Tri sli gtx 480 gpus and bottlenecks

[brianfulcher15]

Just wondering what you guys thoughts are on the tri gtx480 benchmarks. Do you guys think the core i7 is bottle necking it? I havent seen any previews yet of the new sandy bridge processor so if the current i7 cpus can handle 3 gtx 480s, do you think there will be room for a 4th one with sandy bridge.

does anyone have the difference between a q9650 dual sli gtx480 vs a i7-930 dual sli gtx480setup?

 

[Griffolion]

How does one go about determining how and when a CPU will bottleneck a GPU config? Is there a set formula to work it out or is it just instinct?

 

[Rustyy117]

There isn't a set formula because a game may be very CPU intensive or it may not (For example, a game with alot of physics calculations and many units will be CPU intensive) + In game settings play a big part, High res and eye candy will likely bring down the FPS of any system by a substantial amount and so may cause the GPU(s) to be the slowest part of the PC.

All you can do is make an educated guess.

I would guess that a Core i7 920 (or above) @ 3.8Ghz+ would be enough if you were playing at HD res or above, and even if there was a CPU bottleneck then it wouldn't matter as you'd already be getting insane FPS.

 

[brianfulcher15]

You need a 980X at 4Ghz+ to not Bottleneck Tri 480's

This is my thoughts as well, hopefully the later released cheaper 6core, or the new sandy bridge processors will give us some room so spare. Unfortunitally by the time we get something thats affordible that wont bottle neck the tri sli setup, there will be better gpus out most likely.

Im trying to decide if its even worth buying a second one at this time to go with my e8400, it looks like my best alternitive is to just wait untill the sandybridge or bulldozer is released and then get my second 2 gtx 480s.

 

[bertimus]

My roomate has a 980X at 4.7 and 3 OC'd gtx 480s (not sure about the exact clocks on them).
Needless to say, it is kind of difficult to tell exactly where a bottleneck would be, because he runs stereoscopic 3d and still gets rediculous framerates

 

[nforce4max]

Just don't expect the very best results. What bottleneck that you do get you can try nuking the ram which out having horribly high latency or timings. By the way are you trying this with a single drive or a raid setup? Also how much ram do you intend on having in this system? 6GB is a joke while 12GB is nice by today's standards but can be maxed with ease in some apps.

 

[brianfulcher15]

im not sure what i'll be running when i finally do go to the i7 or later. i will most likely get the lowest latency 12gb kit at that time. I'll be using raid on this build raid should not effect it though as i will be using a raid card that does its own processing.

but anyways the final conclusion is that its best to wait a little longer before going to an i7 and see what amd and intel come up with in 2011.

 

[wolfram23]

With an i7, even if there is a bottleneck it'll be over 200fps lol. Depends on a lot of things. Yes, you could bottleneck it, but you could also let them stretch their legs with the right set up. 3 Monitors and/or 3D at, say 2560x1600 would push it and no CPU bottleneck. A single 1920x1080 would bottleneck. Dual GTX480s is probably enough under almost any circumstance tho.

For example, I gained a measly 5FPS in a FurMark run at 0xAA and 1280x1020. Bump the res to 1920x1080 and the gain was 90%. CPU bottleneck at low res, GPU bottleneck at normal res.

I really, really think that the whole "CPU Bottleneck" issue is blown far out of proportion. Unless you're running a 15" CRT monitor and a Pentium 2 you can run many good GPUs no problem. 3 GTX480s are pretty out there for performance, but just in general, CPU bottlenecking needs to be more than a guess, which it almost always is. I've seen little to no evidence when people say "yea, bottleneck!!"

 

[AMW1011]

I find it interesting that you need to get any good quadcore to some serious clocks not to bottleneck two GTX 480s. Even an i7 920 or i5 750 need to be set north of 3.6 GHz to do it and a Phenom II likely needs 4 GHz minimum (the latter is all speculation). This is coming from my experience with some user results over on OC.net. For comparison I noticed no performance difference between stock and 4 GHz on my i5 750 with 2 8800 GTS 512mb. Just goes to show how outdated they are.

 

[brianfulcher15]

im gaming at 1920x1080... 42inch panasonic tv. this will be what i use for a few years untill the 3d tvs are 1500 or less with glasses. Im thinking that at my resolution i should be fine with 2 gtx 480s, I will be upgradeing to a new mobo and cpu later though becuase from what ive read, an e8400 bottlenecks a single gtx 480, however i was seeing an averge of 40-60 fps in crysis at 1920 x 1080 no vsync. with vsync on i only as geting 25 fps average.

 

[AMW1011]

im gaming at 1920x1080... 42inch panasonic tv. this will be what i use for a few years untill the 3d tvs are 1500 or less with glasses. Im thinking that at my resolution i should be fine with 2 gtx 480s, I will be upgradeing to a new mobo and cpu later though becuase from what ive read, an e8400 bottlenecks a single gtx 480, however i was seeing an averge of 40-60 fps in crysis at 1920 x 1080 no vsync. with vsync on i only as geting 25 fps average.

As in any CPU bottleneck, it is completely application or game dependent. Most games don't really need quadcores right now, and some like Crysis don't use them. Clock that E8400 up and you will have no problems. You may lose out a little on performance in BFBC2, but you have plenty of horsepower still.

 

[wolfram23]

im gaming at 1920x1080... 42inch panasonic tv. this will be what i use for a few years untill the 3d tvs are 1500 or less with glasses. Im thinking that at my resolution i should be fine with 2 gtx 480s, I will be upgradeing to a new mobo and cpu later though becuase from what ive read, an e8400 bottlenecks a single gtx 480, however i was seeing an averge of 40-60 fps in crysis at 1920 x 1080 no vsync. with vsync on i only as geting 25 fps average.

Personally, at that resolution, I'd go with a much cheaper option. CF5850, SLI GTX470, or even CF5870s is going to be a lot cheaper and run pretty much just as well (by that I mean over 60fps). My CF5850s are juuust a little underpowered to max Metro and Cryostasis with steady 60fps, so SLI 470s should be about the min for that, and CF5870s will be prime. SLI480s are great, no doubt, but also overkill for 1920x1080... on the other hand, you probably won't need an upgrade for a long time on the GPU side of things

EDIT: Also, if you were budgeting for 3 GTX480s, then by getting 2 you could spend that $450 on a new CPU, mobo, and DDR3 RAM depending what you get. An i7 would be a bit more for sure. An i5 750 would be about that much.

 

[brianfulcher15]

Personally, at that resolution, I'd go with a much cheaper option. CF5850, SLI GTX470, or even CF5870s is going to be a lot cheaper and run pretty much just as well (by that I mean over 60fps). My CF5850s are juuust a little underpowered to max Metro and Cryostasis with steady 60fps, so SLI 470s should be about the min for that, and CF5870s will be prime. SLI480s are great, no doubt, but also overkill for 1920x1080... on the other hand, you probably won't need an upgrade for a long time on the GPU side of things

EDIT: Also, if you were budgeting for 3 GTX480s, then by getting 2 you could spend that $450 on a new CPU, mobo, and DDR3 RAM depending what you get. An i7 would be a bit more for sure. An i5 750 would be about that much.

I already have the first 480, so maybe i shoudl get the second one and see how it does with my e8400 If it doesent bottle neck it to much i'll keep the mobo and cpu i have now, but if it does, i'll upgrade in q4 when the new processor comes out. maybe it'll make the i7-930 cheaper. Its a pity that socket R is a year off from now maybe we'll get some preview benchmarks soon so we can judge waiting better.

 

[wolfram23]

Not a bad plan at all. If you do feel you need to upgrade, waiting for Sandy Bridge and the possible i7 price drops is a decent strategy. However, as we all know, in the PC world you'll always be waiting for the next Best Thing, and once you get it, there's already going to be a new one in the works. I wouldn't worry a whole lot about anything beyond i7s until GPUs become more beastly (like the Asus Ares lol) at which point we might see a need for better CPUs to allow the GPUs to stretch again.

 

[brianfulcher15]

wow, looks like the i7 970 is going to be 850 dollars... i think i'll pass. its a pity though if it would have been 500 i coudl have bought it.

 

[wolfram23]

wow, looks like the i7 970 is going to be 850 dollars... i think i'll pass. its a pity though if it would have been 500 i coudl have bought it.

But you really don't need a 970 for gaming. A 920 or 930 is plenty and a lot cheaper. They'll still OC like crazy.