When does my CPU become the performance bottleneck?

[PeanutR]

First of all, this is my first post here so hello everyone I've been reading Anandtech on and off for the last couple of years, but I just now joined the forums to ask your advice.

My situation is this:
I use my home system mainly for gaming, and I'd really like to crank up the resolution and detail levels a notch, but unfortunately I don't have the money to spend building a completely new system.

That's why I'm looking into upgrading my gfx card to gain a boost in performance. For now, I have my eye on the 8800gts 320mb models, as an upgrade to my current 6800gt.

My question is; will I be able to take advantage og a 8800gts without upgrading the rest of my system, which is:

Athlon64 3800+
2gb ddr400
MSI SLI capable motherboard

Or will I simply be choking it? I know this is also depending on what games I play and how memory hungry they are, so bear with me for not asking a more precise question.

Really, what I want to know is whether or not I'd be wasting my money on a 8800gts and should go with a cheaper card (or maybe even hold out until ATI offers up their dx10 parts)?

All comments appreciated.

PeanutR

 

[Roguestar]

Welcome to the forums!

What resolution are you playing at? The higher the resolution and higher the detail the more important the graphics card is. The 3800+ should certainly be able to keep up to the graphics card, anyway. And it's not like you can actually notice a difference between 145 and 130 fps, as you'll be well set with that graphics card.

 

[PeanutR]

Thank you for the welcome and your reply

Right now it's usually a choice of either 1024x768 and good image quality or 1280x1024 and medium image quality for me. Of course it depends on the game too, but usually I play around with the settings for a while until I find the best compromise between resolution and detail. I never really have the performance to go for things like AA in recent or new games though...

Ideally I'd like to be able to play games at atleast 1280x1024 with high detail and AA for a while, as I don't see myself saving up for a new computer right now, and I figured a 8800gts will let me do that.

It's good to hear I won't be completely handicapping it though

 

[Roguestar]

What kind of games? The resolution is basically your limiting factor with that CPU and graphics card at 1280*1024; practically any new game (F.E.A.R., BF2142, etc) will all run perfectly smooth on max settings at that resolution with a 3800+, 2GB and an 8800GTS.

 

[PeanutR]

Right now I'm into Company of Heroes and Stalker, but I would like to be able to play new games that come out, although I have nothing specific in mind.

If you're asking which genres I play I'd have to say mainly RTS followed by FPS.

 

[s1rwilliam]

i have a p4 3ghz and an 8800gts. I play at 1680x1050 in all games with x16q aa. in steam games (half life 2, css, ect) im never under 60 fps which is my monitors refresh rate. In company of heroes i score 100 fps on the video test thing in the options menu. fear with 16q aa is around 30 fps so i turn it down to x4. BF2 and GRAW are upwards of 60fps. Supreme Commander i have at max with 16q aa at 1680x1050. I get like 40-60 fps normal in small games, but in larger games (3v3 and 4v4 on the bigger maps) i do get unplayable lag when there are thousands of units. This is defiantly my cpu. And as far as oblivion goes i cant give an accurate benchmark cause i have done a lot of visual enhancement mods but its very playable with max settings with my res. I am getting an e6300 in the near future (April 22nd price drops) but that is solely based on supreme commander.