if the display can't refresh fast enough to keep up...

And of course when you have an excess of GPU power you can always crank up the above and beyond IQ settings...notice how the review you link to shows the supposedly slower 3GHz system absolutely on par (well actually 2fps faster) with the 4GHz system when they start to increase the AA @ 2560x1600.

 

[nyker96]

Welcome to AT forum. I believe at this moment, it will be hard to max out a pair of 280s in SLI. Maybe wait until the next gen cpus. out te two I would say a e8400@4ghz probably little faster for your setup right now since few games go quad yet.

 

[ShadowFlareX]

I wonder how much CPU speed the GTX 280 (SLI even) need so the CPU isn't bottlenecking the GPU(s), specifically the 45nm ones. I pretty much play UT3 95% among other games, and with my system setup, I would only need 2.8GHz Q9450 to make use 100% of my 9800GTX capabilities, ie. making my GPU the bottleneck.

I was benchmarking my system using HardwareOC on UT3, running my CPU at 2.66GHz, 1920 x 1200 res, highest quality. HardwareOC reported a result of 121FPS. Cranked the CPU to 3.2GHz, got 122FPS, cranked it again to the max (3.6GHz), still got 122FPS. So I assumed I'd get 122FPS anyway at 2.8GHz. UT3 is one of those games that can utilize all 4 cores on a quad, although it won't be 100%. However, the benchmark is just strolling through a map without any AI running around, in real UT3 gaming (especially offline with tons of bots), faster speed will help the AI/physics calculations.

The GTX 280 sure is nice, but I gotta live with my 9800GTX for at least a year, or maybe 2.

My vote would go to the quad, the future is multi-threaded

 

[tuteja1986]

Nah get a Quad core , new games are going to start using more than 2 core. Alan Wake being one of them

 

[HOOfan 1]

Hell just wait until the Q9650 comes out at $560 in the next few months.

 

[Acanthus]

Honestly unless you do video encoding... the Q6600 should be fine over the long term.

There is very little SSE4 software out there and adoption is slow. Id sit on your current CPU and get a 6 or 8 core down the road.

 

[aigomorla]

nonono dont get me wrong.

im not telling you to bling out on the QX processor, but how about a Q9450?

You get the best of both worlds. You get SSE4 which everyone is ranting about. And you get Quadcore.

And the price difference between a Q6600 vs Q9450 is a bit more palatable.


Mach also im protecting your upgrade value. SLI wont be available on Neha unless Nvidia or Intel decides to act like a real man and give in. Doubt it.

So you really wanna grab the quad now, because you have to assume as of this moment, your current platform will be the LAST PLATFORM you can use SLI on. :\

I hope this makes more sense.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: aigomorla
Myo im sorry, but he has 2 insane gpu cards in SLI. Those cards will outlast his dualcore. So he's best choice is grabing a yorkfield so his cpu doesnt get outdated b4 his gpu's does.

No need to be sorry, you're correct, as am I. Right now, there are only two games that benefit from quads. I considered this, and thought to myself "Anyone spending that kind of money on video cards probably wouldn't mind spending another ~$500 on a Q9650 in six months, if games start using more than two cores." But, if the OP is more worried about keeping this system usable for another year and a half or two years without upgrading the CPU, he'd obviously want a quad.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: myocardia
But, if the OP is more worried about keeping this system usable for another year and a half or two years without upgrading the CPU, he'd obviously want a quad.

which is my point exactly.

because NEHA wont have Nforce and that means NO SLI!

so bang bang on the cpu, and hold out until this whole pissing contest with nvidia and intel lays off.

OP AFAIK QX9650 = almost gaurentee 4.0ghz with proper hardware if you do decide to bite the bill.


Guys telling him to get a dualcore means he is almost gaurentee'd an upgrade next year. And having SLI 280GTX now means he's taking a gamble in 1400 dollars in gpu's being outclassed by 2 cheaper ati cards in xfire next year.

Op to me that top statement seems more of a waste then grabbing any quad.

 

[Tempered81]

if i had the money to shell out i'd take a qx9650 or q9650... but e8400's will do 4Ghz - my bet is that higher MHZ will help out a monster GPU setup.

also $900 vs. $169 (and it comes with a mobo, lol)

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: jaredpace
if i had the money to shell out i'd take a qx9650 or q9650... but e8400's will do 4Ghz - my bet is that higher MHZ will help out a monster GPU setup.

also $900 vs. $169 (and it comes with a mobo, lol)

jared had he NOT have the 1400 dollars in gpu sector im with you 10000000000000% but read my previous statement and see if that makes any sense?

Originally posted by: aigomorla

Guys telling him to get a dualcore means he is almost gaurentee'd an upgrade next year. And having SLI 280GTX now means he's taking a gamble in 1400 dollars in gpu's being outclassed by 2 cheaper ati cards in xfire next year.

Op to me that top statement seems more of a waste then grabbing any quad.

 

[Tempered81]

ARG! I can never win at the dual/quad gaming argument. My (poor person) advice: take the dual now - sell it when your game of choice takes advantage of a quad.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: jaredpace
ARG! I can never win at the dual/quad gaming argument. My (poor person) advice: take the dual now - sell it when your game of choice takes advantage of a quad.

nah as i said under most situations i would absolutely agree with you.

However, thats the situation the OP is in. So it makes no sense to grab a dual now.

 

[mach1point9pants]

Once again thanks for all your replies. I think I Will stick with the quad, at least until I have run Ass Creed and R6Vegas2 for a while on the TH2Go for a while. Those, and Crysis (rolleyes) are what I have upgraded for AC just doesn't run hi qual on the gtx's.
Oh and I changed my sig, I did have it running at 3.5 but it got a bit too hot under orthos and wasn't 100% stable on hot days

 

[Tempered81]

nice to see it worked out for ya. At the rate you're posting, I'll look to hear from you next year.

cya

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: mach1point9pants
Once again thanks for all your replies. I think I Will stick with the quad, at least until I have run Ass Creed and R6Vegas2 for a while on the TH2Go for a while. Those, and Crysis (rolleyes) are what I have upgraded for AC just doesn't run hi qual on the gtx's.
Oh and I changed my sig, I did have it running at 3.5 but it got a bit too hot under orthos and wasn't 100% stable on hot days

WOW your sig almost looks like freya. LOL.

 

[DanK414]

I say if you're on budget get the cheapest bargain you can find. I just helped a friend out build a rig and the down right decision maker from 8400 or 6600 was 6600 on sale that week for $189 vs $214. We got the rig built and oced at 3.6 stable on air~ *he was extremely happy*

The rest, don't believe until you see lots of quad core games. From dual to quad can take little or lots of time depending on what the game devs feel like.... and it could be by that time you'll want to upgrade again.

My rig is already yr+ old and I'm wondering when I'll make my upgrade again.... and thank god I spend under $130 for my cpu. Hence bargain FTW, cause for the amount those suckers paid I'm still gonna get another cpu bargain and that's 2cpus for the price of one~

My last sound advice is invest in better mobo or hd cause you'll probably keep it longer or get better oc results.

 

[Gikaseixas]

Get the quad, a Q9450 would do the trick

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: DanK414
The rest, don't believe until you see lots of quad core games. From dual to quad can take little or lots of time depending on what the game devs feel like.... and it could be by that time you'll want to upgrade again.

My rig is already yr+ old and I'm wondering when I'll make my upgrade again.... and thank god I spend under $130 for my cpu. Hence bargain FTW, cause for the amount those suckers paid I'm still gonna get another cpu bargain and that's 2cpus for the price of one~

so are you saying that a quadcore isnt worth it?

Because if you factor a game like supreme commander, and you truely and i mean truely want to enjoy it, its minimum requirements is:

Dual 24inch LCDs OR greater
Xfire Setup Manditory for Dual monitor support
Quadcore Kentsfield clocked at least to 3.2ghz or Yorkfield clocked @ 3.0ghz.
2GB of ram
Decient IO Cluster. Meaning, no lowball hard drive.

You botch one area, unless you downgrade display, your gonna feel lag from time to time on max settings. :T


People, persephone's price tag was quite large.
And i focused ALL of it on Supreme Commander so i can enjoy it MAX'd on both monitors. It was expensive, but thats the hardware it takes.
When i get into something, i need to go all out or i keep wondering.

And no Persephone isnt Crysis friendly.
Sorry, even freya on SLI has issues with crsis on 1080p.