Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Best gpu to complement the Q8400

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • GPUs
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
May 29, 2011 6:52:52 PM

Hello all,
Recently I have been considering an upgrade from a p4 to a Q8400 and would also like to update my gpu to complement it. I would like to know what the best gpu to complement the Q8400 for under 150 bucks. ( I have been considering the radion 5770 as I have found a good price for it online) Thanks in advance. :D 

More about : gpu complement q8400

May 30, 2011 7:06:41 AM

Nigelfrost said:
Hello all,
Recently I have been considering an upgrade from a p4 to a Q8400 and would also like to update my gpu to complement it. I would like to know what the best gpu to complement the Q8400 for under 150 bucks. ( I have been considering the radion 5770 as I have found a good price for it online) Thanks in advance. :D 


HD 6870 or GTX 470 will get ideal performance. Your CPU will bottleneck any video card above that at stock speeds.
a c 177 U Graphics card
May 30, 2011 11:14:58 AM

why would you upgrade to such an old processor? i doubt your motherboard would support it. If your getting a new motherboard upgrade to at least an AMD phenom II x 4. Forget core 2 quads when building a new system, they are old news.
Related resources
May 30, 2011 11:18:19 AM

iam2thecrowe said:
why would you upgrade to such an old processor? i doubt your motherboard would support it. If your getting a new motherboard upgrade to at least an AMD phenom II x 4. Forget core 2 quads when building a new system, they are old news.


Really, the chip is just fine for mid-range gaming, even for the lower high-range. However, for $100 you could just as easily have purchased a used Q6600 which has benchmarks that match the Q8400 almost exactly.

What motherboard are you on?
May 30, 2011 2:10:37 PM

I am using a P5Q SE2 motherboard with a socket LGA775 and I am on a tight budget of 300 bucks for a cpu and gpu update.
May 30, 2011 5:42:29 PM

Nigelfrost said:
I am using a P5Q SE2 motherboard with a socket LGA775 and I am on a tight budget of 300 bucks for a cpu and gpu update.


Yeah, don't get a Q8400. The Q8200, Q8300, and Q8400 basically replace the Q6600 & Q6700. They have higher clock speeds, but less cache and features. Consequently, the performance is similar to the Q6XXX.

You can get a used Q6600 off of ebay for $60 to $75. Seriously (I just looked). Kind of sucks because I have one and just a month ago they were fetching $100. It is a great chip, but it will bottleneck today's insanely powerful high range cards. However, the low end of the high range, like the HD 6870 and GTX 470 will run just fine.

It will blow the doors off what you are using.

May 30, 2011 5:56:27 PM

http://www.cpu-upgrade.com/mb-ASUS/P5Q_SE2.html

Those are the chips you can use.

If you play your cards right you could get a Q6600 (the equal of a Q8300) and something like the HD 6850 for under $300 together. I've seen the HD 6850 go for $150 to $175 and I've seen the Q6600 go for $60 to $100. (on eBay)
May 30, 2011 6:12:10 PM

Quote:
also phenom II vs core 2 quad is trading blows in performance so my above post is mostly correct


I had a Phenom II 965, it definitely did not bottleneck the GTX480 I had it running with.

However, he would have to spend more than $300 and replace his entire system to run that.

He is trying to stay under $300.
May 30, 2011 6:18:45 PM

Quote:
also phenom II vs core 2 quad is trading blows in performance so my above post is mostly correct


As frame of reference, the Q6600 is roughly equal to the Phenom II 910. The 910 has faster clocks but less on-die cache. If memory serves the two are fairly close in performance.
a c 130 U Graphics card
May 30, 2011 6:22:59 PM

Here is what i would do, Oh and don't worry about bottlenecking its not relevant to you if you are on a $300 budget for CPU and GPU you cant afford a GPU to give you any issues.
Right as i said what i would do is asses what you already have hardware wise. Things to consider are.
1. What are you running graphics wise at the moment ? You want a nice upgrade or its not really worth doing is it ?
2. Power supply. Is it up to running the cards you are looking at getting
3. Display resolution, what is it. this could dictate whats a sensible card to get.
4. What games are you looking to play.
5. Will you benefit enough from a quad core chip or are you better off getting a fast Duo ? (Kinda 4a really)

Use this chart to compare different CPU's and see where the best price performance lies. http://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/2 It could be that a fast duo like a 7xxx will give you the same or similar performance for less than the Q8400 and allow more funds for the GPU.

Some of those questions are dependent on the answer to others so if you post your full specs including your resolution and Power supply details, make /model and power in Watts we can advise better.

Mactronix :) 
May 30, 2011 6:39:13 PM

mactronix said:

2. Power supply. Is it up to running the cards you are looking at getting

I was afraid to ask that question because it often turns into a power supply flame war (at least on overclock.net).

As far as the Core 2 Duo, you can get a Core 2 Quad for $65 to $75, so I don't see the point in that. And Core 2 Quads are a lot better with a 64 bit OS than the Duo's. Running more threads stops background applications from reducing overall performance.

The Duo's aren't bad, but if you can get a duo for the same price as a quad.... get the quad...
a c 130 U Graphics card
May 30, 2011 7:22:00 PM

majesticlizard said:
I was afraid to ask that question because it often turns into a power supply flame war (at least on overclock.net).

As far as the Core 2 Duo, you can get a Core 2 Quad for $65 to $75, so I don't see the point in that. And Core 2 Quads are a lot better with a 64 bit OS than the Duo's. Running more threads stops background applications from reducing overall performance.

The Duo's aren't bad, but if you can get a duo for the same price as a quad.... get the quad...



Yes i agree just thought i would put the option out there. PSU flame wars, that sounds interesting.

Mactronix :) 
a c 376 U Graphics card
May 30, 2011 7:32:57 PM

OCing the hell out of a cheap used Q6600 is your best plan most likely. If you have $300 to spend that should leave enough for a good aftermarket air cooler and something along the lines of an HD6870.
May 30, 2011 9:19:59 PM

jyjjy said:
OCing the hell out of a cheap used Q6600 is your best plan most likely. If you have $300 to spend that should leave enough for a good aftermarket air cooler and something along the lines of an HD6870.


He would benefit performance from an overclock, but even without it the Q6600 should still keep up. My back up system is a Q6600 on stock paired with a free GTX295 that was resurrected with an oven. It only seems to bottleneck the more demanding games by five to ten frames on the max settings, but even then those games are already running at over 30 FPS.
a c 376 U Graphics card
May 30, 2011 10:24:53 PM

A Q6600's stock speed is just 2.4ghz. There are still a lot of games that use only 2 cores and especially in those 2.4ghz is simply not going to be able to keep up with any high end card. I'm sure even your GTX 295 was being limited more than you realize though it varies widely depending on the game.
May 30, 2011 11:41:54 PM

jyjjy said:
I'm sure even your GTX 295 was being limited more than you realize though it varies widely depending on the game.


Not in the games I've played:
Aliens Vs Predator
Area 51
Assassin's Creed
BioShock
Blacksite
Blade & Sword
Brothers in Arms
Call of Duty 2, 4
Company of Heroes
Cryostatis
Crysis
Crysis Warhead
Crysis 2
Dark Messiah
Dead Space
Dead Space 2 (even with the anti-aliasing hack)
Diablo
Diablo 2
Divine Divinity
Doom 3
Doom 3 ROE
Far Cry
Far Cry 2
Fear
Fear Perseus
Fear 2
Gears of War
Grand Theft Auto 3, 4
Half Life 2
Half Life 2 E1
Half Life 2 E2
Halo
Harbinger
Hellgate
House of the Dead
Just Cause 2
Metro 2033
Prey
Prince of Persia 1,2,3
Quake
Resident Evil 4,5
Return To Wolfenstien
Riddick
Stalker COP
Sacred Underworld
Sacred 2
Serious Sam 2
Titan Quest
Titan Quest 2
Turok
Witcher Enhanced
Wolfenstien '09

I'm not saying an overclock won't help the performance. I'm saying that he doesn't really need it. You are not taking into consideration that the Q6600 has 8 MB of on die cache. That really does make a difference and is one of the reasons it performs better than the Phenom 9750 that is also 2.4 GHz (which I have also owned).

Coincidentally, the Phenom 9750 also did not bottleneck the card much. I had the same card in a system with Phenom 9750. The Phenom 9550 chocked the crap out of it though.

Funny that you would say that I wouldn't be aware of performance issues with a card that I disassembled and repaired in an oven. You think maybe I would have paid very close attention to the performance when I tested it to make sure it was working? (Edit: Oh, wait that was a different thread, you would not know that, sorry.)
a c 177 U Graphics card
May 31, 2011 12:17:20 AM

fact is, OP is upgrading an old P4. The motherboard wont likely support 1333 FSB or maybe not even 1066, so his choices will be limited, it mnay not even be socket 775. We do need that information to make a recommendation though.
a c 376 U Graphics card
May 31, 2011 1:36:05 AM

majesticlizard said:
I'm not saying an overclock won't help the performance. I'm saying that he doesn't really need it.

How do you to decide how much performance another person "needs" though? While extensive most of the games on your list are pretty old and most of the current ones aren't particularly CPU intensive. Outrage aside honestly no, I don't think baking a video card makes you an expert in detecting a CPU bottleneck and there are a few on your list where I would be surprised if it wasn't actually happening.
Anyways to illustrate my point more effectively here are two current and quite popular games where a stock Q6600 will limiting things more than a lot of people would find acceptable;
http://www.techspot.com/review/305-starcraft2-performan...
http://www.techspot.com/review/320-civilization-v-perfo...
These are just the two most obvious recent examples where the numbers were easily findable and don't leave much room for debate. There are many other games where it would be an issue to various degrees.
a c 130 U Graphics card
May 31, 2011 6:46:01 AM

A stock Q6600 will defiantly restrict a GTX 295 i dont care how many times you tested and how you did it it if your results showed no restriction then you didn't do the testing properly.
Yet another thread where you are claiming things that are just plain wrong. A stock E 8400 restricts a GTX 295 in Crysis and Farcry 2 and im not talking a small amount here either.

Mactronix :) 
a c 177 U Graphics card
May 31, 2011 7:10:02 AM

^+1 unless its some ultra high res where the gfx card cant cope. My core 2 duo at stock restricts even my humble 8800gts until i overclocked it to 3ghz (this is at 1440x900 mind you)
June 5, 2011 7:12:07 PM

Yeah, i borrowed my friends Zotac GTX 470, and my Core 2 Quad Q8300 bottlenecked it, it was either that or my 8 gigs of "super fast" ddr2 800mhz ram... I'm also interested in this, as im looking to upgrade from my low end GT 220, I think i might go for a GTX 460, or 465.

The computer the 470 came from has an AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition. The GTX 470 along with that beast runs ANYTHING. Its awesome.


June 10, 2011 2:18:20 PM

mactronix said:
A stock Q6600 will defiantly restrict a GTX 295 i dont care how many times you tested and how you did it it if your results showed no restriction then you didn't do the testing properly.
Yet another thread where you are claiming things that are just plain wrong. A stock E 8400 restricts a GTX 295 in Crysis and Farcry 2 and im not talking a small amount here either.

Mactronix :) 


This person did not read anything that I posted. I said it bottle-necked it by 5 to 10 frames in the demanding games, but that those games were already running at above 30 FPS. Anyone who is confused should go back and read. It was quite clear. This post preceded the list. The GTX 470 and HD 6870 are actually slower than the GTX 295, so the bottleneck, while existent, would not be as bad as with the 295.

a c 130 U Graphics card
June 10, 2011 7:54:24 PM

majesticlizard said:
This person did not read anything that I posted. I said it bottle-necked it by 5 to 10 frames in the demanding games, but that those games were already running at above 30 FPS. Anyone who is confused should go back and read. It was quite clear. This post preceded the list. The GTX 470 and HD 6870 are actually slower than the GTX 295, so the bottleneck, while existent, would not be as bad as with the 295.



Oh i read what you posted and its so wrong its laughable. [:mousemonkey:5]
You don't even understand that more demanding games would make things more GPU bound and not CPU bound [:lectrocrew:1]

No one is confused your just wrong.

Mactronix :) 
!