Tom's Hardware > Forum > Graphic & Displays > Nvidia > Minimum CPU to push the GTX 295

Minimum CPU to push the GTX 295

Forum Graphic & Displays : Nvidia - Minimum CPU to push the GTX 295

Tom's Hardware: Over 1.4 million members in 6 different countries available to answer all your high-tech questions. Sign up now! Its free!
Word :    Username :           
 

Currently I have a e6850 w/10% OC is it going to be enough?
Vista 64 ult 8 gigs ram

Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.

Sure, why not.

------------------------------ I'm a git, deal with it.

Antec 1200,PC Power & Cooling 750,Gigabyte DS4-x48,Intel Q9550@3.4 W/Xigmatek S1283,8GB OCZ DDR2 800,ATI 4870X2,X-FI>CA 640C amp>Tannoy R300/Senn 595's
Reply to strangestranger

I would say an e8400 at stock speeds would be a minimum, so a 3.3ghz 6850 should be fine.

Reply to spoonboy

Last i heard you dont need much above a core 2 running at 2.4 to get the best from todays cards, just latly people have been saying that much over 3.0 isnt worth the bother as far as Overclocking goes as the performance returns are not worth the extra hastle. So i would say any Core2 above 2.4 is good to go.

Mactronix

Reply to mactronix

My Q6600 bottle necked my gtx260 at 2.4, so I would have to disagree with the above posts. I would say a quad with at least 3.2-3.4 to get the full benefits of the 295.

------------------------------ EVGA x58 Intel I7 920 4.0Ghz w/ TRUE 1.305 load
3x1Gb DDR3 Corsair Dominator1600mhz 1.65vdimm8-8-8-24-74-1T
GTX260 700/1400/1200,Silverstone FT01B-W,300Gb VelociRaptor,Corsair HX1000
Reply to Liderc

I reckon you don't know what a bottleneck is, i reckon and correct me if i am wrong, that you mean you reached a cpu limit before you reached the gpu limit.

I fail to see how a Q6600 could restrict the performance of your gfx card at decent settings in which it would be unacceptable.

If you can't see the difference it doesn't exist.

Like i say, prove me wrong, although i would then say that there is something wrong with your system as many, many people get along fine with your proc.

------------------------------ I'm a git, deal with it.

Antec 1200,PC Power & Cooling 750,Gigabyte DS4-x48,Intel Q9550@3.4 W/Xigmatek S1283,8GB OCZ DDR2 800,ATI 4870X2,X-FI>CA 640C amp>Tannoy R300/Senn 595's
Reply to strangestranger

^+1
I may be wrong here but any CPU upgrade/overclock will result in a performance increase. Thats not to say you had a bottleneck or more correctly a system restriction before.

Mactronix

Reply to mactronix

With my E8600 going from 3.3-4.3 gave me a noticable boost in framerates with my 4870 X2. Going from 4.3-5.2 watercooled did nothing so, there is a certain amount of truth to this. I think it comes down to the law of diminishing returns.

Reply to The_Blood_Raven

mactronix wrote :

Last i heard you dont need much above a core 2 running at 2.4 to get the best from todays cards, just latly people have been saying that much over 3.0 isnt worth the bother as far as Overclocking goes as the performance returns are not worth the extra hastle. So i would say any Core2 above 2.4 is good to go.

Mactronix



hmmmmmmm i'd have to disagree with you and strangerstranger. Im on a 2mb cache core 2 (e6300) and ive noticed a boost every time i oc. gone in steps from stock to 2.1ghz, then to 2.4ghz, to 2.8ghz, and now finally on 3.0ghz. The last 200mhz oc I definetly felt in games and its a shame i cant go any further on my crappy ram. Ive got a 4870 and im sure as eggs are eggs thats its not operating at full potential for want of cpu power. Games want 2 fast cores much much more than 4 quick-ish cores btw, so a stock q6600 is not gonna cut it alongside say even a e6850. Crysis 1&2, farcry 2 and both stalkers love all the mhz you can throw at them. Besides gaming with fraps on and the odd not so infrequent jerkiness without the HD grinding away and neither the fps going under 25 is nailed-on cpu limitation, which I do experience. Cheers.

Reply to spoonboy

This is one of the best explanations i have found to explain exactly what a bottleneck is. http://www.dba-oracle.com/t_detect [...] enecks.htm
As i said in my post after the one you quoted. "I may be wrong here but any CPU upgrade/overclock will result in a performance increase. Thats not to say you had a bottleneck or more correctly a system restriction before."

Mactronix

Reply to mactronix

oh ok fair enough. Nice explanation for a cpu bottleneck btw!

Reply to spoonboy

Your CPU is bottle necking your GPU until you stop receiving fps gains from the increased CPU speed. It's not rocket science. Take a game like Crysis which is more reliant on your GPU for performance. Lets say you get an average of 20 fps with a gtx260 with your Q6600 at 2.4. You then OC your CPU to 3.2 and gain an average of 10 fps. That means your CPU was preventing your GPU from performing as well as it could be aka a bottle neck.





------------------------------ EVGA x58 Intel I7 920 4.0Ghz w/ TRUE 1.305 load
3x1Gb DDR3 Corsair Dominator1600mhz 1.65vdimm8-8-8-24-74-1T
GTX260 700/1400/1200,Silverstone FT01B-W,300Gb VelociRaptor,Corsair HX1000
Reply to Liderc

That is not a bottleneck, that is a cpu limitation, not the same thing.

Your system performance needs to be severely restricted for it to be a bottleneck.

If the rest of your system can process information at a suitable rate but one component cannot, it is a bottleneck.

You will, never ever ever ever get a fully balanced system even with a software app that had a balanced load between cpu and gpu.

This may come as a surprise but i actually do like helping people and noobs like you you spread fud about what is needed cause too much harm in regards to newbs with your "definition" of a bottleneck.

------------------------------ I'm a git, deal with it.

Antec 1200,PC Power & Cooling 750,Gigabyte DS4-x48,Intel Q9550@3.4 W/Xigmatek S1283,8GB OCZ DDR2 800,ATI 4870X2,X-FI>CA 640C amp>Tannoy R300/Senn 595's
Reply to strangestranger

Considering you're using the words 'noob' and 'newbs' I'll veer away from an intelligent response.

------------------------------ EVGA x58 Intel I7 920 4.0Ghz w/ TRUE 1.305 load
3x1Gb DDR3 Corsair Dominator1600mhz 1.65vdimm8-8-8-24-74-1T
GTX260 700/1400/1200,Silverstone FT01B-W,300Gb VelociRaptor,Corsair HX1000
Reply to Liderc

Im a little confused with the article above. I think I must be missing something.
Quote" A sustained processor queue of less than two threads per processor is normally acceptable, depending upon the workload."

While in Task Man. I see where threads are listed but it cant be the queue.
How do I see the actual queue?
My threads are 739 on a dual core Amd at 3.2G while Im typing this.
I know that cant be right.

Reply to pat mcgroin

Liderc wrote :

Considering you're using the words 'noob' and 'newbs' I'll veer away from an intelligent response.



Wouldn't you need intelligence first?

Oh and crude as those words may be they serve their purpose for common language on the internet.

------------------------------ I'm a git, deal with it.

Antec 1200,PC Power & Cooling 750,Gigabyte DS4-x48,Intel Q9550@3.4 W/Xigmatek S1283,8GB OCZ DDR2 800,ATI 4870X2,X-FI>CA 640C amp>Tannoy R300/Senn 595's
Reply to strangestranger

SS+bottleneck explanations =oh oh
It all comes down to the definition of bottleneck. Too many people refer to restrictions as bottlenecks. Now, If I say a restriction is somewhat of a bottleneck? Each carries so much weight, with the term bottleneck is as SS said, not allowing for competant performance, whereas a restriction allows for acceptable performance, but has slowdowns/restrictions in certain areas regarding HW

------------------------------ I went drifting, thru the capitols of tin, where men cant walk and cant freely talk, and sons turn their fathers in
Reply to jaydeejohn

Somewhat of a bottleneck is akin to saying somewhat of a non performance, just to make this clear

------------------------------ I went drifting, thru the capitols of tin, where men cant walk and cant freely talk, and sons turn their fathers in
Reply to jaydeejohn

Sorry to be an arse about this but not everyone has an unlimited budget and the thought of the uninformed being told by 10 people that they need a 3ghz cpu or else and spending more than they need to annoys me greatly.

The worst part is that there is never, ever and proof to back up what they say.

------------------------------ I'm a git, deal with it.

Antec 1200,PC Power & Cooling 750,Gigabyte DS4-x48,Intel Q9550@3.4 W/Xigmatek S1283,8GB OCZ DDR2 800,ATI 4870X2,X-FI>CA 640C amp>Tannoy R300/Senn 595's
Reply to strangestranger

Yea, alot of people OEM, which eliminates ocing, some have older mobos, so its not just a drop in for a newer cpu, let alone the cost and some older mobos dont have bios support, so sometimes you have to work with what you have.
Wouls a quad help here? Sure. Would higher clocks? Up to a certain speed yes, but that shouldnt be the first thing out by anyone when in the OP, the OP asks minimum. Its NOT optimum, and credit to the OP for knowing that, but it should be fine

------------------------------ I went drifting, thru the capitols of tin, where men cant walk and cant freely talk, and sons turn their fathers in
Reply to jaydeejohn

So someone buying a Gtx295 is just going to be dropping it in their newly bought Bestbuy HP desktop?

 

I believe I was more on point with what this post was: Will an E6850 bottleneck a gtx295?

 

The answer is yes, to a certain degree, considering our definitions of 'bottleneck' vary a great deal as we've seen.

 


Message edited by Liderc on 01-06-2009 at 12:05:00 AM
------------------------------ EVGA x58 Intel I7 920 4.0Ghz w/ TRUE 1.305 load
3x1Gb DDR3 Corsair Dominator1600mhz 1.65vdimm8-8-8-24-74-1T
GTX260 700/1400/1200,Silverstone FT01B-W,300Gb VelociRaptor,Corsair HX1000
Reply to Liderc

A 3.2 kentsfield dual isnt that much of a slow down for any card. It will perform at highest in over 90% of all games, and the other 10%, the majority of those do better on a quad, but its still playable, just not optimal, even for those games. When getting to over 3Ghz on any modern cpu, youre not going to lose alot in gaming

------------------------------ I went drifting, thru the capitols of tin, where men cant walk and cant freely talk, and sons turn their fathers in
Reply to jaydeejohn

Yes, but you cannot visualise your bottleneck nor prove it exists, so your kinda screwed there.

------------------------------ I'm a git, deal with it.

Antec 1200,PC Power & Cooling 750,Gigabyte DS4-x48,Intel Q9550@3.4 W/Xigmatek S1283,8GB OCZ DDR2 800,ATI 4870X2,X-FI>CA 640C amp>Tannoy R300/Senn 595's
Reply to strangestranger

strangestranger wrote :

Yes, but you cannot visualise your bottleneck nor prove it exists, so your kinda screwed there.

 


As I've mentioned before, I need not devalue your opinion, you do a transcendent job of it yourself.

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by Liderc on 01-12-2009 at 06:31:29 AM
------------------------------ EVGA x58 Intel I7 920 4.0Ghz w/ TRUE 1.305 load
3x1Gb DDR3 Corsair Dominator1600mhz 1.65vdimm8-8-8-24-74-1T
GTX260 700/1400/1200,Silverstone FT01B-W,300Gb VelociRaptor,Corsair HX1000
Reply to Liderc

Why thank you, you still have no way of backing up what you say, i could, if i can be arsed get some benchies which show a "slow" CPu gettig perfectly playable fps.

All you can do is prove my point.

------------------------------ I'm a git, deal with it.

Antec 1200,PC Power & Cooling 750,Gigabyte DS4-x48,Intel Q9550@3.4 W/Xigmatek S1283,8GB OCZ DDR2 800,ATI 4870X2,X-FI>CA 640C amp>Tannoy R300/Senn 595's
Reply to strangestranger

The point here is, the OP asked minimum, and the answers yes.
@ Liderc, no where did you mention this,, so in essence, youve only touted what we all know, even the OP, but never really answered his question

------------------------------ I went drifting, thru the capitols of tin, where men cant walk and cant freely talk, and sons turn their fathers in
Reply to jaydeejohn

Perfectly playable is also subjective as well as the definition of bottleneck.

 


Edit: He stated Minimum CPU to PUSH the gtx295, he never stated Minimum CPU to run a gtx295, you could run a gtx295 with a 10 year old CPU if you wished.

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by Liderc on 01-06-2009 at 12:41:54 AM
------------------------------ EVGA x58 Intel I7 920 4.0Ghz w/ TRUE 1.305 load
3x1Gb DDR3 Corsair Dominator1600mhz 1.65vdimm8-8-8-24-74-1T
GTX260 700/1400/1200,Silverstone FT01B-W,300Gb VelociRaptor,Corsair HX1000
Reply to Liderc

sdnerf wrote :

Currently I have a e6850 w/10% OC is it going to be enough?
Vista 64 ult 8 gigs ram


Theres the OP. The answers yes

------------------------------ I went drifting, thru the capitols of tin, where men cant walk and cant freely talk, and sons turn their fathers in
Reply to jaydeejohn

Liderc wrote :


you could run a gtx295 with a 10 year old CPU if you wished.



I'm not sure, but I have to disagree with your statement. GTX295 will be on PCI-express and I don't think any motherboard with a socket fitting a 10 year old CPU have a PCI-express slot. You could also have issues with a 10 year old CPU running XP and Nvidia's drivers, I'm not sure if Nvidia will put out GTX 295 drivers for anything before XP. I'm not sure of these two issues, however, and I didn't look at Nvidia drivers or try to find socket 478 motherboards with PCI-e.

I'm not trying to be mean, but you rudely asserted your intelligence, and I find that annoying.

Reply to Dekasav

My point was, almost any cpu in the last 10 years could run a gtx295, not that it would have the a pci-e slot on the motherboard from 10 years ago.

Take things a little less literal next time.

------------------------------ EVGA x58 Intel I7 920 4.0Ghz w/ TRUE 1.305 load
3x1Gb DDR3 Corsair Dominator1600mhz 1.65vdimm8-8-8-24-74-1T
GTX260 700/1400/1200,Silverstone FT01B-W,300Gb VelociRaptor,Corsair HX1000
Reply to Liderc

pat mcgroin wrote :

Im a little confused with the article above. I think I must be missing something.
Quote" A sustained processor queue of less than two threads per processor is normally acceptable, depending upon the workload."

While in Task Man. I see where threads are listed but it cant be the queue.
How do I see the actual queue?
My threads are 739 on a dual core Amd at 3.2G while Im typing this.
I know that cant be right.





The linked article is defining an acceptable queue in the context of an Oracle Database - Meaning, for each processor in your server, there should be 2 threads at a time in the queue awaiting a response (or less) - in sustained operation. So unless you have an Oracle database running on your PC, it's safe to ignore this specification.

Also, you are looking at the total number of processes running on your computer - Not how many happen to have transactions awaiting a response from a database that you don't have... ;)


As far as the rest of the discussion here... Without defining a context, even in as minimal a fashion as setting a screen resolution, any discussion is essentially meaningless. - (The amount of Processor power needed to max this card at 1024x768 is very different from what's needed to achieve the same result at 1920x1200) - And doubly so since nobody can actually buy one of these cards yet. Therefore, it's probably also safe to ignore everything posted on the topic, too.


Message edited by Scotteq on 01-06-2009 at 05:53:31 PM
------------------------------ Which Chip? Well, it depends on which set of thieving b@stardz you choose to support: The ones who use insider trading to enrich themselves while running their company into the ground? Or the ones who illegally pay vendors to not support the first group?
Reply to Scotteq

Scott thanks for clearing that up for me.
I knew I wasnt catching something.
I saw it was under a Oracle page but I guess I didnt give it enough brain power while trying to learn something.
I RIP a lot of movies and do some gaming and I thought it could possibly be relevent towards helping to know when a new processor is required.

As a side note its rather sad to see this post turn into a flame war.
If the person wants to get the card it will run fine for him well into the future
and give him the ability to upgrade other components as money and needs may require.
As stated somewhere above not everyone has bottomless pockets so a systematic approach to system performance with an eye towards the future is all the rest of us could ever possibly hope for.

Reply to pat mcgroin

Thanks for all the info and the article was informative as well. Im going to order the card as soon as its available and I'll post FPS results based on the my current system and with the switch to the gtx295. I will use the crysis demo, 3d05, 3d06. Thx again.

Reply to sdnerf

Liderc wrote :

As I've mentioned before, I need not devalue your opinion, you do an transcendent job of it yourself.


Not trying to be mean or Rude. But, just a Quick Question.

What kind of Accent do you have?

I have seen The English use "an" when referring to a "Hospital" or a "Helicopter" or a "Home". but, To date, I have not seen an "an" placed in front of words like "Transcendent".

OK I forgive you ;) if it was just a Typo and or missed in Spell check. I am not the perfect speller myself and my grammar leaves a lot to be improved upon.

Bryce

Reply to BGRing

BGRing wrote :

Not trying to be mean or Rude. But, just a Quick Question.

What kind of Accent do you have?

I have seen The English use "an" when referring to a "Hospital" or a "Helicopter" or a "Home". but, To date, I have not seen an "an" placed in front of words like "Transcendent".

OK I forgive you ;) if it was just a Typo and or missed in Spell check. I am not the perfect speller myself and my grammar leaves a lot to be improved upon.

Bryce



Sorry=P Was actually going to use a different word which required an*, ended up using transcendent and forgot to change it, fixed for ya.

------------------------------ EVGA x58 Intel I7 920 4.0Ghz w/ TRUE 1.305 load
3x1Gb DDR3 Corsair Dominator1600mhz 1.65vdimm8-8-8-24-74-1T
GTX260 700/1400/1200,Silverstone FT01B-W,300Gb VelociRaptor,Corsair HX1000
Reply to Liderc

Liderc wrote :

Sorry=P Was actually going to use a different word which required an*, ended up using transcendent and forgot to change it, fixed for ya.



I have Been there and done that. not long ago either. and I will probably be there again soon ;)

I was actually stuck for about 3 minutes trying to say Transcendent with an A or an E or an I or an O or an "a" or an "i" etc etc etc... But then I thought Hmmm. what kind of accent is that :D

NE Way.

No Prob Bob.

Bryce.

PS
Feel free to pick my grammar or spelling at any time ;)

Reply to BGRing
Tom's Hardware > Forum > Graphic & Displays > Nvidia > Minimum CPU to push the GTX 295
Go to:

There are 1328 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Please mind

You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.

Add a reply Cancel
Sponsored links
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them