GPU vs. CPU Upgrade: Extensive Tests
Features
By Tino Kreiss
published World in Conflict v1.05
The Geforce 6800 GT and 7950 GT only run with DirectX 9 effects. Optically, the sunrays breaking through the clouds are missing, and the more simple HDR rendering shows normal blending effects.
The Geforce 6800 GT and the Q6600 are a bad combination: at high resolutions with antialiasing, the frame rate drops to below 1 fps which, freezes both the game and Vista completely. If the Geforce 7, 8 and 9 are used in conjunction with a weaker CPU such as the E2160, the graphics performance is halved. Respectable results with the E6750 are achieved at 2.67 GHz; if the Q6600 is overclocked to 3.2 GHz, the Geforce 8 and 9 still have a little left in reserve.
Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
More about pc components
75 Comments
Comment from the forums
-
randomizer That would simply consume more time without really proving much. I think sticking with a single manufacturer is fine, because you see the generation differences of cards and the performance gains compared to geting a new processor. You will see the same thing with ATI cards. Pop in an X800 and watch it crumble in the wake of a HD3870. There is no need to inlude ATI cards for the sake of this article.Reply -
randomizer This has been a long needed article IMO. Now we can post links instead of coming up with simple explanations :DReply -
yadge I didn't realize the new gpus were actually that powerful. According to Toms charts, there is no gpu that can give me double the performance over my x1950 pro. But here, the 9600gt was getting 3 times the frames as the 7950gt(which is better than mine) on Call of Duty 4.Reply
Maybe there's something wrong with the charts. I don't know. But this makes me even more excited for when I upgrade in the near future. -
This article is biased from the beginning by using a reference graphics card from 2004 (6800GT) to a reference CPU from 2007 (E2140).Reply
Go back and use a Pentium 4 Prescott (2004) and then the basis of these percentage values on page 3 will actually mean something. -
randomizer yadgeI didn't realize the new gpus were actually that powerful. According to Toms charts, there is no gpu that can give me double the performance over my x1950 pro. But here, the 9600gt was getting 3 times the frames as the 7950gt(which is better than mine) on Call of Duty 4. Maybe there's something wrong with the charts. I don't know. But this makes me even more excited for when I upgrade in the near future.I upgraded my X1950 pro to a 9600GT. It was a fantastic upgrade.Reply -
wh3resmycar scyThis article is biased from the beginning by using a reference graphics card from 2004 (6800GT) to a reference CPU from 2007 (E2140).Reply
maybe it is. but its relevant especially with those people who are stuck with those prescotts/6800gt. this article reveals an upgrade path nonetheless -
randomizer If they had used P4s there would be o many variables in this article that there would be no direction and that would make it pointless.Reply -
JAYDEEJOHN Great article!!! It clears up many things. It finally shows proof that the best upgrade a gamer can make is a newer card. About the P4's, just take the clock rate and cut it in half, then compare (ok add 10%) hehehReply -
justjc I know randomizer thinks we would get the same results, but would it be possible to see just a small article showing if the same result is true for AMD processors and ATi graphics.Reply
Firstly we know that ATi and nVidia graphics doesn't calculate graphics in the same way, who knows perhaps an ATi card requiers more or less processorpower to work at full load, and if you look at Can you run it? for Crysis(only one I recall using) you will see the minimum needed AMD processor is slover than the minimum needed Core2, even in processor speed.
So any chance of a small, or full scale, article throwing some ATi and AMD power into the mix?