bottlenecking a load of rubbish

B

bcham

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 23, 2007
Messages
153
my brothers pc,as a q6600 overclocked to 3000mhz,and a 8800gts 320mb,2 gig of ram.i have the same rig only my cpu is a amdx2 4200.at 2500 mhz.in cod 4 mp we both have the same frames per second.but he beats me with 3dmark 06.but whos bothered about that,
 
bcham said:
my brothers pc,as a q6600 overclocked to 3000mhz,and a 8800gts 320mb,2 gig of ram.i have the same rig only my cpu is a amdx2 4200.at 2500 mhz.in cod 4 mp we both have the same frames per second.but he beats me with 3dmark 06.but whos bothered about that,
Click to expand...

single card will not likely over run the cpu, but once you sli, especially with gtx or ultra cards, the extra cpu horsepower makes a difference.
 
I think it also depends on what resolutions you're playing at. In lower resolutions, CPUs will be "bottleneck" performance, but when you hit high resolutions systems with the same GPUs, but different CPUs will performance similarly. That's why all the CPU benches on Tom's charts are all at low resolutions, so you can see the differences.
 
When I first got my 8800 GTS I had a Pentium D at the same 3.4 I am at now and I could tell a world of difference once I got my E6850 in newer games, so yes bottlenecking can be real, it just takes a big difference to show it.

I gave my girlfriend who does not game much my previous video card, a XFX 7600GT XXX, and she only has a Celeron D at 3.4 that I gave her. I could tell a difference in WoW and F.E.A.R (only games we both have installed) on that too. So yeah, again it was there, it just takes a low end processor relative to the card to show it.

No reason to think it is "rubbish'. If the processor isn't up to it, then it won't matter what video card you throw in.
 
I think to a certain degree it's true, I've gotten alot of flack for using an 8800GT SLi set up with an AM2 5200 X2 Windsor (OC'd to 3.0ghz)

I would show benchmarks showing Where there would be a 1ghz overclock yet yield a 1fps gain at high resolutions, I think as long as the CPU Architecture itself is current that makes a differance.

Heck my 3D06 (1280x1024) scores are utter crap, BARELY 12k on an 8800 GT SLi setup, meanwhile quads are benching almost double that with little effort. But turn that resolution up it's probably dead even. I can run oblivion modded to high hell at 1920x1200 with 6xAA and everything set to high and get a minimum of 60 fps, but average out at 80-100 fps.

Heck TF2 Completely maxed out at 16x AA with everyone on screen still nets over 60. Everything set to high on Crysis at 1920x1200 still lets me run at 20-40 fps, (AA Owns me hard though like everyone else) Quake wars is the same way, (didn't have fraps open when I played though so I can't say my FPS for sure) it played without a hitch completely maxed out.

Bottlenecking isn't a "Myth" or Crap, there's just alot of variables on which it depends, resolution being a major factor that many people don't seem to think about, So when you build a Rig, build it around what resolution you'll be playing on rather than going balls to the wall with everything, and you'll be alright.

For A $900.00 PC it'll play pretty much everything maxed out without even blinking.

AM2 5200 Windsor @ 3.0Ghz
G Skill DDR800 @ 1005mhz
2 8800 GT KO's in SLi
Asus M2N32SLi

But if you're going for a lower resolution Definatly get a great processor (Q6600 or So) or you'll be hurting.
 
Yeah this debate goes on all the time and kiddies with $4000.00 dollar dell 720h2o rigs like to think the extra money they spent makes a big difference in games so they tell people they must upgrade their processors to take advantage of newer video cards.
If you play at any kind of high rez 99% of the games out there will perform almost identical on dual core 5400+ amd processors as they do on quad core intels.
Basically if you turn your resolution up and your framerate goes down you are gpu limited and your processor isnt helping at all if you turn it up and your frames stay the same you could use a new processor as you are probably cpu limited.
Too many people try to give advice about gaming and really don't have a clue. Sorry if this sounds harsh but im tired of people reccomending new motherboards and cpu's to people who really only need a new video card.
When we get a new ultra high end video card that may change but in all new games at resolutions of 1920 x 1200 with any kind of aa you will be gpu bottenecked.
Hell crysis is a perfect example, core2 quads don't do any better in that game than amd 5600+'s.
Same as cod4 etc with high rez and aa.
Hell i have 8800 gtx's in sli and overclocked and at the rez i like to play at with aa on i still am bottlenecked by my video cards.
Rant off
 
Well I had a 8800GTX in both a Opteron 165 @ 2.8ghz rig and a 8800GTX in a e4300 stock rig, both same specs 2gb ram etc. They got the same fps in UT3 (shit fps to my standards). but NOTICE! the Opteron is OC'd and the e4300 is not at all, pushed the 4300 to 3.0ghz and there was a VERY noticable increase with fps.

perhaps just the fact that core 2 duos are better but that is my 0.0000002 cents

With that said, I find it hard to believe that a q6600 is equal to such an old cpu..

oh and about COD4 with my Ultra's I never dip below 70fps with 16xAA and 16xAF at 1920x1200 so COD4 as being a "gpu killing example" atleast for me is not true...
 
At high resolutions and eye candy settings......a single card will be GPU limited, the cpu, as long as it is reasonable, say a 2ghz AMD64 or better, or any modern fast P4....will NOT be a factor. This has been proven time and time again.;)
 
I wasn't inferring it was a "gpu killing game" and it was a bad example, call of juarez is better.
Just the fact that if you crank up any kind of aa and rez your uber processor will not help you much if you have at least a 5400+ etc.
The new $1200.00 quad cores are for epeens and other applications they won't help high rez playing gamers.
 
Most of the time cpu bottleneck occurs when your fps is over 60 anyways, so it's moot.
 
Bottleneck was a concept designed by tech companies to force you to upgrade your cpus and gpus at the same time. TINFOIL HAT TIME!! Haha.

Nah, but seriously, bottlenecking is rubbish. With a better video card and raising the resolution, the bottleneck gets bigger, obviously that makes no sense, but its true.

Maybe in the future when games are mutli-threaded the cpu will do something about FPS and a bottleneck will exist, but by that time they'll be multi-core gpus... haha.

LordBritish said:
My ancient Opteron 165 with an 8800GT can play anything - Crysis as well no probs.
Click to expand...

Represent!
 
How do you know when it's even bottlenecked? I think any c2d over 3ghz really wont be bottlenecked by anything out there right now.
 
Honestly, if your entire argument is based on 2 computers and 1 game, this thread is "rubbish". Like others have said, when certain circumstances are met, the CPU becomes limiting and in other circumstances the GPU is the limiter. The trick is maximizing both CPU and GPU without destroying your wallet.
 
yeah, in SLI with GTX cards I noticed a significant playable gain in going from 3200 to 3600mhz on my cpu.. I could bump AA another level up and still had higher fps.. but I think as stated earlier with a single card and running below 1600x1200 (sort of medium and lower resolutions) most games are exremely gpu bound.
 
"How do you know when it's even bottlenecked?"
Like i said raise your resolution and aa if your fps goes down you are gpu bottlenecked, if it doesnt go down you are cpu limited.
Pretty straight forward.
Thats a simplification but very easy to understand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top