Would the X6 1090T bottleneck 2x5850 CF?

[Msshadowman]

1-Would the X6 1090T bottleneck 2x5850 CF?

I'm going to add another 5850 and was wondering if the 1090T would prevent me from running those babies to their full potential

2-How much will I need to OC it to do so?

Thanks in advance

 

[xaira]

no it wudnt prevent them from getting their full numbers, but if the pc is just for gaming, ur better off with a 945/955/965

 

[plus2plus]

My friend seen a huge FPS boost in L4D2 when he upgraded his p4 to a 965. He kept his 8800gt.

 

[Msshadowman]

I'm getting the 1090t for future proof

I don't update every year my friend

 

[enzo matrix]

I'm getting the 1090t for future proof

I don't update every year my friend

How often do you update? Bulldozer desktop comes out next year.

 

[ankydu]

What is going on is very simple, the CPU is creating a bottleneck and as a result the GPU performance is being limited. If the Radeon HD 5870 can easily average 200fps at 1920x1200 but you limit it with a processor that will only allow for 100fps at 1024x768 then you are going to see virtually the same amount of frames being rendered at higher resolutions as the GPU is capable of much more.

So based on that look at the Unreal Tournament 3 results. The Core i7 980 XE allowed for 323fps at 1024x768 and 218fps at 1920x1200 as this is the limit of this GPU setup at this resolution. This limit was also reached with the Core i7 975 EE and Core i7 930 processors.

Now the Phenom II X6 1090T was only able to render 187fps at 1024x768 and we already know that the Radeon HD 5870 is capable of much more at this resolution. Therefore increasing the resolution is not going to see much of a drop in performance until the GPU once again becomes slower than the CPU. Given we have seen an average of 218fps at 1920x1200 with the Core i7 processors the Radeon HD 5870 is not going to be maxed out by the Phenom II X6 1090T using the quality settings which we tested with.

Heres a reply from some other forum discussing the thubans.

 

[enzo matrix]

Here's the link to the site where he got it from:
http://www.techspot.com/news/38729-amd-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-be--phenom-ii-x6-1055t-review.html

 

[Msshadowman]

What if it's OC'ed to 4 GHz or higher?

Can it make full use of the GPU's then?

 

[enzo matrix]

What if it's OC'ed to 4 GHz or higher?

Can it make full use of the GPU's then?

no it wudnt prevent them from getting their full numbers, but if the pc is just for gaming, ur better off with a 945/955/965

 

[Msshadowman]

^I've read this reply my friend, I'm talking about the techspot review

1090T:183fps

i7 930:218fps

and that's with 5870, the gap could be wider with 58580 cf

So will OCing it to 4 Ghz or more increase the fps to that level?

Is playing at resolution 1920x1080 GPU limited? (I only see the different performance bet both cpus in less resolutions)

 

[xaira]

yes, wanna know why, because when you get to high resolutions, you stop seeing frame rates like 183 and 218 fps dont you

5870 was used in tests

 

[jennyh]

Just gonna repeat this from another thread.

Dear oh dear.

AMD has some cool circuitry inside every chip they make. This little part of the chip allows it to sacrifice fps when it doesn't matter (ie, at anytime the fps totals are above 100), in order to boost fps when it does matter (ie, when games need to be boosted most around the 60fps area).

The evidence? You've already shown how Thuban falls behind at 200fps.

There is the evidence of AMD's plan. Make the cpu better at *real* and recent games - 20% faster in FC2 and BC2, not some ancient crap like UT3 which would run perfectly on a 5 year old laptop.

 

[Msshadowman]

^WOW

I didn't know that, besides since it won't matter at my resolution I'll get the cheaper option (which is AMD XD)

Thanks for your answers, you've all been very helpful

 

[notty22]

AMD has some cool circuitry inside every chip they make. This little part of the chip allows it to sacrifice fps when it doesn't matter (ie, at anytime the fps totals are above 100), in order to boost fps when it does matter (ie, when games need to be boosted most around the 60fps area).

p.

This is total b/s . Its a sign of less powerful cores (there is less cache per core).

In the same vein, the gaming benchmarks are a reminder that the latest and greatest graphics cards really do need a capable processor behind them if you want to unleash their potential. An overclockable CPU like the Core i7-920 or -930 can really open up a Radeon HD 5870 or GeForce GTX 480 when you get it up to the 4 GHz range. Dipping down to 3.2 GHz doesn’t really help the 1090T win any battles in the games (Call of Duty excepted, where Turbo CORE seems to improve performance over the X4 965). If you’re a gamer, save the money you’d spend on a six-core CPU, buy your favorite overclockable processor, and spend the difference on graphics or an SSD to cut level load times. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-890fx,2613-14.html

 

[jennyh]

Farcry 2 only uses two cores, yet the phenoms are ahead at maximum settings.

It's got nothing to do with having less powerful cores. There is some flaw in the i7 architecture which prevents it from operating at it's maximum level - that is why the X4 phenoms can beat the i7.

Any game that is properly multithreaed to 6 cores will be a huge win for the X6's. BC2 is the proof of that - the i5 750 is getting destroyed - even at 4.3ghz the i5 750 cannot match a STOCK 1090T in true multithreaded games.

 

[xaira]

and the winner of the biggest failure to see sarcasm is: notty22

the fact is that once ur getting more than 35 fps average, the game is more than playable, so all this talk of we need more powerfull cpus is lunacy, if a i7 gives you 102 fps and a phenom II gives you 60fps you really think ull see the difference? the only reason i recommend quad cores with higher clocks for gamers is because its cheaper...

 

[wh3resmycar]

AMD has some cool circuitry inside every chip they make.

was it an actual circuitry or an instruction set? (3dnow)

 

[jennyh]

Lol, I'm sure there is no actual circuitry designed to do that job, it just seems to work out that way for some unknown reason.

If I were in AMD's marketing, I'd be making those claims though.

 

[notty22]

Thats more b/s, TH just did a article with current games, and the dual core 32nm Intel drove a 5850 to maximun fps in games. Showing how important , per core performance is.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i3-gaming,2588-9.html
At higher resolutions, The gpu is doing more work and is no longer waiting on memory and computational performance from the cpu. Which is inferior in slower cores.

 

[jennyh]

Any reason why this i7 870 is stone dead last in Crysis? :lol:

Another FAIL argument from notty.

 

[jennyh]

Interesting link however notty.

How come the i7 870 is just about always last in these benchmarks? If it's about per-core performance, and the i7 870 should be far superior to anythign else there (by intel fanboy reasoning)...why is the bloody thing always last?

Last

Last

Last

Yet more conclusive evidence of Phenom II's gaming superiority.

 

[saaiello]

Hmm cherry picking benchmarks nice one jenny. I will Spare you the real world app benchs because Phenoms just get spanked all over the place.

 

[jennyh]

Wait how come when I pick the benchmarks that show the Phenoms winning it's 'cherry picking' yet when somebody else shows the phenoms losing it's proof that the Phenoms are bad gaming cpus?

 

[saaiello]

Almost every review I read the Phenoms aren't doing well the only sight that seems to get favorable results from them is Toms.

Yea I sort of just cherry picked but the Phenoms get spanked way more then they win they do win in a few areas but not enough to show me that they did something groundbreaking with the Thuban.

 

[jennyh]

Also, try to understand what cherry picking is. You think the full benchmarks from THG's review will show the i7 in a better light?

5th out of 6

Last

Last

Last

5th out of 6

Last

4th out of 6

Last

Cherry picking? LOL they are ALL bad for the i7. It is never better than 4th in those 10 benchmarks!

It's amusing how some of you who claim THG is the definitive guide for benchmarking are now scrambling for some low-grade websites results instead though. :lol: