Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Bottleneck????

Last response: in Systems
Share
August 24, 2011 7:03:42 AM

do you think that given I am upgrading to a radeon 6850, will that introduce my CPU as the bottleneck in the system, if you guys think it might please let me know how to avoid that or what could synergize well with my new GPU. I have $500 for upgrades if there might be a bottleneck. I want to max out SKyrim 1080p 23" monitor when it comes out


System

AMD Phenom II x2 550 3.7 GHz (OC'd)
9800gtx+ (stock settings)
gigabtyte GA-MA790X-UD4P mobo
4 GB Gskill DDR2 RAM
150GB HDD 7200 RPM
450 PSU

More about : bottleneck

August 24, 2011 9:05:24 AM

+1 mate, time for a new cpu
m
0
l
a b B Homebuilt system
August 24, 2011 5:59:46 PM

Brand of the PSU?

You can either wait for Bulldozer or get Sandy Bridge. 32nm chips can be overclocked better than their 45nm preceedors.
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 84 B Homebuilt system
August 24, 2011 6:22:10 PM

I suspect that you will be limited by the current cpu.

Also, the 6850 is not a huge jump in capability compared to a 9800gtx+. You may be disappointed by a smallish improvement.

To help clarify your options, run these two tests:

a) Run your games, but lower your resolution and eye candy.
If your FPS increases, it indicates that your cpu is strong enough to drive a better graphics configuration.

b) Limit your cpu, either by reducing the OC, or, in windows power management, limit the maximum cpu% to something like 70%.
If your FPS drops significantly, it is an indicator that your cpu is the limiting factor, and a cpu upgrade is in order.

It is possible that both tests are positive, indicating that you have a well balanced system, and both cpu and gpu need to be upgraded to get better gaming FPS.
m
0
l
a c 84 B Homebuilt system
August 24, 2011 6:45:22 PM

werner123 said:
@geofelt the gts250 is a re badged 9800gtx+ and the hd4850 was performance wise comparable with the gts250 or better.

I upgraded from a 4850 to a 6850 and the performance increase is huge, it's actually double the performance, go and have a look at the benchmarks.


Define huge.

On tom's heirarchy chart, the 6850 is two tiers higher. A nice jump to be certain. Their recommendation is to not upgrade unless the jump is three tiers or more. Your experience brings question to that recommendation in this case.
m
0
l
August 24, 2011 9:55:42 PM

geofelt said:
I suspect that you will be limited by the current cpu.

Also, the 6850 is not a huge jump in capability compared to a 9800gtx+. You may be disappointed by a smallish improvement.

To help clarify your options, run these two tests:

a) Run your games, but lower your resolution and eye candy.
If your FPS increases, it indicates that your cpu is strong enough to drive a better graphics configuration.

b) Limit your cpu, either by reducing the OC, or, in windows power management, limit the maximum cpu% to something like 70%.
If your FPS drops significantly, it is an indicator that your cpu is the limiting factor, and a cpu upgrade is in order.

It is possible that both tests are positive, indicating that you have a well balanced system, and both cpu and gpu need to be upgraded to get better gaming FPS.


Ok So i started up dragon age 2 in 1650x1080 (no AA, medium settings, dx9) : 50 fps average it seems, 45fps min

turned up resolution to 1920x1080 (no AA, medium settings, dx9) : 30 fps LOWEST, averaging 45-58 fps around there

The RAM load is 50% for both tests, and the CPU load for the lower settings is about 70% and about 80% for the higher settings test

I'm not sure what my GPU is doing , dont have anything to monitor it

What do you think from that???
m
0
l
a c 84 B Homebuilt system
August 24, 2011 11:09:21 PM

highc1157 said:
Ok So i started up dragon age 2 in 1650x1080 (no AA, medium settings, dx9) : 50 fps average it seems, 45fps min

turned up resolution to 1920x1080 (no AA, medium settings, dx9) : 30 fps LOWEST, averaging 45-58 fps around there

The RAM load is 50% for both tests, and the CPU load for the lower settings is about 70% and about 80% for the higher settings test

I'm not sure what my GPU is doing , dont have anything to monitor it

What do you think from that???

Normally, when you lower your resolution, there are fewer pixels for the gpu to manage, so in theory, you should get a higher fps assuming that your cpu can generate frames faster. In this case, there does not seem to be much difference in fps, so I conclude that your cpu is not strong enough to generate higher fps. The fact that your cpu utilization is high, but does not go to 100% would indicate that your game uses mainly one core, and part of a second. The 78-80% is an average. A look at the task monitor might show this. Anyway, in this case, I think you need faster cores, not necessarily more of them.
The X2 550 has a passmark number of 1886; the sandy bridge 2100, also a dual core has a number of 3861. Not a bad upgrade.
m
0
l
!