System balance

[False_Dmitry_II]

I've got an AM2 only system running a Raedon HD 4670 graphics card. It's also got a 4600+ x2 CPU. Is that a good match or should I look at upgrading the CPU? It's used as a HTPC/LAN gaming PC. I'd say it's still plenty good enough for my needs in the HTPC department, so I'm really only asking about the gaming side of it.

 

[skora]

Gaming will have more to do with monitor resolution, so, what resolution do you game at?

I would generally say those are well balanced for a 1280x1024 monitor. Its not going to max everything out, but your GPU won't be holding back CPU and visa versa. While gains can be made on upgrading either piece, it really depends on what you're trying to improve for the budget. ?which would be?

 

[False_Dmitry_II]

Well for that particular system, I'm fully intending to leave that graphics card for a while now. I was only wanting to know if that CPU was bottlenecking the graphics card at all, so I could know to look at upgrading it.

 

[skora]

If it is, its minimal. Most I'd consider throwing in there would be a x3 720, but if the performance you're getting out of it is good enough, leave it be.

 

[False_Dmitry_II]

By AM2 only I mean, no AM2+ or AM3. So most I'd be looking at is a 6000+ Windsor.

What kind of resolution is 1280x1024 anyway? I've never used it before and it's not 4:3, 16:10, or 16:9. Those being the aspect ratio's I've used before.

 

[skora]

1280x1024 is a 4:3 for all practial purposes. When gaming, theres a calculation that needs to be done for every pixel. So knowing the number of pixels on the monitor is a good gage to how powerful of a GPU you need. But if you're happy with performance, then let it be. Don't think you'd see a great increase by upgrading the CPU.

 

[False_Dmitry_II]

I know full well the rest of that. I end up assuming that more area = more work is common knowledge; but I had to explain it the other day to a friend of mine. I would also think that resolution is more GPU involved than CPU involved.

 

[False_Dmitry_II]

Just so I'm really sure, does anyone else agree with Skora's assessment that any bottlenecking by the current CPU would be minimal?

 

[False_Dmitry_II]

All right, so now that I can boot into windows again (had to RMA hard drive). I used Dawn of War II to test if the CPU was limiting or not the graphics card. I simply did an overclock from the stock clock of 200 to 215. Resulting in an increase from 2.4 gigahertz per core to 2.58. I ran them on 1280x720 since it was connected to the HDTV at the time.

stock 4600+ dawn of war II 200 core clock
high settings
average: 29.53, 27.01, 27.41, 27.21
maximum: 65, 61, 62, 62
minimum: 16.23, 13.77, 14.22, 14.54

medium settings
average:33.74, 33.41, 33.21
maximum:73, 71, 71
minimum:19, 19, 18.7


overclocked 4600+ dawn of war II 215 core clock
high settings
average: 29.36, 29.19, 28.98
maximun: 63, 63, 62
minimum: 17.19, 16.46, 16.25

medium settings
average:34.71, 34.29, 34.38
maximun:74, 72, 73
minimum:19, 19.08, 19.1

Those are close enough to say that the 4600+ isn't limiting the Raedon HD 4670. Thanks for the input.