Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

i3/7950 bottleneck?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 23, 2012 4:28:56 AM

Hello,

I want to know if an HD 7950 GPU will be severely bottlenecked by an i3-3220 CPU in gaming. What's the performance difference between this i3 and an i5 combined with a 7950? Would it be stupid to pair an i3 with a 7950? I'm on a budget and I don't know if this is right or not. I'd just like some opinions.

Thanks everyone.

-Charlie

More about : 7950 bottleneck

Anonymous
a b à CPUs
October 23, 2012 6:42:02 AM

Yep, depends on the game. It's good if you don't play many CPU intensive games, or ones that take advantage of more than 2 threads.
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 109 à CPUs
October 23, 2012 6:53:50 AM

You'll experience a bottleneck, however, it won't be anything severe. They really overuse the term "bottleneck" IMO.

The differences between an i3 and i5 in gaming can be as little as 2% or as big as 10-20% depending on the title. For more CPU dependent titles such as BF3 Multiplayer, you may see a huge gap in performance between the CPU's.

However, this is nothing to fear as the i3 will STILL be able to keep you well above 50-60 FPS as long as you have a very strong GPU supporting it.

Long story short, you're doing the right thing going with an i3 and pairing it with the beefiest GPU you can afford. If I'm not mistaken, there was a review somewhere that paired an i3 with a GTX670... I'll have to find it.

Share
Related resources
October 23, 2012 8:12:59 AM

If you can change the motherboard I'd say get a Phenom II X4 BE ? A solid choice IMO for at least another year. It's like a hundred bucks on Newegg.
m
0
l
a c 185 à CPUs
October 23, 2012 8:13:24 AM

No.....
m
0
l
October 23, 2012 9:43:57 AM

Op, that's the right thing to do, expending twice for GPU compare to your CPU. Actually "bottleneck" depends on the intensity of graphics needed for your applications/games. If you're still in doubt you could go down a step lower and buy a 7850, but it's your choice and decision do what makes you happy.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 23, 2012 10:27:23 AM

Mocchan is entirely correct, mrAB not so much... AMD have just launched new architecture (see front page) - much faster than X4s and very competitively-priced. But still nowhere near as good as Intel for gaming. Slight mistake from andyboy11 - i3 is infact dual core and quad thread (Intel Hyperthreading) so you have two physical cores but Windows will report 4 logical cores (since each core can execute two commands simultaneously). Like mocchan says, i3 is good.
m
0
l
a c 78 à CPUs
October 23, 2012 10:34:45 AM

sam_p_lay said:
Mocchan is entirely correct, mrAB not so much... AMD have just launched new architecture (see front page) - much faster than X4s and very competitively-priced. But still nowhere near as good as Intel for gaming. Slight mistake from andyboy11 - i3 is infact dual core and quad thread (Intel Hyperthreading) so you have two physical cores but Windows will report 4 logical cores (since each core can execute two commands simultaneously). Like mocchan says, i3 is good.

Define "nowhere near".
http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/3314/23/amd-fx-8350--83...
http://www.hardcoreware.net/amd-piledriver-fx-review-vi...
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 23, 2012 10:42:25 AM



In this case I'm defining it as ~15% in CPU-intensive games as an average across all resolutions. Looking specifically at 1080p, that's 20%. A significant difference by processor standards (even by graphics card standards). This is based on the THG numbers. Didn't take long for the fanboys to invade the thread.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 23, 2012 11:33:01 AM

you see, the HD 7950 is a high end AMD graphics card...

you can compare it to my experience...
(this is all done by high spec The Witcher 2 game, without Uber Sampling on) ON 1366 X 768 RESOLUTION
last time out, i have an i3 2100 paired up with GTX 560 Ti,

i got 30 to 45 fps in The Witcher 2 game.

after i upgraded to i5 2500K, i paired it up with GTX 560 Ti,

i got min 60 fps in The Witcher 2 game.


so, as a conclusion, the i3 is a GOOD BUDGET CPU solution to gaming, it can get you up to 40 fps.
but, as far as i know, by playing The Witcher 2, the i5 is a BETTER, YET EXPENSIVE CPU solution to gaming.

(pardon me, i just want to relate my experience with these i3 and i5 chips. Not touching anything regarding bottleneck. You judge it yourself by my experience).
m
0
l
a c 78 à CPUs
October 23, 2012 4:18:19 PM

sam_p_lay said:
In this case I'm defining it as ~15% in CPU-intensive games as an average across all resolutions. Looking specifically at 1080p, that's 20%. A significant difference by processor standards (even by graphics card standards). This is based on the THG numbers. Didn't take long for the fanboys to invade the thread.

I wouldn't look at anything but 1080p personally. FX-6300s are the closest price range launch to the i3.

The first link I gave, show 3 games @ 1080p, none have more than 3% difference in performance. Don't call me a fanboy. Yes, I prefer AMD products for myself, I have never made an effort to conceal that, but I'm also known for giving non BS answers and giving accurate pros and cons of both choices. Theres at least 2 people in this thread running Intel rigs if put on the spot would tell you that. So sit your butt down sir.

I looked at Tom's numbers, as I can see they ran 3 games, Skyrim, BF3 and WoW. The numbers are fine.
m
0
l
a c 78 à CPUs
October 23, 2012 4:30:07 PM

Now in direct answer to the OPs question, my opinion is that the 2 components are not a good complement for each other. Yes, in most games you probably will not notice a difference, but there are indeed some titles that you may. As mentioned, BF3 is one of them, Skyrim potentially, but also Medal of Honor Warfighter, which uses the same multi-core engine as BF3, and other titles going forward are coming out that utilize multi-core processors.

Your sig says you have a 2500K with a crossfire 6850 setup, I find myself wondering why you aren't considering adding a 7970 or GTX 670 to that?

If this is a new build we're talking, I might consider dropping a peg down to a 7870 video card to allow you to squeeze a non-K i5 such as a 3450 or 2400 in there, or yes dare I say it, the new FX-8320 or 8350.
m
0
l
October 23, 2012 4:37:30 PM

OP's question was SEVERELY bottlenecked. The answer is NO. A little? Perhaps. It's that simple guys.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 23, 2012 4:42:01 PM

nekulturny said:
Don't call me a fanboy. Yes, I prefer AMD products for myself, I have never made an effort to conceal that, but I'm also known for giving non BS answers and giving accurate pros and cons of both choices. So sit your butt down sir.


Judging from your pure AMD setup and the way you responded to a minor part of my post, I'd say it's a pretty reasonable assumption that you're a fanboy. That sentence was to illustrate the fact that there are now better options for an AMD gaming processor than the Phenom II X4. That small part of my post was off-topic - the rest of my post was not. It's good to see you now actually have something positive and on-topic to contribute.

nekulturny said:
I looked at Tom's numbers, as I can see they ran 3 games, Skyrim, BF3 and WoW. The numbers are fine.


I never said they weren't fine - I know they're fine. Now that you've seen illustrated the performance difference, you'll concede that there is a significant advantage to the i5s over the new FX in some games?

OP, nekturkey's point about the signature is a good one - are you looking to build an additional system to that, or thinking you'd benefit from an Ivy Bridge i3? If it's the latter, there's honestly no benefit over what you already have. The Sandy Bridge i5s are superb processors and won't bottleneck your setup.
m
0
l
a c 78 à CPUs
October 23, 2012 4:42:37 PM

dyc4ha said:
OP's question was SEVERELY bottlenecked. The answer is NO. A little? Perhaps. It's that simple guys.

And the answer is YES, in CERTAIN games, the video card will be SEVERELY bottlenecked, many they will not. Its so simple, that I bet you could re-read mine and a couple other people's answers and figure it out. :whistle: 
m
0
l
a c 78 à CPUs
October 23, 2012 4:44:15 PM

sam_p_lay said:
Judging from your pure AMD setup and the way you responded to a minor part of my post, I'd say it's a pretty reasonable assumption that you're a fanboy. That sentence was to illustrate the fact that there are now better options for an AMD gaming processor than the Phenom II X4. That small part of my post was off-topic - the rest of my post was not. It's good to see you now actually have something positive and on-topic to contribute.



I never said they weren't fine - I know they're fine. Now that you've seen illustrated the performance difference, you'll concede that there is a significant advantage to the i5s over the new FX in some games?

OP, nekturkey's point about the signature is a good one - are you looking to build an additional system to that, or thinking you'd benefit from an Ivy Bridge i3? If it's the latter, there's honestly no benefit over what you already have. The Sandy Bridge i5s are superb processors and won't bottleneck your setup.

Your post was disrespectful and assumptive. I didn't read anything of this post now beyond the 2nd sentence. When you learn to take a more respectful tone towards others, not jump to conclusions and use passive-aggressive insults, I might give a little more consideration to what you have to say. Fanboy has a negative connotation, and if you use it, on these forums it bears the same implications as using a racial epithet. Fact is, I've owned many Intel systems in my life, starting with Pentium II back in the day, moving on to Pentium 4s, Pentium D, Core2Duo, and Sandy Bridge i5.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 23, 2012 4:46:16 PM

nekulturny said:
Your post was disrespectful and assumptive. I didn't read anything of this post now beyond the 2nd sentence. When you learn to take a more respectful tone towards others, not jump to conclusions and use passive-aggressive insults, I might give a little more consideration to what you have to say.


As opposed to 'sit your butt down, sir'? Stop being a hypocrite and grow up.
m
0
l
October 23, 2012 4:47:27 PM

nekulturny said:
And the answer is YES, in CERTAIN games, the video card will be SEVERELY bottlenecked, many they will not. Its so simple, that I bet you could re-read mine and a couple other people's answers and figure it out. :whistle: 


Yea except OP did not mention ANY games in particular, therefore selecting one or two titles then answering YES is misleading imho. In GENERAL the answer is no. It is that simple.
m
0
l
a c 78 à CPUs
October 23, 2012 4:47:45 PM

sam_p_lay said:
As opposed to 'sit your butt down, sir'? Stop being a hypocrite and grow up.

Well, I could have said "ass", thats a saying I have used for many years, and its always been "ass" not "butt". So there you go. Seriously, calm down. Why so serious? :heink: 
m
0
l
a c 78 à CPUs
October 23, 2012 4:48:46 PM

dyc4ha said:
Yea except OP did not mention ANY games in particular, therefore selecting one or two titles then answering YES is misleading imho. In GENERAL the answer is no. It is that simple.

Which is why I threw out specific game titles and mentioned that the problem only occurs in certain games. This is a probative statement/question, geared to get more information from the OP.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
October 23, 2012 4:49:14 PM

nekulturny said:
Well, I could have said "ass", thats a saying I have used for many years, and its always been "ass" not "butt". So there you go. Seriously, calm down. Why so serious? :heink: 


Oh come on, compared to your rant about respect? I actually +1ed a very good point of your's there anyway.
m
0
l
a c 78 à CPUs
October 23, 2012 4:51:58 PM

I'm over it, seriously, this will lead nowhere good for either of us if a mod drops by the thread. Not that I post that often on the forums anymore these days.
m
0
l
October 23, 2012 4:57:08 PM

Let's stop arguing, at least until OP provides more info lol. Have a nice day
m
0
l
October 23, 2012 7:31:39 PM

Alright, well thanks to most of you for providing me with some helpful opinions and facts! I think I'll stick with the i3 for now.
m
0
l
October 23, 2012 7:32:52 PM

Best answer selected by cskoler.
m
0
l
April 1, 2013 7:51:24 AM

cskoler said:
Hello,

I want to know if an HD 7950 GPU will be severely bottlenecked by an i3-3220 CPU in gaming. What's the performance difference between this i3 and an i5 combined with a 7950? Would it be stupid to pair an i3 with a 7950? I'm on a budget and I don't know if this is right or not. I'd just like some opinions.

Thanks everyone.

-Charlie

Here's the best answer .
http://www.techspot.com/review/458-battlefield-3-perfor...
m
0
l
!