Lower processor, bigger video card or vice versa?

[joleme]

I'm going to be updating my current computer.... or more exactly, completely overhauling it.

I would like to hear people's thoughts on processor vs bigger ram video cards.

I've set myself to buy an 8800gts... but with the price differential between the 320 and the 640, it leaves me with an issue.

smaller processor, like an amd x2 - 4400, with the larger 640.....
or
bigger processor, like an amd x2 - 6000, with the 320.....

What would any of you do *assuming you can't do both or I would * any opinions would be appreciated

 

[homerdog]

In general, for gaming GPU > CPU. However, VRAM is not nearly as important as you would be led to believe. For example, the choice between a 512MB 7600gt and a 256MB 7900gs would go to the 7900 hands down.

That being said, the 320MB 8800gts is a strange beast. In most games it's absolutely great, providing 60+fps on the highest settings. In others it can suck hard. World in Conflict is an example (the demo at least). Performance will be great and then out of nowhere it drops to unplayable levels. It's a driver level memory management issue where it doesn't clear unneeded textures properly, causing the system to resort to its main RAM, killing frame rates. This has been acknowledged by Nvidia and they have stated that a fix should be out "late August to mid September," but only for dx9. A dx10 fix may come later.

Unfortunately this problem is present on all 8800 series cards (there have been claims that it exists on 7 and 6 series cards as well), but the 320MB version suffers most, obviously because it has less room for error than its big brothers with double or more the VRAM.

I don't mean to scare you into not buying an 8800, I have a 320MB eVGA one right now and for the most part it's awesome. I just want to provide the reason why I would recommend that you go with a 4400+ and the 640MB 8800gts rather than option B

 

[joleme]

Yeah, I have been leaning towards the bigger card and lesser processor, but I like to hear with others have to say.

I do keep up on most hardware, or at least I try, didn't realize though that the 8800s had an issue like that. The 2 games I am planning on picking up and using with the new system with be Call of duty 4, and UT3. I'll probably replay bioshock too, get a better experience than with my current x850.

I guess I can always look at it this way, processors will drop quick enough, can always get a mobo that will take a 6000, but just buy a x2 4400...... anything is better than the ole 2800+ i have, heh.

 

[lunyone]

Voting for option A: 4400 and a 8800gts 640mb, if I had to pick between the two options. Hopefully you have a good enough PSU to power it, because I'd hate to hear that your new setup failed and took out other parts because of a weak PSU.

 

[joleme]

http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=10006428
thats the one someone pointed to me to use... sadly... it doesnt have specs on the site..... and looking back it was you luny you said good for up to a 8800gtx.... so as long as thats still valid with a 640mb, guess im good to go.

btw, I only use 1 dvd drive, 2 sata HDs.

 

[kpo6969]

8800GTS 640, X2 4400 and that psu most definetly!
get a $10.00 rebate too

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139003

Here are your specs also: 33amps

http://www.jonnyguru.com/review_details.php?id=125

 

[Osa4747]

If your going with the 8800 GTS640 have you condisdered the HD 2900xt? Virtually the same price, with the new driver (just yesterday) runs closer to the GTX.

 

[Valdis]

x2 3800+ and 2900XT

 

[lunyone]

http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=10006428
thats the one someone pointed to me to use... sadly... it doesnt have specs on the site..... and looking back it was you luny you said good for up to a 8800gtx.... so as long as thats still valid with a 640mb, guess im good to go.

btw, I only use 1 dvd drive, 2 sata HDs.

Yes, I'm sure I did say that it's good for a 8800GTX. Here's the link to see the 33 amps on the 12V rail.
http://www.corsairmemory.com/products/vx.aspx
For the $, you won't be dissatisfied!
And if you want to wait for $45 MIR, here is the screaming deal on a PSU that I can find in this price range. $60 shipped!!!
Antec NeoPower NeoHE 550 ATX12V 550W Power Supply 100 - 240 V UL, CUL, TUV, CE, FCC, CCC, CB, C-tick - Retail
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817103941

 

[4745454b]

There are several things you need to consider. First, what type of game are you playing? FPS's tend to need highend video cards to render the screens fast enough. RTS's on the other hand aren't "twitch finger" games, and need more CPU power to handle the movements of 150+ units. So the type of game that you play should factor in to what you need to buy. The second thing to consider is the resolution that you play at. If you have an older LCD, or one with a low native resolution, then you don't need a massive video card. If the biggest you play at is 1280x1024 or 1440x900, then the 8800GTS 320MB is more then enough. You don't need a 640MB card or the 2900XT. (unless you want to play with ultra settings, which require 512MBs of vram.)

Without know the answers to these questions, its hard for me to suggest what to get. I can assume that you probably don't have a massive screen, so the 320MB card is probably enough. Getting the 6000+ and that card is probably better then the 4400+ and the 640MB. (assuming no overclocking involved)

 

[Rabidpeanut]

You need more ram on your gpu for texture heavy games, like graw 2, so if you want to run everything on full get the 640 mb.

Oh and HD2900.... Much nicer card. catalyst 7.9 yesterday, this time it actually supports the hd2900.

 

[rosu9801]

I bought a C2D 6400 and a 8800GTS 320 factory oc'ed.
I play in 1280x1024 as its my screens native res.
And for now the only game that have decreased my settings below max is GRAW2(cant remember most games though, short memory).
But then it runs completely smoothly, i can manually turn some eyecandy up and still be smooth.

Ive played many games on ultra high textures (Doom3, not sure its a good measurement) so i dont know why people tell me 320MB isn't enough.
Maybe cause my oc makes it fast enough to handle it?
Im still unsure about what all the 8800GTS 640 and HD2900xt owners are saying my card is supposed to perform like.

So i guess to be sure buy bigger and better or if your more into price/performance buy the little "lesser".
Bigger cpu for RTS.
Bigger gpu for FPS.
Big HD for RPG.

 

[marvelous211]

bigger GPU and you can get better cpu later on. You will enjoy better AA and or higher resolutions now with the 640GTS.

 

[spuddyt]

I'll second the question... what do you want it for?

 

[cleeve]

If you want better gaming, go for the better video card.

If you want better everything else, go for the faster CPU.

 

[joleme]

well, I do a lot of things. some RTS, some FPS. The reason I'm stuck upgrading now is because apparently I didn't stay up to date on shader models and such. finding out that I couldn't play bioshock was a bit annoying. Luckily the community released that patch and I was able to play through error free.

Also, to those that say the HD2900 is better. lowest I can find is $390. While not much more than a 640 8800, its a bit more than a 320. I've been annoyed that ATI dropped the ball with the x850 card I have, the whole not supporting sm3 bit. Is the HD2900 a good buy for the future as well?

Anyway.
I use my computer for a lot of stuff. So I guess you could just say average, but probably more action/fps games than RTS if I had to say on the average. Also, there is no such thing as future proofing a computer, but I would like to have a card that will at least get the job done for at least a year. * won't cry if at the end of the year its not playing at 60fps smooth, currently I get 5-30 so anything is better than this*

I do watch movies on my computer, but even now they run fine, cept when im running it to the TV for my gf to watch something while Im checking out websites.

 

[jedi940]

While FPS do require a good graphics card to keeps the frames up, they don't require much vram. RPG's on the other hand, because of the environment, do require more vram. For example, I can play the demo of bioshock on the highest settings as well as bf2 and bf2142 (including AA maxed out). What I can't play at high res is Neverwinter nights 2. Because of the environment detail, my card bogs down a bit. I say a bit because I am only gaming at 1280 X 1024. When I upgrade my monitor later to a 1680 X 1050, I will start to see some problems because of the memory. Go to THG's website and look at the interactive Graphics card charts. Check out the different gaming benchmarks at different resolutions. The most noticable difference will be in obvlion where the frames drop down considerably over 1600 X 1200. If you game at or above 1600 X 1200, get the 640 card. If you are not going to upgrade you monitor any time soon, then the 320 will be just fine and you will benefit from the higher processor more.

See my Sig so you can relate my settings to my rig.

BTW, if you are not married to AMD? perhaps a 4400 intel and overclock would be better. I know it's $40 more than the 4400, but may you could cut some cost elsewhere on your rig. Post everything you are buying and maybe we can critique it.

P.S. when looking at the price for the E4400 i found this review:

Pros: Easily overclocked to 2.8MHZ on stock..low voltages 1.25V on my P35-DS3R

Cons: Dont know if its my case or not but runs 61C on Prime95 (AC Freezer 7 Pro) on those low Voltages. I think I can easily get to 3MHZ but the more voltage needed would make it hotter than I would like.

 

[joleme]

well, the monitor I currently have is a 1440x900 native. I don't play any RPGs atm, but I'm waiting to find another I like. Said goodbye to Lagforge on WoW a few years ago, never went back.

I've never run at 1440x900 So I don't know if I've been missing much, but I would like to be able to actually use my native resolution for a change and not suffer for it.

Im not married to an AMD, but even though I have built a lot of PCs over the years, I've never been much of one to OC. I've never fried anything, but I don't have the money to replace it if I did. Better to be safe than sorry I guess.

then again, that may mean a 640 will be a little less

Sad part is, I doubt I'll have the money together until late october, by then all this great info you guys gave me will probably be old and different prices for newer stuff. Ah well, such is the life of the computer user.

 

[joleme]

I hate when edit doesnt work, 640 part should be last

 

[lunyone]

If your not going to buy in late October, please wait until the 8700's come out sometime in Nov. I'm sure it will make things interesting .

 

[joleme]

how so? 8700s meaning cards slower than the 8800s? i know numbers are practically meaningless, so I'll just ask you to explain please

 

[joleme]

and I'll say, I dont have any problem buying an 8800 640.... if Im going to be able to play game from 08-09.... I just dont want this whole shader model thing to happen to me again. I dont want to buy X game in late 08 and see a "not compatible with 8800cards or less....

 

[lunyone]

Okay, I was just stating that if your going to wait until late October, to just wait a few weeks and see if your card will come down in price, or if the 8700's will have any different options that the 8800's don't. The 8800's have been out for almost a year and haven't had any hardware changes (not that I've read anywhere, correct me if I'm wrong please). If your buying today, than get the 8800gts and you'll won't be upset. It's going to be interesting what will bring in November timeframe. I know there is supposed to be a dx10.1 update, but not sure if it's going to affect any of the current cards or not. I don't know, just what I've read on a few forums. I can't seem to find any links right at this moment (I'm at work ).

 

[raptorxt]

of the options you gave me i would go for the 8800gts 640mb so you could play the fps and graphics intense games at higher resolutions.

you can always wait until the cpus come down, but you probably want to play games now.

games are just better at higher resolutions
if you play at 1024x768 then go to 1600x1200 on the same the game, it would be like playing an entirely different game. It's awesome.

 

[4745454b]

DX10.1 will break all current DX10 cards. None of them are DX10.1 compatible. The only cards that I know of that will be DX10.1 compatible is the 2400/2600 refreash cards. (rumored to be the 2500/2650) These cards are supposed to move from 65nm to 55nm, and bring in DX10.1 support. I don't know if the G92/8700GTS will support DX10.1 or not.

I also don't know how well 10.1 will be adopted. People supporting DX10 is a given, 10.1 I'm not so sure. Seeing the pace of DX10 games coming out, I'm not even sure that 10.1games will be here even one year from now. Being forced to buy 10.1 games is probably a very "long" time away.

If you can afford it, get the 8800GTS/GTX. (or if your money allows, the 2900XT.) If money is tight and you can't spend that much, get the x1950pro/xt. For your budgeted dollars, there aren't any better cards.