Thinking about replacing my 6950, need advice.

ashmelev75

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
1,796
I'm thinking about replacing my video card with either R9 280x or 290.

Current system:
M/B: Asus P6T Deluxe v2 (x58)
CPU: Intel i7-920 3.2GHz
RAM: 12GB
Video: XFX 6950 with unlocked shaders.

The system is used for gaming (BF4 and other stuff) at 1920x1200 resolution.

Is it a good idea to replace the video card now or wait for whatever AMD/Nvidia may come up next year?
Does the XFX (or any other brand) 280x or 290 come with regular firmware or the UEFI crap?
 

Araxie

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
6,455
Nvidia will probably not launch Big Maxwell until Q1 2015 and R9 Series are too recent launch (even the rebranded 7000 Series) to think in any new series of card soon.. for 1920x1200 if you can find any 290 at a good price then take it, if not the 280X will do a amazing job at that resolution.. also i would be thinking in overclock a little more that 920 :)
 

jojo69

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
11,122
I'm waiting

X58 with 69xx has had just stellar staying power, tough it out and let the script mining ASICs saturate that market, I'm betting next gen cards will be more affordable anyway.
 

Yakk

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 5, 2010
Messages
5,810
I have a couple x58 systems and only upgraded my 5870 because I had spare cards from mining. As mentioned the x58 and 58xx & 69xx cards are still very good value today.

A 290 if you'd like more vram, otherwise I'd wait.

And ... that 920 is begging to be oc'd some more! ;)
 

ashmelev75

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
1,796
also i would be thinking in overclock a little more that 920
that 920 is begging to be oc'd some more!

Yeah, yeah... but i7-920 @ 3.2GHz is optimal from the heat/performance standpoint. I don't see CPU utilization going anywhere over 60% when I play BF4.

So in short, there should be no issue with just plugging in a new 290 card unless it explicitly stated to come with UEFI firmware?

As I see, a new 280x with good cooling is about $380 after taxes and 290 is about $500... that's been a very long time since I spent that kind of money on a video card.
 

Mr. K6

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
5,077
No point in getting a 290 for BF4 if you're sticking to the i7 920, you'll see a small fraction of what it's actually capable. I would look into getting a cheap used 7950 or 7970 now that mining cards are hitting the market and driving prices down. You should be able to score one for <$200 and that should hold you over until the next generation.
 

Mr. K6

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
5,077
^ small fraction?
really?
:rolleyes:
My 2500K @ 5.0GHz limits my 7970 @ 2560x1600 in BF4, how well do you think he's going to fair with an almost 6 year old CPU? Use your heads, kids.
 

Araxie

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
6,455
My 2500K @ 5.0GHz limits my 7970 @ 2560x1600 in BF4, how well do you think he's going to fair with an almost 6 year old CPU? Use your heads, kids.

cool story bro.. :rolleyes:

a 2500K limiting a single 7970?.. damn.. :confused: and at 2560x1600?? its that statement serious?:eek:. a 2500K will not even make any limit Xfired 290X(well yes only if running the PCI2.0 at x8) and you came to say that it limit you at 2560x1600 a single 7970?.. the limit that at resolution its the 7970 not the CPU.. GOD.. things that one have to read this days.. U_U.. :(

i have to ask again.. so the old 7970 being bottle-necked by a 5Ghz 2500K..? :eek:
 

Araxie

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
6,455
ahhh IDK but in the next image i see a stock i7 920 (2.66ghz) at 1920x1200 with a 290X where the CPU have a heavy job than a 2560x1600 performing at 4FPS of average difference from a i7 4960X whats thats mean?. the 4960X its limiting too the 290X as the 5ghz 2500K limit your 7970?... whats next? the CPU load at 2560x1600 its higher than 1920x1200?? the limiting factor at 2560x1600 its the CPU?. tell me bud, whats next.. please enlighten me.. ;)

CPU_01.png
 

Mr. K6

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
5,077
ahhh IDK but in the next image i see a stock i7 920 (2.66ghz) at 1920x1200 with a 290X where the CPU have a heavy job than a 2560x1600 performing at 4FPS of average difference from a i7 4960X whats thats mean?. the 4960X its limiting too the 290X as the 5ghz 2500K limit your 7970?... whats next? the CPU load at 2560x1600 its higher than 1920x1200?? the limiting factor at 2560x1600 its the CPU?. tell me bud, whats next.. please enlighten me.. ;)
That's a single player chart, it says so in the beginning of the review, are you an idiot? BF4 multiplayer has been established as the benchmark for CPU performance because it's so intensive, or are you suggesting he should only play single player since that's all the data you're showing? Next time pull your head out of your ass and read the article you're posting instead of trying to be cute.
 

jackstar7

Gawd
Joined
Jan 7, 2012
Messages
568
With Mantle, a 290 would likely show big gains for you.

I have no idea what all the bickering is about.
 

DraginDime

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 12, 2012
Messages
1,464
I thought Mantle helped to reduce the load put on the CPU? Or am I just crazy?
 

ashmelev75

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
1,796
No point in getting a 290 for BF4 if you're sticking to the i7 920, you'll see a small fraction of what it's actually capable.

Honestly, not sure what you were smoking.
Got XFX 290 DD black edition, played BF4. The lowest FPS I saw while playing was about 50. With my old 6950 and lower quality settings the lowest FPS was about 15.

Anyway, very happy with the purchase.
 

jackstar7

Gawd
Joined
Jan 7, 2012
Messages
568
Honestly, not sure what you were smoking.
Got XFX 290 DD black edition, played BF4. The lowest FPS I saw while playing was about 50. With my old 6950 and lower quality settings the lowest FPS was about 15.

Anyway, very happy with the purchase.

That is the kind of gains I would expect, too. I'm assuming you're using Mantle now?
 

Mr. K6

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
5,077
Honestly, not sure what you were smoking.
Got XFX 290 DD black edition, played BF4. The lowest FPS I saw while playing was about 50. With my old 6950 and lower quality settings the lowest FPS was about 15.

Anyway, very happy with the purchase.
Wow, three times the GPU power gave you higher FPS? You must be a wizard.

Doesn't really change what I said, does it? Laying down $450+ on a GPU that won't see near its full potential because you're using a six year old CPU is replacing one bottleneck with another. Your money, spend it how you like.
 

ccityinstaller

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
4,241
Wow, three times the GPU power gave you higher FPS? You must be a wizard.

Doesn't really change what I said, does it? Laying down $450+ on a GPU that won't see near its full potential because you're using a six year old CPU is replacing one bottleneck with another. Your money, spend it how you like.

While I understand what you were trying (quite rudely) to say, you are ignoring quite a few things here. He is using Mantle, which is designed to remove the cpu as a bottleneck. Also, the first gen I7s aren't exactly lacking in IPC, but I agree if he were to take it to 4Ghz he would see much better gains in DirectX 11 games.
 

dmoney1980

Gawd
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Messages
533
I had a i7 920 OC''d and paried with a 280x. My cpu utilization in 64 player maps never crossed 70%. Hell I even bought a xeon 5639, ran it at a lower clock and paired that with the 280x and was never bottlenecked. Multiplayer in bf4 is cpu heavy, but in no way will a 920 hold a 280 back. It's not like he'll be running 2 or 3 GPU's here.

Oh and the comment about a 2500k at 5GHZ bottlenecking a 7970 @1600p is just not true. That 2500k, at that clock, will do exactly what a 3930k cpu at stock will do in BF4 multiplayer with a single GPU. Current games, BF4 included, still can't take advantage of more than 4 cores.
 

Mr. K6

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
5,077
While I understand what you were trying (quite rudely) to say, you are ignoring quite a few things here. He is using Mantle, which is designed to remove the cpu as a bottleneck. Also, the first gen I7s aren't exactly lacking in IPC, but I agree if he were to take it to 4Ghz he would see much better gains in DirectX 11 games.
If people are hostile I respond in kind, not sure why that was so unsettling for you. Mantle's a toss-up until it's more developed. I haven't played with it since the graphical glitches in 14.2 (IIRC), if it improves, it will be a game changer for CPU's that were lacking.
I had a i7 920 OC''d and paried with a 280x. My cpu utilization in 64 player maps never crossed 70%. Hell I even bought a xeon 5639, ran it at a lower clock and paired that with the 280x and was never bottlenecked. Multiplayer in bf4 is cpu heavy, but in no way will a 920 hold a 280 back. It's not like he'll be running 2 or 3 GPU's here.

Oh and the comment about a 2500k at 5GHZ bottlenecking a 7970 @1600p is just not true. That 2500k, at that clock, will do exactly what a 3930k cpu at stock will do in BF4 multiplayer with a single GPU. Current games, BF4 included, still can't take advantage of more than 4 cores.
There's very little in this post that's correct. Playing the game and looking at CPU usage in the task manager is not how you determine a CPU bottleneck; you have to look at the time graph while playing. If you properly analyzed BF4 with the in-game fps graph, it's clear as day when the CPU bottlenecks the GPU. It happens often on my system and I guarantee it happens often on yours as well. Secondly, the OP hasn't overclocked the 920, hence the original discussion. Finally, BF4 can take advantage of 6+ cores, you need to do more research.
 

dmoney1980

Gawd
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Messages
533
If people are hostile I respond in kind, not sure why that was so unsettling for you. Mantle's a toss-up until it's more developed. I haven't played with it since the graphical glitches in 14.2 (IIRC), if it improves, it will be a game changer for CPU's that were lacking.

There's very little in this post that's correct. Playing the game and looking at CPU usage in the task manager is not how you determine a CPU bottleneck; you have to look at the time graph while playing. If you properly analyzed BF4 with the in-game fps graph, it's clear as day when the CPU bottlenecks the GPU. It happens often on my system and I guarantee it happens often on yours as well. Secondly, the OP hasn't overclocked the 920, hence the original discussion. Finally, BF4 can take advantage of 6+ cores, you need to do more research.

I was referring to cores, not threads. I've done my research I have experienced BF4 on an i7 920, xeon 5639, and my current cpu -4820k at 4.5ghz. I can tell you that at 1440p, with my 280x, there was no cpu bottleneck on any of those CPU's.

The fx 8350 does well with bf4, and HT seems to be a mixed bag. BF4 will use 6 cores / threads pretty well. Regarding cpu utilization - you are correct that it will not show bottlenecks, but it is a good indicator of usage. Fact is the higher rez you play at, the more gpu you need. Since you play at 1600p, I bet that GPU is your bottleneck, not your 5ghz cpu. But we can agree to disagree....
 
Top