Which card upgrade for a Q6600 stock? opinions needed

N

NIKOKAPS

n00b
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
5
I have a system with these specs which needs a new videocard opinion...

q6600 stock (G0)
x38 mb
6gb 800
8800gtx 768 which I want to upgrade.
1920x1080 gaming resolution.

This system only has a 425W power supply.

Do I get a gtx295 which will work with my low power supply?
Or get a new power supply for cards such as the gtx460 or gtx470? hd6950?

I know my cpu will bottleneck these cards, what really is the best option for this system?
 
Last edited:
You really need to overclock the Q6600.
I think every Q6600 ( B3 or G0) can be overclocked to 3.2ghz minimum.
I have a B3 step with high VID and it is overclocked to 3.4ghz with no problem. I have a GTX460 overclocked by 25% and and PSU of 450W (Corsair VX450 80+)

Your PSU will be enough for a 460gtx or radeon 6850 if it a good brand or certified 80+.

And please you have to OC that Q6600 :), and it should last for another few years...My 460gtx is even not powerful enough for my Q6600 in 1080p...

You can even go with a 6950 if you overclock your q6600 to 3.2ghz or more :)
 
definitely overclock. I just sold a q6600 system with 4890 in it. Ran great! I OC'd with SetFSB to 3.2Ghz STABLE ~60C full load!
 
Danny Bui said:
Which 425W PSU do yo have?
Click to expand...

I failed to mention this system is a dell xps420 so overclocking can not be achieved through the dell bios. And the 425W PSU is also dell branded. I do remember back when this system came out an 8800GTX needed at least a 475W PSU to function. Leaving me scratching my head to why its working with this system configuration.
 
NIKOKAPS said:
I failed to mention this system is a dell xps420 so overclocking can not be achieved through the dell bios.
Click to expand...

BSEL mod it. It supports 1333mhz FSB's so the 1333mhz BSEL mod will give you 3ghz.

If you don't have a conductive trace repair kit, buy a window defroster repair kit ( $10 - $15 ) and just draw a trace where the red line is on your CPU's BSEL pads. That or use aluminum foil and a small dap of super glue ( on the outter edge only ) to hold the foil in place but make sure you are very precise in cutting the foil and install the CPU very gently so the foil doesn't shift.

10661333.jpg


After you get more speed out of yor CPU I would say a used 1gb HD 4870/4890 or GTX 260 Core 216 which can be had between $70 and $100 shipped and should run off of any PSU that can power an 8800GTX.
 
Last edited:
I have a Radeon HD6850 and it doesn't use much power. Therefore, I'd say the 6850 or 6870 with a really good aftermarket-type modified cooler.

Here's some examples of power usage I've gotten, as measured from the wall with an 80plus bronze PSU.

Idle: 57
CPU full load: 107
Gaming: 160 W
Full CPU/GPU load: 230 W

That will easily fit within your envelope.

Most people will disagree with me, but a lot of people GROSSLY overestimate the capacity of the power supply they need.

Good luck with the Dell PS though. Last time I messed with them, they were junk. Not even good enough to be 80+ certified, loud, short lifespan, etc...
 
is it worth getting a new PSU for something like a gtx470 or hd6950, and transfer over my 425W PSU and 8800gtx over to an old pentium d 820 which could really use a halfway decent vidcard?
 
i just got a gtx560ti with my q6600 at 3,2ghz,runs all games fast,
 
Your Dell case may not be compatible with an ATX power supply. Ask me how I know.... :)
 
NIKOKAPS said:
is it worth getting a new PSU for something like a gtx470 or hd6950, and transfer over my 425W PSU and 8800gtx over to an old pentium d 820 which could really use a halfway decent vidcard?
Click to expand...
a gtx470 or 6950 would really be held back by your stock Q6600. just get something like a 6850 and your stock psu will be fine. a 6850 uses even less power than your 8800gtx and is about 75-80% faster in cases where your cpu is not the limitation.
 
I disagree about the 6950 being held back by a stock q6600. I have that set up currently and I can play all games at max settings with 60-100 frames per second. On games like Battlefield Bad Company 2, Stalker - Pripyat, Just Cause. I get high frame rates in all on max settings so go for the top one it will make a big difference. I game on 1650 x 1080. I recently moved up from a 3870 that was giving me 25-30 frames on almost all high settings.
 
DANCRYST said:
I disagree about the 6950 being held back by a stock q6600. I have that set up currently and I can play all games at max settings with 60-100 frames per second. On games like Battlefield Bad Company 2, Stalker - Pripyat, Just Cause. I get high frame rates in all on max settings so go for the top one it will make a big difference. I game on 1650 x 1080. I recently moved up from a 3870 that was giving me 25-30 frames on almost all high settings.
Click to expand...

You did not just compare an HD 3870 which was barely on par with a 9600GT to a 6950. You were GPU limited before at that res so your FPS boost was manily moving quite a few times the speed of your HD 3870 ahead.

The Q6600 will be a bottleneck in modern games at 2.4ghz before a modern video card will be.

You guys may not have made that part clear but think of this OP, games use much more CPU power now than they did 2 - 4 years ago and your Q6600 @ stock will honestly become a limiting facter before a video card like an HD 4870 1gb or GTX 280 would. Of course going with a faster card will always net you higher FPS to a point but if I were you I wouild seriously, seriously try to software OC or BSEL mod your Q6600 to 3ghz THEN try the same games you were playing and see what that 8800GTX can really do with more data being pumped from the CPU faster.

Your 8800GTX really isn't that far behind an HD 4870 512mb card with enough CPU power to let it shine which it doesn't have yet.

Get your CPU OC'd first then give that 8800GTX a second chance and you'll have a better idea on how much more GPU power you actually need once you aleviate your CPU speed issue.
 
I can see overclocking will help make an older card like a 8800gtx or 4870 or even the 3870, which I was not comparing to a 6950, better. But if he wants a better experience in games he does not really need to upgrade to a new processor or even overclock. The graphics card alone will be enough. It amazes me that people need everything to be the absolute fastest. Their is not much difference between 60-70 FPS and 80-100 FPS if everything is on max settings. It is just a mental thing where people think it will look so much better if they get higher FPS. As long as you have at least 60 FPS you are good and a 6950 on a Stock Q6600 provides that in most games unless you are on multiple monitors or over 1080p and even then you can turn down a few settings and still get above 60. Most games will actually play fine down to 45 FPS. So why does everyone insist on Overclocking and maxing everything out. It is just not necessary unless you need it to boost your ego.
 
If you really think the above, you might be in the wrong forum lol.

Try running BFbc2 at stock clocks on a 32 man server and see how that goes.

To be helpful, in order to get the most of what you have:

Buy a used mobo for $40, use the dell mobo as a frisbee.

Install your 6600, ram and whatever gpu you decide on and oc the crap out of it.

That is what I would do if the budget was tight.

Otherwise, save up for a new system with a 2500. It will run nicely at stock.
 
spaceman said:
If you really think the above, you might be in the wrong forum lol.

Try running BFbc2 at stock clocks on a 32 man server and see how that goes.

To be helpful, in order to get the most of what you have:

Buy a used mobo for $40, use the dell mobo as a frisbee.

Install your 6600, ram and whatever gpu you decide on and oc the crap out of it.

That is what I would do if the budget was tight.

Otherwise, save up for a new system with a 2500. It will run nicely at stock.
Click to expand...

^ That's what I'd do too.
 
I can see if you are playing it online with others but some of us are ok playing the single player campaign.
I do think getting away from the dell motherboard and upgrading the power supply are both good Ideas but
the need to overclock till the max is not necessary unless he is gaming at an extreme level. From the looks of his system he is not looking to do that. So stock or a mild overclock and a good new graphics card will most likely be sufficient for him unless he is looking at online gaming or at high resolution then in that case a large overclock or a whole new system is warranted.
 
Okay Dan, you can leave now.

He will be gaming at 1920x1080 and at that resolution a faster video card will help but the CPU will becme a limiting factor, kinda like how the CPU directly affects AA performance.

OP, I'm running a Q6600 @ 3ghz with a 1gb GTS 250 @ stock and if you tell me what game/s you are playing I will see if I can get ahold of them to test with stock speed and 3ghz as my video card is about on par with yours.

Sadly the best res I can put out is 1680x1050 with my LCD TV but I will be able to let you know roughly how bottlenecked you might be.as I can test at lower resolutions.

I can definently say that the 512mb 8800GTS I had before was good but when I OC'd my Q6600 to 3ghz it got a lot better at Mass Effect 2, Fallout 3 took a nice increase in minimum FPS and allowed me more AA out of the same card as well on Ultra Detail. The only reason I upgraded was to get more vram to run the Fallout 3 HD mod which uses 700mb+ vram :)

CPU speed most definently matters with newer games and helps older more intensive games be pushed to the max.

Ever wonder why video card review use heavuly OC'd i7's? Kinda hard to show off a new video card when the framerate is cut to almosty 60% because you are using an old slow dual-core or quad-core. It has been proven a few times over that at 1920x1080 the CPU becomes a limiting facter in most newer games.

Get the CPU to 3ghz ( not a [H]ardCore OC by any means for a Q6600 ) and give that 8800GTX another shot and you WILL have a better idea of how far you actually need to go with a new video card if you even have to with the extra 600mhz per core.


Oh, on a side note, @ 3ghz I cannot load 30 bots on CoD4 without lagging which is why I will be OverClocking my CPU even further :) those lil SOAB's use quite a few cpu clocks. The greedy bastages. But that goes to show you that enough ai characters on a level at any given time can impact your gaming performance with a weak enough CPU as the ai uses your CPU to calculate and recalculate its next move, not your video card. That will be true on any game where the ai characters are not linear.
 
Last edited:
so lets say my idle temp on my Q6600 stock is about 32C and 45C on load, if i go ahead and BSEL my CPU, would my stock cooling be enough? Also my 8800GTX idles at about 62C which seems high and on load i have seen it go as high as 80C ouch. I have read though that an 8800GTX runs pretty hot.
 
DANCRYST said:
I can see overclocking will help make an older card like a 8800gtx or 4870 or even the 3870, which I was not comparing to a 6950, better. But if he wants a better experience in games he does not really need to upgrade to a new processor or even overclock. The graphics card alone will be enough. It amazes me that people need everything to be the absolute fastest. Their is not much difference between 60-70 FPS and 80-100 FPS if everything is on max settings. It is just a mental thing where people think it will look so much better if they get higher FPS. As long as you have at least 60 FPS you are good and a 6950 on a Stock Q6600 provides that in most games unless you are on multiple monitors or over 1080p and even then you can turn down a few settings and still get above 60. Most games will actually play fine down to 45 FPS. So why does everyone insist on Overclocking and maxing everything out. It is just not necessary unless you need it to boost your ego.
Click to expand...
its the same reason you bought the the 6950. you got that card to play games at a higher settings and framerate did you not? well MOST people that buy a high end card actually like to get the most out of that card. and I hate to break it to but a stock Q6600 will severally limit a 6950. and I also hate to break it to you that you cant average over 60fps in every game with a Q6600 running at settings a 6950 is capable of. yes a Q6600 will provide a playable framerate in all games but then again so would a 6850 instead of a 6950.
 
NIKOKAPS said:
so lets say my idle temp on my Q6600 stock is about 32C and 45C on load, if i go ahead and BSEL my CPU, would my stock cooling be enough? Also my 8800GTX idles at about 62C which seems high and on load i have seen it go as high as 80C ouch. I have read though that an 8800GTX runs pretty hot.
Click to expand...

Use Rivatuner to force the fan speed on your 8800GTX and the stock CPU HSF should work fine. You'll only be adding maybe 10 - 15w of heat, maybe 20w max with the BSEL mod to 3ghz.

I'm not 100% sure but looking around on the net it appears the G0's put out10w less heat than the B3's so you should be good.
 
NIKOKAPS said:
so lets say my idle temp on my Q6600 stock is about 32C and 45C on load, if i go ahead and BSEL my CPU, would my stock cooling be enough? Also my 8800GTX idles at about 62C which seems high and on load i have seen it go as high as 80C ouch. I have read though that an 8800GTX runs pretty hot.
Click to expand...

CPU temps could be improved with some new thermal paste. Over time, it dries up. You should drop at least 5C with new paste and a good seating of the cooler. Still 45C isn't horrible.

GPU temps are fine. 80C isn't high. 105C is but the 4800 series used to avrg that and still ran fine.

We are here to help. If anyone is exceedingly douche, they will be dealt with.
 
I got the 6950 over a 6850 or 6870 because I new it would give me 50-70 FPS in more games than the other two with my processor and I also got if for just a little more than the 6850. I also got it for future games that will most likely require more card than the 6850 or 6870 would provide. I do understand that not all games will be around 60 FPS. Most games play perfectly fine around 45 FPS and I should be able to get that in most games even If I need to turn a few settings down a little. I am not one of these people who get a new graphics card everytime one comes out. I like for my computer equipment to last a few years before I replace or upgrade. I buy high end items so that the last me not so I can push them to the limit.
 
DANCRYST said:
I got the 6950 over a 6850 or 6870 because I new it would give me 50-70 FPS in more games than the other two with my processor and I also got if for just a little more than the 6850. I also got it for future games that will most likely require more card than the 6850 or 6870 would provide. I do understand that not all games will be around 60 FPS. Most games play perfectly fine around 45 FPS and I should be able to get that in most games even If I need to turn a few settings down a little. I am not one of these people who get a new graphics card everytime one comes out. I like for my computer equipment to last a few years before I replace or upgrade. I buy high end items so that the last me not so I can push them to the limit.
Click to expand...
again MOST people that buy a high end card also oc their cpu to get the most out of it. if you are happy with 45 fps then you could have bought a 6850. with your cpu at stock 2.4, a 6850 would have given you the same framerate as the 6950 in most games anyway. in other words you are not even seeing the actual advantage that a 6950 has over a 6850 or 6870. just because you don't understand that doesn't make it any less true.
 
Eh, he can build around that 6950 eventually. There will be a game soon that brings that old quad to a slideshow kneeling position.
 
compudocs said:
BSEL mod it. It supports 1333mhz FSB's so the 1333mhz BSEL mod will give you 3ghz.

If you don't have a conductive trace repair kit, buy a window defroster repair kit ( $10 - $15 ) and just draw a trace where the red line is on your CPU's BSEL pads. That or use aluminum foil and a small dap of super glue ( on the outter edge only ) to hold the foil in place but make sure you are very precise in cutting the foil and install the CPU very gently so the foil doesn't shift.

10661333.jpg


After you get more speed out of yor CPU I would say a used 1gb HD 4870/4890 or GTX 260 Core 216 which can be had between $70 and $100 shipped and should run off of any PSU that can power an 8800GTX.
Click to expand...
I've BSEL modded 3 Dells, two with Q6600 cpus. To up the FSB all you need to do is cover the one pin on the bottom, instead of connecting the two, with a piece of black tape. It works great on my XPS 630i

like so here http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1287918
 
Yes a 6850 probably would have been just fine but I got the xfx 6950 for $165 which is not much more than the 6850 so I went with it as it will provide me with more than 45 FPS on most games. I was saying it is still playable at this level. Their is not any need for more than 60 FPS as there is nothing gained from the extra FPS.
 
Lol if you got that 6950 at $165, well, you should have SAID so. Great deal. No brainer.

Now, fix the cpu bottleneck eventually and you will be running smoothly for a good while.
 
yalouf said:
You really need to overclock the Q6600.


And please you have to OC that Q6600 :), and it should last for another few years...My 460gtx is even not powerful enough for my Q6600 in 1080p...
Click to expand...

Are you really, really sure? I am saving up for sandy bridge...I think my GTX 460 is held back by my Phenom II...your CPU and mine aren't that far apart...

Let's say your Q6600 is equal clock-for-clock with a Phenom II 970 @ 3.5 Ghz.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/...core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/20




The most notable difference is obviously with RTS like SC2 and Dawn of War. I play Sins and Supreme Commander and I know for a fact that it's night and day in FPS with Core series CPUs, not to mention the extra FPS you gain graphically.

And just look @ the difference in Dragon Age.

You may be speaking proudly about your Q6600 bc you are like me and can't afford sandy bridge just yet..but the differences are undeniable.
 
2500k ftw. Finally got mine today after 3 months getting the money together. Now have to wait all ticking rocking cock blocking weekend to get my 480 gtx s o c on Mon BC ups doesn't work weekends here. Bastards. Go sandy. You must ASAP. Eat noodles and give blood. Fight bums. Whatever.

I sold my old gear for $330. Got the 2500k Msi p67 mobile corsair vengeance 1600 ram and the galaxy 480 gtx soc for $730 or $500 after the $$ I got from selling my old gear. Not too shabby for a straight killing machine that will rock a good long time.
 
Q6600 is ok and i currently have mine @ 3.6GHz running 2 XFX HD6850's in Crossfire and i have owned it for about 2-3 months but really thinking about moving to Q9450 after selling Q6600.........
 
spaceman said:
2500k ftw. Finally got mine today after 3 months getting the money together. Now have to wait all ticking rocking cock blocking weekend to get my 480 gtx s o c on Mon BC ups doesn't work weekends here. Bastards. .
Click to expand...

lol anxious? Nothing like the smell of freshly-packaged computer components in the morning. It smells like victory. :D
 
After you get more speed out of yor CPU I would say a used 1gb HD 4870/4890 or GTX 260 Core 216 which can be had between $70 and $100 shipped and should run off of any PSU that can power an 8800GTX.
Click to expand...
I had an EVGA 8800 GTX which died, and I got a replacement GTX 260. It's not really any faster as far as I can tell.

Also running a Q6600 G0 at stock. I can get 3.2 easily or 3.6 if I try harder, but I'm just too lazy to OC it again after the BIOS settings got reset. It's fast enough for me at 2.4 as it is.
 
I don't see any PMs.

3DMark2001 SE (Default 1024x768@32):

Q6600/Windows XP/GTX 260 - 44493
Q6600/Windows XP/Quadro NVS 290 - 14869
Q6600/Windows XP/8800 GTX - 42908

Maybe it makes a larger difference at higher resolutions or with newer DirectX 10 stuff. But I doubt it's much.
 
shurcooL said:
I don't see any PMs.

3DMark2001 SE (Default 1024x768@32):

Q6600/Windows XP/GTX 260 - 44493
Q6600/Windows XP/Quadro NVS 290 - 14869
Q6600/Windows XP/8800 GTX - 42908

Maybe it makes a larger difference at higher resolutions or with newer DirectX 10 stuff. But I doubt it's much.
Click to expand...
so testing a gpu in an 10 year old test at 1024x768 is defense that a gtx260 is not really any faster?

a newer gtx260 216sp is about 30-40% faster than an 8800gtx in games at resolutions a normal person would use. not a massive difference but still something that should be noticed. heck the difference between gtx260 and gtx460 is much smaller than that.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top