I have a GIGABYTE GA-880GMA-UD2H with 333 onboard Acceleration Motherboard, Rev 2.2, and I am seeking to purchase a better graphics card. I am running currently a Radeon HD6570 Core Edition 2GB DDR3 card. My processor is an AMD Phenom II 6 core processor. I have 4 (2x2GB Kingston Memory modules (8GB). I have an ANtec 750 Watt Modular Power Supply, Plus an ANTEC 900 Tower. All are configured and installed correctly by a installation technician. I play World of Warcraft and currently I am only getting 20 frames per second. I have a 60GB SSD for Processor only, and WOW is installed on my 1.5TB HDD. Is this whats causing my lag problem? Do I need a new Video CArd? Any hlep would be great
Highly Recommended Video Card
- Thread starter Kryloc
- Start date
Solution
This is my mother load PC, so any high end graphics card is game. But since I'm married, lol, my price range can be around $300 max for now. My system does support crossfire, though I've heard mix results from such. Plus, I had a space issue when I have a bulky video card, so one fantastic card should do it...
This is my mother load PC, so any high end graphics card is game. But since I'm married, lol, my price range can be around $300 max for now. My system does support crossfire, though I've heard mix results from such. Plus, I had a space issue when I have a bulky video card, so one fantastic card should do it...
Quaddro
Distinguished
- Sep 1, 2010
- 2,074
- 2
- 20,965
well, for $300, you'll get a good graphic cards..
for example gtx 760, or
this one..
gtx 770..http://pcpartpicker.com/part/pny-video-card-vcggtx7702xpb
but unfortunately, your processor will severely bottleneck that card...and you'll need a new motherboard and strong processor to extract all performance of 760/770..
Soo..if you want a pure gaming machine..it'll be huge budget..
but, if you just sometimes play games, then mid range card will fit on you.
gtx 650Ti boost for $115 is a nice card without causing a massive bottleneck to your system..
for example gtx 760, or
this one..
gtx 770..http://pcpartpicker.com/part/pny-video-card-vcggtx7702xpb
but unfortunately, your processor will severely bottleneck that card...and you'll need a new motherboard and strong processor to extract all performance of 760/770..
Soo..if you want a pure gaming machine..it'll be huge budget..
but, if you just sometimes play games, then mid range card will fit on you.
gtx 650Ti boost for $115 is a nice card without causing a massive bottleneck to your system..
quilciri
Splendid
- Mar 16, 2012
- 4,104
- 4
- 23,965
Knowing the model of your CPU would help, but the above statement isn't really true.
If you have a 1045T (the absolute slowest 6 core phenom 2) *may* hold a 770 back a little, but not even enough to worry about. Also, as more games support 6+ cores, you CPU will actually get better
If you have a 1090/1100, the CPU (with a moderate overclock) could support two 770's
quilciri
Splendid
- Mar 16, 2012
- 4,104
- 4
- 23,965
For $300, an HD 7970 is the best single GPU you can get. However, if you want to eventually pick up a second GPU, I recommend Nvidia. AMD's frame pacing drivers aren't fully matured yet.
In that vein, I recommend the 670 above the 760 and 770. It's about $20 more expensive than the 760 right now but it has frequently gone on sale for $200 in the last few months. (keep your eyes on slickdeals.com and techbargains)..
The 670 is considerably faster than the 760 and only a hair slower than the 770 (which is a re-badged gtx 680). Nvidia is actually going to re-release the 670 as the "760 Ti" and charge more money for it, so I've been recommending people snap up the remaining 670s any time they drop to $250 or less.
In that vein, I recommend the 670 above the 760 and 770. It's about $20 more expensive than the 760 right now but it has frequently gone on sale for $200 in the last few months. (keep your eyes on slickdeals.com and techbargains)..
The 670 is considerably faster than the 760 and only a hair slower than the 770 (which is a re-badged gtx 680). Nvidia is actually going to re-release the 670 as the "760 Ti" and charge more money for it, so I've been recommending people snap up the remaining 670s any time they drop to $250 or less.
Quaddro
Distinguished
- Sep 1, 2010
- 2,074
- 2
- 20,965
are you sure..?
in cpu intensive gaming for then example skyrim..well, better to see this chart..
well, even best amd cpu line (fx 8350) loose 60 fps against 3770k..well, that's not a slight bottleneck..
you can imagine what will happen to 1045/1055/1075/1090/1100t then..
and run 1100t in dual card configuration, well, that's will be a huugee bottleneck in cpu intensive games..and that's something that you have to worry about..
quilciri
Splendid
- Mar 16, 2012
- 4,104
- 4
- 23,965
Yes, I am sure. Your smug sarcasm belies that you don't fully understand what's going on there.
That's not a video card being held back. That game isn't going to use much of the GPU even if you have a 3570k running at 4.5ghz, so the 8350 isn't holding back the GPU from doing anything.
In other words, you'll see the same amount of GPU resources used in Skyrim over a wide range of CPU's.
Once you have even a midrange card, the video card ceases to matter in Skyrim It doesn't take much video card to pull above 60 fps at 1920 maxed settings.
Besides, all CPU's you listed were at 60fps or above. Unless Kryloc has a 120hz monitor, he's not going to get much benefit out of higher fps.
Also, skyrim only uses 2 cores.
That's not a video card being held back. That game isn't going to use much of the GPU even if you have a 3570k running at 4.5ghz, so the 8350 isn't holding back the GPU from doing anything.
In other words, you'll see the same amount of GPU resources used in Skyrim over a wide range of CPU's.
Once you have even a midrange card, the video card ceases to matter in Skyrim It doesn't take much video card to pull above 60 fps at 1920 maxed settings.
Besides, all CPU's you listed were at 60fps or above. Unless Kryloc has a 120hz monitor, he's not going to get much benefit out of higher fps.
Also, skyrim only uses 2 cores.
quilciri :
Knowing the model of your CPU would help, but the above statement isn't really true.
If you have a 1045T (the absolute slowest 6 core phenom 2) *may* hold a 770 back a little, but not even enough to worry about. Also, as more games support 6+ cores, you CPU will actually get better
If you have a 1090/1100, the CPU (with a moderate overclock) could support two 770's
quilciri :
Yes, I am sure. Your smug sarcasm belies that you don't understand what's going on there. That's not a video card being held back. That game isn't going to use much of the GPU even if you have a 3570k running at 4.5ghz, so the CPU isn't holding back the GPU from doing anything.
Once you have even a midrange card, the video card ceases to matter in Skyrim It doesn't take much video card to pull above 60 fps at 1920 maxed settings.
That's not a case of "holding the video card back" since a high end video card still isn't going to be doing much work in the game even if you have a high end CPU.
Besides, all CPU's you listed were at 60fps or above. Unless Kryloc has a 120hz monitor, he's not going to get much benefit out of higher fps.
Also, skyrim only uses 2 cores.
Once you have even a midrange card, the video card ceases to matter in Skyrim It doesn't take much video card to pull above 60 fps at 1920 maxed settings.
That's not a case of "holding the video card back" since a high end video card still isn't going to be doing much work in the game even if you have a high end CPU.
Besides, all CPU's you listed were at 60fps or above. Unless Kryloc has a 120hz monitor, he's not going to get much benefit out of higher fps.
Also, skyrim only uses 2 cores.
My monitor is a Samsung Symcmaster T24B350. 24 " Led.
1080p but don't see a hertz on the specs...
So my three hiccups are my Monitor, GPU, and Mobo. So I guess the best solution is now getting a GPU that doesn't bottleneck my system, and still outputs decent graphics with a reasonable rate of return on the FPS...
What card do you suggest...
What card do you suggest...
quilciri
Splendid
- Mar 16, 2012
- 4,104
- 4
- 23,965
Yeah, you're golden on that CPU. Nothing wrong with your monitor or mobo, either
Like I posted earlier, the HD 7970 is the best single GPU for $300 or less. If you want a second card down the line, Nvidia is the better choice, in which case any of the above cards are good (670, 760, 770). Which one is the best value depends on prices at that particular point in time.
Right now, Newegg has the Asus DirectCU II 760 for $200, which is the best deal today. Tomorrow may be a different story and this time next week will certainly be different
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?nm_mc=AFC-TechBargains&cm_mmc=AFC-TechBargains-_-NA-_-NA-_-NA&Item=N82E16814121775
quilciri
Splendid
- Mar 16, 2012
- 4,104
- 4
- 23,965
Quaddro :
you can imagine what will happen to 1045/1055/1075/1090/1100t then..
FYI there isn't much performance difference between an 1100T and an 8350. You could consider the 1090T comparable to an 8320.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html
The bulldozer chips, the 4/6/81xx series, were actually slower than the phenoms II's. The piledriver chips were about a 15% improvement on the bulldozer, which makes them only marginally faster than the phenom II's
Unfortunately, the FX chips are very similar to intel in that fashion - they're not much better than two generations ago..i.e just like the 1090T is about as fast as a 8320, the 2550k is about as fast as a 4670k.
Quaddro
Distinguished
- Sep 1, 2010
- 2,074
- 2
- 20,965
quilciri :
Yes, I am sure. Your smug sarcasm belies that you don't fully understand what's going on there.
That's not a video card being held back. That game isn't going to use much of the GPU even if you have a 3570k running at 4.5ghz, so the 8350 isn't holding back the GPU from doing anything.
In other words, you'll see the same amount of GPU resources used in Skyrim over a wide range of CPU's.
Once you have even a midrange card, the video card ceases to matter in Skyrim It doesn't take much video card to pull above 60 fps at 1920 maxed settings.
Besides, all CPU's you listed were at 60fps or above. Unless Kryloc has a 120hz monitor, he's not going to get much benefit out of higher fps.
Also, skyrim only uses 2 cores.
That's not a video card being held back. That game isn't going to use much of the GPU even if you have a 3570k running at 4.5ghz, so the 8350 isn't holding back the GPU from doing anything.
In other words, you'll see the same amount of GPU resources used in Skyrim over a wide range of CPU's.
Once you have even a midrange card, the video card ceases to matter in Skyrim It doesn't take much video card to pull above 60 fps at 1920 maxed settings.
Besides, all CPU's you listed were at 60fps or above. Unless Kryloc has a 120hz monitor, he's not going to get much benefit out of higher fps.
Also, skyrim only uses 2 cores.
sorry, away from computer for a minute for real life..
what is the meaning of bottleneck..?
well, bottleneck is..let's see what wikipedia say..
"A bottleneck is a phenomenon where the performance or capacity of an entire system is limited by a single or limited number of components or resources."
i think you'll agree with that definition..
okay, then let's look your earlier post..
===
"That's not a video card being held back. That game isn't going to use much of the GPU even if you have a 3570k running at 4.5ghz, so the 8350 isn't holding back the GPU from doing anything."
i really confuse with the statement..
well, as you can see in my post..8350 is holding back gpu...you can see 60fps delta performance between 3570k and 8350..
===
"In other words, you'll see the same amount of GPU resources used in Skyrim over a wide range of CPU's. "
So, we can assume 60 fps delta performance because of processor bottleneck..right..?
===
"That's not a case of "holding the video card back" since a high end video card still isn't going to be doing much work in the game even if you have a high end CPU."
Well faster cpu help gpu to work better..the fact is there are 60 fps between 3570 and 8350
So, we can assume 60 fps delta performance because of bottleneck..right..?
===
"Besides, all CPU's you listed were at 60fps or above. Unless Kryloc has a 120hz monitor, he's not going to get much benefit out of higher fps"
so you can assume there is no difference between $800 card and $180 card..as long as OP can get 60fps..right..?
the why suggest him with to buy $400 card mean while OP can get exact same result with $180 card..?
===
"Also, skyrim only uses 2 cores."
yes,skyrim only use 2 cores, that's why processor with better IPC lead to better result..
and your chart show different card and different result of each card..nothing wrong in here..
===
"FYI there isn't much performance difference between an 1100T and an 8350."
yeah, 8-10 fps, if you can say that's not too much..
well, please note, this test using XFX Radeon HD 7950, if using stronger card, the delta performance will be bigger..
============================
well, for the OP, 650 Ti boost/7850 be a good choice to upgrade your graphic card without causing massive bottleneck to your system..
quilciri
Splendid
- Mar 16, 2012
- 4,104
- 4
- 23,965
It seems like you don't understand why CPU-limited games are worthless for determining whether a CPU and GPU are balanced.
You're equating "bottlenecking the GPU" with a difference in framerates between the two CPU's in Skyrim, which is wrong.
If the GPU were being held back by the 8350, then the GPU would be working harder (using a higher % of it's resources) when paired with a 3570k.
In Skyrim, you see the same amount of GPU resources used whether the card is paired with an 8350 or a 3570k. That is a clear indication that the card is not being held back in that game.
Just because there is a difference in frame rates between two CPU's does not mean that the GPU is being bottlenecked. In order to determine that, you must know if A: the GPU is using less than 100% resources with one CPU, and B: that it uses a higher % of GPU resources when paired with another CPU.
You're equating "bottlenecking the GPU" with a difference in framerates between the two CPU's in Skyrim, which is wrong.
If the GPU were being held back by the 8350, then the GPU would be working harder (using a higher % of it's resources) when paired with a 3570k.
In Skyrim, you see the same amount of GPU resources used whether the card is paired with an 8350 or a 3570k. That is a clear indication that the card is not being held back in that game.
Just because there is a difference in frame rates between two CPU's does not mean that the GPU is being bottlenecked. In order to determine that, you must know if A: the GPU is using less than 100% resources with one CPU, and B: that it uses a higher % of GPU resources when paired with another CPU.
quilciri
Splendid
- Mar 16, 2012
- 4,104
- 4
- 23,965
when you're running 80 fps, 8 is 10%...i.e. not much. any card that is balanced with an 8350 isn't going to be much put out by an 1100T.
Once again, all those games are run above the OP's refresh rate on all the CPU's (even the APU gets damn close)
Once again, all those games are run above the OP's refresh rate on all the CPU's (even the APU gets damn close)
Quaddro
Distinguished
- Sep 1, 2010
- 2,074
- 2
- 20,965
dude..well whatever you thinking..please don't miss lead other people..
suggesting sli 770 with 1090T is not funny at all..
you're sooo confuse me, whatever i give you the fact, you still trying to talking about something weird..
suggesting sli 770 with 1090T is not funny at all..
you're sooo confuse me, whatever i give you the fact, you still trying to talking about something weird..
quilciri
Splendid
- Mar 16, 2012
- 4,104
- 4
- 23,965
Quaddro :
dude..well whatever you thinking..please don't miss lead other people..
suggesting sli 770 with 1090T is not funny at all..
you're sooo confuse me, whatever i give you the fact, you still trying to talking about something weird..
suggesting sli 770 with 1090T is not funny at all..
you're sooo confuse me, whatever i give you the fact, you still trying to talking about something weird..
Sorry if I'm confusing you. I'll try to state it as plainly as I can:
In order to know that a CPU is holding a GPU back, you must find out if the GPU uses more of its resources when paired with a stronger processor.
Skyrim shows that the game greatly benefits from the strong individual cores. For Skyrim performance, you're much better off with intel CPU's. However, that is not sufficient evidence to show that the AMD CPU is holding back the GPU because the game is unable to fully utilize a strong GPU at all.
I'm going to try not to take offense at your accusations, but it's getting hard not to. This might help you.
*sorry, wrong link originally posted. fixed.
http://abundantcores.blogspot.com/p/a-cpu-can-bottleneck-and-gpu-in-gaming.html
basically reverse this case. You could drop the clock speed on a strong GPU in skyrim, when paired with a 3570k, and not see much loss in framerate.
Oh, and I suggested SLI 770 with an overclocked 1100T, not a stock 1090. I was using that example to further illustrate that a single gtx 770 is fine with Kryloc's 1090.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram