CPU usage at high resolution ?

[squ1rr3l]

First of all i would like to apoligise for my bad english. I'm from The Netherlands you see

I'm confused about what CPU i would take to play at a resolution of 2560x1600 on my Dell 3007FPW. Is it true that at this resolution it doesn't matter what CPU you will use because the graphic card will do all the work ? If so i'm considering taking a X2 3800 instead of a expensive CPU. The system i composed is :

- X2 3800+
- 2x X1900XTX Cross
- Asus A8R32 MVP Del
- Corsair XMS 2x 1GB Cas 2

Will the CPU be a bottleneck ? If so, the FX55 cost only around 400 euro's now here in holland. But yet no dual core

Any help appreciated

 

[Chernobyl1]

it very much depends on the game but just about any new A64 or Pentium if clocked will give you nearly the same performance as the best chip you can buy at default clocks.
From all that I have read, the 3800 x2 chips clock really well!

You have got pretty much the optimum kit already, the only thing worth doing now is clock all of it

 

[Weazmeister]

CPU scaling still applies. Especially if you end up running SLI or X-fire. CPU does become the binding factor.

 

[Chernobyl1]

CPU scaling still applies. Especially if you end up running SLI or X-fire. CPU does become the binding factor.

At that resolution, the whole system is being pushed to the max. Any bottleneck in CPU, memory or graphics performance will hurt the framerates.
A x2 3800+ will clock to give pretty near or even better than the max performing chip you can buy so a 3800+ x2 is a good chip.
You can get around 5% more performance with the San Diego core chips (1MB cache vs 512K) assuming you can clock as high.

The CPU he has chosen is very good and I would recommend it for the task.

 

[squ1rr3l]

At that resolution, the whole system is being pushed to the max. Any bottleneck in CPU, memory or graphics performance will hurt the framerates.
A x2 3800+ will clock to give pretty near or even better than the max performing chip you can buy so a 3800+ x2 is a good chip.
You can get around 5% more performance with the San Diego core chips (1MB cache vs 512K) assuming you can clock as high.

The CPU he has chosen is very good and I would recommend it for the task.

Thanks for the reply's

All that i've read was that at any resolution higher then 2048x1536 the CPU isn't a factor at all.. Even the 1MB cache didn't make any diffrence.. But since it's still alot of money i wanna make the right decision

 

[Bona Fide]

If you can get an FX-55, you can most certainly get an Opteron 170. It will perform and overclock MUCH better than an X2 3800+.

 

[Chernobyl1]

Thanks for the reply's

All that i've read was that at any resolution higher then 2048x1536 the CPU isn't a factor at all.. Even the 1MB cache didn't make any diffrence.. But since it's still alot of money i wanna
make the right decision

Yeah I agree thinking about it.
Physics and AI calculations are performed by the CPU.
The CPU could become a bottleneck but its unlikely given that the games are made to run on much slower machines.
The graphics subsystem will be the major bottleneck.

Have you thought about watercooling your SLI setup?
That would yield you the most reward apart from going to quad SLI with NVidia