Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

7970 bottleneck with i7 860?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 1, 2012 8:01:48 PM

Hi everyone,
I am wondering if a 7970 will be bottlenecked by an i7 860 @ 3.6Ghz?
Thank you!

More about : 7970 bottleneck 860

a c 251 U Graphics card
January 1, 2012 8:06:09 PM

The 7970's are not even released released for sale yet.
January 1, 2012 8:13:32 PM

inzone said:
The 7970's are not even released released for sale yet.


I'm aware of that, I just referred to a 7970 because of its performance. Then my question is whether a gtx590 would be bottlenecked by an i7 860 @ 3.6Ghz?
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
January 1, 2012 8:16:09 PM

it wont really be bottlenecked. you could get 5-10% more performance with a 2500k at same speed but thats enough to justify the $300 it would cost for the upgrade.
a c 103 U Graphics card
January 1, 2012 8:16:10 PM

not at all. The 860 is still a workhorse
January 1, 2012 8:26:56 PM

At stock speeds, even the Sandy Bridge can be a bottleneck with hardware acceleration equal to or greater than the 6970.

I can only imagine that it would be worse with the 860, but that is only my guess, albeit an educated one based in experience (I have both the i5 2500k and 6970).

Unless you plan on doing some serious overclocking, it is time for an upgrade.

Sorry.
a c 251 U Graphics card
January 1, 2012 8:32:25 PM

olivierhacking said:
I'm aware of that, I just referred to a 7970 because of its performance. Then my question is whether a gtx590 would be bottlenecked by an i7 860 @ 3.6Ghz?



Are you looking for a video card to buy? It does seem to be the case with the questions you are asking. I'm not overly impressed with a GTX 590 simce it is clocked so low when it ships and I would want to know how it is being overclocked. I would prefer getting a GTX 580 and then if I wanted to SLI get another one. There is something to consider though , the 7970 has been benchmarked and it was actualy only marginaly faster than a GTX 580 so in your original question the cpu that you have would not be a bottleneck for the 7970.
January 1, 2012 9:46:31 PM

inzone said:
Are you looking for a video card to buy? It does seem to be the case with the questions you are asking. I'm not overly impressed with a GTX 590 simce it is clocked so low when it ships and I would want to know how it is being overclocked. I would prefer getting a GTX 580 and then if I wanted to SLI get another one. There is something to consider though , the 7970 has been benchmarked and it was actualy only marginaly faster than a GTX 580 so in your original question the cpu that you have would not be a bottleneck for the 7970.


My Sandy Bridge bottlenecked my 6970X2 pretty badly. I gain performance in considerable amounts up until about 4.20GHz (where it is now), after which I no longer notice a significant gain (from overclocking further).

At 3.30GHz, I averaged about 5-10 fps lower than what I am getting now (depending on the game). At 4.5GHz it stays about the same it is now in all but the most CPU intensive games.

I really don't see how his first generation i7 would be any less a bottleneck than the Sandy Bridge.
January 1, 2012 11:31:19 PM

olivierhacking said:
Hi everyone,
I am wondering if a 7970 will be bottlenecked by an i7 860 @ 3.6Ghz?
Thank you!


I'd have to agree with pinhedd, The i7 860 is absolutely still a workhorse, you have nothing to worry about. Buy whatever card you want and you will be fine. Don't listen to the people who tell you you cant use it, they just want you to buy what they have or wish they had. Don't throw your money away, and if you want to upgrade wait for ivy bridge but still no need. in my opinion you'll be set for a while yet.
a c 172 U Graphics card
January 1, 2012 11:51:04 PM

To be honest even current cards are pushing the limits of even the best cpus out there now but what you got is still what most can still consider a very nice cpu. Even if there does turn out to be a small bottleneck you can always overclock the cpu or look to other ways to balance that out.

You can at least get around 3.8ghz or more if you choose your settings right and the board is solid.
January 2, 2012 12:44:00 AM

reaxion said:
I'd have to agree with pinhedd, The i7 860 is absolutely still a workhorse, you have nothing to worry about. Buy whatever card you want and you will be fine. Don't listen to the people who tell you you cant use it, they just want you to buy what they have or wish they had. Don't throw your money away, and if you want to upgrade wait for ivy bridge but still no need. in my opinion you'll be set for a while yet.


The i5 2500k is the best CPU on the market for gaming, and that is fact. Mainstream games only use 4 cores/4 threads, that's it - and the i5 2500k dishes out the best for what will be used. The i7 2600k is dead equal, but overkill as it's primary feature, hyper-threading, is a non-factor when it comes to gaming.

And again, when even the Sandy Bridge struggles to keep current gen GPU's at full potential, how will the first generation i7 allow one to get the most out of a high-end, next-gen GPU?

It won't. At least not at safe clock rates.
January 2, 2012 12:44:29 AM

nforce4max said:
To be honest even current cards are pushing the limits of even the best cpus out there now but what you got is still what most can still consider a very nice cpu. Even if there does turn out to be a small bottleneck you can always overclock the cpu or look to other ways to balance that out.

You can at least get around 3.8ghz or more if you choose your settings right and the board is solid.

+1
a c 251 U Graphics card
January 2, 2012 3:06:00 AM

I don't know what the problem is with the Sandy Bridge processor and running into a bottleneck , but I am running an Intel i7-980X six core at 4.15ghz and it is not a bottleneck for my three GTX 580 3gb video cards. I currently get over 150 fps in BF3 , so a first gen cpu still does pretty well I guess.
a c 103 U Graphics card
January 2, 2012 3:36:50 AM

inzone said:
I don't know what the problem is with the Sandy Bridge processor and running into a bottleneck , but I am running an Intel i7-980X six core at 4.15ghz and it is not a bottleneck for my three GTX 580 3gb video cards. I currently get over 150 fps in BF3 , so a first gen cpu still does pretty well I guess.


That's because you have 3 cards. The Nehalem chips have 32 PCI-E lanes per chip, the sandybridge have only 16
a c 251 U Graphics card
January 2, 2012 3:42:02 AM

So then the OP is better off with the i7-860 and the 7970 or 590 will not be bottlenecked by the cpu.
Also I thought that the Z68 chip opened up more lanes for the Sangy Bridge.
a c 103 U Graphics card
January 2, 2012 5:31:12 AM

inzone said:
So then the OP is better off with the i7-860 and the 7970 or 590 will not be bottlenecked by the cpu.
Also I thought that the Z68 chip opened up more lanes for the Sangy Bridge.


The PCI-E controller for GPUs is on the CPU. The Z68 simply expands the available 16 PCI-E lanes into various configurations, either 1x16, 2x8 1x8 + 2x4, etc... as well as adds a few of its own which aren't connected directly to the CPU (8 I think) that serve up the the smaller 1x (and sometimes 4x) slots, Ethernet, onboard audio, etc... These additional lanes communicate over DMI
January 2, 2012 8:25:13 AM

Well, thanks for the responses. I decided not to go for a CPU upgrade yet, however I am considering overclocking my CPU further to 3.8Ghz at least. Problem is, with Prime95/ other stress tests my CPU reaches (on average) high 60 degrees C. I think in gaming this is not as high, but maybe there is a way to overclock more efficiently? I still have Turbo Boost enabled, and the 'true' overclock is 3444Mhz. All i did was increase the CPU multiplier. Any advice? And for some reason, voltage control is locked.
a c 103 U Graphics card
January 2, 2012 8:49:11 AM

olivierhacking said:
Well, thanks for the responses. I decided not to go for a CPU upgrade yet, however I am considering overclocking my CPU further to 3.8Ghz at least. Problem is, with Prime95/ other stress tests my CPU reaches (on average) high 60 degrees C. I think in gaming this is not as high, but maybe there is a way to overclock more efficiently? I still have Turbo Boost enabled, and the 'true' overclock is 3444Mhz. All i did was increase the CPU multiplier. Any advice? And for some reason, voltage control is locked.


high 60, even mid 70s is perfectly fine for a stress test load. That may seem really hot to us but it's warm at best for electronics. Overclocking is dangerous and results will vary dramatically, hence the binning process which guarantees that chips will work at the frequencies advertised. You may not be able to obtain the desired frequency, nor may you be able to replicate someone else' results.

Best of luck
a b U Graphics card
January 2, 2012 8:53:40 AM

PCgamer81 said:
At stock speeds, even the Sandy Bridge can be a bottleneck with hardware acceleration equal to or greater than the 6970.

I can only imagine that it would be worse with the 860, but that is only my guess, albeit an educated one based in experience (I have both the i5 2500k and 6970).

Unless you plan on doing some serious overclocking, it is time for an upgrade.

Sorry.


Yet my 8150 doesn't bottleneck my three 6950s?
a b U Graphics card
January 2, 2012 8:54:44 AM

If you game at 1280x1024, then ALL high-end chips will be bottlenecked, even some mainstream GPUs. The CPU arranges the to-be-rendered scene (as objects and loading the textures), so at a certain FPS every game will be CPU-limited. The question is, can the card give those FPS? That's why you see some games more CPU-limited than others.
But if you game 1920x1200 at 8x or 16x antialiasing, then I think even a i5 will not limit the 7970. Triple-monitor and it's even better for CPU. SLI/Crossfire however has an added CPU overhead.
I would say stick with your CPU, get the new card and maybe 6 months later get a new CPU. Afte all, my 5850 was bougth when I had an E8400.
January 2, 2012 10:09:06 AM

FtsArTek said:
Yet my 8150 doesn't bottleneck my three 6950s?


How do you know? Have you compared your benchmarks with tri-fired 6950's with a more powerful CPU (Intel)?

Just because you're happy with the performance you're getting, doesn't mean it's not bottlenecking.

If you can gain a significant performance increase by overclocking further, then you are bottlenecked..
January 2, 2012 10:11:00 AM

It is like feeding pigs. If the pigs can eat faster than you can dump the slop, then you're a bottleneck.

And the current-gen CPU's most certainly are, at least at reasonable speeds.
a b U Graphics card
January 2, 2012 10:24:08 AM

PCgamer81 said:
How do you know? Have you compared your benchmarks with tri-fired 6950's with a more powerful CPU (Intel)?

Just because you're happy with the performance you're getting, doesn't mean it's not bottlenecking.

If you can gain a significant performance increase by overclocking further, then you are bottlenecked..


No real gaming diff between 3.6 and 4.6, only in Adobe AE, but also, I've tried with my mate's 2600k too. @4.2
January 2, 2012 11:51:19 AM

FtsArTek said:
No real gaming diff between 3.6 and 4.6, only in Adobe AE, but also, I've tried with my mate's 2600k too. @4.2


Well then, one would have to ask, why game at 4.6GHz? Do you just absolutely love the prospect of decreasing your CPU's lifespan by overclocking 30%?
January 2, 2012 12:30:04 PM

I wasn't awake you could overclock not k versions of intel processors. o.o
a c 216 U Graphics card
January 2, 2012 5:42:06 PM

It depends on the resolution and refresh rate. At 1080p with a 60hz monitor, you are limited to 60 FPS being displayed, so in all reality, the GPU is just not needed in most games.

But at 1080p and 120hz monitor, you can then use that graphics power, but then your CPU will sometimes bottleneck you unless you overclock it a lot. (and that CPU can overclock quite easily)

Now if you use eyefinity with 3 1080p monitors, the 7970 will still hold back performance and be the bottleneck, not your CPU. Two on the other hand would run it nicely.

Then a 2550x1600 monitor, then everything will likely be balanced out of the box.

Your monitor setup means everything, yet no one ever asks about it. (mathew7 did bring it up late)
January 3, 2012 12:05:39 AM

internetswag said:
I wasn't awake you could overclock not k versions of intel processors. o.o


"Not k" processors?

Yeah, man. They aren't the only Intel CPUs that can be overclocked, not by a long shot. If that were the case, Intel wouldn't be as widely known and loved among PC gamers long before the current-gen CPU's.
!