CPU Bottlenecks

[immersive]

This is my system:

EVGA 680i - A1
E6600 stock - 2.4: Stock cooler
CORSAIR Dominator 2GB: Dual Channel Kit @ stock 1066
EVGA 8800 GTS 320MB
OCZ GameXStream 700W PSU
Windows XP

I have Windows Vista I just prefer to run XP due to the memory Vista takes.
I have noticed in Vista that games do not seem to take a hard performance hit since SP1 although Warhammer Online did not like to run well under Vista due to the memory issure.

This is what I just ordered:

ZALMAN CNPS9900LED 120mm 2 Ball CPU Cooler - Retail

EVGA 896-P3-1171-AR GeForce GTX 275 Superclocked Edition 896MB 448-bit DDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Supported Video Card - Retail

CORSAIR Dominator 2GB: Dual Channel Kit

My question is with the stock speed of my processor will it really be a bottleneck for my new graphics card and if so; how high would I have to clock it before the gains are not worth it?

I figure the new heat sink should allow for a 3GHz - 3.4GHz overclock.

Also should I turn down my ram from the stock 1066 to about 900? I have seen alot of people do that with this ram. I really do not have a clue about ram timings. I have read up on how to overclock my processor and what to disable in the bios so I know I can over clock my processor just fine it is just the ram and the bottleneck of the processor I am worried about.

P.S if this should go into the OC thread please move it for me.

 

[hundredislandsboy]

Generally speaking about PC components and upgrading, anytime you combine a hardware part from 3 years ago to one just recently released, the older part will be the bottleneck.

Fortunately, with a little overclock your CPU might still be able to get the most of the GTS 250. It may not max out the video and if you're playing at a resolution below 1680 X 1050, you may not even notice your new CPU's overclocked setting and the GTS 250. But you'll see it for sure in 3dMark06.


For the e6600 -
9 x 333MHz = 2997 Mhz(easily reachable speed with DDR 667, running at 333MHz and CPU to RAM ratio of 1:1)
9 x 400Mhz = 3600 Mhz (somehwat likely with Zalman air cooling with DDR 800, running at 400MHz and CPU to RAM ratio of 1:1)

There might some stability issues at 3.6 Ghz.


If your system is stable with your RAM running at 1066 I would keep it there. Something else to consider is to replace the e6600 with an e8400 which will easily at 3.6 GHz 9 X 400.

 

[jsc]

I estimate that at around 3.2 - 3.3 GHz, the GPU starts to be the limiting factor.

Sometime after I get back from vacation next month, I am going to do some testing.

I got my E6600 up to 3.6 GHz. in my 680i. Used a hand-lapped TRUE with a Scythe S-Flex fan for cooling.

OC guides:

HOWTO: Overclock C2Q (Quads) and C2D (Duals) - Guide v1.6.1
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/240001-29-howto-overclock-quads-duals-guide

Core 2 Quad and Duo Temperature Guide
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/221745-29-core-quad-temperature-guide

And look for a guide on OC'ing 680i motherboards.

 

[jay2tall]

There will ALWAYS be a bottleneck, there will always be something in your computer waiting for a slower component to fetch information. Your CPU is fine. I'd look at OCing it a little since C2D's OC so well. Just get a modest cooler, like an Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro. It's a fav among budget overclockers.

I have Windows Vista I just prefer to run XP due to the memory Vista takes.
I have noticed in Vista that games do not seem to take a hard performance hit since SP1 although Warhammer Online did not like to run well under Vista due to the memory issure.

Why are you concerned how much memory vista takes? It is designed differently than XP. In XP it keeps less information resident in RAM and has to fetch it when needed. Vista actually monitors what applications you use most and prefetches it and stores it in memory allowing apps to launch faster. Why does everyone talk about how much memory it uses? If you have 2GB of memory, USE IT. All of my games have run better for me since I upgrade to Vista. DX10 is awesome and I didn't notice a performance hit at all. On the contrary, some games ran BETTER, like FarCry2.

 

[immersive]

With the same settings in Warhammer Online in XP vs. Vista there was a major performance hit. All the performance was due to the ram usage.

Fresh boot in XP my systems uses 320mb ram and when Warhammer is running at the max settings I could get I used 1.87gig of ram. Under vista it was using 1.99gig of ram and the performance was horrible. Warhammer is the most memory intensive game I run. Although with my 4gig of ram I don't figure it will be an issue anymore.

I will take all your comments into consideration and thank you.

PS: HundredIslandsBoy its a GTX 275 not a GTS 250. A lot more card

I figure it will go into my new I7 Rig I plan on building in about 4 month or so.
Oh and for the resolution I have a Dell 27" Ultra Sharp so 1920X1200 is what I would love to play my games at.

 

[WR2]

Why are you concerned how much memory vista takes? It is designed differently than XP. In XP it keeps less information resident in RAM and has to fetch it when needed. Vista actually monitors what applications you use most and prefetches it and stores it in memory allowing apps to launch faster.

+1 Why pay for RAM that isn't being used?
Vista does a much better job than XP of "getting out of the way" for serious multi-tasking if your multiple applications start needing more RAM. It can end up using less RAM for itself than XP ever could.
The extra 2GB of RAM is a smart move.

 

[mi1ez]

Why are you concerned how much memory vista takes? It is designed differently than XP. In XP it keeps less information resident in RAM and has to fetch it when needed. Vista actually monitors what applications you use most and prefetches it and stores it in memory allowing apps to launch faster. Why does everyone talk about how much memory it uses? If you have 2GB of memory, USE IT. All of my games have run better for me since I upgrade to Vista. DX10 is awesome and I didn't notice a performance hit at all. On the contrary, some games ran BETTER, like FarCry2.

+2

 

[immersive]

Well my new heat sink has been installed. My temps went from 45 idel down to 32. This weekend I will do some testing for you all. I will 1st check fps in many games with stock cpu and 8800 GTS 320. Then stock CPU and GTX 275. After that I will overclock my CPU and test both cards again. I will post all information including all settings, clocks, volts, etc. in the Overclocking thread. I will post a link to my new post when it is complete here.