With a Geforce 8800GT, what CPU is "Fast enough"

[PingSpike]

CPUs are pretty cheap now (compared to years past) but honestly...they're pretty overblown as an upgrade. When CPU performance stagnated a few years back, game developers continued the trend of offloading the heavy lifting onto graphics cards.

While CPUs are pretty cheap these days, it just isn't a good place to throw your limited dollars for a gaming rig. With the exception of a handful of titles, most games don't seem to give much of a shit if you've got an X2 2.4ghz or a Q6600 overclocked to 3+. Its a hard concept for me to wrap my head around, since so much computing revolves around the processor...but I really feel like the bang for the buck these days is a fast video card combined with a cheap midrange processor.

 

[Sunrise089]

@OP - You will be fine. 1600x1200 is a pretty high res, and the 8800GT isn't THAT powerful (it's great for the money, but overclocked it's still equivalent to a year-and-a-half old high-end card). With settings turned up on modern Crysis type games, you will be GPU limited.

That said, please overclock that CPU. I have a Opty 165, with non-state-of-the-art Scythe Ninja cooling. I overclocked my CPU to 2.8ghz in a total of 15 minutes. I have no idea what the limit would be if I really took the time to do it right. With decent airflow and proper settings (lower the HT multiplier first!) you could probably hit 2.5ghz on your first try - that's worth at least an attempt. At 2.5-3.0ghz that is very realistic, I think you have plenty of CPU power. FWIW, my 2.8ghz CPU provides plenty of performance in WIC - I'm totally GPU limited at 1280x1024 on my OC'd 7900GT.

 

[wildside50]

Originally posted by: Sunrise089
@OP - You will be fine. 1600x1200 is a pretty high res, and the 8800GT isn't THAT powerful (it's great for the money, but overclocked it's still equivalent to a year-and-a-half old high-end card). With settings turned up on modern Crysis type games, you will be GPU limited.

That said, please overclock that CPU. I have a Opty 165, with non-state-of-the-art Scythe Ninja cooling. I overclocked my CPU to 2.8ghz in a total of 15 minutes. I have no idea what the limit would be if I really took the time to do it right. With decent airflow and proper settings (lower the HT multiplier first!) you could probably hit 2.5ghz on your first try - that's worth at least an attempt. At 2.5-3.0ghz that is very realistic, I think you have plenty of CPU power. FWIW, my 2.8ghz CPU provides plenty of performance in WIC - I'm totally GPU limited at 1280x1024 on my OC'd 7900GT.

8800gt not that powerful? That's crazy talk sir!! It's 90% as powerful as an 8800 GTX, the second fastest card in the known universe; the fastest being a 600 dollar card. I'd call the 3rd fastest card in the world pretty fast. You have high standards man! Hehe.

As for overclocking it -- I am not having a lot of luck. I have the stock HS/fan, but I cannot get my system to post above 2300. I have started a thread trying to get my problems worked out. You can read it here --

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...id=28&threadid=2124455

Basically there has to be something I need to adjust besides the FSB, the LDT/FSB ratio, CPU voltages, and RAM setting and voltages. Ah well.

 

[math20]

If your budget is tight don't bother upgrading your cpu especially for first person shooters. If you really want to upgrade though, go for an ip35-e + e2160 and OC it to 3ghz. Quad core is unnecessary right now unless you play a lot of real time strategy games.

 

[taltamir]

CPU is most definitely a SECONDARY factor compared to GPU...

So just buy yourself an 8800GT. And then run a few games in your comfortable settings with the task manager open... Look for 100% cpu usage, thats a sign you need to upgrade.

Ofcourse you will get some gain if you are not at 100% cpu. But not as much... at 1680x1050 you are GPU bound. Your estimate of "50 fps at 1024 and 5 fps at 1600...)" is right on the money... that is how much FPS benefit you will get from the CPU upgrade after you have gotten your GT...

I would still upgrade the cpu. but for faster application usage. Not for gaming.


Oh, one more thing... if your mobo is old enough it might have PCIEv1.0 instead of v1.1

v1.0 is not compatible with v2.0
Only v1.1 is.... a few of people with via chipsets suddenly found out their mobos are using pcie1.0 and don't work with their brand new GT or 3870

Originally posted by: wildside50

Originally posted by: Sunrise089
@OP - You will be fine. 1600x1200 is a pretty high res, and the 8800GT isn't THAT powerful (it's great for the money, but overclocked it's still equivalent to a year-and-a-half old high-end card). With settings turned up on modern Crysis type games, you will be GPU limited.

That said, please overclock that CPU. I have a Opty 165, with non-state-of-the-art Scythe Ninja cooling. I overclocked my CPU to 2.8ghz in a total of 15 minutes. I have no idea what the limit would be if I really took the time to do it right. With decent airflow and proper settings (lower the HT multiplier first!) you could probably hit 2.5ghz on your first try - that's worth at least an attempt. At 2.5-3.0ghz that is very realistic, I think you have plenty of CPU power. FWIW, my 2.8ghz CPU provides plenty of performance in WIC - I'm totally GPU limited at 1280x1024 on my OC'd 7900GT.

8800gt not that powerful? That's crazy talk sir!! It's 90% as powerful as an 8800 GTX, the second fastest card in the known universe; the fastest being a 600 dollar card. I'd call the 3rd fastest card in the world pretty fast. You have high standards man! Hehe.

As for overclocking it -- I am not having a lot of luck. I have the stock HS/fan, but I cannot get my system to post above 2300. I have started a thread trying to get my problems worked out. You can read it here --

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...id=28&threadid=2124455

Basically there has to be something I need to adjust besides the FSB, the LDT/FSB ratio, CPU voltages, and RAM setting and voltages. Ah well.

His grammar clearly indicated that he was saying that despite being the 3rd fastest card of the market it is not enough for it to become CPU bound at 1680 resolution. He was clearly not saying that the card is slow by any means;
Which is correct... the fastest card in the world (which is a year and a half old btw). 8800Ultra will not be CPU bound on new games using 1680.... And on older games/lower rez you will max out your monitor anyways (60FPS).

 

[xColdSteelx]

That's how I got my fps, with fraps. I tried recording a short 30 sec vid with frags. It was impossible to play with fraps recording. At most you get 30 fps, and worst I got down to 5 at times. lol

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: Sunrise089
With settings turned up on modern Crysis type games, you will be GPU limited.

With settings turned up in Crysis it will be in the 20s most of the time if not lower. I run a 8800gt with an e6400 and at stock CPU clocks Crysis isn't even playble at medium settings. Thankfully, overclocked to 2.88GHz the game mostly stays above 30fps while only having to keep object detail and shadows turned down to medium, shaders on high, and everything else on v.high. Granted, Crysis is the only game I've come across like that, and my e6400 is well fast enough for everything else I've thrown at it. I'm pretty sure an Opty 170 would breeze though much everything but Crysis as well, at least once you figure out how to overclock it.

 

[wildside50]

Weeeeell I caved in anyway, and bought a new system.

Dell XPS 420
Q6600
3 Gigs of RAM (which seems like an odd base option... 2 1gig sticks and 2 512 sticks...)
Geforce 8800GT
Very few bells and whistles. Bells and whistles are for... people who like... bells..... and whistles.

COD4 -- here I come!

 

[Syntax Error]

I hope you didn't pay a lot for that system. That's like $1000 in components there.

 

[wildside50]

Originally posted by: Syntax Error
I hope you didn't pay a lot for that system. That's like $1000 in components there.

I would tend to disagree.

X38 mobo -- cheapest on newegg 230. Or, if you argue x38 sucks, P35 4 LIFE!, we can say 100

Q6600 -- 280

Geforce 8800GT -- 250 (if you can find one)

Cheapest retail 500 gig HDD -- 130

2 gig DDR 800 RAM -- 50-100, depending on your quality. We'll call it 125 for 3 gig.

Optical drives -- 70

So on the cheapest end, we're at 930. On the high end we're at 1085, and I have yet to get a case, PS, keyboard, mouse, an operating system (that's at least 100 right there), wireless card/modem, or any software.

Could all of that be had for less than the 1350 I paid for my system? Probably. But I really like the XPS's case, with the programable LCD on the front. At most I'd figure to save about 100 bucks. Feel free to prove me wrong, but when I built a system on Newegg I ended up at 1450 putting in all the parts I wanted, before OS.

 

[XNice]

I have an X2 4200 @ 2.7ghz (270x10)
2gb of OCZ ram at 227mhz(divider)
EVGA 8800GT @ 650/1900
A8N5X s939 Mobo

I get 35fps with everything on high @ 1280x1024 in Crysis.

It seems cpu speed helps raise the minimum framerate, but doesn't increase the avg fps or max that much. At stock I get many more hitches, and OC'ed it smooths things out much more.

 

[wildside50]

Originally posted by: XNice
I have an X2 4200 @ 2.7ghz (270x10)
2gb of OCZ ram at 227mhz(divider)
EVGA 8800GT @ 650/1900
A8N5X s939 Mobo

I get 35fps with everything on high @ 1280x1024 in Crysis.

It seems cpu speed helps raise the minimum framerate, but doesn't increase the avg fps or max that much. At stock I get many more hitches, and OC'ed it smooths things out much more.

That seems pretty reasonable. I just get frustrated because everytime I build a new AMD system, they release a new socket the next week (litterally). I mean I know the new sockets are on the horizon when I build the system, but mot of the time I can't wait the next week (or at least, dont' want to). I built a Socket 754, and 939 came out killing any chance of a faster 754 processor, and AM2? What a joke. It's no faster than 939, but the fastest 939 proc they released ended up topping out at 2.6 ghz. BAH!!

So, now that I just bought a Quad core on a socket 775 -- it will be discontinued. I jsut want everyone to be aware of that.

 

[wildside50]

Well, I found this website for anyone who's been watching this thread -- it's a pretty much what I was looking for --

http://livedeviant.com/graphic...oth-intel-and-amd.html

As you can see from the charts, there is basically no difference between a 2.0 ghz AMD x2 and a 3.33 ghz Core 2 Duo. Company of heroes, as expected, does show a decided bump in frame rate (up to 33% faster) with a card as powerful as the 8800 GTX, but with the still very powerful 8800 GTS, those differences are lost even in Company of Heroes. Good stuff to know.

 

[cubeless]

16x aa??? that sure will make the thing gpu bound... real life is a little different than that, methinks... there is a definite difference in the experience between a 3.0 core 2 and a 2.6 x2 @ 1680 with everything but aa turned up on a gts 640... gameplay is a bunch smoother, especially once things get busy... my kids' 20 in screen doesn't even need aa in most games...

 

[wildside50]

Originally posted by: cubeless
16x aa??? that sure will make the thing gpu bound... real life is a little different than that, methinks... there is a definite difference in the experience between a 3.0 core 2 and a 2.6 x2 @ 1680 with everything but aa turned up on a gts 640... gameplay is a bunch smoother, especially once things get busy... my kids' 20 in screen doesn't even need aa in most games...

Well, those with a CRT display *raises hand* still appreciate AA. Furthermore, those frame rates are FAR from unplayable. I'd call a 65-75fps average pretty darn good. So, why wouldn't you turn on the eye candy if it still runs at 60fps?

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: wildside50

Originally posted by: cubeless
16x aa??? that sure will make the thing gpu bound... real life is a little different than that, methinks... there is a definite difference in the experience between a 3.0 core 2 and a 2.6 x2 @ 1680 with everything but aa turned up on a gts 640... gameplay is a bunch smoother, especially once things get busy... my kids' 20 in screen doesn't even need aa in most games...

Well, those with a CRT display *raises hand* still appreciate AA. Furthermore, those frame rates are FAR from unplayable. I'd call a 65-75fps average pretty darn good. So, why wouldn't you turn on the eye candy if it still runs at 60fps?

What does having a CRT have to do with AA?

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: wildside50

Originally posted by: Syntax Error
I hope you didn't pay a lot for that system. That's like $1000 in components there.

I would tend to disagree.

X38 mobo -- cheapest on newegg 230. Or, if you argue x38 sucks, P35 4 LIFE!, we can say 100

Q6600 -- 280

Geforce 8800GT -- 250 (if you can find one)

Cheapest retail 500 gig HDD -- 130

2 gig DDR 800 RAM -- 50-100, depending on your quality. We'll call it 125 for 3 gig.

Optical drives -- 70

So on the cheapest end, we're at 930. On the high end we're at 1085, and I have yet to get a case, PS, keyboard, mouse, an operating system (that's at least 100 right there), wireless card/modem, or any software.

Could all of that be had for less than the 1350 I paid for my system? Probably. But I really like the XPS's case, with the programable LCD on the front. At most I'd figure to save about 100 bucks. Feel free to prove me wrong, but when I built a system on Newegg I ended up at 1450 putting in all the parts I wanted, before OS.

Dell uses an even cheaper motherboard which they manufacture (so forget about any advanced capability or driver support in the future) as well slower, cheaper ram, etc... that being said... did you get it on a discount? because this is definitely more for less as far as dell prices are normally concerned...
And if you are not one to build your own then its a pretty good deal.

 

[wildside50]

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: wildside50

Originally posted by: Syntax Error
I hope you didn't pay a lot for that system. That's like $1000 in components there.

I would tend to disagree.

X38 mobo -- cheapest on newegg 230. Or, if you argue x38 sucks, P35 4 LIFE!, we can say 100

Q6600 -- 280

Geforce 8800GT -- 250 (if you can find one)

Cheapest retail 500 gig HDD -- 130

2 gig DDR 800 RAM -- 50-100, depending on your quality. We'll call it 125 for 3 gig.

Optical drives -- 70

So on the cheapest end, we're at 930. On the high end we're at 1085, and I have yet to get a case, PS, keyboard, mouse, an operating system (that's at least 100 right there), wireless card/modem, or any software.

Could all of that be had for less than the 1350 I paid for my system? Probably. But I really like the XPS's case, with the programable LCD on the front. At most I'd figure to save about 100 bucks. Feel free to prove me wrong, but when I built a system on Newegg I ended up at 1450 putting in all the parts I wanted, before OS.

Dell uses an even cheaper motherboard which they manufacture (so forget about any advanced capability or driver support in the future) as well slower, cheaper ram, etc... that being said... did you get it on a discount? because this is definitely more for less as far as dell prices are normally concerned...
And if you are not one to build your own then its a pretty good deal.

Having seen benchmarks for various motherboards over the years, as well as various RAM, I would not say that a "slow" motherboard is really that much slower than a "fast" motherboard. Case in point --

http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3149&p=6

It's sorta splitting hairs at that point. It's DDR-2 800 mhz ram. Just because Dell "manufactures it" (I'm sure they just relable some chip manufacturers stuff), doesn't make it bad, IMHO. They offer the RAM that is OC'd (by Dell) to 1066 mhz. I've always had good luck with Dell stuff.

And while yes, I would have loved to build my own system, as I have always done, it was a financial issue. I don't have 1500 in cash laying around, and Dell has no interest finacning for a year. So I could get more PC now for the same price as building it myself.

And no, no discounts. If you don't add all of the peripherals (uber keyboards/mice, TV tuners, blueray players, etc etc) Dell's prices have ALWAYS been good.

 

[wildside50]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton

Originally posted by: wildside50

Originally posted by: cubeless
16x aa??? that sure will make the thing gpu bound... real life is a little different than that, methinks... there is a definite difference in the experience between a 3.0 core 2 and a 2.6 x2 @ 1680 with everything but aa turned up on a gts 640... gameplay is a bunch smoother, especially once things get busy... my kids' 20 in screen doesn't even need aa in most games...

Well, those with a CRT display *raises hand* still appreciate AA. Furthermore, those frame rates are FAR from unplayable. I'd call a 65-75fps average pretty darn good. So, why wouldn't you turn on the eye candy if it still runs at 60fps?

What does having a CRT have to do with AA?

Well, if you run an LCD at anything other than it's native resolution, there will be some blurring going on, negating most of the effects of AA. So, AA is more "useful" (by that I simply mean can be used in more sittuations) on a CRT, while it's effectiveness on an LCD is limited to the native resolution of the monitor, at which some games (AHEM, Crysis, I'm lookin' at you) won't run well. That's all I meant. No need to go into a lengthy technical discussion or anything.

 

[taltamir]

I said the RAM was slower, the motherboard was LOWER QUALITY... Motherboard speed is very insiginificant.. its reliability, interoperability (ie, lack of conflicts), features, overcloackability, and future driver support are what makes a motherboard bad or good... and as far as all of these go a dell OEM mobo is the worst in each field with the exception of reliability (and it will not conflict with anything that originally came with the computer either).

But as long as you don't overclock OR upgrade it then it matters little.

 

[wildside50]

Originally posted by: taltamir
I said the RAM was slower, the motherboard was LOWER QUALITY... Motherboard speed is very insiginificant.. its reliability, interoperability (ie, lack of conflicts), features, overcloackability, and future driver support are what makes a motherboard bad or good... and as far as all of these go a dell OEM mobo is the worst in each field with the exception of reliability (and it will not conflict with anything that originally came with the computer either).

But as long as you don't overclock OR upgrade it then it matters little.

I guess it depends on what system you get.. the XPS 720 uses a Nvidia 680i mobo that you can configure with a factory OC'd CPU, so that mobo can't be all bad for overclocking...

The 420 (the one I chose) isn't going to be as good at OCing, obviously. I'm not a fan of OCing -- I don't do 3D Studio Max or run video compression 10 hours a day, so saving 5 seconds per render time doens't really mean too much, for my personal applications.

As far as conflicts -- perhaps I am naive in this one, but have you really met someone who has a motherboard that won't run a new graphics card (short of slot incompatibility, i.e. PCI-e 2.0) or sound card or new RAM of the correct type? I haven't, OEM or otherwise...

And the features are fine and dandy -- Firewire, onboard sound if that's your bag, 10 USB ports, enough expansion slots (if you don't need Crossfire or SLi), etc.

I realize my last link was a mobo comparo, but how's about this then --

http://www.anandtech.com/memory/showdoc.aspx?i=2878&p=5

The spread between the various quality and speeds of RAM are about 2 fps.

Whatever -- I'm starting to sound like a Dell fanboy who wants to validate his purchase, so I'm going to stop now. It's coo' if you don't lilke Dell. More power too ya. I've had good luck. I've also got a launch 360 that still runs (knocks on wood), so all the hardware failures don't deter me too much. God bless opinions!

 

[taltamir]

If its an nvidia 680i then its definitely good. They usually cram the cheapest sis or via chipset they can find in there... But a 680i is as good as it gets, I had no idea dell started using boards that good.

 

[wildside50]

Well the 420 uses the x38 Express, which is technically Intel's high-end chipset. You can make up your own mind about if its better than the P35 or not. Nonetheless, I woudln't call the chipset poor. The board itself is fairly barebones by the x38 standard, not even supporting crossfire (and obviously not SLi). But as I believe dual video cards to be a poor investment, I didn't care much. Heaven forbid they start making physics accelerators that use an x16 PCI-e slot though...