Q9550 Quad Core 2.83 GHZ bottleneck GPU

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
I

ID39

Honorable
Jan 9, 2014
1
0
10,510
Hi
specifically for Battlefield 4 multiplayer, 1900 x 1080, high setting (no AA) what would be the highest video card I can go with before the CPU bottleneck the performance?
thanks
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
rvilkman

rvilkman

Distinguished
Jun 12, 2009
2,307
0
20,960
Difficult to say, however i would go with an R9 270 or R9 270X as a good starting point for that resolution in any case.
Possibly GTX760 if you want to go with nvidia. There will most likely experience a some form of a bottleneck, but should still provide good performance at that resolution.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
jaguarskx

jaguarskx

Titan
Apr 19, 2006
27,979
3
84,965
Still using my Q9450 with a Radeon HD 5850. The Radeon HD 5850 would like be equivalent to today's Radeon HD 7790 / GTX 650.

As for the "best card" for a Q9550. I would say the Radeon HD 7870 or the GTX 660 both of which have similar performance and within $10 of each other when I checked yesterday. It just boils down to if you favor AMD or nVidia.

The Radeon R7 270 (not the 270x) is pretty close to the HD 7870 / GTX 660, but I have not seen any benchmarks for it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
logainofhades

logainofhades

Titan
Moderator
Apr 27, 2009
37,581
3,253
143,290


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-270-review-benchmarks,3669.html
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
M

Mun0425

Honorable
Dec 30, 2013
64
0
10,640
I know I am late at answering this, but seriously, dont go over a gt 9800, when the gtx 480 came out, i tried to pair my core 2 quad and the bottleneck was so bad that i could not run half life 2 at max settings without dipping into the freaking 20s! So even if you have already paired the two, I recommend that you upgrade the rest of your system, you will be amazed on how much more performance you will get!
 
Upvote -2 Downvote
M

Mun0425

Honorable
Dec 30, 2013
64
0
10,640


Im not to judge, but i tried to run a gtx 660 with a core 2 quad and the bottleneck was so bad i could not max out half life 2 from 2004, and I dared not to even try to watch youtube! In my opinion, you should not go over a gt 9800.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
spentshells

spentshells

Judicious
Apr 1, 2006
8,556
294
33,990
akay so withoout syaing these guys are retarded just don't listen to them, the cpu is good enough for damn neat any card. I would ven look to a 660 ti or 760, if youo can overclock all the better if you can not ther will be reserve gpou power when you do upgrade.

read the article I linked and choose a different better answer. The 7870 270x and 660 are good matches bit will not bottle neck on a 9550. where it does the games are cpu bound and not relating to the ability of the cpu to actually handle the gpu.

My gtx 570 is heavily overclocked and @ 3.6Ghz I still have tonnes of room to upgrade the gpu. Im not going to because Im dying for a new setup but all this none sense and that is what it is simply doesn't apply to your cpu
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
M

Mun0425

Honorable
Dec 30, 2013
64
0
10,640


Are you kidding me?! Im the one who tried to run a gtx 660 with a c2q, not you dont beleive that bullcrap, the bottleneck was so bad that i couldnt even play half life 2 maxed out without it dipping into the freaking 20s. Nor could i watch youtube. You shouldnt even try to answer questions if you have not experienced it, me and one other person have and that is why we answered. Plus, i have the right to report you for insulting other members by calling them retards, we are the ones who tried to do it, you got the info from someone else. So, point taken?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
spentshells

spentshells

Judicious
Apr 1, 2006
8,556
294
33,990


no poiunt taken, you simply didn't overclock it or you are terrible with drivers, my oc 570 is more powerful than any 660 on the market, and I have lots of headroom. I was coinsidering a 760 but wanted to stick it out there and get something newer cpu and ram wise


 
Upvote 0 Downvote
M

Mun0425

Honorable
Dec 30, 2013
64
0
10,640


I overclocked it, i stuck a water cooler onto it, overclocked it by 640 megahertz, are you using a c2q. FYI I said point taken because I wanted for you to note that insulting other users is an offense.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
logainofhades

logainofhades

Titan
Moderator
Apr 27, 2009
37,581
3,253
143,290


Then you were doing something wrong. Back in the C2Q days, I had a 3.6ghz X3210 and had no issues pushing a 9800gx2 or my HD 4870 with it. Both better than a 9800gt.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
M

Mun0425

Honorable
Dec 30, 2013
64
0
10,640



It only happened with CPU intensive games like bf4 and crysis 3 or games that used single core threads. Sometimes bottlenecks can be very light and not noticeable in average games, but I got a much lower score in 3d mark than when I got a new CPU. In fact, right now im using a core i5 2500k with a GTX770, it bottlenecks in bf4, but not enough to lower the frame rate below 60 fps most of the time except when a building is falling. Surprisingly, when monitoring the CPU, it hardly ever jumps to 100 percent except when in a loading screen
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
spentshells

spentshells

Judicious
Apr 1, 2006
8,556
294
33,990


I am offended by the poor advice given thus far. The cpu is great,9550 is plenty for most games. Overclocked to 4Ghz or even 3.6 there is no reason not to look all the way up to a 770.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
M

Mun0425

Honorable
Dec 30, 2013
64
0
10,640


Sorry for the inadequate information, The Q9550 is a decently powerful CPU and likely wont bottleneck with cards like radeon 7850 or 70 or with cards like the gtx 660. however if you are planning to play games like bf4 on high and ultra settings, you may experience dramatic frame drops during transitions or large amounts or physics. But besides that, there should not be any problems, you just wont get as much performance with powerful cards as if you were pairing one with an i5 or 4 gen i3. Other than that, games should run mostly stable if they are multi threaded processes that use multiple cores. When I said frame drops, I mean like when you blow something up that involves physics and scatter, it may freeze for a fraction of a second and then regain the FPS in CPU demanding games. If you just want to upgrade your whole system, i recommend going the core i3 4330 or the i5 3570, or the amd side, the fx 6300. Overall, it should play fine on high settings, just don't expect a absolute constant 60 FPS.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
spentshells

spentshells

Judicious
Apr 1, 2006
8,556
294
33,990


not ina million years, my c2q @ 3 ghz hold better frame rates than any dual core hyoerthreaded cou, i;ve tried with nvdia and amd they both expeeriencedproivdd mosre sable frame rates in all my steam games.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
logainofhades

logainofhades

Titan
Moderator
Apr 27, 2009
37,581
3,253
143,290
Upvote 0 Downvote
logainofhades

logainofhades

Titan
Moderator
Apr 27, 2009
37,581
3,253
143,290
I can tell you didn't read a thing. There were full quality gaming benchmarks there. The i3 3225 beat a 3.4ghz Q9550 in every single one. Some were close, but they were still wins. An i3 4130 is faster yet, and your CPU is at a slower clock speed. At stock, which is what the OP is running at, the gap is even further. Given their age, yes the C2Q have stood their ground well. But their time has come and gone. They have been surpassed by newer architecture at the lower end of the current gen.


 
Upvote 0 Downvote
spentshells

spentshells

Judicious
Apr 1, 2006
8,556
294
33,990
It seems you did not read mine. So I guess were even then right?

The only difference being I had the ivy i3 and the q6600 @ 3.33 and it was a better, more consistant experience on the c2d

the i3 would as it shows in borderlands 2 which you posted have big drops in frame rates from average to min. This makes for really annoying game play and snapping. Same could be said for Tombraider. I tested with latest v of drivers @ the time and fresh installs of windows. with a gtx 570 and a 7850 oc to 1150. I tried to blame the amd card but that wasn't the case as I found out. The i3 just desn't have the resources to provide the more even experience.

Higher average and lower min makes things look silly and choppy. The i3 did encode better using the software I had,
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
WhiteSnake91

WhiteSnake91

Distinguished
Jun 16, 2013
1,431
2
19,665
Am I the only one that laughed out loud when the guy said the core 2 quad wouldn't even play youtube? There's something wrong with your hardware then man because for years I was on youtube fine with a very sucky single core AMD laptop at 1.99ghz on windows 7 which I know is muchhh worse than a core 2 quad.


The most I'd pair with one is around 7770-7790 or maybe 7850 or 7870/r9 270. At stock speeds it's going to be a bottleneck online in multiplayer, but for single player it'll probably still play everything out there, just don't expect much, because as said by others, even Sandy Bridge utterly leaves c2q in the dust
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom