Will HD6950 to R9-280X video card upgrade help? Or bottlenecked by system?

[WAZ]

Hi all, my current system is several years old... I built it to be reasonably long-lasting and future ready at the time (like 6 years ago) and it HAS held up surprisingly well. It's no beast, but it mostly gets the job done, even doing pretty well in newer games.

• Gigabyte GA-MA790X-UD4P Motherboard (AMD 790X + SB750 Chipset)
• AMD Phenom II X4-960T - 3.60 GHz - Quad-core CPU
• 8GB DDR2 RAM (I believe I can upgrade to 16GB if necessary)
• Sapphire HD6950 Video Card - 2GB GDDR5
• Samsung SSD 840 EVO SSD hard drive
• Windows 7 64-bit

The newest semi graphically intensive games I've tried are Thief (2014) and Watch Dogs, both which run surprisingly decent at high-to-max detail @ 1920x1200, but do get choppy and prone to FPS drops. At medium to high they run great. But I am looking ahead to Fallout 4, Star Wars Battlefront, DOOM, etc and am sure these upcoming games will be too much for my system. Given my current system, will it be a real bottleneck on gaming in these kinds of upcoming games? Or will JUST upgrading my video card be enough to play these games at reasonably high levels? 1920x1200 is key; I don't do multiple-monitor gaming or 4K or super high res, but do want to stay at least at 1920x1200 or 1080.

I was looking at upgrading my 2GB HD6950 to either a 3GB or 4GB R9-280X or R9-290... something in that ~$250 range. I'd also consider boosting my RAM from 8GB to 16GB, but not sure how much real-life improvement this would give me.

Any advice would be great. With only a few hundred to spend I'm obviously looking to squeeze as much more life out of this good old system as possible, as rebuilding is pretty much out of the question. At the same time I don't want to spend $250 on a new video card if the rest of my system will be a bottleneck and the improvements are not going to be worthwhile. Thanks!

 

[MustISO]

RAM would be a waste of money. You'd definitely get a large increase from the 6950 and the CPU will probably impact performance but not enough to make it not worth the upgrade. The nice thing about a video card upgrade is it can be used in any system that you have in the future so if you upgrade the rest of the system you already have the GPU.

Make sure your power supply can support whatever card you get.

 

[KingFatty]

How much longer until you plan to upgrade your motherboard, CPU, and RAM?

Perhaps find out if your CPU alone will be limiting your FPS, and then find a video card that somewhat matches that performance at 1920x1200.

But safest bet is to get a card you plan to stick with for a while, so it will continue on in your new system. Or, get a card you could still resell later for not much depreciation (e.g., a used R9 290x you buy today for $200 would probably still sell for close to that in a year when you upgrade your motherboard/CPU/RAM).

 

[NTMBK]

That CPU is actually a 6 core, with two cores locked. See if you can unlock them!

 

[AtenRa]

Go for the R9 390 or if you can find a very cheap R9 290/X.

From my testing at 12 games with a 3.2GHz Core 2 Quad 9450 vs Core i7 3770K @ 4.44GHz, the C2Q with HD7950 was faster in 11 games vs the Core i7 paired with the HD6950.
The only game the Core i7 won was the Formula 1 2014.

 

[happy medium]

Try some of the latest games at low graphical details and see if your cpu gives you playable fps in the games you like. Your CPU would be.like mine running at 3.4 ,and that's good up to a gtx670 or a 7950 before my CPU begins to bottleneck the gpu in most games. At 3.8/4.0 my CPU can push a gtx770/ gtx960/280X/285X.

Word of advice, NVIDIA gpus run faster with weaker CPUs

Even with your CPU @4.0 , a 290x,390,gtx 780 and up are a waste,your system is just to slow.

 

[Elixer]

Even with your CPU @4.0 , a 290x,390,gtx 780 and up are a waste,your system is just to slow.

Not really, they can run everything with all gfx settings maxed out quite well, and when OP finally does upgrade the CPU/RAM, they can still use a 290X, so, I wouldn't call that a waste.

How do I know? I know someone who has the OP's CPU, and is using a 290X and they are a heavy gamer, and he says most everything he plays still works well, but, there are some games that start to choke because of the CPU.
So, a used 290X would be the way to go, to tie the OP over until OP can upgrade the CPU/RAM, and still use the 290X for the new system.
290X is still best bang for the buck here.

 

[happy medium]

290X is still best bang for the buck here.

Well I have a similar cpu and I promise you, a 290x would be a waste of money even if his system was overclocked to 4.0. A q9550 @ 4.0 can not fully utilize a gtx970. A 290x with its driver overhead would be even worse. Now his cpu is @ 3.6 which is about the same speed as my q9550 @ 3.4 . My cpu can not fully push a gtx960 @ 3.4 .

The OP should buy a used 160$ gtx960 (at best) and call it a day. It's a good 50% boost from his 6950.

 

[fralexandr]

psolord's comparison of q9550 @4.0 and 2500k @4.8 with gtx 970
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2428699&highlight=q9550
thief and watchdogs both perform twice as well with a 2500k

the gtx 970 ~ 2-3x the performance of the 6970 (no 6950 on 2014 bench; expect 6950 to be ~10% slower)
http://anandtech.com/bench/product/1061?vs=1355

-----
star wars battlefront MIN reqs (ALPHA testing)
phenom II 955 X4 @3.2
i5 2300 @ 2.8
FX-8350 @ 4.0

gtx 680/7970 2GB+

fallout 4 and doom 4 system requirements unknown

-----
The battlefront reqs indicate you might need a better GPU.
if comparing your GPU to consoles, the 6950 is slightly slower than the 7850/750 ti.
If comparing your CPU to consoles, the phenom II 960 x4 is probably faster than jaguar, though I can't find any direct comparisons.
It's pretty safe to say both your CPU and GPU need some upgrading , though with DX12 eventually coming around, your GPU probably needs it more

 

[shady28]

Really a 280X or 290 is a waste of money and electricity for your rig.

Your best bet is going to be an R9 380 or GTX 960. The 380 is cheaper for the most part and avoids the driver issues with switching from AMD to Nvidia (otherwise I'd rec the 960) and it's AMDs newest architecture (GCN 1.2).

You can pick up the 2GB ones for $199 and 4GB for $219 without messing around with rebates at newegg. Might be able to hunt and find better deals.

New 960 2GB can be had for ~$170 if you wait for a good rebate, otherwise about $190 and $230 for 4GB variants.

Here's a 7970 (R9 280x) bottlenecking on CPU with Skyrim :

And Starcraft 2 :

Arkham City - clearly single thread bottleneck :

 

[WAZ]

Thank you for all the replies and advice.

Well I have a similar cpu and I promise you, a 290x would be a waste of money even if his system was overclocked to 4.0. A q9550 @ 4.0 can not fully utilize a gtx970. A 290x with its driver overhead would be even worse.

Can you please clarify how it would be a waste of money? I don't quite know how it all works... would a faster video card (i.e. 290X), even if NOT fully utilized, not be better than a fully utilized slower card (i.e. GTX960)? Or would I actually get better performance out of the latter?

My cpu can not fully push a gtx960 @ 3.4 .

The OP should buy a used 160$ gtx960 (at best) and call it a day. It's a good 50% boost from his 6950.

Really a 280X or 290 is a waste of money and electricity for your rig.

Your best bet is going to be an R9 380 or GTX 960.

New 960 2GB can be had for ~$170 if you wait for a good rebate, otherwise about $190 and $230 for 4GB variants.

Kind of hand in hand with the above question... even if my 3.6 CPU can't "fully push" a 290X, would it not still perform better? Are you saying the CPU's inability to fully push/utilize the bigger card would actually result in WORSE performance than, say, a GTX960 (i.e. CPU struggling, actually hurting performance)? Or are you mainly just saying it might indeed run better, but not enough better to justify the higher price? And that the CPU will limit the 290X so much that it really will NOT be better than a 380 or 960?

If I can get a GTX960 for about the same price as an R9-280X or 290 (3GB or 4GB, maybe used), would I not just want to go for the 280X or 290?

Either way, I'm assuming a minor price difference. Probably can't go up to a 290X, but a little lower. So if we remove money from the debate (assuming similar prices or maybe a $40-50 difference, which I'm fine paying for even slightly better performance), then which would give me straight-up better performance? GTX960 running at 90-100% of its capabilities? or 280X/290 running at, say, 70% of its potential due to my CPU (just ballparking, assuming that's what you're talking about)?

I won't be upgrading the rest of my system for at least another year or two (new baby, now in expensive daycare for the foreseeable future ), so this is it for a while for me.

Thanks!

 

[fralexandr]

AMD supposedly has higher driver overhead, so given your potentially underpowered CPU, the 960 would probably outperform the 280x in cases where you are CPU limited, at least for dx 11 games.

 

[RussianSensation]

AMD supposedly has higher driver overhead, so given your potentially underpowered CPU, the 960 would probably outperform the 280x in cases where you are CPU limited, at least for dx 11 games.

The counter-argument to that is in GPU limited scenarios a 290 would crush a 960 and in some of those games like Thief or Civilization BE or BF4, Mantle would give a huge boost to his AMD CPU. Plus, 2GB on a 2015 videocard is a huge downside.

960 at $160-170 makes no sense. If he wants a budget upgrade, buying a used HD7970/7970Ghz or R9 280/280X is way better. If he is going to spend $160-170, might as well hunt down a used 290.

Sure, that CPU will be a major bottleneck in many titles but 960's 2GB of VRAM and lack of Mantle support in some older titles is a big negative against it considering how easy it is to find a used HD7970/7970Ghz for a lot less.

TIf I can get a GTX960 for about the same price as an R9-280X or 290 (3GB or 4GB, maybe used), would I not just want to go for the 280X or 290?
Thanks!

Then you get a 290 hands down. If you are CPU limited, you just crank MSAA to 4 or even 8X or you can enable VSR (AMD's super-sampling). In games that can take advantage of Mantle, you get the benefits of much better performance with a slower CPU, something a 960 can't provide in those instances. If you play modded games or games that use stutter with 2GB of VRAM, 960 2GB is going to get crushed too. You mentioned Fallout 4 which is bound to have texture mods.

You may also be able to unlock 2 more cores on your processor but I haven't found a specific guide for your board:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h45uO0Pafs0

Don't upgrade the DDR2 ram as that would be a waste of $. 8GB is enough for a large majority of games.

If you can resell your 6950 and pick up a used 280X/1Ghz 7970 or 7970Ghz (whatever 7970 you get, do not get the reference blower version), that would be a very cheap upgrade and a much way better way to spend your resources than a $160-170 960. If you do end up upping your budget close to $200, no reason to get the 960 again because then might as well get a used 290 (again do not get a reference blower one).

 

[AtenRa]

Some benchmarks for you to get an idea,


Core 2 Quad 9450 @ 3.2GHz
2x 2GB DDR-2 1066MHz

Core i7 3770K @ 4.44GHz
2x 4GB DDR-3 2133MHz

HD6950 810MHz core
HD7950 1GHz core

Windows 8.1 64bit
Catalyst 15.7

-------------------------

Alien Isolation

1080p High settings
C2Q + HD6950 = 59,08fps
C2Q + HD7950 = 97,16fps
Core i7 3770K + HD6950 = 60,91fps


1080p Ultra settings
C2Q + HD6950 = 47,42fps
C2Q + HD7950 = 80,91fps
Core i7 3770K + HD6950 = 49,21fps

---------------------------------

Metro Last Light Redux

1080p High settings, AF 16x, Tessellation Normal
C2Q + HD6950 = 38,20fps
C2Q + HD7950 = 61,12fps
Core i7 3770K + HD6950 = 38,46fps


1080p Very High settings, AF 16x, Tessellation High
C2Q + HD6950 = 23,04fps
C2Q + HD7950 = 49,30fps
Core i7 3770K + HD6950 = 23,24fps

--------------------------------

Civilization Beyond Earth

HD6950 with DX-11
HD7950 with Mantle

1080p High settings, no AA
C2Q + HD6950 = 36,57fps
C2Q + HD7950 = 56,67fps
Core i7 3770K + HD6950 = 37,03fps


1080p Ultra settings, 8x MSAA
C2Q + HD6950 = 31,40fps
C2Q + HD7950 = 52,83fps
Core i7 3770K + HD6950 = 31,54fps

------------------------------

Sniper Elite III

HD6950 with DX-11
HD7950 with Mantle

1080p Medium settings
C2Q + HD6950 = 68,8fps
C2Q + HD7950 = 148,3fps
Core i7 3770K + HD6950 = 68,0fps


1080p Ultra settings, 2.5x SuperSampling
C2Q + HD6950 = 24,4fps
C2Q + HD7950 = 58,8fps
Core i7 3770K + HD6950 = 24,6fps

 

[FearfulSPARTAN]

Yeah if it comes down to between getting a 960 or spending a bit more and getting a used 290 id would say definitely go for the 290. Your cpu is pretty old but it has held up pretty well with time so I would suggest a gpu upgrade now and then next year look to upgrade your mobo, cpu and ram and go for kaby lake or zen. If your cpu does bottleneck in the worst scenarios you could just crank up all gpu bound graphics settings. Oh and on a side note whoever up there said it was pointless because your just wasting heat and power is just wrong, at least im pretty sure because I dont see if its a cpu bottleneck why the gpu would throw out alot of heat it would normally give off if it were under heavy load it should be using less power when not fully utilized.

 

[happy medium]

A used 7950 is a good choice, a little slower than a gtx960,3gb of memory ,and about 115$.

 

[Headfoot]

Used 7950s can be found as low as $100 too, I got one on this forum for that much not long ago. But even at $115 it would still be a great deal. Its the used sweet spot now IMO

 

[WAZ]

Thanks for all the advice everyone. I really appreciate the links and benchmarks and everything.

It all led me to lean towards going ahead and getting something like a 7950 for cheap right now, but due to some car expenses and having to push my timeline back a little bit, I'm probably going to wait and spring for the R9-290. Seems to be a worthwhile jump and is probably something I can afford by November. My current card is churning along just fine for games like Thief -- maybe not at 100% max detail, but pretty high up there -- and I'm mainly looking for the bigger stuff later this year anyway (Fallout 4, Battlefront, Hitman, etc).

So even if it's bottlenecked by my CPU, it sounds like it will be a pretty hefty increase in performance despite not being used to its full potential. Plus by that time I'll want it to be even more future-ready, and that's where I think the extra money now will pay off when I have a 290 that I can keep when I eventually upgrade the rest of my system down the line. No matter what it's good to know that for a couple hundred bucks I can still squeeze some more performance out of my good old current PC. So thanks again!

 

[RussianSensation]

Thanks for all the advice everyone. I really appreciate the links and benchmarks and everything.

It all led me to lean towards going ahead and getting something like a 7950 for cheap right now, but due to some car expenses and having to push my timeline back a little bit, I'm probably going to wait and spring for the R9-290. Seems to be a worthwhile jump and is probably something I can afford by November.

Since it's only end of August, there could be a price war in Q4 2015 as NV/AMD try to get as many sales as possible in this strategically crucial quarter (i.e., historically speaking Q1 is a very bad quarter for GPU sales so they will try to get as many sales as possible in Q4). That means be on the look out for deals on cards like 960 4GB, GTX970 (EVGA B-stock), remaining clearance R9 290/290X (1-2 $200-220 deals are bound to pop up).

Also, if you go to this website and expand the 1080P chart on the main page, you will find an HD6970 on there and slightly below it the R7 360 -> this is roughly an HD6950. Very quickly you can determine which cards are well priced by comparing their performance on that chart when the time comes for you to buy a new card. Let us know what you end up going with and how it has improved your experience. :thumbsup:

 

[tweakboy]

A 7950 will do. CPU will struggle but do what you want it to. gl