Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

What CPU is needed for the GTX 295?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 8, 2009 7:55:07 PM

Is an E8400 enough to run the GTX 295 without there being a bottleneck?

More about : cpu needed gtx 295

January 8, 2009 8:02:58 PM

if you overclock your E8400 i thing you will be fine.
January 8, 2009 8:05:46 PM

Do you have any more information? How much do I need to overclock it?
Related resources
January 8, 2009 8:14:45 PM

Core i7 @ 4.0ghz+
January 8, 2009 8:15:56 PM

3.8GHz will be will be good. Also is what Resolution you play. if you play at high Resolution (eg 1900x1200) you do not need to overclock to high.
January 8, 2009 8:19:11 PM

Noya you do not need Core i7 for the GTX 295
January 8, 2009 8:21:29 PM

I do play at 1920x1200. Can I overclock to 3.8 ghz using only the stock heatsink fan that came with the processor?
January 8, 2009 8:25:14 PM

Is it just me or are people getting dumber?
January 8, 2009 8:30:05 PM

With the stock heatsink you can overclock around 3.4GHz but for more you need a new heatsink.
January 8, 2009 8:33:47 PM

Jus136 said:
I do play at 1920x1200. Can I overclock to 3.8 ghz using only the stock heatsink fan that came with the processor?


um no, that wouldnt be good. the stock hsf can handle a small oc like 3.2-3.3GHz but i found that 3.4GHz and above the temps were a little too much. i run a e8400 also and i have a temp asus 80mm cooler on it and it idles at 43C and i have smart fan so it changes the fan rpms as the temp rises. which is annoying because when i play a games i can usually hear the asus cooler, i have cm 690 case with 7 1200mm+ sized fans and the cpu cooler is the only one i can hear. but tommorow ill have my zalman 9500a cooler and try to push 4.0GHz. i reccomend you buy a arctic freezer 7 pro or a zalman 9500/9700 hsf as those are the best rated coolers on newegg. get a new hsf.
January 8, 2009 9:11:00 PM

xxcoop42xx said:
um no, that wouldnt be good. the stock hsf can handle a small oc like 3.2-3.3GHz but i found that 3.4GHz and above the temps were a little too much. i run a e8400 also and i have a temp asus 80mm cooler on it and it idles at 43C and i have smart fan so it changes the fan rpms as the temp rises. which is annoying because when i play a games i can usually hear the asus cooler, i have cm 690 case with 7 1200mm+ sized fans and the cpu cooler is the only one i can hear. but tommorow ill have my zalman 9500a cooler and try to push 4.0GHz. i reccomend you buy a arctic freezer 7 pro or a zalman 9500/9700 hsf as those are the best rated coolers on newegg. get a new hsf.


I been running an e8400 24/7 with the stock cooler @ 4005 MHz for months with no problems.The stock cooler is fine.So would be a gtx 295
January 8, 2009 9:20:49 PM

gerardfraser said:
I been running an e8400 24/7 with the stock cooler @ 4005 MHz for months with no problems.The stock cooler is fine.So would be a gtx 295


you lucky
January 8, 2009 9:29:00 PM

I'm really confused now. So is the e8400 adequate for the GTX 295 without overclocking? It seems like there are conflicting opinions on this...
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
January 8, 2009 10:49:28 PM

Kaldor said:
Is it just me or are people getting dumber?



I strongly agree.

I think its something in the food.....
January 8, 2009 11:27:15 PM

Quote:
Is an E8400 enough to run the GTX 295 without there being a bottleneck?


In short ... No

Read this: (Used a QX9650 overclocked just avoid bottlenecking)

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTU5OSwy...

Quote:
I do play at 1920x1200. Can I overclock to 3.8 ghz using only the stock heatsink fan that came with the processor?


Stock heatsink ... yes YOU can try, but I wouldn't ... No

Quote:
I think its something in the food.....


+1







January 9, 2009 1:59:53 AM

Jus136 said:
Is an E8400 enough to run the GTX 295 without there being a bottleneck?


There shouldn't be a problem with e8400 just overclock it. my rig is e6600 overclocked to 3.2 in sli gtx 280 it runs smoothly.
January 9, 2009 9:16:44 PM

I just ordered the GTX 295 and all I have is a lowly QX6700 (2.66GHz). Don't I feel inadequite. :p 
January 9, 2009 9:24:12 PM

You dont need to overclock it but hey you may aswell just buy another Heatsink for $30 and wack it to like 3.6Ghz whats the worst that can happen you'll have too much power!!! (yeah like that really a problem!) IF THE MAN WANTS POWER GIVE IT TO HIM GOD!!!
a c 106 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
January 9, 2009 11:22:59 PM

Well, at 1900x1200 your CPU will probably hold back the 295. It's not like it would matter if you're getting over 100 FPS though. If you're worried about it then get the Xigmatech cooler and some Arctic Silver to help you overclock your CPU if you don't want to worry about being CPU limited. You should be good if your CPU hits around 3.8-4.0 GHz.
May 14, 2009 1:26:40 AM

I just got my 295 a few days ago and it's running great. I'm using a QX6850 at 3.5Ghz on a 680i board playin at 1920x1200. As far as I can tell there is no bottleneck.... I'm runnin FC2 maxed, Crysis on high, Mass Effect maxed. I'm still not sure if its cores or freq. that's makin the difference though.
May 14, 2009 3:10:58 AM

It depends on the game, settings and resolution, as some of these elements create situations that are more computer bound than others.

I'm a fan of having actual numbers to back up my claim, so here you go...

http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=807

If you really don't want to read the whole article, at least check out the following two pages. I believe they do a good job highlighting the difference between a faily graphics card bound game (Crysis Warhead), versus one that is a little bit more even handed (World in Conflict).

http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=807&p=5

http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=807&p=15

As you can tell, when paired with a GTX 295 at high resolutions, a Core 2 at 3.0 Ghz is decent in Crysis Warhead, but a notable bottleneck in World in Conflict.
!