Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

My friend and his upgrade - 9800GT

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Processors
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
May 4, 2009 12:45:54 PM

hey guys

My friend wants to upgrade his PC but since i'm not that much of an AMD expert i'd ask what you guys think. He currently has an AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 3600+ 1.9Ghz with 2.5 gb of ram and an 8500GT which is one of the crappiest cards ever if you ask me :p  But he wants to upgrade to either a GTS 250 or a 9800 GT (both Nvidia's), basicly for modeling and gaming. He's also concidering getting another 2gb of ram to replace the 512mb with so he has 4gb total.

Is his processor too weak to handle this graphics card? Would this bottleneck his pc?

Thanks in advance.

More about : friend upgrade 9800gt

a b U Graphics card
May 4, 2009 10:27:40 PM

In any game that taxes both the CPU and GPU (ie. Crysis, FarCry 2) he will be severely CPU-limited no matter what card he upgrades to. My Athlon X2 5000+ is OC'd to 3.2GHz and I run into that issue in those games using my 8800GT, which is pretty much identical to a 9800GT. I'm forced to play them at either medium or a mix of medium w/ some high level detail to maintain playable framerates. And anything beyond 2x AA brings my system to it's knees, dropping framerates into the teens and twenties easily.
May 5, 2009 12:46:50 AM

RazberyBandit said:
In any game that taxes both the CPU and GPU (ie. Crysis, FarCry 2) he will be severely CPU-limited no matter what card he upgrades to. My Athlon X2 5000+ is OC'd to 3.2GHz and I run into that issue in those games using my 8800GT, which is pretty much identical to a 9800GT. I'm forced to play them at either medium or a mix of medium w/ some high level detail to maintain playable framerates. And anything beyond 2x AA brings my system to it's knees, dropping framerates into the teens and twenties easily.

AA doesn't stress the CPU... it stresses the video card. Are you certain the 8800GT in your system is indeed the bottle neck?
Also, its impossible to run Crysis smoothly on an 8800GT, unless you don't mind running it at 1024x768.
Related resources
May 5, 2009 12:57:24 AM

yes, it will bottleneck the gpu..
e7400 with a gts 250 will do.. both products are already cheap..=D
a b U Graphics card
May 5, 2009 1:07:33 AM

g3force said:
AA doesn't stress the CPU... it stresses the video card. Are you certain the 8800GT in your system is indeed the bottle neck?
Also, its impossible to run Crysis smoothly on an 8800GT, unless you don't mind running it at 1024x768.


An 8800GT 512mb can run Crysis well at 1280x1024 with GFX options on medium-high.
May 5, 2009 2:35:47 AM

Bluescreendeath said:
An 8800GT 512mb can run Crysis well at 1280x1024 with GFX options on medium-high.

Sorry, I was referring to very high settings.
a b U Graphics card
May 5, 2009 6:19:04 AM

Well get the fastest card that he can afford as he can even use it in his next PC when he upgrades(which I think would be around the corner :p )...

But if you ask me I would try and get a decent mobo and CPU, for that $150 or so he is willing to spend on the graphics card and RAM for now, reuse the RAM and stick with the 8500GT and then buy a graphics card...
a b U Graphics card
May 5, 2009 6:20:14 AM

Well if you could get the mobo details, we could say if he could just add a faster CPU as most of the AMD CPUs are backwards compatible...
a b U Graphics card
May 5, 2009 7:52:14 PM

g3force said:
AA doesn't stress the CPU... it stresses the video card. Are you certain the 8800GT in your system is indeed the bottle neck?
Also, its impossible to run Crysis smoothly on an 8800GT, unless you don't mind running it at 1024x768.


I know AA doesn't stress the CPU... What I was pointing out was that I'm CPU limited in those games and any further, major increase in detail (including use of AA beyond 2x) brings my system to a crawl in those titles. If I had separated those statements, would that have been clearer?

Quote:
In any game that taxes both the CPU and GPU (ie. Crysis, FarCry 2) he will be severely CPU-limited no matter what card he upgrades to. My Athlon X2 5000+ is OC'd to 3.2GHz and I run into that issue in those games using my 8800GT, which is pretty much identical to a 9800GT. I'm forced to play them at either medium or a mix of medium w/ some high level detail to maintain playable framerates.

And anything beyond 2x AA brings my system to it's knees, dropping framerates into the teens and twenties easily.


Better?

Fact is, I have a faster CPU and identical GPU. So, if I'm already experiencing bottlenecking in those titles, his friend would feel it even worse. I should also point out that I'm using a 1680x1050 monitor and on-board audio. (If I disable audio, framerates increase - a clear sign of CPU-limited performance.)

Lastly, it's not impossible to run Crysis on an 8800GT smoothly. I do, and so do many other people. Medium settings are usually required, but it's smooth.
May 6, 2009 4:56:43 AM

RazberyBandit said:
I know AA doesn't stress the CPU... What I was pointing out was that I'm CPU limited in those games and any further, major increase in detail (including use of AA beyond 2x) brings my system to a crawl in those titles. If I had separated those statements, would that have been clearer?

Quote:
In any game that taxes both the CPU and GPU (ie. Crysis, FarCry 2) he will be severely CPU-limited no matter what card he upgrades to. My Athlon X2 5000+ is OC'd to 3.2GHz and I run into that issue in those games using my 8800GT, which is pretty much identical to a 9800GT. I'm forced to play them at either medium or a mix of medium w/ some high level detail to maintain playable framerates.

And anything beyond 2x AA brings my system to it's knees, dropping framerates into the teens and twenties easily.


Better?

Fact is, I have a faster CPU and identical GPU. So, if I'm already experiencing bottlenecking in those titles, his friend would feel it even worse. I should also point out that I'm using a 1680x1050 monitor and on-board audio. (If I disable audio, framerates increase - a clear sign of CPU-limited performance.)

Lastly, it's not impossible to run Crysis on an 8800GT smoothly. I do, and so do many other people. Medium settings are usually required, but it's smooth.

I see your point, but its irrelevant. If the GPU is the limiting factor, putting a faster/stronger CPU will not increase the framerates whatsoever. I also clarified that its impossible to run Crysis on very high settings on moderate resolutions with an 8800GT. I do not dispute that it is possible to run it smoothly, albeit having to lower some settings.

P.S. I reread my previous post, and I noticed that I was rather harsh with my statements. I apologize, I just wasn't in the best of moods when I wrote that :non: 
a b U Graphics card
May 7, 2009 5:55:09 AM

My point is not irrelevant. My CPU is limiting my performance. If not more, then as much my 8800GT does. Maybe some Crysis Warhead benchmarks will clear things up.

I used the HardwareOC Crysis Warhead Benchmark - HOCBench.com - I have an X2 5000+ Black Edition and eVGA 8800GT 512mb. Adjusting only the CPU Multiplier, I ran it at 2.6, 2.8, 3.0, and 3.2GHz. Test resolution was 1680x1050@32bit.

Here are the average frame results of each, first with 8800GT at stock settings, later with it OC'd to 648/1620/950:

Test Demo - Ambush
Settings - High Detail - No AA
@ 3.2GHz - 28fps avg
@ 3.0GHz - 26fps avg
@ 2.8GHz - 25fps avg
@ 2.6GHz - 22fps avg

Same test with 8800GT OC'd
@ 3.2GHz - 29fps
@ 3.0GHz - 27fps
@ 2.8GHz - 26fps
@ 2.6GHz - 24fps

I ran the test on High Detail settings to attempt to push the GPU as much as possible. If I run the test on Medium Detail, averages jump into the mid-40's and even low 50's at the top CPU speed. On Very High, it's just a mess, no matter the OC settings. I don't even want to give those stats... LOL

So, back to the results... With an increase of 6fps from the CPU OC and only a 1-2fps increase from GPU OC, I think it's pretty safe to conclude that the faster the CPU, the better the framerate. I think it proves the case I made that I am indeed CPU-bound, not GPU-bound.

So yeah... Like I said, in my system consisting of an X2 5000+ Black Edition OC'd to 3.2GHz with an 8800GT 512MB, I'm CPU-bound in Crysis. Therefore, the OP's friend would be even more CPU-bound than I am as he has a much slower CPU.

Edit: I'd like to point out the fact that at 3.2GHz and 2.8GHz, my CPU uses even-numbered multipliers (14x and 16x), which clocks the RAM properly at 400MHz, which I think was the determining factor in the slightly "larger" (if you can call 2fps larger than 1fps) jumps in framerate at those settings.
May 7, 2009 7:07:33 PM

RazberyBandit said:
My point is not irrelevant. My CPU is limiting my performance. If not more, then as much my 8800GT does. Maybe some Crysis Warhead benchmarks will clear things up.

I used the HardwareOC Crysis Warhead Benchmark - HOCBench.com - I have an X2 5000+ Black Edition and eVGA 8800GT 512mb. Adjusting only the CPU Multiplier, I ran it at 2.6, 2.8, 3.0, and 3.2GHz. Test resolution was 1680x1050@32bit.

Here are the average frame results of each, first with 8800GT at stock settings, later with it OC'd to 648/1620/950:

Test Demo - Ambush
Settings - High Detail - No AA
@ 3.2GHz - 28fps avg
@ 3.0GHz - 26fps avg
@ 2.8GHz - 25fps avg
@ 2.6GHz - 22fps avg

Same test with 8800GT OC'd
@ 3.2GHz - 29fps
@ 3.0GHz - 27fps
@ 2.8GHz - 26fps
@ 2.6GHz - 24fps

I ran the test on High Detail settings to attempt to push the GPU as much as possible. If I run the test on Medium Detail, averages jump into the mid-40's and even low 50's at the top CPU speed. On Very High, it's just a mess, no matter the OC settings. I don't even want to give those stats... LOL

So, back to the results... With an increase of 6fps from the CPU OC and only a 1-2fps increase from GPU OC, I think it's pretty safe to conclude that the faster the CPU, the better the framerate. I think it proves the case I made that I am indeed CPU-bound, not GPU-bound.

So yeah... Like I said, in my system consisting of an X2 5000+ Black Edition OC'd to 3.2GHz with an 8800GT 512MB, I'm CPU-bound in Crysis. Therefore, the OP's friend would be even more CPU-bound than I am as he has a much slower CPU.

Edit: I'd like to point out the fact that at 3.2GHz and 2.8GHz, my CPU uses even-numbered multipliers (14x and 16x), which clocks the RAM properly at 400MHz, which I think was the determining factor in the slightly "larger" (if you can call 2fps larger than 1fps) jumps in framerate at those settings.

Ah, I see your point now. Sorry for being so contradictory!
a b U Graphics card
May 8, 2009 3:53:34 AM

Hey. No worries g3force. What's a good discussion without some opposing positions, right? It's not like I took any offense to any of your statements.

I suppose seeing the actual numbers helped my case, huh?

To the OP:

Your friend should consider a new build (Mobo, CPU, Graphics Card, RAM) or at minimum, a CPU and GPU upgrade.

If he chooses to upgrade, he should check to see if his motherboard supports either a new Phenom II 920 or 940. They really are amazing. Go for the 940 if he can. If they're not supported, his best bet from a performance standpoint might be either an original Phenom X4 (9850 maybe) or the X2 7850 Kuma. Yeah, the X2 7850 is simply a Quad laser cut to only dual-core, but it's got a nice little chunk of L3 cache. That L3 cache (which other X2 CPUs lack) helps make it a decent performer, especially for it's price.

As far as graphics cards are concerned, I'd get away from the old 9800GT completely. For the money, the new ATI HD4770 just plain spanks the 9800GT's ass, and trades blows with the GTS250 (512mb - 1GB outperforms the 4770 at higher resolutions). But, if he's got an SLI-capable motherboard, I'd recommend a single GTX260-Core216. He'll have the option to add another later if he so chooses.
June 13, 2009 4:53:20 PM

I recently got an AMD athlon 64 x2 dual-core processor 5000+ 2.6GHz, 4GB RAM system

and added a Nvidia geforce 9800 GT 512MB x16 PCIexpress graphics card. The system is fine for normal use although when I play online games, like WoW or CoH, it causes the computer to literally shut down after 10-3- minutes. I havent found a solution yet, any suggestions?
a b U Graphics card
June 21, 2009 6:17:16 AM

CaptnJack, it sounds as though you may have a power-related problem. What are your complete system specs and your power supply's wattage and amperage ratings? You may need to read the actual label on the power supply for that information. Specifically, be sure to provide the 12V Amp rating.
June 21, 2009 6:28:29 PM

RazberyBandit said:
CaptnJack, it sounds as though you may have a power-related problem. What are your complete system specs and your power supply's wattage and amperage ratings? You may need to read the actual label on the power supply for that information. Specifically, be sure to provide the 12V Amp rating.



and then again maybe it isnt a power supply problem. I went in and unplugged all lines, RAM, onboard battery, etc... replugged them in and presto it works great. Something somewhere must have gotten jarred loose in shipping, thanks.
!