Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

GTX 560 Ti bottleneck q6600? - Answered

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
March 16, 2011 9:34:21 AM

Hi guys,

Before i bought my GTX560 Ti (gigabyte 900Mhz stock version), i searched all web sites and forums goole could find about if my q6600 would bottleneck the GPU.

I didnt find a conclusive outcome, so i had to take a guess, and eventually considereting i could return it, i went for it.

My specs b4 were:
Asus Rampage formula//Q6600 @ 3GHZ (used ASUS level up as for some reason i cant manually oc)// 4 gb ddr2 800Mhz corsair dominator (32bit system 8()//7.200 rps samsung hdds// 700W thermaltake thoughtpower 2+ years old // 2 4850 (512MB)in crossfire and aftermarket cooling (thermalte DuOrbs all copper).

With that setup my Gaming quality in games like Crysis/Crysis warhead/Metro 2033.. was normally in high quality settings (not very high) and 1680x1050. No AA. Normally my Fps went from a very low minimum (hited 3 when using binoculars in crysis) to a maximum that was well above 40.

After i switched to That GTX 560 Ti, i got the crysis series to 1900x1200 4 AA all enhusiast and while someitmes i still hitted a very low FPS (but much much less times), most time my FPS went well over 60.

In other words, the Setup does limit the GPU, but overall, i like the change a lot.

Ofc im hoping to keep that GPU for the next 2 years in use becouse i cant afford a new computer untill that, but then mayb ill get another 560 and sli it :D .
a b Î Nvidia
March 16, 2011 10:42:36 AM

To get ride of or improve your minimum frame rates, OC your CPU. The four cores you have are nice, but the speed on them is to low. Not all games like cores. You should be able to get to around 3GHz pretty easy.
March 16, 2011 10:46:39 AM

They are at 3GHZ already :D . I guess you miswrote or misread.
And im almost certain its RAM related, after all DDR2 800MHZ is old by now and i really use only 3gb (32bit system [crap]) for vista, good ammount of *** programs eating free ram. (Crysis needs about 2gb free just for itself in some levels).

But really, the Low frames are 1 time each 10 minutes or so, so i definitly wont complain.
Related resources
a b Î Nvidia
March 16, 2011 11:53:51 AM

I have a Q9550 and I just purchased and have been running a 560. Before the upgrade my processor was bottle necking my system. Even more so now. Save your money until you can upgrade to a better mobo/proc/ram.
March 16, 2011 11:55:27 AM

I know it can bottleneck it, but i still got a huge improvement from a crossfire 4850 so im not going to return it.
April 5, 2011 2:02:30 AM

The term of 'bottleneck' is sometimes taken as something bad or somesort. Actually, even the bottleneck is on CPU, just take a look at the game.
Does it mean the game run at 65 FPS, while if not bottleneck it could reach 80+ FPS?

Now think about it, does 65 FPS is so bad? imo 60 fps is enough to appease my eyes' pleasure.
April 6, 2011 12:03:37 AM

Nice read. I have a similar system, just an older MoBo and I am getting the GTX 560 Ti, so always good to come across these posts that have good news to report
B.T.W., there are allot of threads on the Internet and these forums as well with people having the Q6600 and asking about pairing it up with 500 series. Ususally the response is to OC the CPU. Definitely though, get a 64bit OS on there.

~Des
April 6, 2011 8:19:30 AM

I know, simply no money for it. For now it manages well enought so i dont complain (except the last level of crysis that always crashes, but i think its a diffrent bug), some games cant go totally maxed out,(dragon age 2 for example, dunno why thou) but its more than enought.

I do think however, the gigabyte i own is susceptible to artifacts and crashes (those are rare, and artifacts are very hard to spot since they are extremely fast refreshed), Havent used the oc programs from gigabyte yet so ill see later.

Also i do belive it would be good to change the thermal paste on the GPU for something high quality, but i havent found any site yet about how to unmount the cooler.

Peace!

April 19, 2011 5:51:30 AM

I also have a Q6600@3.0ghz and it goes just over 45 degrees celsius on load. Anyways I'm wanting to upgrade my 5770 to a 560TI and OC the 560 to 1000mhz....This seems to be a viable option because I just rebuilt my pc inside a new case (NZXT Phantom) and dont want to redo all of the cable management again. Thanks for this post, and hope my info helps.

PC Specs:
Q6600@3.0ghz
60GB Vertex 2 SSD
750i SLI FTW Mobo
HD Radeon 5770 - drivers SUCK!
4GB RAM 800mhz
64 bit WIN 7
Tons of Air cooling....I have 8 fans I believe

Overall for me I dont see my CPU lacking to cause much of a bottleneck to this GPU, I just want to make sure it is worth it to upgrade the GPU instead of going i5 2500k or something.
April 19, 2011 8:37:10 AM

Carefull with that OC, its quite easy to get the card unstable and create artifacts past 900 MHz.
My personal sugestion: "Dont oc while you dont NEED to."
a b Î Nvidia
April 19, 2011 9:01:29 AM

900mhz is not a particularly high OC for the GTX 560 Ti. And that is a factory OC which means the manufacturer tested the chip to make sure it could handle that speed. It should be fine.
In general these days overclocking is not something to avoid as long as you aren't reckless with voltage increases/temperatures.
April 19, 2011 9:03:16 AM

Still, any oc increses the chance of fail, so why do it if u dont need to? for fun? :D .
Thats my point.
a b Î Nvidia
April 19, 2011 9:12:07 AM

For better performance obviously. You could also underclock a card from reference speeds and lower the chance of "fail." You could also not buy the card altogether and then there's no chance it will fail! :p  You have to draw the line where it is reasonable and there is nothing unreasonable about overclocking a video card or processor. Especially if you keep it at reference voltage the increased danger of "fail" is extremely small.
April 19, 2011 9:44:31 AM

You gain 4 fps extra from 900 to 1000 in most demanding games if i remmber right. Dont know if the risk of crashes, artifacts, higher amp draw and a slightly higher chance of burning your GPU is worth it. I know its not for me (Bare in mind that althou the Core is not really hot, the memory indeed is).
But i guess im over carefull after i burned my 6600 GTs in SLI back in the old days :D 
a b Î Nvidia
April 19, 2011 10:04:42 AM

Yeah, things have changed since the 6600GT era with regards to overclocking(both GPU and CPU.) Lately Nvidia has seemingly taken to purposely designing cards with an artificially low reference speed and they are more often sold with a factory OC than not(all the GTX 460s, GTX 560 TI, GTS 450, GTX 550 Ti, etc.)
April 21, 2011 4:49:24 AM

I was running a q6600 @ 3.2 for a couple years. The last video card I had (250 GTS) ran great with this processor. When I decided to pair a 560 ti with it, I found that it lagged when playing newer high end games. I bumped up the CPU to 3.6 and it alleviated some of the lag/stuttering. So defiantly a bottle neck at the cpu when running a 560 ti. I threw a q9650 in the board and no more lag/stutter. OC'ed it to 3.8 (highest I can get stable on a 750i chipset) and all games barely budge from 60 fps synced with high texture settings and anti-aliasing enabled @ 1920x1200 resolution. Also, the 560 ti is a good overclocker. Get a WEI of 7.8 @ 975MHz GPU. Card is still cool at this OC, could easliy do 1000MHz on this GPU with a slight voltage bump.
May 20, 2011 6:07:11 PM

Thanks to the OP for the initiative of throwing this info out there. I got a q6600 @ 3.2 (400mhz x8), with a 9800gtx+ and Witcher 2 just kicked it's arse nine ways from sunday.
So I went shopping for a gtx560 (can\ t afford a full system upgrade for now) and this thread was the encouragement I needed to make the switch. I will pick the board up this afternoon, so by monday I post my experience with it on Witcher 2 =D

Cheers!
May 26, 2011 8:22:01 PM

As I promised before: playing The Witcher 2 on ultra settings (uber sampling off), 4x AA on the driver and 1920x1080 res, I am getting a ver satisfactory 30is fps on average, sometimes spiking to 45 fps or diving to 25-28is, depending on the scene.

But overall very playable.

Btw, I undid my cp OC to test, and I lost about 10 to 15 fps with the q6600 at stock speeds.
June 16, 2011 2:51:15 AM

vantroy said:
As I promised before: playing The Witcher 2 on ultra settings (uber sampling off), 4x AA on the driver and 1920x1080 res, I am getting a ver satisfactory 30is fps on average, sometimes spiking to 45 fps or diving to 25-28is, depending on the scene.

But overall very playable.

Btw, I undid my cp OC to test, and I lost about 10 to 15 fps with the q6600 at stock speeds.


Sweet, more good news. My Q6600 will be OC'ed to at least 3.2 GHz with the GTX 560 Ti, so i'm glad to hear of more success stories on this setup

Nuff Recpect
~Des
June 16, 2011 8:24:04 AM

Update, and an important one. According to some spanish review i cant quite find now, a 3.2GHz q6600 has the same cpu performace in game as a stock i5-2500k.
So it would seem the very demanding games are still GPU dependant, not really CPU.
Will be an interesting thing to see the potential of new games once the next LGA comes out.
a b Î Nvidia
June 16, 2011 8:23:30 PM

somebody on that site smokes crack.......... there's no comparison.
June 16, 2011 9:25:19 PM

Even though the Clock Speed would be higher, the i5 has more fancy features which would still make it perform better. i5 at stock may be comparable to Q6600 at 3.2GHz, but I doubt the Q6600 would really be noticeably better going against a stock i5-2500

~Des
a b Î Nvidia
June 17, 2011 6:30:54 AM

He said in gaming, not CPU tasks. A 3GHz+ Qxxxx should perform very close to an i5. Most games don't need a lot of CPU power. There are exceptions like GTA4 and Metro, but most of your normal shooters shouldn't care.
June 17, 2011 10:37:19 AM

Well, im running all the physx in the GPU, as i know my CPU would probably go on a strike other way. In a way i even feel sad not to have gone for a 6950 and eventually crossfire it with another 8(.
!