Hey, So I put this rig together a little over a year ago, just before every computer component manufacture popped out something brand new.
AMD Anthlon 64 x2 6000+
Foxconn 590 sli mobo
4 gigs corsair 6400-c4 low latency 800 mhz ram
Geforce 8800 gtx
750w psu
vista 32 bit
When it was finished, it was definitely a solid gaming PC, but with a lot of the more recent games ive been running, (crysis,crysis warhead, farcry 2,etc.) It's starting to show it's age. Yeah, this would have been a fantastic rig in 2006, but by todays standards it lacks in a few areas. Because foxconn is lazy and wont release a BIOS update, my mobo isn't compatible with phenom quad cores, despite the AM2 slot. the mobo is also limited to 800 mhz ram. It does have 2 pci-e x16 slots, but not pci-e 2.0, still from what I've read there isn't much difference, just the bandwidth, and performance doesn't really seem to be effected for most people.
Anyways, moving on to my bottle necking question. This rig runs crysis on high in dx9 at roughly 35-45 fps, crysis warhead on high DX10 for 35-45 in game play with some fluctuation above and below those numbers.
I've been doing some benchmarking with FC2's benchmark program, and i consistently get 40 fps average on a mix of high-ultra high setting, but where the fps seems to dip the most is when there are significant fire effects, which according to the benchmark program are controlled by the CPU despite being rendered by the gpu.
Because there isn't much I can do to upgrade without building a whole new system, I was looking at swapping out the 8800 gtx for a evag gtx 260 core 216 SC edition which according to most of the research I've done would give me somewhere between a 30% and 45% fps increase. I just wanna make sure the amd anthlon 6000+ won't bottle neck my performance. I tried some tests overclocking my 8800 gtx, and got about a 7-10% average performance increase, however, the minimum frame rate on the benchmark didn't increase much, and it was always during the heavy fire effects. This is leading me to believe the cpu really is the limiting factor of the rig.
Can anybody tell me if that really is the case, or is my cpu powerful enough to handle the video card upgrade?
AMD Anthlon 64 x2 6000+
Foxconn 590 sli mobo
4 gigs corsair 6400-c4 low latency 800 mhz ram
Geforce 8800 gtx
750w psu
vista 32 bit
When it was finished, it was definitely a solid gaming PC, but with a lot of the more recent games ive been running, (crysis,crysis warhead, farcry 2,etc.) It's starting to show it's age. Yeah, this would have been a fantastic rig in 2006, but by todays standards it lacks in a few areas. Because foxconn is lazy and wont release a BIOS update, my mobo isn't compatible with phenom quad cores, despite the AM2 slot. the mobo is also limited to 800 mhz ram. It does have 2 pci-e x16 slots, but not pci-e 2.0, still from what I've read there isn't much difference, just the bandwidth, and performance doesn't really seem to be effected for most people.
Anyways, moving on to my bottle necking question. This rig runs crysis on high in dx9 at roughly 35-45 fps, crysis warhead on high DX10 for 35-45 in game play with some fluctuation above and below those numbers.
I've been doing some benchmarking with FC2's benchmark program, and i consistently get 40 fps average on a mix of high-ultra high setting, but where the fps seems to dip the most is when there are significant fire effects, which according to the benchmark program are controlled by the CPU despite being rendered by the gpu.
Because there isn't much I can do to upgrade without building a whole new system, I was looking at swapping out the 8800 gtx for a evag gtx 260 core 216 SC edition which according to most of the research I've done would give me somewhere between a 30% and 45% fps increase. I just wanna make sure the amd anthlon 6000+ won't bottle neck my performance. I tried some tests overclocking my 8800 gtx, and got about a 7-10% average performance increase, however, the minimum frame rate on the benchmark didn't increase much, and it was always during the heavy fire effects. This is leading me to believe the cpu really is the limiting factor of the rig.
Can anybody tell me if that really is the case, or is my cpu powerful enough to handle the video card upgrade?
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram