Fastest video card for Q6600

T

The Oatman

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 19, 2007
Messages
415
So I am still considering whether to upgrade my system now or wait until sandy bridge. If I were to hold on to my Q6600 @ 3.4 for as long as possible, and I wanted to upgrade my video card before everything else, what would be the fastest GPU I could get that would not be held back (too much) by my CPU @ 1920x1200?
 
GTX 460 1gb.

However, now isn't a good time to buy unless you have to. AMD is releasing new cards in three weeks, and overall prices should go down by November (hopefully).
 
I would agree with the GTX460, but not because you have a Q6600... just because it's the best bang for your buck card right now. The Q6600 might be 'old' in the face of more recent Core i7 offerings, but it's not a dog by any means and will be able to handle pretty much any GPU you throw at it. You could throw a GTX480 in there if you wanted to...

Or as someone said you could wait and see what AMD has coming in a few weeks. Personally I favor Nvidia just because I can't stand the pile of shit AMD/ATI calls the 'Catalyst Control Center'.
 
The Cataclism Control Center isn't very intuitive but works fine, there's other alternatives like ATT and Rivatuner, but even if you don't want an AMD card, waiting for their launch for their new series of cards will means that nVidia cards will further drop in price. Consumers will have the benefits of buying the fastest and the greatest from AMD, or going to a cheaper route and buying an nVidia card which offers great bang for the buck. I love competition.

Q6600 is a still capable CPU.
 
im also running Q6600 just like op. I am waiting to see what unfolds as the successor to the 5770(as i was thinking of crossfiring since its a nice cheap upgrade from my 9800gtx+). Price/performance/Xfire scaling are what im looking for. If it doesnt pan out,im going to single best gpu i can get
 
NIVO said:
im also running Q6600 just like op. I am waiting to see what unfolds as the successor to the 5770(as i was thinking of crossfiring since its a nice cheap upgrade from my 9800gtx+). Price/performance/Xfire scaling are what im looking for. If it doesnt pan out,im going to single best gpu i can get
Click to expand...

Q6600 over 3ghz is fast enough for any card on the market.

so get what you want to pay for, but id get one of the new 6k series since they are so close
 
Fastest card for any processor is either a gtx480 or HD5970 (5870 if you wanted to go single gpu). You won't see the same frames as if you had an i7, but a higher end card will ALWAYS be better than the ones below it.
 
Wildace said:
Q6600 over 3ghz is fast enough for any card on the market.

so get what you want to pay for, but id get one of the new 6k series since they are so close
Click to expand...
While I agree to wait for the 6xxx series, I want to point out that a Q6600, even at 3GHz, will heavily bottleneck modern high-end cards. The GTX 470 and GTX 480 are hit hardest, and although AMD's cards don't seem as susceptible, they can be bottlenecked as well. For reference: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/cpus-and-games-2010_4.html#sect1

OP, I would wait for Sandy Bridge, as it's a substantial jump in performance over what's currently available. Also, I would wait for AMD's 6xxx series to drop in the next few weeks before buying a graphics card. First, see if the 6xxx series parts are something you'd want, second they'll drop prices on current hardware.
 
I dunno brother. That review doesnt really show much of a "bottleneck". Yes on some games, the GTX480 and 5970 perform better with a better CPU but I would hardly call a bottleneck as even with the i5, theyre returning framerates in the 90's! On the majority of the games though, there is virtually no difference between the i7 and i5.

So while a $500 i7 will let a $500 GPU perform a little faster, chances are youll never notice the difference.
 
What is your current video card?

I would say go with either a HD5870 or an GTX480. Your CPU is a bit old but it is still awesome by today's standards. Especially overclocked like it is.
 
I have a 8800 GT @ 745 but have already decided to wait until the 6xxx series shows its face. Thanks for all the responses.
 
leh18621 said:
GTX 460 1gb.

However, now isn't a good time to buy unless you have to. AMD is releasing new cards in three weeks, and overall prices should go down by November (hopefully).
Click to expand...

GTX 460 SLI you mean. A Q6600 over 3.0GHz is not going to be CPU bottlenecked in most games although there will be some like GTA IV.
 
Gym Rat said:
I dunno brother. That review doesnt really show much of a "bottleneck". Yes on some games, the GTX480 and 5970 perform better with a better CPU but I would hardly call a bottleneck as even with the i5, theyre returning framerates in the 90's! On the majority of the games though, there is virtually no difference between the i7 and i5.

So while a $500 i7 will let a $500 GPU perform a little faster, chances are youll never notice the difference.
Click to expand...
really what difference there was is more to do with clockspeed then being an i5 or i7 anyway. if that i5 would have been oced to 3.33 like the i7 they would have been basically dead even. the Q6600 at 3.4 is still pretty fast and plenty enough for any single gpu. only if trying to run high end SLI/Crossfire would the Q6600 at 3.4 show any noticeable deficit compared to the i5/i7 cpus.
 
The difference between the Q6600 at 3.4GHz and an i7 for multi GPU setups isn't enough to make a difference in playability, specially when with those tests shown, it never dips below 64fps with the i7 750 which at stock speed of 2.66GHz, should be as fast as the Q6600 at 3.20GHz.
 
I tried a GTX460 1GB SSC (633core) on my [email protected], and wasn't really impressed over my GTX260 stock (192 shaders). I think the drivers were just too crappy, and the card dumped massive heat into my case, the cores may run cool but the rest of the card emmits massive amounts of heat. I proabably would have kept the card if it weren't for some random video freezing in Bluray playback.
 
The fastest card is the GTX480, regardless of CPU, you will get the best performance out of this card.
 
cooter said:
The fastest card is the GTX480, regardless of CPU, you will get the best performance out of this card.
Click to expand...
regardless of cpu? um no. if you have a really crappy and slow cpu then a gtx480 is not going to do more for you than say a gtx470 or 460. it really just depends but you cant make a generalized statement like that. I have actually come across people on Steam forums with single core P4 cpus running cards like gtx260 and even a 5850. they could have bought a cheaper video card and gotten the exact same playable performance.
 
cooter said:
The fastest card is the GTX480, regardless of CPU, you will get the best performance out of this card.
Click to expand...

Thats quite wrong. Under powered CPU will give you under powered results with a high end card like the GTX 480. GTX 460 is a far better match for a Q6600.
 
Godmachine said:
Thats quite wrong. Under powered CPU will give you under powered results with a high end card like the GTX 480. GTX 460 is a far better match for a Q6600.
Click to expand...
at 1920x1200 and with a Q6600 at 3.4 he would most certainly be able to get most of what a gtx480 can offer. there is no reason to just stick with a gtx460 because of his cpu. now if it was at the stock speeds sure but at 3.4 its hardly a limitation at all.
 
Godmachine said:
Thats quite wrong. Under powered CPU will give you under powered results with a high end card like the GTX 480. GTX 460 is a far better match for a Q6600.
Click to expand...

Yeah, at 1440x900. I don't care what CPU you have - pushing Crysis, you're going to see a benefit from a better card, no matter what your CPU is (within reason, no PD's of course).
 
Mr. K6 said:
While I agree to wait for the 6xxx series, I want to point out that a Q6600, even at 3GHz, will heavily bottleneck modern high-end cards. The GTX 470 and GTX 480 are hit hardest, and although AMD's cards don't seem as susceptible, they can be bottlenecked as well. For reference: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/cpus-and-games-2010_4.html#sect1

OP, I would wait for Sandy Bridge, as it's a substantial jump in performance over what's currently available. Also, I would wait for AMD's 6xxx series to drop in the next few weeks before buying a graphics card. First, see if the 6xxx series parts are something you'd want, second they'll drop prices on current hardware.
Click to expand...

How does this article show "heavy bottleneck"?
You show i5 and i7 CPUs and various GPUs at various resolutions.....if you can tell a difference between 4-5 FPS during a game, more power to you.
The framerates are nearly identical across the board....except that they decrease as the resolution decreases.
Go big.

You can always wait for the next big thing. If I was you I'd buy a new GPU whatever flavor you like and run like crazy, you can always invest in a new MB and CPU and probably RAM as you save up....you'll always need the GPU.
 
I saw a guy with a Pentium 4 3.0GHz and a GeForce 8800GTS 320, and my old computer which had a Pentium M at 2.70GHz and a Radeon X1950XT, had better performance, Pentium 4's has ver lousy gaming performance.
 
The Oatman said:
So I am still considering whether to upgrade my system now or wait until sandy bridge. If I were to hold on to my Q6600 @ 3.4 for as long as possible, and I wanted to upgrade my video card before everything else, what would be the fastest GPU I could get that would not be held back (too much) by my CPU @ 1920x1200?
Click to expand...

in terms of playability your not going to see much of any kind of bottleneck. this is a way over done issue here. The truth is that most games still do just fine with a medium grade dual core CPU. look at it this way. your CPU is almost on par with with the current phenom lines (sad isn't it?) and the truth is that they game just fine. now if your going multi gpu or the like then I would worry about it (crossfire does much better on an i7).

I would wait a couple of weeks though, right know everyone seems to be trying to get the 5800 out of inventory at regular prices. so I am sure that the rumors of the 6700 is probably true.
 
The only game you'll have problems with is GTA IV. That's it. Pretty much everything else will not be bottlenecked with a Q6600 @ 3.4GHz.
 
Godmachine said:
Thats quite wrong. Under powered CPU will give you under powered results with a high end card like the GTX 480. GTX 460 is a far better match for a Q6600.
Click to expand...

At stock speeds, yes, but not at overclocked speeds in the 3.3-3.4GHz range.
 
frame rates are still far above playable even if you are bottle necked slightly. 5-7 frames doesn't mean squat when your well into the 70 and 80fps range.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top