Max Video Card for i7 920

L

lhernandez

n00b
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
24
Hi Folks,

I have a PC that I built in late 2009 that's has 12GB RAM, i7 920 @ 3.7 Ghz running on a Asus P6T motherboard. I'm trying to determine what's the highest end video card I should put in to this PC. I'm assuming putting something like a GTX 980 would be overkill and the PC would not take full advantage of the video card.

What is the best way to figure out the PCs limitation in terms of GPU?
 
Last edited:
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Even though it's a bit old, an i7 [email protected] is still a very decent processor by today's standards and in almost all gaming apps will not be a bottleneck to any single video card that's available right now. I wouldn't hesitate to slap a 980Ti in there (or the AMD equivalent if you prefer - whatever your budget will allow) and enjoy. Note that the next batch of video cards from nVidia and ATI are probably being released sometime this year (mid range) or early next year (high end).

At this point in time, I would not purchase a videocard with less than 6GB memory on it - unless its really cheap second hand card that's a holdover until the next batch of cards get released from the GPU manufacturers.
 
Yeah, you may get a few % more FPS with a new high-clocked CPU, but if you drop in a 6-core and OC it to the upper 3s or lower 4s, you'll have no issues enjoying modern titles on ANY card. You only have to worry when your CPU is an actual bottleneck.

There is a huge difference between CPU performance in games and CPU bottlenecking in games. You can have a CPU that is not the top-performer in the charts, but it may not be bottlenecking you GPU in any way.
 
I would say crank that 920 up to at least 4.5ghz and run it for another couple of years. Get a stronger cooler if you need to
 
The older i7's are hanging in wonderfully. My 2600k @ 4.2Ghz and a 390 run all of my games just fine at 4k. Sure, I can't run at full settings on everything, but things look great!

I'll throw my vote in for a 390, and see how that works for ya. If your board can take it, the Xeon is a perfectly viable upgrade route as well!
 
Don't get an AMD gpu.

AMD gpu require a fast cpu to be able to perform optimally that is why there is a huge performance gain on DX12 because of AMD poor reliance on CPU draw calls on DX11 and prior.
 
I upgraded from a Core i7 970 @ 4.6 to a 5930k @ 4.6, with a 680 SLI, there was no perceptable difference.

Grab a 6 core Xeon and overclock it, it's cheap and smart.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jaffy
like this
raclimj said:
Don't get an AMD gpu.

AMD gpu require a fast cpu to be able to perform optimally that is why there is a huge performance gain on DX12 because of AMD poor reliance on CPU draw calls on DX11 and prior.
Click to expand...

Not sure if serious..... :cautious:
 
Daniel_Chang said:
Then and Now: Almost 10 Years of Intel CPUs Compared

They didn't test EVERY CPU, with the closest equivalent being the i7-870 (I believe that the 920 was slightly slower, IIRC). It held up fine in modern games (testing was conducted prior to release of Skylake).
Click to expand...

I7-870 rruns at 2.93Ghz - dual channel RAM instead of triple channel though - and less PCIe lanes.
The 920 stock clocks are 2.66Ghz

ZL580 said:
I would say crank that 920 up to at least 4.5ghz and run it for another couple of years. Get a stronger cooler if you need to
Click to expand...

Pretty sure 920s that would clock past around 4.2 were not that common. ~4Ghz is a more likely overclock with good cooling.
 
raclimj said:
Don't get an AMD gpu.
AMD gpu require a fast cpu to be able to perform optimally that is why there is a huge performance gain on DX12 because of AMD poor reliance on CPU draw calls on DX11 and prior.
Click to expand...
say what? lol he not running a dual core from 2001
 
Just upgraded from an i7 930 to a 6700K.. Dude do yourself a favor and upgrade your CPU as well. Night and day difference. I'm not even kidding.
 
Ran 980Ti on i7 920 @ 3.9ghz for a few months, upgrade made a big difference, but not in all games.

Buy a xeon, or upgrade platform, but you'll survive on this cpu for most titles
 
cyclone3d said:
I7-870 rruns at 2.93Ghz - dual channel RAM instead of triple channel though - and less PCIe lanes.
The 920 stock clocks are 2.66Ghz



Pretty sure 920s that would clock past around 4.2 were not that common. ~4Ghz is a more likely overclock with good cooling.
Click to expand...

Thought for sure the the high point was 5ghz and 4.5 was easy...
 
if you can get your 920 to clock above 3.8 ghz you will be in good shape. Mine never wanted to go there. Upgraded to a hex core and got it up to ~4.2 and I have used and r9 290x 780ti and 980 and never felt cpu limited in the least.
 
Would a similar video card recommendation be made for a q9450 at 3.6 GHz?

Sitting with a 2GB 6950 (6970 bios) for now.
 
Unfortunately, I don't think that the ipc on the q9450 would be adequate. The bus width would be adequate for higher end cards, but I don't think that the processor would have the legs for higher end cards. If I threw out a recommendation I would say that the NVidia 680 or 770, or the 7970 or r9 280 would be your cap.
 
MirageMobile said:
Would a similar video card recommendation be made for a q9450 at 3.6 GHz?
Sitting with a 2GB 6950 (6970 bios) for now.
Click to expand...
with that cpu you will be somewhat cpu limited no way around that....that doesn't mean a better video card wont help -cause it will. You just wont get the same performance someone running a modern cpu will. There is still quite a few games that are not overly cpy heavy..the ones that are you would be at 100% cpu usage vs myself at 30%. pick up a used 7970/280x for a hundred bucks and enjoy. get an xfx and rep here will still help you if it has problems
 
Killerxp100 said:
If not you can always sell that X58 board (to me :p) and upgrade.

Seriously if you have a good x58 board and your not running a cheap x56xx Xeon then your doing it wrong.
Click to expand...

So much this. The $120 I paid for my x5660 is the best money I have ever spent on a processor.

Still using it as my primary rig until I have the time to migrate everything to my 4960x.

With good cooling, you can get 4.4ghz easilly (making it neck and neck with a 5820k). Throw in a USB 3.0 and Sata 6.0 PCI-E card, and you have a pretty rocking platform for under $200.
 
caltech31 said:
So much this. The $120 I paid for my x5660 is the best money I have ever spent on a processor.

Still using it as my primary rig until I have the time to migrate everything to my 4960x.

With good cooling, you can get 4.4ghz easilly (making it neck and neck with a 5820k). Throw in a USB 3.0 and Sata 6.0 PCI-E card, and you have a pretty rocking platform for under $200.
Click to expand...


Same here. Running 4.2 Ghz on an X5660. Also have 18 gigs of Ram and a 970. My X58 Board already has USB 3.0 and Sata 6.0. ( Asus P6x58d-Premium)

Now I will admit that I recently built a friend a computer using an I5-6600k and an AMD 380 Card. That, for some reason felt smoother than my pc, but other factors may be coming into play as technically my system is more powerful.
 
FalconSS said:
Same here. Running 4.2 Ghz on an X5660. Also have 18 gigs of Ram and a 970. My X58 Board already has USB 3.0 and Sata 6.0. ( Asus P6x58d-Premium)

Now I will admit that I recently built a friend a computer using an I5-6600k and an AMD 380 Card. That, for some reason felt smoother than my pc, but other factors may be coming into play as technically my system is more powerful.
Click to expand...

Short answer: your friends IPC is higher. So FPS doesn't fluctuate near as much.

18 gigs? That must be an odd RAM configuration....

EDIT: Marvell and NEC controllers for your SATA3/USB3? How's that working out? I don't even bother using mine 'cause their such a joke....
 
lhernandez said:
Hi Folks,

I have a PC that I built in late 2009 that's has 12GB RAM, i7 920 @ 3.7 Ghz running on a Asus P6T motherboard. I'm trying to determine what's the highest end video card I should put in to this PC. I'm assuming putting something like a GTX 980 would be overkill and the PC would not take full advantage of the video card.

What is the best way to figure out the PCs limitation in terms of GPU?
Click to expand...



Run eVga970 ssc in a phenom 2 at 3.9 ghz and am more than pleased.No problems with any games
 
FalconSS said:
Same here. Running 4.2 Ghz on an X5660. Also have 18 gigs of Ram and a 970. My X58 Board already has USB 3.0 and Sata 6.0. ( Asus P6x58d-Premium)

Now I will admit that I recently built a friend a computer using an I5-6600k and an AMD 380 Card. That, for some reason felt smoother than my pc, but other factors may be coming into play as technically my system is more powerful.
Click to expand...
Have you checked your Windows Power Options? What Plan are you on? Create a new Plan with maximum performance. Go to BIOS, disable any power saving/throttling CPU features - CPU Enhanced Halt(C1E), C3/C6 State Support, CPU Thermal Monitor, CPU EIST Function.

I guarantee those tweaks will make your system more responsive and smoother overall.
 
chaikovski2002 said:
Have you checked your Windows Power Options? What Plan are you on? Create a new Plan with maximum performance. Go to BIOS, disable any power saving/throttling CPU features - CPU Enhanced Halt(C1E), C3/C6 State Support, CPU Thermal Monitor, CPU EIST Function.

I guarantee those tweaks will make your system more responsive and smoother overall.
Click to expand...
ill take the power saving any day on x58's and trust me it does. Matter of fact almost all the overclockers i talk to leave the power saving on. I cant detect any difference in performance with it on or off on a high end x58. it can make a difference as in low end systems that barley get by as it is...especially ones that don't hold a certain cpu speed very well (my low end cheap laptop). My x58 setup looses zero performance with power saving on. it just pulls less watts from the wall until its needed.
 
I'm sorry but the jump i got from my 4790k from my i7950 at 3.7ghz was amazing. With a 390x in both systems and ram totals and drives the same i ended up with a good 30% boost. Games felt night and day different.
 
raclimj said:
Don't get an AMD gpu.

AMD gpu require a fast cpu to be able to perform optimally that is why there is a huge performance gain on DX12 because of AMD poor reliance on CPU draw calls on DX11 and prior.
Click to expand...
AMD has improved DX11 drive ron win10.... and really the performance difference is not only the overhead, and a xeon x5650 with 3,5Ghz can match an i7 2600k at stock
 
PontiacGTX said:
AMD has improved DX11 drive ron win10.... and really the performance difference is not only the overhead, and a xeon x5650 with 3,5Ghz can match an i7 2600k at stock
Click to expand...

and don't forget Westmere can handle 40 PCIEx lanes, so will do a 16x SLI without problems, in time that Sandy is limited to 16
 
A P6T Deluxe V2 can definitely run a X5650 at least and OC it,I messed around with a few over the years, still have a XL5639 sitting on the desk I started off with after I used the old Q6600 Slacker on another build.

I still have a X5650 on the HTPC using an old P6T Deluxe, just need to make sure the BIOS is the one of the newer ones. A X5675 is probably the fastest thing you can pop in there at low heat as far as cooling.

I use a X5680 on an ASUS P6T7 OC'd on air to 4.5 on the main rig still I picked up a year ago for around $130 bucks then to mess with, but it runs a bit hot.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top