Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Have phenom ii 965 be need advice on graphics card (s)

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
June 1, 2012 1:34:00 AM

Hi there. I have a phenom ii 965 be and an asus sabertooth 990 mobo sitting around in box collecting dust and figured I'd finally go ahead and build a rig as I'm getting tired of my laptop. My question is with those two items as a base would someone please direct me to a few graphics cards that would work well if I oced the cpu to say 3.6? I've been browsing but I don't have a lot of expertise in this area and id like to have the choices narrowed a bit. Budget prices are nice but not a must as I have that financing deal through best buy. Id like to be able to tackle pretty much every game at high frames but I've read about bottlenecking and don't really want to pay high dollar for something that won't be able to perform at its optimum level. Thanks!
a c 105 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 2:00:00 AM

what opsys....32 or 64bit/what ram/monitor and res/power supply/what you will be using the machine for... ???
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 2:02:47 AM

I would recommend you look at the Radeon HD 6950 or 7850 as well as the Nvidia GTX 560ti or 570. Those would get you into the types of frame rates you would need.
m
0
l
Related resources
June 1, 2012 2:11:56 AM

swifty Windows 7 64 bit RAM will be ddr 3 1600 probably 8 gb moniter is tbd power supply will be a 750 watt good brand sorry if this all seems a bit rough haven't put a ton of thought in to it. I looked at the 7850s, would that require more than 3.6 on the overlook to run stable?
m
0
l
June 1, 2012 2:13:12 AM

Also ill be using it for gaming mostly. Diablo 3 and maybe a few mmos and fps games like battlefield
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 2:29:20 AM

clintk55 said:
swifty Windows 7 64 bit RAM will be ddr 3 1600 probably 8 gb moniter is tbd power supply will be a 750 watt good brand sorry if this all seems a bit rough haven't put a ton of thought in to it. I looked at the 7850s, would that require more than 3.6 on the overlook to run stable?



That will run just fine,infact it should run 2 of them fine.I have run a 980 stock/oc and now an 1100t stock/oc and they both ran/run 2 6950's just fine.
I pretty much only play BF3 and using open hardware monitor,either Cpu and both Gpu's are running pretty much 100%.
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 2:35:54 AM

Diablo 3 and MMOs aren't heavy games, but BF3 is. Were you referring to BF3 when you said Battlefield or an older version?

Also, I'd overclock that CPU. 4GHz is where I think it should be. Don't get a 570 because it has way too little VRAM nowadays. The same is true for any 6950 or 560 TI that doesn't have 2GB of VRAM. The 7850 is the best option here, but a 6950 2GB or 560 TI 2GB are okay... However, I do not recommend them.
m
0
l
June 1, 2012 2:43:49 AM

Thanks so much for the input so far guys. BF3 is what I was referring to. Should I worry too much about the Catalyst driver issues that have been popping up?
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 2:49:24 AM

GTX 670. look at my specs bro. we have same system. my 980 at 3.7 is about the same as yours at 3.6
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 3:06:10 AM

Don't worry about driver issues. I've worked with 7850s and they're fine if you use recent driver. Since BF3 is important, the 7850 is an excellent choice. Even at stock, the 965 wouldn't be much of a CPU limitation, but a moderate overclock to 3.6GHz (like you suggested) or 4GHz should solve any CPU limitations in all games with the 7850. The 7850 isn't so ridiculously fast that it presents a problem for the Phenom IIs.
m
0
l
June 1, 2012 3:29:30 AM

I'd go with a GTX 670 or an HD7870, your going to need 2gb vram if you want to turn up the textures on BF3 or even Max Payne. You should be able to hit 4.0-4.2ghz on your 965 easily enough just make sure you get an aftermarket cooler. The stock cooler does work but the fan will stress you out even at 48c the fan spins up to 7k. Even at stock clocks that fan will wear on you, I wish I'd taken that advice.
m
0
l
June 1, 2012 3:36:59 AM

Any single GPU will work perfect even the ATI 7970 or the GTX 680, even mid end SLI's like gtx 460, 560 or crossfire's like 7950 etc. Only dual cpu beats like the gtx 690 , ATI 6990 or high end Sli's would bottleneck it, so go for the best you can!
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 4:26:27 AM

Hydroc10 said:
I'd go with a GTX 670 or an HD7870, your going to need 2gb vram if you want to turn up the textures on BF3 or even Max Payne. You should be able to hit 4.0-4.2ghz on your 965 easily enough just make sure you get an aftermarket cooler. The stock cooler does work but the fan will stress you out even at 48c the fan spins up to 7k. Even at stock clocks that fan will wear on you, I wish I'd taken that advice.


The Radeon 7850 has 2GB of VRAM. No 7850 has less than 2GB.
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 4:31:58 AM

davemaster84 said:
Any single GPU will work perfect even the ATI 7970 or the GTX 680, even mid end SLI's like gtx 460, 560 or crossfire's like 7950 etc. Only dual cpu beats like the gtx 690 , ATI 6990 or high end Sli's would bottleneck it, so go for the best you can!


You are overestimating the capabilities of the Phenom IIs. It takes an overclock to at least about 4GHz just for the GTX 670 to not be too noticeably bottle-necked by a Phenom II x4 or Phenom II x6 CPU in any CPU intensive games. Anything more than that would be too much for the Phenom IIs. Crossfire 7950, Radeon 6990, GTX 690, and others are too much for them. Two 7950s are between two GTX 580s and two GTX 670s.
m
0
l
June 1, 2012 5:27:38 AM

blazorthon said:
The Radeon 7850 has 2GB of VRAM. No 7850 has less than 2GB.

IMO the 7850 is not that good of a deal, heck a 6870 has more compute power although is slower in games. So I say get at least a 7870-7950 or GTX670, the OP has a nice motherboard and should be able to get a nice OC the 7850 may be the bottleneck at that point.
I agree though a 7850 would be enough, I won't buy one but I can wait a few months. Peace.
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 6:03:34 AM

The 7850 has more computer power than the 6870 and regardless of that, its compute power has zero effect in most current games anyway. The 7850 also has far greater tessellation performance. You people are suggesting these overly high end cards for this system when it won't even run at high enough resolutions and such to justify these cards and the CPU would be a bottle-neck. The Phenom II x4s have trouble in BF3 MP with anything better than a 7850 or 7870. You're all also spreading outright lies about these hardware components. The 6870 does not have more compute performance than the 7850, the Phenom IIs are not as fast as some of you claim, and I don't even know why you brought up compute performance anyway.
m
0
l
June 1, 2012 6:49:12 AM

blazorthon said:
The 7850 has more computer power than the 6870 and regardless of that, its compute power has zero effect in most current games anyway. The 7850 also has far greater tessellation performance. You people are suggesting these overly high end cards for this system when it won't even run at high enough resolutions and such to justify these cards and the CPU would be a bottle-neck. The Phenom II x4s have trouble in BF3 MP with anything better than a 7850 or 7870. You're all also spreading outright lies about these hardware components. The 6870 does not have more compute performance than the 7850, the Phenom IIs are not as fast as some of you claim, and I don't even know why you brought up compute performance anyway.

Look on amd.com at the specs for the HD7850 1.76 TFLOPS compute power as compared to the HD 6870 2.0 TFLOPS compute power. I did not suggest the OP buy a 6870 over a 7850. There's a cream that will help with that painfull burning when you sit, I'm sure you can find it at your local pharmacy. Enjoy!
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 9:49:15 AM

You know nothing about compute if you think that maximum theoretical SP TFLOPS is equal to performance. The VLIW5 architecture of the 6970 usually maxes out at about one fifth of it's maximum compute performance because VLIW5 is a bad architecture for compute (it never hits 100%) whereas GCN is designed specifically for compute and can easily reach 100% efficiency. Would you like me to explain exactly why this happens? Next time you want to argue about something that you know nothing about with a computer engineer, you might want to try not say something so blatantly ignorant. Enjoy.

Also, if you don't believe me, then why don't you look at the GTX 580's compute TFLOPs and then think about why a card with lower TFLOPS than many of AMD's Radeon 6000 and 5000 cards is several times faster than those AMD cards in real-world compute performance. Those maximum AMD TFLOPS are theoretical numbers that will never be reached, but the GCN Radeons can easily hit their maximums. GCN is an architecture designed for supreme compute performance and in that regard, it succeeded greatly.
m
0
l
June 1, 2012 12:59:34 PM

blazorthon said:
You know nothing about compute if you think that maximum theoretical SP TFLOPS is equal to performance. The VLIW5 architecture of the 6970 usually maxes out at about one fifth of it's maximum compute performance because VLIW5 is a bad architecture for compute (it never hits 100%) whereas GCN is designed specifically for compute and can easily reach 100% efficiency. Would you like me to explain exactly why this happens? Next time you want to argue about something that you know nothing about with a computer engineer, you might want to try not say something so blatantly ignorant. Enjoy.

Also, if you don't believe me, then why don't you look at the GTX 580's compute TFLOPs and then think about why a card with lower TFLOPS than many of AMD's Radeon 6000 and 5000 cards is several times faster than those AMD cards in real-world compute performance. Those maximum AMD TFLOPS are theoretical numbers that will never be reached, but the GCN Radeons can easily hit their maximums. GCN is an architecture designed for supreme compute performance and in that regard, it succeeded greatly.

Sir if you'll reread my statement I wrote I didn't think the 7850 was that great of a value and mentioned the TFLOPS then finished the sentance by saying that the 7850 was faster. I stand by my opinion that the 7850 is not a good value. For some reason you felt the need to add "You're all also spreading outright lies about these components". WTH is that all about? You tried to put words in my mouth and go on to pontificate how isignificant compute power is which I had already agreed that although the 7850 had less TFLOPS performance it was faster in games. These are facts. This is all about you dude. I never even contradicted you. Get over yourself. The OP asked for advice on cards and 3 of us gave our advice, nobody on this thread spread any lies. What was accomplished with the 7850 was great but the card is over priced IMO. Read the whole thread again. If your offended by my opinion about the 7850, well fine. But to say I'm spreading lies and then go on to write a manifesto about things that are not even being disputed is laughable at this point. I gave my source "amd.com" about the TFLOPS however pointless that may be this is fact. I repeat nobody spread any lies and you sir should be ashamed of yourself for insinuating such. To be honest this whole thing has become a joke and makes both of us look foolish. I don,t do flame wars and can only assume you are the proud owner of a 7850 or not, Have a nice day.
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 5:01:27 PM

That the 7850 is faster in games has absolutely nothing to do with compute performance. The GTX 680 is far inferior to the Radeon 7950 in compute performance, yet the 680 beats the 7950 in most games. These are the facts. Compute performance and gaming performance are two very different workloads and are not very related, so by saying that the 6870 has inferior compute performance (wrong), yet loses in games, does not imply that the 7850 is better at compute at all, at least not to anyone who knows much about GPGPU compute. How is the 7850 overpriced?It is right behind the 6970 in gaming performance, but is cheaper and uses far less power (saving more money) and not only that, but it also overclocks better and comes with free games. I'm not ashamed of anything. You took a number of which you don't even understand and used it to say that the 6870 is faster at compute than the 7850. That is a lie and I called you out on it.
m
0
l
a c 105 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 5:11:56 PM

clintk55 said:
swifty Windows 7 64 bit RAM will be ddr 3 1600 probably 8 gb moniter is tbd power supply will be a 750 watt good brand sorry if this all seems a bit rough haven't put a ton of thought in to it. I looked at the 7850s, would that require more than 3.6 on the overlook to run stable?



forget about "optimized" anything. If you want the 7850 get it.It should work fine with the rest of your system. It won't be "optimized" and your processor won't push it to the nth......... but.................... and don't get a card with less that 2gig of vram.

To the guys above in the war............... thanks for messing up the thread.

m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 5:20:33 PM

Yea, the Radeon vs Geforce will never end. One company has its ups just like the other has its up. No one will ever be a CLEAR winner for anything. Blame the market not argue over a matter that will never end
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 5:22:26 PM

Wrong. Completely wrong. The Radeon 7950 and 7970 are the fastest single GPU cards for compute in the consumer market. The 7800 cards beat the GTX 480 in single-precison badly, although they don't win in dual-precision (which is arguably more important, but that's not the point).

In single precision, the closest single GPU Nvidia card to the 7970 is the GTX 680 and the 7970 is about 50% ahead of the 680 in that. The closest single GPU card to the 7970 in dual-precision is the 580 and the 7970 is about three times faster than the 580 (about five to six times faster than the 680 in dual-precision). The 480 is behind the 580 in both single and dual precision. The 7970 is the fastest compute single GPU card overall.
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 5:24:43 PM

You don't know what you're talking about. The 480 doesn't even come close to the 7970 in single nor dual precision compute performance.
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 5:30:27 PM

Rockdpm said:
Yea, the Radeon vs Geforce will never end. One company has its ups just like the other has its up. No one will ever be a CLEAR winner for anything. Blame the market not argue over a matter that will never end


AMD is a clear winner for compute in the consumer cards. I'm not saying that they win everything (they don't come close to winning everything), but the Radeon 7950 and 7970 win in compute and there's no consumer competition for them. Quadro and Tesla cards are all that can fight the 7900 cards in compute and even then, the 7950 and 7970 beat many of them.
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 5:34:53 PM

Quote:
Yup and neither does the price....
Being a arrogant smartass does not suit you very well my friend..

Your Vram info is very misinformed too.
1.5GB:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZs_FfriN_Q


How is my VRAM info wrong? That's 1.5GB at 1080p. 1.5GB has no trouble at 1080p (at least not in my experience) at this time in any game with reasonable settings, AA/AF, etc. Also, I'm not the one who started this crap, I simply told everyone the truth about it. The 7970 has far more performance for the price when it comes to compute than any other card. The 480 is less than one third of the 7970's dual-precision and is even worse when single precision is counted. That the 7970 can now be had for $450 to $500 while the 480's cheapest non-used price is around $200 doesn't help the 480, especially since the 7970 uses less power and is better overall in every performance related way.
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 5:39:36 PM

Quote:
Enthusiasts who’re only interested in gaming might argue that investing staggering amounts of time and money in a complete GPU redesign to better facilitate general-purpose computing tasks is a bold gamble, and we’d certainly agree, especially after witnessing the recent outcome of AMD’s processor division presenting a redesign of its own. Right now, the primary purpose of a high-end graphics card is indisputably to serve up uncontested game performance. Although we’ve watched AMD push its heterogeneous compute initiative for a while now, it’s still a work in progress. And though we’ve tasted the sweet possibilities of GPU-accelerated video transcoding, password cracking, and Wi-Fi brute-forcing, the real-world applications of compute on the desktop are still disappointingly limited. We continue leaning on our CPUs for a majority of tasks. We hold out hope that this stuff will start catching on in a more serious way, though. The HPC space knows what parallelism can do, after all.



Fortunately, the Radeon HD 7970 doesn’t rely on its compute potential to turn heads. It pushes game performance in a big way, too. With months to go before Nvidia can retaliate with its upcoming Kepler architecture, AMD is able to claim it sells samples the fastest single-GPU graphics card—no small achievement for the company more known for its value proposition as of late.



Hardly worthy pointing out it's compute performance....


I didn't bring up compute performance; I simply stated the truth about compute performance. What's that at the end of your post? The 7970 is only the fastest single GPU card overall depending on the workload. Nvidia can lay claim to the fastest single GPU card just as much as AMD can, if not more so because their card is faster overall in more reasonable workloads for most of the gamers who can afford such cards than the 7970.
m
0
l
a c 105 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 5:39:38 PM

hurry up admin, please close this thread...............
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 5:42:49 PM

Quote:
Would you be surprised if i said that a single 480 can play BF3 at 2560x1600 with all bells and whistles cranked?
I bench nearly everything...

Funny that you mentioned prices... not everyone has the money to fork out for your luxurious 7970... and nearly no one has a monitor above 1080p with 3 screens.
The 670 craps on the 7970 and the 7870 at it's current price...
Why are you so hell bent on the 7xxx series? showing a bit too much love for the red devil..

None subjective mannerism is a more preferred way of speaking.


I'm not being biased about any of this. The 7970 is the winner in compute performance and compute performance for the money. I did not suggest that anyone go out and buy it because of that unless compute is important to them. I do suggest that people looking for a card in the 7850's performance range get the 7850 because it is the best option there for people who aren't reliant on something such as CUDA or are simply a Nvidia fan. I've never suggested that anyone buy a 7970 except a few times for people looking for high compute performance. In fact, I often recommend the GTX 670 4GB to people who want a card that high end far more often. The 7970 is too overpriced right now to be considered and even if it wasn't, the Radeon 7950 and the 7970 are indistinguishable when overclocked, so if 7900 seems to be the way to go, then I recommend buying and overclocking the 7950. The problem with Nvidia right now is that their competition for the 7800 cards and below all uses far too much power and their competition for the 7900 cards has severe memory bottle-necks in many situations, so they can only be recommended after looking into the individual's situation. Nvidia is the one who isn't getting more cards out quickly and is giving their new cards memory bottle-necks, not me. Take it up with them if someone has to call them out on that.

EDIT: Also, the 7970 is best used for 2560x1600, not 5760x1080. I guarantee that the 480 will not beat the 7970 nor even come close to beating it, except maybe in a few of the most Nvidia preferring games.
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 6:42:33 PM

The memory bandwidth bottle-neck of the Kepler cards is the only major reason for the Kepler cards not beating the 7900 cards in every game at resolutions such as 2560x1600 and below. Nvidia might think that giving a card with substantially more GPU performance than the GTX 580 the same memory bandwidth as the 580 is okay, but that the 680 and 670 perform poorly in memory bandwidth heavy games shows how bad of an idea this was. They perform hardly any better than the GTX 580 in many of these games. The capacity is a little less of a problem, but it can be problematic in high resolutions such as Eyefinity resolutions, but I was referring to the bandwidth bottle-neck more than the far less important capacity bottle-neck. If not for this, then the 7900 cards would be left competing against the more mainstream cards of the Kepler series instead of the top Kepler cards.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 6:56:16 PM

Omg, is that the only thing you can come up with a reason for why the 7970 beats the 680? Direct Compute? gtfo. Were talking about Graphics cards for gaming, Not professional hard heavy mega monstorous super computing. Idk why everyone keeps saying 7970 is worlds "fastest" GPU, and the 690 is the worlds fastest graphics card.... since when does a 7970 beat a 690 (Dual 680) card at gaming?
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 7:16:30 PM

Who said anything about direct compute? I said that the 7970 beats the 680 in some games because of the 680 having a memory bandwidth bottle-neck. I also said that the 7970 is superior for compute, but I stated that the compute advantage of the 7970 does not help it in gaming much, if at all. Who said anything about the 7970 beating the 690 in gaming? I'm not aware of any situation in which the 690 is beaten by the 7970. I know of many where the 670 and 680 are beaten by the 7970, but unless SLI is not working properly, the 690 should pretty much never lose to the 7970 (except maybe in some rare situation) in gaming performance.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 8:12:16 PM

blazorthon said:
AMD is a clear winner for compute in the consumer cards. I'm not saying that they win everything (they don't come close to winning everything), but the Radeon 7950 and 7970 win in compute and there's no consumer competition for them. Quadro and Tesla cards are all that can fight the 7900 cards in compute and even then, the 7950 and 7970 beat many of them.

Right here, thats where you said it........
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 8:26:28 PM

Rockdpm said:
Right here, thats where you said it........


I said that the 7970 has the compute advantage. I did not say that the 7970's compute advantage is also reflected in gaming performance. Gaming performance and compute performance are two totally different things. The 7970 wins in compute performance against the GTX 680 greatly and overall, loses sightly in gaming performance in games that are not dependent on memory bandwidth. 1536 Kepler FP32 cores don't come close to 2048 GCN cores of a somewhat lower frequency in single precision compute and the 680's minuscule amount of Kepler FP64 cores aren't enough to let it come close to the GTX 480 in DP compute performance, let alone the Radeon 7950 and Radeon 7970.
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 8:40:57 PM

Quote:
This is exactly the issue with my 480:

2560x1600 single GTX 480 results:

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
4974, 161383, 0, 57, 30.821
Bear in mind, i had started the benchmark before applying the full screen resolution of 2560x1600, so the minimum would be around 16 fps, as this was the lowest i saw it drop for around 3 seconds.

I have limited the card to the x4 slot.. so expect better from a higher bandwidth lane.

http://i46.tinypic.com/14xjkn5.jpg
http://i46.tinypic.com/28ioie9.jpg
http://i46.tinypic.com/2jd4zo5.jpg


I know that what I'm about to say truly is opinionated, but I wouldn't consider an average of only 30FPS very enjoyable in a shooter type of game. 30FPS can be playable, but I would not like minimums dropping below about 30FPS. I'm used to playing like that on some of my older crap machines when my better ones are being worked on for one thing or another and I can play well with low frame rates in my favorite shooter games, the Unreal and Unreal tournament games (I know, even the newest of them is kinda old and none of them have eye candy nearly as good as newer games, but I like them and I've played around with making a few simple mods), but I don't find it as enjoyable as high FPS gaming.

I'd like to apologize since I do oftentimes say things far more rudely than I should and I admit that I get carried away in arguments and more personally, I've probably been more rude to you than is excusable, but I stand by what I've said (excluding any insults). I'm not biased against either company when I'm making recommendations about which card to buy, I recommend what, to the best of my knowledge, is the best card (or cards) for the situation and in its performance tier, that is the Radeon 7850.
m
0
l
June 1, 2012 10:25:24 PM

I got pretty excited when I saw this was at 42 responses but quickly realized I understood about a quarter of the material posted. Thanks to everybody who gave input, hopefully I can get this thing fully functional soon as it will be the first time I've ever built my own computer. One last thanks, and I suppose that's all I need at this time.
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 1, 2012 11:22:52 PM

You're welcome.
m
0
l
June 1, 2012 11:54:44 PM

Btw, just to inform some of you, VRAM is fine at 1gb if you are running @ 1080p or under with one monitor, you only need more than that to handle resolutions above 1920x1080 or a multi-monitor set-up. :) 
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
June 2, 2012 1:58:55 AM

1GB is a VRAM capacity bottle-neck with a single 1080p display in many of the more GPU intensive games. No one should buy a 1GB video card for 1080p gaming anymore unless they know that they will not play any very intensive games. A few games that can easily break 1GB at 1080p with upper mid-range graphics cards such as the Radeon 7850 and other cards with similar performance (when not being RAM capacity bottle-necked):

BF3
Alien versus Predator
Metro 2033
and many more.
m
0
l
!