Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Need help to find CPU or GPU bottleneck in my case!!!

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 24, 2012 8:03:50 AM

friends, I have low CPU pentium D, 3Ghz,2GB RAM, Asus GTX560, CM 550W Gx PSU. Problem is poor performance(FPS). Consider Mafia II, here with all settings (incl Physx, HD) maxed, I get about 15 to 19 FPS and with all settings to low\disabled, still getting just 20 to 23 FPS and no better.

I also found there is no impact in FPS :ouch:  when I set my resolution to 1024x768 and also to 1920x1080!!!. What does this mean?, pure CPU bottleneck?.

Not just MafiaII, but in many games like GTA4, etc this is my problem. Reducing all settings to low does not boost FPS :pt1cable: 

Thanks
a c 92 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
January 24, 2012 8:07:30 AM

yes its a huge cpu bottleneck.

your cpu is like 8 years old, its no where near powerful enough to use in modern games. pentium Ds are also bad cpus in general.

Score
0
January 24, 2012 8:16:51 AM

Yep it's a full CPU bottleneck Dispite having 3GHZ Of speed the Pentium D lacks many other features of a modern CPU such as having a faster FSB Speed, Not supporting DDR2-DDR3, No hyper-threading And having a smaller cache.

If it is an LGA755 socket type You may be able to get a Core 2 Duo CPU but make sure to check if your motherboard can support it. ( Or yours might not be an LGA755 check first)
Score
0
Related resources
January 24, 2012 8:28:52 AM

brythespy said:
Yep it's a full CPU bottleneck Dispite having 3GHZ Of speed the Pentium D lacks many other features of a modern CPU such as having a faster FSB Speed, Not supporting DDR2-DDR3, No hyper-threading And having a smaller cache.

If it is an LGA755 socket type You may be able to get a Core 2 Duo CPU but make sure to check if your motherboard can support it. ( Or yours might not be an LGA755 check first)


Thanks, Mine is LGA 755. It supports for Core2Duo\Quad core :wahoo:  . But will I benefit from Core2Duo high end CPUs?. If so how long is it gonna last? :sarcastic:  . Or can I try something like Core i5 2300\2400 ?.

How much difference I could see with say Core2Duo E8400 3.0Ghz compared to i5 2300\2400?.

<Quad Cores are costly in my country>.

Once upgraded, I dont want next upgrade to happen for at least another 3.5 to 4.5 years :love:  . So what CPU should I prefer?.
Score
0
a c 172 U Graphics card
a c 86 à CPUs
January 24, 2012 8:42:52 AM

HUGE cpu bottleneck there. A core 2 duo will be a lot better, but still doesnt cut it for some games. for many modern games you need a half decent quad core cpu. Something like a phenom 955 if you can still get them, dont get AMD's FX series, or even better any of intels core i3, i5, i7 range.
Score
0
January 24, 2012 9:16:51 AM

Your motherboard will not support Intel's i3, i5, i7. But the Core 2 Duo can compete with lower end i3's and i5's. Mostly the i*'s will Support newer features in Processing but the Core 2 Duo isn't too old and will work just fine for many games.

A Core 2 Duo can last many years possibly a Decade! :o 
Score
0
January 24, 2012 5:51:43 PM

brythespy said:
Your motherboard will not support Intel's i3, i5, i7. But the Core 2 Duo can compete with lower end i3's and i5's. Mostly the i*'s will Support newer features in Processing but the Core 2 Duo isn't too old and will work just fine for many games.

A Core 2 Duo can last many years possibly a Decade! :o 


Yes, But I dont want to once again put myself into trouble by upgrading into Core2Duo. Instead how about Core i3 2100 and core i5 2300\2400?. In my town, the price of i3 2100 is about INR 6800(US$135) where as i5 2400 is about INR 11300 (US$ 230). I dont know if the online price is higher, I dont have such option. So out of these two, which is recommendable?. And a good value for the money/performance, please categorize it's performance in gaming and suggest me.
Score
0
January 24, 2012 5:54:19 PM

Update: I'm to buy a new basic Mobo from Intel such as DH61WW, hence I'm open to buy i-series
Score
0
January 24, 2012 6:33:05 PM

You may want to a wait a bit for Intels new line up although you can't really play anything on that Pentium D. If you decide to upgrade now either go for a Core i3 2100 or a Core i5 2500k. Both will net you a massive performance increase.
Score
0
January 24, 2012 6:42:56 PM

Yes, you are right. My PC can't even now play games like COD MW2 properly with all medium settings, where as in reviews I see this GPU card doing fantastic. Hell with Pentium D series.....I believe it is just a renaming of Pentium4 with 2 cores mimicked.

That is okay, but between i3\i5 of what will be the best for price?. Huge price difference is the problem!!!. For this huge price difference, can equivalent performance\dollar be expected>

Quiet confusion....
Score
0
a c 125 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
January 24, 2012 6:56:39 PM

xtcx said:
A quick look at this

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2011/01/03/intel-...

This is shocking....Choosing a CPU slightly with lesser value really has such a big impact?.... I just can't believe....This gets me the creep even more. Huge FPS impact???


The only thing that really changed in those was the minimum framerate, which makes sense because there can be areas where perhaps there is a lot of AI and physics for the CPU to compute, so the fastest CPUs pull out of it better. Still, min FPS lasts a fraction of a second and while it might be noticeable, the vast majority of the time you won't notice a thing.

Anyway, for a moderate budget, have you looked at AMD? The nice thing about AMD CPUs, unlike low end Intel, is that they are unlocked so you can overclock them. The Phenom II X4 955 and 965 are considered to be very good bang for your buck CPUs and can overclock over 4ghz with a decent air cooler. If you get a cheaper AM3+ mobo you'll be all set and will have the option to upgrade to a better CPU in the future.
Score
0
January 24, 2012 7:00:30 PM

If you can afford it, the i5 2500k is the way to go.

Otherwise, I totally agree with wolfram23, the Phenom II X4 965 is the way to go.
Score
0
January 24, 2012 7:04:55 PM

Well, I do not prefer OC. I don't wish to take any risk and reduce my PC life. So I'd stay off with factory set values. Also I prefer Intel since all my friends have this and I may find easier to swap at times for testing or so....

Is there a chance that the CPU price may likely drop with Ivy bridge introduction?, if so possibly when?...
Score
0
January 24, 2012 7:08:09 PM

2546543,12,614406 said:
The only thing that really changed in those was the minimum framerate, which makes sense because there can be areas where perhaps there is a lot of AI and physics for the CPU to compute, so the fastest CPUs pull out of it better. Still, min FPS lasts a fraction of a second and while it might be noticeable, the vast majority of the time you won't notice a thing.

In that case, i3-2100 is not that bad as it shows. :) 
So is i3 2100 acceptable for a decent gaming?. My next upgrade will be approx 3.5 yrs only. So I need to make correct decision.
Score
0
January 24, 2012 7:10:38 PM

If it's 3,5 years, i5-2400 and you're good to go.
Phenom's may still cut it today, but they are already starting to show their age.
Score
0
a c 125 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
January 24, 2012 7:12:02 PM

I'd suggest the i3 2120, but yes it's a great CPU. Stock vs stock is is basically as good as the AMD PII 965.

Check this article out: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-o...

Also if you buy at least a decent motherboard you will be able to upgrade the CPU to Ivy Bridge so maybe in 2-3 years, if they are still available, you could get an Ivy Bridge quad core and really kick ass.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
January 24, 2012 7:17:34 PM

^+1
i3-2120, you'll have a great upgrade path in the future if the cpu ever holds you back again, which it shouldn't for a few years.
Score
0
January 24, 2012 7:36:22 PM

omega21xx said:
^+1
i3-2120, you'll have a great upgrade path in the future if the cpu ever holds you back again, which it shouldn't for a few years.


Whats big diff between i3 2100 and 2120?.
My locality, i3-2120 not available though.
Score
0
a c 92 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
January 24, 2012 7:38:21 PM

the difference is 200mhz, its not much. just get the i3 2100
Score
0
January 24, 2012 7:40:38 PM

wolfram23 said:
I'd suggest the i3 2120, but yes it's a great CPU. Stock vs stock is is basically as good as the AMD PII 965.

Check this article out: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-o...

Also if you buy at least a decent motherboard you will be able to upgrade the CPU to Ivy Bridge so maybe in 2-3 years, if they are still available, you could get an Ivy Bridge quad core and really kick ass.


Well, what I feel is, CPU upgrade should be done once for every two GPU upgrades. Since in most games, the power of the GPU is very important than CPU. Correct me if Im wrong.

In this case, i5-2400 looks decent and i5-2500k looks pretty high-end CPU which can withstand the GPU leech for 5 years. Correct?. :) 
Score
0
a c 92 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
January 24, 2012 7:42:12 PM

the i3 should hold for 2-3 years.

the i5 would be somewhat better since its quad core.
Score
0

Best solution

a c 125 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
January 24, 2012 7:54:23 PM

The i5 2400 is basically the same as the 2500 just a lower clock, like the i3 2100 to the 2120.

The 2500k is an unlocked CPU specifically to be used with P67 or Z68 motherboards for overclocking.

The 2500k is also considered the best gaming CPU on the market for both value and performance, and it will be a viable CPU for many years if you are willing to over clock. They are usually getting up to 4.5ghz or more with decent cooling.

It really comes down to budget. If you have a budget it makes things a lot easier, since an i3 2100 build is a bit different than an i5 2500k build.
Share
January 25, 2012 7:23:17 AM

esrever said:
the i3 should hold for 2-3 years.

the i5 would be somewhat better since its quad core.


Are there games which use quad-cores in CPU?...
If that happens, how would the performance in i3-2100 and other similar 2 core CPUs?. Any wild guess :sarcastic: 
Score
0
a c 109 U Graphics card
a c 186 à CPUs
January 25, 2012 7:26:03 AM

Or wait 3 months for the new ivybridge cpu's....
Score
0
January 25, 2012 7:27:05 AM

wolfram23 said:
The i5 2400 is basically the same as the 2500 just a lower clock, like the i3 2100 to the 2120.

The 2500k is an unlocked CPU specifically to be used with P67 or Z68 motherboards for overclocking.

The 2500k is also considered the best gaming CPU on the market for both value and performance, and it will be a viable CPU for many years if you are willing to over clock. They are usually getting up to 4.5ghz or more with decent cooling.

It really comes down to budget. If you have a budget it makes things a lot easier, since an i3 2100 build is a bit different than an i5 2500k build.


You are correct, the i3-2100 loses about 5 to 10 FPS to i5-2500k in most of the games as shown in some CPU reviews. It seems it is a worth option to buy for money. But as "esrever" said about quad-core, what happens in another 1 yr period of time, many popular game developers start using quad-core utilization in CPU?....

In that case, I really hate to see the requirements lists of next gen games asking for quad-core as recommended config :( 
Score
0
January 25, 2012 7:28:33 AM

And by the way. Overclocking......? Why take risks :) 
I never do that and put myself risk. Only factory settings
Score
0
a c 125 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
January 25, 2012 2:10:00 PM

xtcx said:
And by the way. Overclocking......? Why take risks :) 
I never do that and put myself risk. Only factory settings


You can overclock without taking risks ;) 
Score
0
January 31, 2012 9:16:59 AM

wolfram23 said:
You can overclock without taking risks ;) 


I quite disagree here. I cannot make up my mind saying overclocking is no-risky. It reduces chip life I believe gradually. And also, no Chip manufacturers advertise about overclocking as of my knowledge
Score
0
a c 125 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
January 31, 2012 1:58:43 PM

xtcx said:
I quite disagree here. I cannot make up my mind saying overclocking is no-risky. It reduces chip life I believe gradually. And also, no Chip manufacturers advertise about overclocking as of my knowledge


Intel offers an overclocking warranty. http://www.guru3d.com/news/intel-overclocking-warranty-...

Anyway, increasing the CPU frequency without touching voltage does no harm at all.
Score
0
February 1, 2012 3:29:33 AM

wolfram23 said:
Intel offers an overclocking warranty. http://www.guru3d.com/news/intel-overclocking-warranty-...

Anyway, increasing the CPU frequency without touching voltage does no harm at all.


okay, I agree. If this is the case, why wouldn't the manufacturer ship with overclocked units?. Whats so blocking?. Don't you think there is some other risk factor involved?. Otherwise all the stock models might have been replaced with OC versions.
Score
0
February 1, 2012 3:59:37 AM

As long as you have proper cooling overclocking should not cause your system any heartburn. Manufacturers probably do not overclock units because they would need to provide better stock coolers. In essence, they don't do it because it is cheaper for them not to.
Score
0
February 1, 2012 4:03:05 AM

Anyway I would say you should be ok with the i3 2100 if you are on a budget although like others mentioned I would wait till ivy bridge just in case a better part comes along and/or a further drop in price occurs for the i3 2100
Score
0
a c 125 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
February 1, 2012 1:53:57 PM

Well CPUs do come overclocked to an extent. Look at AMD, from the 955 to the 975 it's always the same CPU but with higher clocks. Anybody can buy a 955 and OC it to 975 clocks no problem, and save a bit of cash.

GPUs also come overclocked. Sapphire Toxic, MSI Lightning, EVGA Super Clock and Classified, etc.
Score
0
February 4, 2012 3:22:52 PM

Best answer selected by xtcx.
Score
0
a c 271 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
February 4, 2012 11:07:02 PM

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
Score
0
!