Except I can overclock a $300 CPU to smoke a $1000 CPU. No matter how hard I try, I unfortunately can't overclock 1GB of VRAM to be 2GB of VRAM.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
a $1230 5970
- Thread starter Brackle
- Start date
Except I can overclock a $300 CPU to smoke a $1000 CPU. No matter how hard I try, I unfortunately can't overclock 1GB of VRAM to be 2GB of VRAM.
A) Nothing is gauranteed
B) The e8400 is not a $300 cpu and you're not going to get that thing to clock high enough to outperform a high end i7
C) What's your point? How does this have anything to do with a gold plated case somehow being the same thing?
I think the point that everyone or just about everyone is trying to make is that the CPU used is WAY under powered for that GPU, even if it's overclocked. Saying "$1000 cpu" is more of a performance benchmark rather than an actual $1000 CPU, at least that's they way I'm looking at it. I'm sure if he had a lower end i7 clocked in the 4GHz range there wouldn't be much fuss even if it isn't a $1000 cpu because it performs like one.
Sorry, I quoted the wrong person. My point was more in response to this:
Spending $1000 on a CPU when you can OC an i7 920 to be faster at a third of the price is ridiculous.
I agree
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 9,101
Considering I paid $280 for my i7 920 and im at 4.2ghz.
I saved me over $700 for not getting the 980x
I saved me over $700 for not getting the 980x
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2003
- Messages
- 6,677
Come back when you've managed to overclock the number of cores from 4 to 6.
Nope.
The i7-930 and the i7-980X both clocked to 4.3ghz prdform the same with a 5970.
So it's exactly the same as buying 1k$ case/
Why?
They prefrom the same (as long as we are talking about gaming here, not server apps, and nobody buys a 5970 like that for server apps) regradless of 4 cores, 6, or 600 cores.
No, it's not. You're gauranteed not to get better performance from your overpriced case, you're not gauranteed 4.3GHz on a 930 and you don't even know if a 980x would have a higher ceiling especially with an unlocked multiplier.
I'm not saying someone should get a 980x over a 930 and OC it, but what I AM saying is that it's NOT the same thing. Your analogy IS flawed, no if's ands or buts about it.
Dude, It's been shown time and time again, even at stock clocks, the 980X PREFROMS THE SAME AS THE I7-930 IN GAMES DUE TO A GPU BOTTLNECK.
I put it in caps for ya/
Maybe at 800x600 in CPU bound games with no aa and no af it's the diffrence bewteen 1000 frames and 1100 frames, but you can't display them so who cares?
At a Reoultion that suits someone who might aucutally own a 980X theres no diffrwnce.
Who said anything about 6 cores? Intel still sells a $1000 quad core Extreme Edition in the form of the i7-975: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115212
This has turned into an epic flamefest.
A lot of people are arguing over my $1,000 CPU comment. Plz stop.
1. I don't think anyone can argue $1200+ is a ridiculous price for a 5970, 2GB or 4GB..
2. An OC'd 930 is not quite as fast as an OC'd 980EX, as far as gaming is concerned. But while the performance difference is not extreme, I was only pointing out that a person buying a $1,200+ 5970 is likely just buying the most expensive card he can, thinking it's the best. That person would probably buy a 980EX, as well. There are plenty of valid reasons for buying a 980EX, but the target market for a $1,200+ 5970 must be the uninformed pricks that buy tech based on the "more expensive = better" train of thought.
I mean, c'mon, you can get watercooled SLI GTX 480's for a hair more...
A lot of people are arguing over my $1,000 CPU comment. Plz stop.
1. I don't think anyone can argue $1200+ is a ridiculous price for a 5970, 2GB or 4GB..
2. An OC'd 930 is not quite as fast as an OC'd 980EX, as far as gaming is concerned. But while the performance difference is not extreme, I was only pointing out that a person buying a $1,200+ 5970 is likely just buying the most expensive card he can, thinking it's the best. That person would probably buy a 980EX, as well. There are plenty of valid reasons for buying a 980EX, but the target market for a $1,200+ 5970 must be the uninformed pricks that buy tech based on the "more expensive = better" train of thought.
I mean, c'mon, you can get watercooled SLI GTX 480's for a hair more...
NO!
Nobody getting a 5970 would buy a 980X if they arn't a moron!
You're better of with 3 480s, liquid cooling, and a i7-930.
4 CPU cores don't scale well now, nevermind 6!
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2000
- Messages
- 16,301
NO!
Nobody getting a 5970 would buy a 980X if they arn't a moron!
You're better of with 3 480s, liquid cooling, and a i7-930.
4 CPU cores don't scale well now, nevermind 6!
have you played the latest games?
Oh, Yeah like Metro?
That CPU bound game where 6 cores make a diffrence?
/Sarcasm.
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2000
- Messages
- 16,301
like BF:BC2 where a quad makes a big diff =p
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2003
- Messages
- 6,677
People don't only use their computer for games, and there are a lot of things this side of "server apps" that would benefit from a hex core. There are more than a few people in the Intel forum who decided to get the 980X because it would help their video encoding immensely.
The 980X will probably be a kickass CPU for far longer than the 4 GB 5970 will be a kickass GPU...
Given that it's the same price as the hex-core alternative, who in their right mind would buy it?
You remind me of all the guys who insisted that an E8400 is a better choice than a Q6600 back in the day. Today we've got multiple games that use more than 2 cores or even use two cores fully leaving no "free" resources for any background processes. Many of those dual core owners have found the need to upgrade while the quads are still breasing through the games of past and the games of today.
There are games that are CPU bound even at "normal" resolutions. Bad Company 2 is incredibly CPU bound in the majority of situations, as is GTA IV, i also just picked up BLUR and it uses my CPU way more than it does my GPU. >80% utilization on my OCed quad and ~50% usage on my GPU at maxed settings 1920x1200. Metro 2033 isn't the only game out there, it isn't even the most popular one, not even close. It just happens to be one that supports your argument, which is the only reason you used it.
If I was rich I'd buy up tons of watercooled GTX480s in a 4U case and put them in racks in a DC and then use them to encode H264 videos for Flash streaming.
Who said anything about "right mind"?
We are talking about Extreme Editions - nobody in their right mind buys one of those (with the sole exception being the hex-core EE since there aren't any cheaper hex-core CPUs - afaik this is the first time the extreme editions have actually offered something unique). Likewise, nobody in their right mind pairs a $1200 5970 with a C2D.Who said anything about "right mind"?
Pent 4 had extra cache.
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2000
- Messages
- 16,301
what exactly are you arguing 0.0? The latest and greatest always ends up costing alot, specially from intel, for what I do, 6 cores > 4 cores > 2 cores, even for games I play 4 cores > 2 cores, you want to see a dual core chip fall flat on its face?
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2010/01/03/intel_westmere_32nm_clarkdale_core_i5661_review/6
even the 955 gets spanked in some games
what exactly are you arguing 0.0? The latest and greatest always ends up costing alot, specially from intel, for what I do, 6 cores > 4 cores > 2 cores, even for games I play 4 cores > 2 cores, you want to see a dual core chip fall flat on its face?
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2010/01/03/intel_westmere_32nm_clarkdale_core_i5661_review/6
even the 955 gets spanked in some games
?
I was just pointing out that his statement was incorrect.
And everyoen can agree that money for gaming s better spent on the GPU than the CPU.
Example: 5770 with 980X/x58 loses to 480 SLI with AM3.
I dont see what your complaining about, theyre cheap.....
Using Xe.com, they work out to be £850.08 and at aria.co.uk they are.....
£999.98
(inc. VAT)
And amazingly, someone has bought 1, as they did have two in stock... had it on special offer one day with £30 off though.
Using Xe.com, they work out to be £850.08 and at aria.co.uk they are.....
£999.98
(inc. VAT)
And amazingly, someone has bought 1, as they did have two in stock... had it on special offer one day with £30 off though.
Oh, well the 30E off makes it all worth it.
Maybe if you didn't continuously cherry pick your "examples" they'd have more credibility.
If you read around, you will see that many, if not most people that have performance issues in today's games is usually down to the CPU. Many of these people (as I alluded to earlier) are having these problems because at the time of their purchase, they listened to someone like you and got a dual core over a quad.
Cherry picked examples aside, here's the problem with the blanket statement about spending money on a GPU is better than a CPU... In a game, almost every single in-game option is a GPU loading option. Meaning, if you don't have enough video power for something, you can almost always turn down a setting or multiple setting until you get your desired performance.
There are VERY few options that affect CPU load and just about none affect it in any significant form or fashion, so if you're running into a performance wall because of a CPU limitation, you're pretty much SOL.
It's also a lot easier to upgrade a GPU than a CPU, especially if your platform is EOL or nearing EOL. So I absolutly do not agree that it's better to spend on the GPU over the CPU. I think it depends on the situation, again, chery picked examples aside.