espguitarguy232

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2007
115
0
18,680
Hey, just bought a BFG 8800gt oc2 and i was wondering if my cpu is causing a bottleneck in my system. I used fraps to count fps, and what i found was that in games such as arma and empire at war (havent tested the others i have) changing the screen resolution had little impact on my average fps. I have a Intel 2160, is that the most likely source? Here are my specs...

BFG nforce 650i Ultra
BFG Geforce 8800GT OC2
Intel 2160 1.8ghz (oc to 3.0)
3 gigs of RAM
Rosewill 550W psu
Western Digital 160Gb HD @ 7200rpm

Thanks
 

mihirkula

Distinguished
Nov 27, 2007
964
0
18,980
well a faster cpu like an E6750 definitely does increase the performance.... although if you're oc'ing your E2160 to 3 gigs you should get good frame rates.... i suggest you test bigger games like COD4 and Crysis....you'll get your answer eventually.
 

espguitarguy232

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2007
115
0
18,680
Ye i am planning on an upgrade, but only if it will allow the 8800gt to perform to its potential. Is a lack of fps difference when changing resolution generally a cpu issue? Also i had a closer look at empire at war and found that in cinematic mode my fps was higher than when i was using the command interface. What do u guys think? Also mine is OC to 3 GHz on just a dual core, not core 2 duo. I think the e2160 is just a step above a Pentium 4, but i could be wrong
 

ryanthesav

Distinguished
May 27, 2007
708
0
18,980
might as well overlcock the crap out of that cpu and then buy another not a person in the wold will buy that...so just sell them a burnt out one...woord
 

randomizer

Champion
Moderator

I'd buy it if it was fully functional and for a good price.
 

yadge

Distinguished
Mar 26, 2007
443
0
18,790


Pentium D processors are just a step above Pentium 4s.

The dual core pentium processors (e2xxx series) use the core architecture. It's just an Allendale instead of a Conroe. Much less cache, and slightly less performance. I'd say your processor overclocked to 3 Ghz is about the same as a regular Core 2 Duo at like 2.8

So your processor wouldn't really be holding you back that much, although it might a little as the 8800gt is a pretty powerful card.
 

espguitarguy232

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2007
115
0
18,680
All i am afraid of is that if i try to run the newest games my CPU will limit the GPU considering how fast a 8800gt is. I have the most problems with Arma, but from what other people are saying even with higher end comps. they have trouble running it. I used www.systemrequirementslab.com to check out how my stuff would run crysis and COD4, in both cases the CPU was the one that fell behind the recommended setup. This site any accurate?
 
That cpu wont be much of a bottleneck at all. IF at all. Your resolution is more dependant upon your cpu being a bottleneck than anything , other than your card. The higher the resolution, the greater the need for the gpu to fill a larger or denser screen, thus putting a greater demand on the gpu to reproduce all those textures, while a lessor resolution will cause a greater strain on your cpu, which while having less information to reproduce by the gpu, all the instructions are speeded up do to the lack of them with using a smaller res. The cpu then has to direct all this at a much higher rate, just like the lower the res, the higher the fps. As for sysreqlabs, theyre ok to use, if you dont mind being scanned. If youre running higher than 12x10 res, youll be ok, and even so, at 3GHZ, you wont see much if any bottlenecking. Even a far less cpu setup wouldnt show much of a bottleneck, as I always say, the single most important thing a gamer can do is to buy the best card he/she can afford when it comes to gaming, because a card will have the greatest impact, and you have a great card, so I wouldnt worry about a bottleneck from your cpu, as I dont think youll see much of one from it, crysis or no. The only game that REALLY requires a great cpu is flight sim
 

nightscope

Distinguished
Jan 20, 2007
828
0
18,980


E2160 at 3.0 Ghz > E6750 at 2.66 Ghz
 

qmalik

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2007
382
0
18,780
dude ur fine. a OC 2160e is amazing.

I have a single core AMD 3500+ !!! and a 8800GT!!! im only getting like....50% performance if that....I do plan on my upgrades soon tho...
 


Dude, don't think you are in that bad of shape. Your AMD 3500+ may becoming a little dated, but it certainly is not bottlenecking your 8800GT by 50%.
10%-15% would be much more like it. And, with a little overclocking, you could to could run any single-threaded game right along with rest of the "big-dogs".
Now if you are talking about Cyrsis, that is another matter all together and nobody is running at high settings, high resolution with blistering speed....no matter what you have.
 

espguitarguy232

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2007
115
0
18,680
Why would you upgrade a brand new processor? At 3ghz you should have no problem hanging with the best of them. Theres no bottleneck if your running at 3ghz. High resolution fps has more to do with gpu horsepower and gpu memory. The higher the resolution, the more buffer memory you need. I only run at 1280x1024 so I picked up the 256mb 8800GT, and its smoking fast.
The 2160 is no C2D, but its certainly no P4. Its just a bit slower than a C2D due to the lower fsb and the lower cache.


The slower cache and fsb does concern me with higher end games, but it sounds like i should wait for somethin like the quad cores to come down in price.
 

brett_monkey

Distinguished
Mar 3, 2007
87
0
18,630
All of this talk of the CPU so called 'bottleneck' is a big myth. Most of us (people who post/read in the forums) are running our games at or above 12X10. The CPU almost is not a factor when it comes to higher resolutions. Case in point, my bro is running COD 4 with a Athlon 3200, he is still getting 60FPS, because his graphics card can handle it. Same here I ran a Athlon 3000 for years before recently upgrading to an X2, and I am still using a 939 mobo.
 

systemlord

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2006
2,737
0
20,780
I also found that my E6600 @ 2.4 GHz was bottlenecking my 8800GTX OC @ 651MHz core, 1525MHz Shader and 2006MHZ Memory. But when I overclock my processer to 3GHz beon that point I saw no more increase in performance. My OC'ed 8800GTX didn't show any performance gain with my E6600 @ 2.4GHz, but at 3GHz is where my card came to life with 15 extra FPS on Crysis plus a much higher average FPS.
 

espguitarguy232

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2007
115
0
18,680


That makes sense to me that u would see a performance gain. The thing i have to deal with is if i get a 1333 FSB CPU i have to update my BFG 650i ultra mobo's BIOS to P03 (with current bios only supporting 1066), which I am not sure how to do. But having the ability to get 1333 would be nice
 

systemlord

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2006
2,737
0
20,780


In my last two computers I haven't updated the Bios not once, if it performs well with my hardware with no hick-ups I leave it be. You will only see a 3% difference between the 1066, 1333 MHz FSB processers. The 1333MHz FSB processers do OC better than the old B2 stepping, but if your not interested in overclocking then you don't need a 1333MHz FSB processer.

Heres my benchies, have a look at the minumum/average FPS. Its not just about the extra FPS its the fact that the whole game runs much smoother when you pan left to right. Updating my mobo's Bios is as simple as plugging in a USB flash drive, I don't know how your mobo updates its Bios. Updating Bios's isn't one of my things I'm good at because I have never needed to update the Bios.

12082007174149ym7.jpg

By systemlord at 2007-12-07

12122007130631dv3.jpg

By systemlord at 2007-12-11
 

espguitarguy232

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2007
115
0
18,680
What game are you using for those FPS readings? The CPU's I am considering are E6600, E6750, and E6850. The last 2 being at 1333, which is why I would need the bios update. I have some experience overclocking, but it depends what chip i get as far as how much overclocking i will do
 

systemlord

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2006
2,737
0
20,780


In the Crysis Bin32 folder the GPU and a CPU benchmark that the Crytek's Dev. was kind to include, its in the demo as well. The E6750 and E6850 are going to overclock better than a E6600, I couldn't believe the other day at NewEgg I saw the E6600 going for $234.99 while the E6750 is going for $189.99 and the E6850 for $279.99. More people are buying the E6750 and overclocking it, the difference between the E6750 and the E6850 is 400MHz which you can very easy OC.

What type of cooling are you considering air or water cooling? If air cooling I recommend the Tuniq Tower 120. It will fit most standard ATX cases just fine.

Tuniq Tower : http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835154001&Tpk=tuniq+tower+120



tuniqtower120qh3.jpg

By systemlord at 2007-11-13


tuniqtower1202bx3.jpg

By systemlord at 2007-11-13

 

systemlord

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2006
2,737
0
20,780


The ultra 120 has problems with machine marks on the base and doesn't even come with a fan, and with all the base problems that you can read at NewEgg and all the reviews. The reviews clearly show which one is better. So if you want round swirl marks on the base get the Ultra 120, because I had one and not only was it marked up badly, but the base was slanted.

Tuniq Tower 120 reviews : http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835154001&Tpk=tuniq+tower+120

Ultra 120 Extreme reviews : http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835109140


 

espguitarguy232

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2007
115
0
18,680
I actually already have a aftermarket cooling fan, the stock cooler never made it out of the box. It is a ARCTIC COOLING Freezer 7 Pro 92mm. It keeps my E2160 @ 27C when the fan is at 73% idle, in game it doesnt go past 35C. Regardless I have to call BFG and have them walk me through this bios update, which will be a hassle. I might as well get a 1333 fsb chip because id rather get the best i can get for under 300 so i dont have to do this again anytime soon
 

pernicious

Distinguished
Feb 14, 2007
21
0
18,510
I have to ask a bit of a stupidly obvious question.

It's not staying on the same FPS because you have vertical sync on, and you're constantly getting 60fps is it?

Sorry if that just insults your intelligence. I just thought it is a bit odd that the FPS doesn't change at least somewhat between resolutions, even if the CPU is bottle necking.

 

systemlord

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2006
2,737
0
20,780



I'm sorry but I don't understand your question.