Pairing a modern GPU to a Q9650

kent

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 8, 2001
Messages
2,603
Which modern GPU is not too overkill for a Q9650? Gave my friend an old SSD and upgraded the processor.

Lower resolution gaming acceptable like 1366x768

Thanks!!
 
at that res a 270x sounds about right. although for the price might as well get a 280/280x.
 
Last edited:
I would check out used cards, like a 670, 680, or even a 690 (dual-GPU card). The main limitation of these cards is the 2GB of VRam, but if you know that you are going to be playing at low resolutions, then it isn't an issue. Many newer mid-range cards like the 960 also only have 2GB VRam. The 600 series isn't as old as it's name might suggest, as the 600 series was re-branded into the 700 series, and there was no 800 series. The 680 is faster than a 960 in most games and can be had for bargain prices used.
 
750 ti sounds good for you like the above posters said! And defaultluser is right to mention the UEFI issue, with a CPU like yours the mobo has to be pretty ancient as well so some modern cards might not work well (or not work at all) with it.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, Crossfire is only for people who can't afford enough performance in a single card, or they'd rather pay for two upper-midrange card rather than one high-end card.

Also, compared to SLI, Crossfire scaling is much more iffy from game to game.

You can easily afford a single powerful GPU.
 
Well according to AnandTech, your Q9650 is just about on par with a Sandy i3 2100 when it comes to gaming (scroll to bottom for gaming benchmarks).

It appears the gaming benchmarks were done on a GTX 280. GTX 280 is about equal to 460, which is 10% behind a 650 Ti.

Given how old your CPU is, I probably wouldn't bother upgrading at all since you'll be CPU bottlenecked like crazy especially at lower resolutions. Here's a nice summary on how much bottlenecking you can expect in different games (just compare the i3 2100 results with the i5 and i7 chips) If you must upgrade, this GTX 750 for $70 after rebate is your best bet, assuming it has a legacy bios. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127788&cm_re=gt_750-_-14-127-788-_-Product.
 
Last edited:
I don't know what GPU you're using currently, but your money would be better spent on a higher resolution display if your maximum is 1366x768.
 
My q9550 was originally paired with a 5850.

Last year I replaced the 5850 with an R9 280 and I could NOT be more pleased that my almost 8 year old motherboard/system is still able to run current games very well.

I think I paid $180 last year, so you can probably find a used one for $100 or less.
 
My q9550 was originally paired with a 5850.

Last year I replaced the 5850 with an R9 280 and I could NOT be more pleased that my almost 8 year old motherboard/system is still able to run current games very well.

I think I paid $180 last year, so you can probably find a used one for $100 or less.

Not surprised in the least. The CPU bottleneck idea is heavily overplayed.
 
It depends on the game, in general MMO and RTS games will suffer the most, but there can be exceptions.

35040.png


20 FPS or a 25% deficit is not exactly trivial.
 
In my experience the CPU bottleneck is actually not overplayed at all when talking about older or AMD CPUs (I mean modern AMD vs modern Intel CPUs). Massive difference in many games, notably on minimum framerates which is crucial.
 
In my experience the CPU bottleneck is actually not overplayed at all when talking about older or AMD CPUs (I mean modern AMD vs modern Intel CPUs). Massive difference in many games, notably on minimum framerates which is crucial.

While I certainly might easily obtain 25% in framerates simply by changing out my motherboard and cpu, that's $300 or more I don't have to spend for the time being.
 
Another vote for a 750ti. Cheap, powerful, and since you are buying new, you get a warranty and piece of mind.
 
Another vote for a 750ti. Cheap, powerful, and since you are buying new, you get a warranty and piece of mind.

We can only speak for ourselves, but that card would be worthless for someone like myself before or after a cpu upgrade...but thats just me lol:D
 
While I certainly might easily obtain 25% in framerates simply by changing out my motherboard and cpu, that's $300 or more I don't have to spend for the time being.

And there's nothing wrong with that, it's not like it makes it completely worthless to have a strong GPU.
 
Things to consider:
Buying a used card will save you a lot of money and ensure compatibility with older systems.

HOWEVER:
Driver updates are usually for newer cards only. Do a google search on when mainstream driver updates are expected to end for a particular model. Main stream support is typically 2 years. End of support is usually 5 years.

ALSO, if you buy a newer card, it very well might overpower your CPU by quite a bit. But if you plan on upgrading your CPU/motherboard in the next year or two, it might be worth it to buy it now so that the transition to a newer system will be easier money wise.
 
As Griffin said, you need to consider what you will be doing in the future...are you planning on upgrading or keeping this computer as it is?
 
For what its worth, my brother's PC was a Q9550 and a GTX 560 then upgraded to an R9 290. He was able to run Heroes Of The Storm on max settings on a 1080p 120Hz display whereas it struggled on high with the GTX 560.
 
This all depends on the games you play. I went from a 3570K to a 2600K clocked at the same speed and no other change in hardware. My Hitman Absolution benchmark went from 62 average FPS to 79 average FPS.
 
Just get the best card you can afford. If and when you upgrade the CPU/MB, you'll already have a nice GPU to go with it. Deliberately buying a less powerful GPU due to worries about bottlenecking is silly, especially since AMD CPU's have fallen so far behind Intel that they've only now caught up with the Q9xxx series clock-for-clock. Developers aren't going to code their games so that AMD users are left out in the cold, so neither will you be. You might get more FPS with a faster CPU, but there won't be many games where you would have to drastically reduce resolution or settings, especially if you overclock your Q9650 close to 4 GHz.
 
Just get the best card you can afford. If and when you upgrade the CPU/MB, you'll already have a nice GPU to go with it. Deliberately buying a less powerful GPU due to worries about bottlenecking is silly, especially since AMD CPU's have fallen so far behind Intel that they've only now caught up with the Q9xxx series clock-for-clock. Developers aren't going to code their games so that AMD users are left out in the cold, so neither will you be. You might get more FPS with a faster CPU, but there won't be many games where you would have to drastically reduce resolution or settings, especially if you overclock your Q9650 close to 4 GHz.
No its not always silly in general. It is idiotic to buy a top gpu that will perform like a mid range gpu if the cpu is a huge limitation. If someone takes months or years to upgrade their cpu then they will have accomplished nothing during that time over having a cheaper gpu. By the time they can fully utilize a high end gpu, there will be cards just as fast for a fraction of the cost.
 
I would second the notion for the 750ti or 960 cards. The 960 is a bit overpriced, but has great power usage.

As far as buying an ultra high end gpu goes, while you might bottleneck, if you have plans on upgrading your cpu/mobo in the near future, at least you wouldn't have to upgrade the gpu as well. However, if you never intend on upgrading the cpu/mobo, then what misterbobby said will hold true in your case.
 
Back
Top