Will a stock Q6600 bottleneck a GTX260 Core 216

[skylinegtr191]

I am trying to decide between a GTS250 1GB and a GTX260 Core 216 for my XPS 420. The XPS has a stock Q6600 @2.4GHz and I'd really like to get the GTX260 Core 216 but I want to know if it will bottleneck. Any insight would be appreciated.

Specs:

Q6000 @2.4GHz
4GB DDR2 @800MHz
9800GT
1680x1050 Resolution
550w PSU

 

[chef7734]

You would be fine with the gtx 260

 

[megamanx00]

If you can't overclock your CPU then it's low stock speed will hold that card back. A GTS250(aka 9800 GTX/GTX+ aka 8800 GTS) won't really be too big of an improvement over your current 9800GT. A GTX 260 sp 192 would probably be a better fit for you since it will be more of an improvement and while it will still be held back by your CPUs low stock clocks, it will probably give you almost the same performance as a 260 sp 216 would.

 

[megamanx00]

BTW if it was me I would think about getting a new 750a board, a second 9800GT, a Rifle cooler, and an Antec PSU/Case combo when there is a good deal on new egg. Running two 9800GTs in SLi with an overclocked Q6600 would certainly overshadow your current XPS system with a 260 core 216 in most cases.

 

[jennyh]

It will bottleneck the 260 at stock, no question.

I have a Q6600 and 4870, and the chip really bottlenecks the card at stock. Simply raising the clock to 2.7-2.8 makes a very big difference however, and most Q6600's will get there without needing to touch the voltages. XPS's can be overclocked to a certain degree can they not?

 

[g3force]

It will bottleneck the 260 at stock, no question.

I have a Q6600 and 4870, and the chip really bottlenecks the card at stock. Simply raising the clock to 2.7-2.8 makes a very big difference however, and most Q6600's will get there without needing to touch the voltages. XPS's can be overclocked to a certain degree can they not?

Ive never heard of a Q6600 being a bottle neck for neither a 4870 nor a GTX 260. What application were you seeing this result in? Also, how does raising the clock rate, as you say, by about 10% bring that much of a noticeable difference?

The ONLY difference you would see in frame rates is if you were running a game at the lowest settings, at which point a Q6600 with a very high clock rate would have around 20% faster framerates. But will you really be doing that?

 

[secolliyn]

Seriously who the hell cares? I really want to know i know the eyes can interpet more than 60 FPS but if your over that who cares you know that great HD on either Bluray or HDDVD they are only running 30 FPS at 60Hz so please will someone tell me after your getting 60 FPS who cares?

 

[michaelmk86]

Seriously who the hell cares? I really want to know i know the eyes can interpet more than 60 FPS but if your over that who cares you know that great HD on either Bluray or HDDVD they are only running 30 FPS at 60Hz so please will someone tell me after your getting 60 FPS who cares?

If you play a game with 60fps avg is not perfect because you with get 35fps min but if you have 100fps avg then the min with be 60fps.

 

[lejay]

It will bottleneck the 260 at stock, no question.

So you are saying that a stock q6600 with gtx 260 will run at the exact same framerate as a q6600 with the gtx 295?
I doubt very much that is true.
Claiming it is "no question" is kinda silly, when you are incorrect.

 

[jennyh]

Well I just tested it.

At stock 2.4ghz and stock gpu, I scored

12148 3dmark 06 marks
SM2 score 4701
SM3 score 5781
cpu score 3453

With the gpu overclocked and same 2.4ghz on the q6600, I scored

12437 3dmark 06 marks
SM2 score 4752
SM3 score 6057
cpu score 3430

With the cpu overclocked to 3ghz and stock gpu, I scored

14101 3dmark 06 marks
SM2 score 5431
SM3 score 6538
CPU score 4259

Ok so it's not the 'exact' same, and maybe even calling it a bottleneck is a bit harsh on the stock q6600 - but it is definitely holding back the 4870 by a lot. Overclocking the gpu got me 300 extra marks while overclocking the cpu got me 2000 extra. Is that big enough to call it a bottleneck? It is for me.

And I know some people are gonna say '3dmark 06 lol blah blah', but while running it at stock the lowest fps i hit was 18 on the first test. The lowest was 24 fps with the cpu overclocked. 3dmark 06 still stresses decent cpu's and gpu's at parts.

If the op is unwilling to overclock the cpu then it would probably make more sense to save money and buy a 4850 or 9800gtx or better still just keep his 9800gt. I always felt my q6600 was a really good match for my 8800gt, certainly overclocking the cpu and gpu gave me similar points increases with those 2 parts.

 

[michaelmk86]

3dmark 06 scores mean nothing games benchmark are much more important.
Here is the results with my old 8800GTS 512 OC

q6600 2.4 + 8800GTS 512
12000 3dmark 06 marks

q6600 3.0 + 8800GTS 512
14200 3dmark 06 marks

q6600 3.2 + 8800GTS 512
14600 3dmark 06 marks

q6600 3.2 + GTX295
17000 3dmark 06 marks


But in games benchmarks going from 2.4 to 3.2 performance incise was 0%!!!! with the 8800GTS 512. So the 3dmark 06 is more like CPU-benchmark instead of GPU-benchmark.

The performance incise from the 8800GTS 512 to the GTX295 was amazing up to 3 times faster in almost all my games, but not in 3dmark 06.

 

[jennyh]

3x faster? Maybe in the most recent gpu intensive games that would almost be possible but a lot of games still require a half decent cpu as well.

The cpu benchmark hardly adds anything to the overall score in 3dmark 06, it's the SM3.0 score that adds most. That is the test of how quickly the shaders are being drawn and if you look at my numbers you will see ~15% increase in that from stock speeds to 3.0.

If you didnt see any increase from 2.4ghz to 3.2ghz it just means that you are gpu limited with the 8800gts, which is what I'm saying here. Even though you didn't see an increase, I would see one with the 4870 because it's the cpu that is holding it back at 2.4ghz.

I was watching the fps numbers and they were 10-20fps higher in some places with the overclock. I know you aren't gonna get that in games but quite often you will get 5-10fps difference when you aren't gpu limited.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Its been proven that 3Ghz and up on C2Ds will give you optimum fps in most games. YMMV per game. Whether this makes a huge difference will also vary with game. Maybe itll do nothing at all. Maybe itll only increase fps, where the game doesnt even need it, and maybe itll only be minimum fps improvements. It can give you better fps, and can then be used by your gpu for higher in game settings, and on rare occasion, make the difference between playable at decent eyecandy in game settings and not. It all depends, just one things for sure, more is better, up and a lil past 3Ghz

 

[efeat]

Its been proven that 3Ghz and up on C2Ds will give you optimum fps in most games. YMMV per game. Whether this makes a huge difference will also vary with game. Maybe itll do nothing at all. Maybe itll only increase fps, where the game doesnt even need it, and maybe itll only be minimum fps improvements. It can give you better fps, and can then be used by your gpu for higher in game settings, and on rare occasion, make the difference between playable at decent eyecandy in game settings and not. It all depends, just one things for sure, more is better, up and a lil past 3Ghz

+1

This really is something that varies by game. It depends how CPU or GPU intensive the game is, how well it makes use of multiple CPU cores, and what settings you use.

If you played Crysis on max details at 1920x1200, would you see a difference between a CPU frequency of 2.4 ghz and 3.0? Probably not.
If you played FSX on max details at 1920x1200 would you see a difference between 2.4 ghz and 3.0? Hell yes.
How about Far Cry 2 at 800x600 on min details? Yeah, you'd have an increase, but you'd already be going hundreds of FPS anyway.

Since the gts 250 is pretty much the exact same card you already have, your choice really comes down to keeping what you've got, or snagging a gtx 260. With that said, what games do you like to play? What settings do you usually use? What kind of FPS are you hoping to get with the new card?

 

[skylinegtr191]

TF2, L4d, Crysis WARHEAD, FarCry 2, COD4 and COD5, GTA4..

I play them all at 1680x1050 and usually try for high to very high settings. For example, COD4 with maxed settings gives me 50-60 fps and sometimes dips to 40 causing a big of jerking.

 

[skylinegtr191]

Maybe I could just buy a new case and motherboard? Then swap everything else and be able to overclock my cpu some?

 

[jennyh]

Imo, your CoD4 is dropping frames due to the Q6600 not being overclocked.

On the other hand, the games you've mentioned will probably let you run on max with a 260gtx and a stock q6600. I don't know for sure because I have hardly gamed with my q6600 at stock. The lowest i run is at 2.7ghz and that's only because i want to lay off the voltage increase. 2.4 is just too slow for gaming imo especially when i can get 2.7 for 'free'. If you have a good SLACR q6600 you can even get up to 3ghz without a voltage increase...

You said it's an xps so it should allow limited overclocking I think?

 

[mamw93]

That is one of the best combos you can use with an Intel quad.

 

[spoonboy]

3dmark 06 scores mean nothing games benchmark are much more important.
Here is the results with my old 8800GTS 512 OC

q6600 2.4 + 8800GTS 512
12000 3dmark 06 marks

q6600 3.0 + 8800GTS 512
14200 3dmark 06 marks

q6600 3.2 + 8800GTS 512
14600 3dmark 06 marks

q6600 3.2 + GTX295
17000 3dmark 06 marks


But in games benchmarks going from 2.4 to 3.2 performance incise was 0%!!!! with the 8800GTS 512. So the 3dmark 06 is more like CPU-benchmark instead of GPU-benchmark.

The performance incise from the 8800GTS 512 to the GTX295 was amazing up to 3 times faster in almost all my games, but not in 3dmark 06.

A gts 512mb is some way off a 4870, so you cant really make a valid example here. Jennyh is saying 2.4 feels a bit restricted for his 4870, but JUST GOING TO 2.7 is enough to show some tangible benefits (gaming with fraps on and knowing your gaming performance inside out helps) but what your saying is that your considerably slower former card had all the room it could want working inside a 2.4ghz quad. I got a 4870 and an e6300@2.8ghz, and im crying out for more cpu cycles. My Farcry 2 fps is pitiful.

 

[efeat]

TF2, L4d, Crysis WARHEAD, FarCry 2, COD4 and COD5, GTA4..

I play them all at 1680x1050 and usually try for high to very high settings. For example, COD4 with maxed settings gives me 50-60 fps and sometimes dips to 40 causing a big of jerking.

I see. Well, I think this is the situation you are looking at.

TF2:
With a GTX 260: Would see very little changes. TF2 isn't graphically intensive at all.
With CPU overclocking: Yes! TF2 is completely single-threaded. I run a C2D at 3.4 ghz, my first core is floored at 99% usage while my second core never goes above 5% usage.

L4D:
With a GTX 260: You'd see some solid improvements. While it's easily playable with a 9800gt, a gtx 260 will allow you to max every setting, turn on some AA + AF and still average over 60 FPS.
With CPU overclocking: Some improvements, but probably not a lot. Valve did a good job of making L4D take advantage of multiple cores, so just having 4 cores usually is good enough.

Crysis Warhead:
With a GTX 260: Would be leaps and bounds above your 9800 GT. Crysis [Warhead] loves powerful GPUs. Especially powerful nvidia GPUs.
With CPU overclocking: A little bit better. For the most part, it's the GPU that holds back the CPU, but it still helps a bit.

Far Cry 2:
With a GTX 260: While not as demanding as Crysis, Far Cry 2 still offers lots of eye candy. A gtx 260 would help you unlock some of it.
With CPU overclocking: Some benefits. FC2 likes multi-core CPUs, but it likes clock speed as well. According to PC games hardware any quad core will do very well, but you can still eek out some extra frames with a good overclock.

CoD4
With a GTX 260: You already run CoD4 pretty good. A gtx 260 would help to eliminate those dips in framerate, but not do a whole lot else.
With CPU overclocking: I dunno. I've never played any of the CoD series. According to an article from Tom's, it seems as though it uses multiple cores well and doesn't need super high clocks, but I can't say for certain one way or another.

CoD5:
See above.

GTA IV:
With a GTX 260: Maybe a bit of gain. Not a whole lot though, as GTA IV is kinda weird for PCs.
With CPU overclocking: Probably. The game is more dependent on CPU than GPU, so having some extra Mhz on your side will help.



So there's my guessimation as to how overclocking your CPU and/or buying a GTX 260 would work for you. As you can see, there really is no simple answer as to whether a GTX 260 is bottlenecked by a Q6600. Just like jaydee said, your mileage may vary by game. You'll have to look at how important each game is to you and what you're willing to do to increase its performance.

 

[spoonboy]

So you are saying that a stock q6600 with gtx 260 will run at the exact same framerate as a q6600 with the gtx 295?
I doubt very much that is true.
Claiming it is "no question" is kinda silly, when you are incorrect.

way to go sounding snooty. You wont get the best out of a gtx260 with a stock q6600, you'll get even less of the best out of a gtx295. How hard is that to understand?

Want to test this out yourself? Get rivatuner, enable 'background monitoring', play a fairly demanding game, (ignore any source titles), after 10 mins alt+tab back to the desktop. If your gpu usage history doesnt show 99.99999999% or whatever with it absolutely nailed to the top of the chart, then your pc is bottlenecking your card.

Crysis warhead for me averages 75% gpu usage, stick object detail onto enthusiast instead of gamer, watch it magically drop 10% again.

 

[butcher]

I would defiantly OC the CPU

i noticed the difference between 2.4 and 3.0ghz and it required no extra voltage and minimal extra heat

getting a better GPU will almost always get you a better frame rate but there is a diminishing return unless followed buy a increase in system power as well

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

If you have to use any tools to see if it is "bottlenecking", it ain't bottlenecking. How hard is that to understand.

This could make for a great sig. Good thoughts

 

[skylinegtr191]

Well.. I said what the hell and picked up a 55nm Evga GTX 260 216 SC. After reinstalling 182.08 drivers, my computer screen went to a pale green. I restarted it and the screen was still pale green. I reformatted using vista x64 and everything seemed okay. As soon as I ran the vista experience test AFTER installing the same drivers.. pale green screen again. Did I get a bad card?

 

[efeat]

This problem only occurs AFTER installing the drivers...?