Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

8800GTS 512Mb bottleneck?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 22, 2008 4:36:30 PM

Just a quickie,

Do you think it would be a waste to plant a 8800GTS into my rig??
January 22, 2008 4:40:01 PM

Seeing as i cannot edit this message I have poted again...it may be useful to know that i have the following:

AMD 64 X2 4400+
2GB DDR400
ASUS NForce something or other (shamefulthat i have forgotten in know! ;)  )
+ the standard bits and bobs.
January 22, 2008 4:44:21 PM

no way. This processor is fast as crazy. It performs up there with the GTX and in some cases better, so no, it will not bottleneck you. What are you OCing to?
Related resources
January 22, 2008 4:57:28 PM

I think he's wondering if his system is fast enough to justify using a video card as fast as the 8800GTS.
January 22, 2008 5:45:44 PM

I'll throw in my $0.02. This last weekend was a mad upgrade weekend. Got my GTS 512MB card on Friday, plunked it in to my E6300 (overclocked to 2.4GHz) system. Got 9800 on 3DMark06. Then on Saturday, I picked up an E8400 processor. Plunked it in, and went up to 12,000+. Nothing else changed.

I did not, however, benchmark a bunch of games, unfortunately.

Clint
January 22, 2008 5:55:11 PM

I just bought the Nvidia 8800 GTS. It's the best card I've owned so far :)  considered it's so cheap.
January 22, 2008 5:57:14 PM

I'm very happy with mine, too... Very quiet, fast, came with Crysis... I figure it ended up being cheaper than buying a GT, since I was going to buy the game and a VGA cooler anyway...

Clint
January 22, 2008 6:02:52 PM

Yes it WILL bottleneck. Quite a bit, but that doesn't mean performance will magically stop at an invisible wall, it'll keep increasing.


Tbh think 8800GT is more worth its money for your computer. Maybe get a aftermarket cooled one for your extra money.
January 22, 2008 6:03:18 PM

CNeufeld said:
I'm very happy with mine, too... Very quiet, fast, came with Crysis... I figure it ended up being cheaper than buying a GT, since I was going to buy the game and a VGA cooler anyway...

Clint


Same here. Also came with a dual slot cooler, faster clocks, and 16 more SP!
January 22, 2008 6:53:11 PM

I have a 320mb 8800gts, which used to run with E6600 until recently. After upgrading to E6850 I scored higher in 3dmark05 and 06, and experienced better frame rate while playing certain titles
January 22, 2008 9:55:59 PM

Quote:
here's a tricky one, explain what a bottleneck is, this should be interesting.
I will echo that... I always see a lot off posts such as this, folks will say "sure it will slow down, bottleneck, etc". How do you know??? have you used these same components, do you have a site that reflects these tests, with these exact components???
a b U Graphics card
January 22, 2008 10:10:07 PM

I would not hesitate to put a 512MB GTS in your rig. It depends on the resolution and games you play, but check out at higher res with fsaa things become GPU bound with an 8800GT on all these cpu's (COD4, UT3, Crysis):
http://firingsquad.com/hardware/$500_gaming_pc_upgrade/page5.asp

I would not put two 8800GTS 512MB cards in an X2 4400 rig though.
January 22, 2008 10:30:50 PM

no ur system will be able to handle it. Sure it will slow the gpu down a bit but nothing huge
January 22, 2008 10:31:01 PM

You couldn't have picked a better graphics card for your system, you put your money in the GPU which is where most of the demanding stuff is done, in the GPU. :) 
January 22, 2008 10:46:29 PM

With that card if you stay at a respectable res that cpu is fine.
January 23, 2008 5:53:45 AM

my 4800 at 3.0 ghz bottlenecks my card will be getting a 8400 and a x38 soon
January 23, 2008 7:09:09 AM

Wow! wasnt expecting so many replies but thanks to you all for the input. I will be playing (hopefully at my native res of 1680x1050) - Based what has been said, I think i will take the plunge as I am looking to go Intel in the next few months aswell.

On a completely non graphics note, I was wondering if someone could give me one further snippet of advice re the rest of the system upgrade...?

Was looking at getting an E8400 CPU or Q6600, now do you have to match the RAM speed to the CPU FSB?? ie do i need 1333Mhz RAM for the E8400 to get the best from it or will DDR800 do? I have seen 4xGb of OCZ Reaper (4-4-4-15) DDR2 800Mhz for just under £76 and am very tempted to pick it up in case the prices go up but if i need other RAM more suited to a higher FSB on the CPU then I will have to wait.

As always any help is appreciated.

January 23, 2008 12:25:45 PM

CNeufeld said:
I'll throw in my $0.02. This last weekend was a mad upgrade weekend. Got my GTS 512MB card on Friday, plunked it in to my E6300 (overclocked to 2.4GHz) system. Got 9800 on 3DMark06. Then on Saturday, I picked up an E8400 processor. Plunked it in, and went up to 12,000+. Nothing else changed.

I did not, however, benchmark a bunch of games, unfortunately.

Clint


?

an important point that needed to be made lol
a b U Graphics card
January 23, 2008 12:36:23 PM

No you do not need higher clocked DDR2, you can run DDR2-800 (PC-6400) with a 1333 bus cpu.
January 23, 2008 2:38:44 PM

Thanks for that Pauldh that is good to know but would it have a significant impact on gaming performance?
a c 130 U Graphics card
January 23, 2008 4:09:48 PM


No.
Mactronix
January 23, 2008 4:42:46 PM

Toss it in there! I use an 8800GT with my 4200+, and it's a HUGE improvement over my old 7900GT. Sure, you may not get quite as many frames as someone with an e6850, but in most games (not including Crysis, etc.), 10 frames isn't going to killl you.

Trust me. It's worth it.
a c 271 U Graphics card
January 23, 2008 7:05:00 PM

chedrz said:
HUGE improvement over my old 7900GT.


:bounce:  9 days to go, I have to wait 9 whole days! :bounce: 

January 23, 2008 8:31:09 PM

Its a good idea to run the RAM at a 1:1 with the DRAM:FSB ratio, ie. my processor runs at 3.2GHz on a 1600MHz FSB so running my RAM at 800MHz gives me a 1:1 ratio and half of 1600 is 800 = 1:1. This is how Intel comes up with 1:1 ratio. My processor is a 1066MHz FSB unlike yours being a 1333MHz FSB so your 1:1 ratio will be a bit different. My RAM will run at 1200MHz overclocked but I run it at 800MHz to get the 1:1 ratio, plus at 1200MHz extra cooling is required because my dimms get very hot! :pt1cable: 


The Q6600 will be remembered as one of the best quads Intel has come out with for so little money, once overclocked can even beat the pants off some of the $1000 dollar top of the crop CPU's from Intel. These Q6600's have been known to OC upto 3.8GHz, most being happly with 3.6GHz. You can't go wrong with either the E8400 or the Q6600, there both monsters for any hardcore gaming rig. As for the best RAM I think the Crucial Ballistix DDR2 800 are the best.

Crucial Ballistix DDR2 800 >> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
January 23, 2008 9:00:04 PM

My set up is very similar to yours.

I was planning on getting the Q6600 with new mobo, and ram. But based on the performance I am seeing, there is no need for me to spend the extra money.

My native resolution is 1680 x 1050.
Crysis performance is very playable with setting on high and no FFSA.
January 23, 2008 9:07:59 PM

And here is my take on this whole "bottleneck" concept.

Total system performance is based on the cumulation of all system components. Most benchmark programs are optimized to test certain aspects of the systems performance. To the best of my knowledge, no single benchmark can provide you with good indication of the system's overall performance. That being said, dont rely on benchmarks to determine whether or not any one component is holding back the rest of your system.

In the same respect, games and applications are optimized differently, and thus are effected by hardware differently.

All that being said, the 8800GTS 512 will be not be fully utilized by programs that are optimized for the CPU, and the CPU will not be fully utilized by programs that are optimized for the GPU.

To the OP, I am not making these statements to punish you for using the word "bottleneck." It's aimed more at the folks that love to debate this topic.
January 23, 2008 9:12:57 PM

CNeufeld said:
I'll throw in my $0.02. This last weekend was a mad upgrade weekend. Got my GTS 512MB card on Friday, plunked it in to my E6300 (overclocked to 2.4GHz) system. Got 9800 on 3DMark06. Then on Saturday, I picked up an E8400 processor. Plunked it in, and went up to 12,000+. Nothing else changed.

I did not, however, benchmark a bunch of games, unfortunately.

Clint



Im going to pick on you for a second.

In 3dmark06, the final score is broken down into different catagories. Which scores changed?

Im willing to bet that the only score the increased was your CPU score, and that is why your overall score increased.

My point here is that the score probably didnt go up because the CPU "unlocked" your cramped GPU, but that the overall score increased soley due to the better CPU score.

:) 
a c 130 U Graphics card
January 23, 2008 9:23:58 PM


The reason the score went up so much is down to the way 3dmark06 works it is very CPU intensive and the results cneufeld got only go to highlight that its time to move to the wolfdale cpu's. Which could mean cheap core 2 chips for those that dont want/need the extra power. probably not but you never know ?
Mactronix
January 23, 2008 9:47:14 PM

mactronix said:
The reason the score went up so much is down to the way 3dmark06 works it is very CPU intensive and the results cneufeld got only go to highlight that its time to move to the wolfdale cpu's. Which could mean cheap core 2 chips for those that dont want/need the extra power. probably not but you never know ?
Mactronix



DOES NO ONE READ MY POSTS!!! :fou: 
a c 130 U Graphics card
January 23, 2008 10:10:58 PM


Now dont get angry i think and i may be wrong here but you may be missing the point.
3dmark has always split things up like you posted but the whole of 3dmark 06 is very very CPU heavy, like a lot more so than before. Not saying you are wrong just didnt know if you knew about it thats all i posted for.
Mactronix
January 23, 2008 11:17:51 PM

rallyimprezive said:
Im going to pick on you for a second.

In 3dmark06, the final score is broken down into different catagories. Which scores changed?

Im willing to bet that the only score the increased was your CPU score, and that is why your overall score increased.

My point here is that the score probably didnt go up because the CPU "unlocked" your cramped GPU, but that the overall score increased soley due to the better CPU score.

:) 


How much do you want to bet?

Here's the breakdown, with the old processor first:

E6300 (OC) (http://service.futuremark.com/orb/projectdetails.jsp?pr...)
3DMark Score 9839 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score 4488 Marks
SM 3.0 Score 5060 Marks
CPU Score 1973 Marks

E8400 (http://service.futuremark.com/orb/projectdetails.jsp?pr...)
3DMark Score 12042 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score 5722 Marks
SM 3.0 Score 5540 Marks
CPU Score 2647 Marks

I don't know if the links will work, since it's not your project, but you're welcome to try.

Clint
January 27, 2008 12:13:25 AM

rallyimprezive said:
DOES NO ONE READ MY POSTS!!! :fou: 



People tend to ignor multi posting when you can put them all in one post, instead of making almost three post in a row. :) 
January 27, 2008 12:36:54 AM

bottleneck= gpu that can go faster then what the cpu can handle or if the cpu that is faster then what the video card can handle.

EXAMPLE: A 1950pro will perform close to the same in a AMD X2 4800+ and a X2 6400+ (slight difference). A 8800 GTS/8800GT will increase in speed greatly between the two (huge difference). Really no cpu made that is faster then the 8800 series video cards...yet.
Tom's actually had benchmarks showing "bottlenecking". look it up.
January 27, 2008 1:41:57 AM

CNeufeld said:
I'll throw in my $0.02. This last weekend was a mad upgrade weekend. Got my GTS 512MB card on Friday, plunked it in to my E6300 (overclocked to 2.4GHz) system. Got 9800 on 3DMark06. Then on Saturday, I picked up an E8400 processor. Plunked it in, and went up to 12,000+. Nothing else changed.

I did not, however, benchmark a bunch of games, unfortunately.

Clint

I saw the same thing when I went from my 1.)FX60/8800GTS 640 -> 2.)FX60/8800GTS 512 -> 3.)Q6600/8800GTS 512. The difference from 1->2 was not huge, but noticeable, 9000 to 10000. 2 to 3 went from 10000 to almost 15000. And it's not just an artificial boost based on the CPU's score. I've seen real and significant performance gains in real games. One surprise has been with Oblivion. With setup #2 I was getting an average of 45fps in one test I had setup. With setup #3 I was getting 60fps, with VSync on in both tests. I always read peoples opinions about bottle necking and how what CPU will affect which GPU and I always think, unless they actually have like 10 systems running all these different configs who do they really know? A lot of what people give as advice is just crap they heard and are just passing on without knowing if it's true or not. To the OP: You can't go wrong with an 8800GTS. However a faster CPU will probably (in my experiences) benefit you in gaming also.
January 27, 2008 6:01:12 PM

computertech82 said:
bottleneck = gpu that can go faster then what the cpu can handle or if the cpu that is faster then what the video card can handle.



That is the most illogical statement I think I've seen posted to date anywhere. How is it then that in tripple SLI see's such a huge increase in FPS if there is only one CPU and three 8800GTX??? You need to be more careful what you type, because your missleading information is garbage to those that don't know anybetter.


!