3700+ and 8800 series card

twoeyes

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 15, 2006
Messages
243
Would getting an 8800GTS or 8800GTX be worth it right now with my current setup or am I better off just waiting a while and building a whole new rig?
 

Frosteh

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 30, 2004
Messages
3,664
In Vista my old 64 4000+ @ 2.7Ghz was bottled necking my machine, and I have a 7950GX2, my new C2D E6600 @ 3.0Ghz changed that greatly.

If my system is bottlenecked with a 7950GX2 then with a similar card like the 8800GTS or the faster card like the 8800GTX I suspect you'll see similar issues.
 

Crazystick

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Messages
235
twoeyes.. what do you plan on doing? Cus im upgrading from a AMD 3200+ 939+ Evga 6800 Ultra .. to a dual core 4400+ and a BFG 8800 GTS. Ive had issues... probably bottlenecking ...with my current setup. Let me know how it goes , I got the new proc arriving friday.. Fingers crossed..
 

Cyrilix

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
2,188
It may be bottlenecking but if it's an ISSUE, then it's not bottlenecking for sure. A 4400+ is more than fast enough to run current games. If you're having issues, look elsewhere. Bottlenecking really isn't an issue unless you're running an old P4. It's more of a "I get a high framerate, but not 300 fps" kind of "issue", on any modern processor.
 

twoeyes

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 15, 2006
Messages
243
I'll probably just end up waiting. Forgot to mention the fact that my CPU is OCed to 2.8Ghz, probably doesn't matter much though as game are starting to be multi threaded now.
 

w1retap

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 17, 2006
Messages
13,268
I'd say that would be a pretty nice bottleneck if you got a nv8 series card. I mean, my X2 5000+ at 3GHz scores 2000 points lower in 3DMark06 compared to my buddies conroe setup at the same clock speed. For a 8800 card, get the fastest processor you can afford and OC it if you want results.. oh, and have a high res monitor please if you go with a GTX. The GTS is a plenty powerful card for anything 1600x1200 and under. A GTX would be necessary with 1920 and up resolutions with all eyecandy on, especially in the upcoming DX10 games.
 

legcramp

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
11,938
I'd say that would be a pretty nice bottleneck if you got a nv8 series card. I mean, my X2 5000+ at 3GHz scores 2000 points lower in 3DMark06 compared to my buddies conroe setup at the same clock speed. For a 8800 card, get the fastest processor you can afford and OC it if you want results.. oh, and have a high res monitor please if you go with a GTX. The GTS is a plenty powerful card for anything 1600x1200 and under. A GTX would be necessary with 1920 and up resolutions with all eyecandy on, especially in the upcoming DX10 games.
Who cares about 3dmark06... the total score puts the cpu score into the total.... so that 2000 extra points would mean nothing if you dont run the cpu test and compare the fps again.... the difference is barely anything.
 

w1retap

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 17, 2006
Messages
13,268
Who cares about 3dmark06... the total score puts the cpu score into the total.... so that 2000 extra points would mean nothing if you dont run the cpu test and compare the fps again.... the difference is barely anything.
Yea, who cares about numbers, that's all PC's deal with anyhow. :rolleyes: I believe just about all reviews of the 8800 series card find it to be CPU limited anyhow? Sure, throw a GTX in a rig with a 3700+, rofl.
 

i_am_mustang_man

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
510
numbers don't matter, smoothness does. your proccy may hold your gpu back, but it would be the diff between 80fps and 160fps, which you won't know.

when the gpu is being taxed, like oblivion maxed @ 1920x1200, the cpu will play less of a role, and instead of 50% drops, the diff will prolly be more like 5-8 fps (say 40fps versus 35)

can be a big, and it also could not be
 

legcramp

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
11,938
Yea, who cares about numbers, that's all PC's deal with anyhow. :rolleyes: I believe just about all reviews of the 8800 series card find it to be CPU limited anyhow? Sure, throw a GTX in a rig with a 3700+, rofl.

that's not the point I was trying to make. You specifically compared the cpus in 3dmark06 where they run seperate test JUST for the cpu, and the program averages that into the total score.

If you run real in-game benchmarks, the difference is barely noticeable and that extra 2000 points would mean nothing. :rolleyes:
 

w1retap

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 17, 2006
Messages
13,268
I'm merely saying the CPU makes the difference. Just take a gander at all the benches of 8800's on different CPUs. From many indications, the 8800 itself is CPU limited unlike many cards in the past where the cards themselves were the limiting factor. Just look at the real world gaming benchmarks of all different CPU's being used in combination with the 8800. I still suggest the OP get the fastest processor they can afford, OC it, and run a 8800 series card if that is what they want.
 

ZeroH

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 20, 2006
Messages
442
OP. I'm pretty much in the same boat as you.. I have/had a 3700+ (939 board) and 7800GT.

I just got the 8800GTX in today but unfortunately the FX-60 i had ordered as well didn't arrive. SOOOO I got impatient and just replaced the video card. I already see a marked difference in gaming. So far I've played GRAW and R6Vegas and I can easily run 1900x1200 at the highest settings without any framerate issues (GRAW gets about 55fps, Vegas gets about 40fps). With the 7800GT, I had to use all low settings in GRAW (and still suffer low framerates) and with Vegas I could use medium settings but disabled shadowing (and again suffer low framerates).

I should had the new CPU tomorrow and hopefully it'll be even better. :)
 

Cyrilix

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
2,188
Yea, who cares about numbers, that's all PC's deal with anyhow. :rolleyes: I believe just about all reviews of the 8800 series card find it to be CPU limited anyhow? Sure, throw a GTX in a rig with a 3700+, rofl.

Sorry, but I agree with azn_plyr. You never addressed his point. 3dmark06 has a DEDICATED CPU benchmark. That's BAD, when it comes to testing fps and fps only. 'nuff said. The CPU makes a small difference. That's all. In fact, you should expect almost no difference, except with maximum frame rates, which quite honestly, don't matter. I could get a maximum frame rate of 200, but the minimum frame rate of 15 (for example), will kill my gaming experience.
 

Unknown-One

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 5, 2005
Messages
8,905
I have a Socket 754 3400+ Venice @ 2.7GHz, I have an 8800GTS on the way, I'll let you know how it performs once it gets here. :D
 

Grahxen

Gawd
Joined
Mar 6, 2003
Messages
580
How do you plan to put a PCI-E card in your AGP mobo? Unless I am missing something.
 

twoeyes

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 15, 2006
Messages
243
I realize that performance will not be as good because of the CPU, but do you guys really think it's going to stop me from playing some upcoming UT3 engine based games and games such as crysis at higher settings? I realize we dont know what the CPU load is going to be like with these games, but I know often with CPU bottlenecking it can stick you with 45FPS no matter what you turn the graphics to, will this be the case or am I going to be somehow held back from seeing the high res textures?
 

w1retap

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 17, 2006
Messages
13,268
Is this honestly for real? You are considering a top of the line graphics card over $500, yet you have a CPU that is less than $70? Buy a kia optima and put a semi truck diesel engine in it while you are at it. :p
 

Aix

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
236
w1retap, you need to come back down to earth methinks, you're losing sense of reality

e6600 + mobo + ram will cost at *least* $600, probably $700 if you want quality components that will OC. That is more than the price of the 8800gtx itself. Show me a benchmark that shows over 100% increase in FPS when going from a comparable (2.8ghz amd64) CPU to a conroe. Those benchies you posted show at best a 25% difference, and that's for *SLI*, where as you pointed out it's a lot more pronounced. This is not even mentioning anything about the effort it will take to reassemble the whole system, reinstall the OS, and tinker with it.

P.S. your car analogy is stupid
 

J-Mag

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
3,640
w1retap, you need to come back down to earth methinks, you're losing sense of reality

I have to agree with ya on this one.

I'm merely saying the CPU makes the difference. Just take a gander at all the benches of 8800's on different CPUs. From many indications, the 8800 itself is CPU limited unlike many cards in the past where the cards themselves were the limiting factor. Just look at the real world gaming benchmarks of all different CPU's being used in combination with the 8800. I still suggest the OP get the fastest processor they can afford, OC it, and run a 8800 series card if that is what they want.

A 2.4ghz A64 or a 2.0ghz C2D is plenty for 98% of the games out there when coupled with a G80. Sure there are some that perform better with high end CPUs, but it is rare.

At most reasonable settings the G80 does not scale with increase CPU speed.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/Videocards/391/23/
 

pain.angel

Gawd
Joined
May 6, 2005
Messages
525
I'd like to see some official review on this too that doesn't use brand spanking new processors. There's a big difference between me shelling out $350 for a new video card and replacing my entire system. I can't afford a whole new rig but I can afford a new video card.
I'd like to run my monitor's native res (1650x1080) with a little bit of eye candy and pull a reasonable 60 fps. Not really concerned about getting 200fps, my epenis will survive.
 

w1retap

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 17, 2006
Messages
13,268
lol, reguardless of your fact bending opinions, this should be quite humorous to see. :D
 

ZeroH

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 20, 2006
Messages
442
Continuing from my previous post...

Well I just got the FX60 today and replacing the 3700+ gave me a boots of about 10-15 fps. GRAW, which ran at about 55fps, is now running at 65fps. Vegas, which ran at about 40fps, is now running at 55fps.

Although there wasn't a noticeable difference in playing the game... where I did see a huge difference was in the loading of the game and the maps.. GRAW maps loaded in a few seconds when it usually takes about 30 or so.. Vegas was pretty quick too but not as big of a difference as with GRAW.
 

pain.angel

Gawd
Joined
May 6, 2005
Messages
525
Continuing from my previous post...

Well I just got the FX60 today and replacing the 3700+ gave me a boots of about 10-15 fps. GRAW, which ran at about 55fps, is now running at 65fps. Vegas, which ran at about 40fps, is now running at 55fps.

Although there wasn't a noticeable difference in playing the game... where I did see a huge difference was in the loading of the game and the maps.. GRAW maps loaded in a few seconds when it usually takes about 30 or so.. Vegas was pretty quick too but not as big of a difference as with GRAW.

what where your fps pre-8800? From what I see all over a better cpu can gain you a small increase where a gpu upgrade can gain you a huge increase. This whole omg you need a core2 to run anything! sentiment is getting old.
 

Unknown-One

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 5, 2005
Messages
8,905
I have a Socket 754 3400+ Venice @ 2.7GHz, I have an 8800GTS on the way, I'll let you know how it performs once it gets here. :D
How do you plan to put a PCI-E card in your AGP mobo? Unless I am missing something.
Who said I had an AGP motherboard? I have an EPoX 8NPA-SLI which is s754 + PCIe (it even supports SLI).

Check my sig, I have a single 7900GT in it right now. I would have gone SLI with a second 7900GT, but the prices on 7900 series parts just aren't dropping...
 
Top