Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Video Cards' started by jnick, May 10, 2016.
2600 OC'd and single GPU? Yeah definitely go for it.
I think you'll be fine especially at 1080p. I would say get the 1070. Unless you plan on getting a used 970 or 980 which seem to be dropping quite a bit with the announcement of the 1080/1070. For me I did upgrade to a Z77 motherboard years ago and it seemed liked my overclocking was better and more stable with my 2600k when compared to my previous P67 motherboard. But seeing the price of Z77 motherboards lately I would say stick with the P67 for now.
I finally upgraded recently, from an i5 750 to an i7 6700k. The minimum frame rates and stuttering were terrible, and that's the real benefit of moving to a new processor. You may be able to have high frame rates a lot of the time, even with an older CPU such as the i5 750, but the real advantage of newer processors is not only the higher average frame rate, but most importantly the higher minimum frame rate, and complete lack of the related slowdown and stutter.
A lot of people don't seem to notice or mind the difference, but I'm extremely sensitive to this sort of thing, so I guess it depends on where you fall along the spectrum. Personally I can hardly stand anything under 90 FPS, though I can notice a difference until about 110 - 120 or so.
I'm talking about something like a i7-930 and up. The 750 is 50% less powerfull than this i7. For most games a CPU upgrade will offer the worst price/performance upgrade. And GPU upgrade will be the best price/performance upgrade.
you moved from an i5 , that's why you got a good increase.. OP already has an i7 , he wont see nearly as much improvement and its hardly worth it.
I am in a similar boat as the OP, but I am coming from an un-overclockable Core i7-2600 @ 3.4Ghz. My big issue is that I can't seem to use any newer GPU than my GTX 760. SO I am constrained on both ends. For background this was a prebuilt Lenovo which I had bought because I was just tired of building up complete rigs and wanted something I could pull out of a box and just run. I bought it at the time just to run MS SQL-Server and converted it to my desktop machine (replacing a Core i7-860 HP used previously).
I am finding a renewed interest in building a new PC again. I have moved into doing quite a bit of 3D CAD work and finding that rendering on the 2600 is just a bit slow. I have also had a renewed interest in some gaming (I don't play many FPS types of games, mostly stuff where I can explore or sneak around). I managed to snag a Core i7-6700K on RetailEdge this time around and I am seriously looking at maybe doing something with Crossfire or at least moving to a current generation single GPU. I am hoping to gain a significant amount of performance over my current rig. I still have yet to decide on MB/RAM/Storage/Cooling, but am leaning toward Asus Sabertooth, PCI-2400, SSD only, Water respectively.
I too was wondering if my expectations were needing to be reset, since I just don't know what to expect from the i7-6700K.
Skip upgrading this gen and go for the GPU. I don't see any especially CPU demanding coming this year and next year, you'll be fine.
You can always turn up the settings to shift the bottleneck to the GPU by the way. DSR, ReShade and ENBs really help with that.
It might be a slight bottleneck in some games but not enough to really matter IMO. Any game that makes decent use of many cores/threads will be fine.
The few games that still only use 2 cores (like ARMA 3) you will probably be CPU limited, but even upgrading to the newest CPU doesn't get you a ton of extra single-threaded performance. I am still waiting and hoping Intel makes a socketed Kaby Lake or Cannonlake CPU with eDRAM (which seems to improve single-thread performance quite a bit) then I might finally get rid of my 2500K/Sandy Bridge.
I would just upgrade the RAM to 16GB and of course a video card, assuming it's pretty dated if you haven't used it for gaming for the last several years. CPU is fine, I don't think the chipset will hold you back much really. I'd avoid SLI, not because of the chipset but because of inherent issues with SLI. Doom for example doesn't even support it.
I wouldn't upgrade cpu right now. At least wait until AMD's Zen processor comes out and then decide
doom is going to support SLI.
According to the doom thread, there seems to be issue with getting 3 way sli to work, but 2 way seems to be working. It seems to be decent scaling with sli though not great.
It's not really much of an issue though.
PCIE-2.0 vs 3.0
Gotta love Russians
You'll see the largest increase in performance from your GPU, RAM is also very cheap right now if you're interested
Just spend the money on a GPU upgrade. You'll be fine. I run CPUs ranging from Sandy Bridge up to Haswell. Can't tell a difference unless the GPUs are different.
/looks at cheat sheet
/looks at signature
/hangs head in shame
I think you are fine. I have a nearly identical system with an AMD 7970 and it does everything I need and then some. It can feed a faster video card just fine (I've done it).
Bear in mind, that list was for gaming and geared towards keeping a system for the next year or two. Now, if you have a Q9550, you're very close to the top end of what that platform can provide. The thing about Core 2 Quads is that you really can't overclock most of them very well unless you're lucky and get a good motherboard, and a good processor. But Sandy Bridge can generally be overclocked enough to remain competitive with newer processors, if you find that stock speeds aren't enough.
Your system is competitive with a lower-end, locked i5. Now, if you upgraded to any i7 processor... you would be future-proofed for a long time. When I say you're "pushing it," what I mean is that you're getting by today, but only just. You're using the absolute oldest generation of processors you could get away with before I called it totally inadequate for modern gaming. It's roughly equivalent to AMD's offerings. For reference, the OP's 2600k gets almost twice the performance of your CPU at slock.
Remember, your processor came out in 2008. The fact that you can still use this and not be certain that it's obsolete is a testament to how mind-warpingly slow things are moving now. It's gone from being a field where things are changing all the time, to the tech equivalent of having to listen to people talk about how old cars are better than new ones because they're made in the USA, easier to repair, and don't have electronics and tracking in them. That's the kind of thinking that prevails now.
It will help with min frames.
yeah, the pentium 4 had hyperthreading, too. i guess i should have upgraded to one of those.
...first of all, that was my post, so no idea how it's being quoted as "lapaloma11". Second, those are my minimum frames. As in, I get more than 60FPS in those titles. Practically all the time. I have a 60Hz display because I prioritize color quality over panel speed. High minimum frames are irrelevant to me so long as it doesn't dip below 60.
But it only had one core. Hyperthreading is more helpful with the i7, because it has four cores and has two threads on each one... allowing it to be as effective as an 8-core processor for some purposes.
There is no Z67 chipset and the PCI-E limitations are on the CPU, not on the chipset, I have the Z68 chipset and when I sidegraded from the 2600K to the 3770K, I got PCI-E 3.0 support. PCI-E performance scaling is overrated. Even PCI-E 2.0 at 4X, barely gets a dent on a Fury X or GTX 980 Ti.
I meant Z68, sorry. I was thinking of P67 and Z77. And I thought the way it worked was that you had to have both a Z77 chipset AND an Ivy Bridge CPU. That is, if you had either a Z68 and an Ivy Bridge, or a Sandy Bridge and a Z77, you would be limited to PCI-E 2.0. I was pretty sure some of the PCI-E lanes were provided by the chipset and not by the CPU, although the first 16x slot is definitely CPU powered.
But what you're saying is... I could hypothetically drop an Ivy Bridge CPU into any old Sandy Bridge motherboard and get PCI-E 3.0 if I wanted it? Or is that just on the Z68?
Thanks for correcting that, it's been too long...
It worked for me like that, but apparently the P77 chipset could be a different story.
FAQ: Does my P67/Z68 motherboard(s) support PCI Express 3.0?
I'd upgrade the GPU. That CPU still holds up with even new games except maybe GTA V. Specially on if you're only running 1080p. I've been playing with this setup for quite sometimes now with 1440p and soon 3840x1440p since I just ordered the new ASUS P34 monitor. I have no doubt that it will run most of the games I play to at least over 60+ fps G-sync
I explained to you why you saw an increase and you make some stupid fucking remark?
Thats real mature of you pal...you have any more retarded shit to share with us?
damn dude i've gotten infractions for less than that. it's what everyone's thinking though, i like it.
Crosshairs is an admin... so I don't see the ban hammer coming down any time soon. Plus you know, there's the part where he's right.
As you said. We were all thinking it.
My friend recently upgraded his core2quad to an i3 w/ 16GB ram and new motherboard for under $200 for a pretty good budget system. I gave him my old GTX 580, and he went from 4 fps playing rust to about 50 fps (this is at a less than 1920x1080 resolution).
I believe that an admin should hold composure and behave by leading example, and not doing cussing like this cause that is the kind of stuff that gives us infraction points, and then how an admin can get away with it?
if you were running what I am AM3+ chipset or the older LGA775, then by all means held back a great deal, but 2600k cpu on any chipset that can handle it, I would consider modern, so the differences will be small enough, and pci-E 2.0 @x16 or 3.0 @x8 link speed is ample, now if running at x8 or x4 then yes held back, but is full speed operation, so difference likely small anyways, IMO you would be getting majority of the raw performance that can be had anyways, but hey, its your $ to waste lining pockets of Intel or chasing that ultimate performance(even if wasteful) dream
I wonder what the original poster actually did with his system, we all are clearly eager to find out
1) no one has ever received an infraction for cursing in a thread, unless it was in a thread title .
2) you want me to respect you, then you respect me.
3) if you get stupid with me, you can expect me to get stupid back..I'm not here to be abused.
4) I broke no rules , I just spoke my mind.
If infractions were given out for swearing in threads... I would have been banned years ago.
2600k was a great CPU but it's not the mythical beast it's made out to be. That award goes to the 3930K.
There's already a number of games that take advantage of 6 cores and with DX12 around the corner there's the potential that higher core CPU's will deliver even more. If it's within your budget I'd suggest considering a broadwell E once the reviews come out. As others have mentioned it will prevent and reduce frame pits which you'll definitely want to avoid in BF1 64 players.
...and if you aren't playing BF 1 or GTA V (like most of us) it won't matter. At all.
In other words, don't spend on what you don't give a fuck about, OP.
Listen man, I'm not saying that OP specifically mentioned that he'll be playing BF1 but.....well.......he literally put that in the OP.
The person wasn't even replying to you, I think like I said before, back then in 2009 I got two infractions due to cursing, so time changes it seems, still quite unprofessional, but just speaking out my mind.
Sometimes I appear a little hot headed myself here. While it may seem that way, I'm actually quite cool and level. I just can't believe the stupidity of some comments so I lace some strong words in to emphasize this. Sometimes you have to, to get your point across. But...there are some comments that are either so trollish or so stupid they deserve the, "I'm not even going to waste my time that comment was so stupid" reply because I know this person is completely a dunderhead on the given subject.