• 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.

Video card or CPU?

Spivonious

Spivonious

Junior Member
I'm thinking of upgrading my system. Here's what I have now:

C2D E6600 (first-gen Conroe)
6GB DDR2
HD3850 512MB
P965-based mobo

What would give me the bigger gain?
1. HD6850
2. i5 750

Obviously, I'm leaning towards #1 because #2 would mean a new mobo and RAM too, and I'm hesitant to do that with the new Intel chips (and new socket) right around the corner.

Will my CPU limit the HD6850 too much to see a large jump in performance from the 3850?
 
6850. I have slightly better CPU than you, C2D E6850 (lol same number) and it still works fine for me in all the games i play, though i havent bought anything really new yet like Civilization 5 or Starcraft 2.
I'm myself going to upgrade my entire rig when Sandy bridge or Ivy bridge hits the market, and i reckon it's a really good idea to wait for the new CPUs.
 
Just overclock the CPU to 3.2+ghz and the videocard will provide a very large performance boost. You would still be limited in some games, but 3850 is definitely the slower piece here.
 
Thanks for the responses. Resolution doesn't really matter as I'm still rocking a CRT (max 1600x1200, 125dpi). Let's just say I am unable to put up with TN panel limitations, and too cheap to get a nice IPS panel. 🙂

My typical gaming resolution is 1280x960.
 
I checked my heatsink (stock) and two of the clips had come loose. I reapplied some thermal grease and reinstalled the heatsink and got my idle temp down to 30C (it's never been that low). My RAM isn't the greatest, so I managed to get a stable overclock of 3.2GHz (350x9, memory at 700). 366x9 got to Windows but was very unstable. Idle temps are around 37C. A credit card works great for taking off excess thermal grease.
 
Last edited:
Spivonious said:
Thanks for the responses. Resolution doesn't really matter as I'm still rocking a CRT (max 1600x1200, 125dpi). Let's just say I am unable to put up with TN panel limitations, and too cheap to get a nice IPS panel. 🙂

My typical gaming resolution is 1280x960.
Click to expand...


CRT and 1280x960

you need a widescreen LCD... trust me... you ll thank me lateron.
LCDs are much easier on the eyes than CRTs.
 
3.15GHz (9x350) is pretty good for the oldest Conroes like your E6600. Even better if you can still use power-saving modes.
 
Last edited:
Spivonious said:
I checked my heatsink (stock) and two of the clips had come loose. I reapplied some thermal grease and reinstalled the heatsink and got my idle temp down to 30C (it's never been that low). My RAM isn't the greatest, so I managed to get a stable overclock of 3.2GHz (350x9, memory at 700). 366x9 got to Windows but was very unstable. Idle temps are around 37C. A credit card works great for taking off excess thermal grease.
Click to expand...

Stableness doesn't mean anything because you could still be corrupting data. You have to run a stress test like Orthos overnight at least.
 
Spivonious said:
My typical gaming resolution is 1280x960.
Click to expand...

At such a low resolution, the difference between a GTX460 768mb and an HD6850 will be only about 2-5%. But you are probably running it this way as a result of the underpowered HD3850. If you plan to run at higher resolutions or grab a new monitor soon, then grab the HD6850. If you really will play at only 1680x1050 4AA or below, the GTX460 768mb for $127 after coupon EMCZZYR24 is the better value imo.
 
Last edited:
RussianSensation said:
At such a low resolution, the difference between a GTX460 768mb and an HD6850 will be only about 2-5%. If you plan to upgrade the monitor soon, then grab the HD6850. Otherwise, the GTX460 768mb for $127 after coupon EMCZZYR24 is the better value imo.
Click to expand...

Too bad no one tests higher levels of AA (than 4x) at lower resolutions.
 
betasub said:
3.15GHz (9x350) is pretty good for the oldest Conroes like your E6600. Even better if you can still use power-saving modes.
Click to expand...

Yes, I still have the power saving modes on and things are stable.

Throckmorton said:
Stableness doesn't mean anything because you could still be corrupting data. You have to run a stress test like Orthos overnight at least.
Click to expand...

True, I really should let Prime95 run overnight, but I've let it run for 40 minutes without error. The temperature levels out around 58C after 4-5 minutes of Prime95.

CRT and 1280x960

you need a widescreen LCD... trust me... you ll thank me lateron.
LCDs are much easier on the eyes than CRTs.
Click to expand...

No thanks. I have two LCDs at work and they bug my eyes more than the old CRT I had there. Plus I can't get an even gamma across the screen no matter what angle I look at them from. CRTs may be big on the desktop, but the picture quality is definitely better than any TN panel LCD out there. As I stated above, I'm too cheap to get a nice IPS panel LCD, which would address most of my complaints about LCDs.

cusideabelincoln said:
Too bad no one tests higher levels of AA (than 4x) at lower resolutions.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. AA was invented to compensate for lower resolutions but we never see test results for higher than 4x.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top