• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

460 bottleneck this system?

sturmtruppe

sturmtruppe

sturmtruppe

Associate
Joined
27 Feb 2009
Posts
565
Location
Hinckley
Was thinking of going for a 450 for my other system, however, the 768mb 460can be had for around £130.

Would the 460 bottleneck this system though?

e6550 @2.33ghz
p5k-e with ddr2 - 800mhz

I'm not comfortable oc'ing this system due to cooling requirements so just want to know if the 460 will be wasted in this system.

Thanks
 
The only advice I can offer is based mine and my sons PC.

Mine i7 920, 6GB Ram and GTX 460 1GB model, Win7 64bit, ForceWare 260.63

His C2D [email protected], 2GB Ram, GTX 460 768MB model, Win 7 64bit, ForceWare 260.63

My Kombuster average FPS No AA 520 FPS

His Kombuster average FPS No AA 320 FPS

I was very supprised my self as to how much of a bottleneck his CPU has caused.

I know the memory interface is a little faster on the 1GB model, but 40% difference in performance is not what the benchmarks were showing on the review sites
 
Last edited:
Sometime tomorrow I will try the GTX 460 768MB model in my PC with a Core i7 to see if the CPU really is as much of a bottleneck as I suspect.

I will report back the results.
 
Fitted the GTX 460 768MB into my system with the i7 920 and 6GB ram.

Kombuster no AA score is now an average of 386.

So thats a 20% increase in performance in Kombuster with a much faster processor.

To be honest I am disappointed in the performance difference between the 1GB and 768MB models. That is unless there is some thing wrong with the 768MB card, which was brand new yesterday.

Going to do some more tests.
 
Martini1991 said:
The 768mb version trades blows/gets beaten by the 5830.
Click to expand...

What's that got to do with anything in this thread.

We are trying to establish whether a GTX 460 would be bottlenecked by dual core CPU's.



Ran Dirt2 benchmark all settings maxed out at 1920x1200

GTX 460 768MB model averaged 56 FPS

GTX 460 1GB model averages 62 FPS

Seems Kombuster is not representative of real world game perfromance. Only 10% difference in Dirt 2 and inline with online benchmark reviews.

I also ran Left4Dead 2, Team Fortress 2 and Just Cause 2 with both cards and there is no noticeable difference between the two cards.

Going to see how the 768MB model performs with the dual core CPU in real games.
 
barmyllama said:
What's that got to do with anything in this thread.

We are trying to establish whether a GTX 460 would be bottlenecked by dual core CPU's.
Click to expand...
Yea don't know what he's trying to achieve saying that...except try to claim 5830 is better than a GTX460 768MB, which I think he's alone with that opinion, as it is commonly agreed that the GTX460 768MB is overall faster for 1920x1200 with 4xAA (AA hurt 5830's frame rate pretty bad from what I recall). Sure the 5830 is deliver higher frame rate than the GTX460 768MB at 2560x1600, but it's only higher by number as it's not even playable frame rate.
 
Last edited:
Martini1991 said:
Your post above mine....
You're "disappointed".

Must one always become on the defensive?.
Click to expand...

I wasn't being defensive, I was questioning the relevance of your comment.

If you had quoted me then it would have been clearer.

Either way my disappointment was not down to the card, but a software issue.

A clean install of Windows on my son's PC means that the GTX 460 768MB is now performing as I would expect. In actual fact his C2D 6600 isn't as much of a bottleneck as I thought.

Counterstrike Source Stress test has an average of 187 FPS for the GTX 460 768MB with a C2D 6600, whereas my GTX 460 1GB and an i7 920 scores 197 average FPS.

As far as normal gaming goes, the only drops in fame rates that are noticeable are games with high CPU usuage.

For example: Left4Dead2 runs very well maxed out at 1680x1050 with the C2D 6600 and a GTX 460 768MB until there are lots of AI controlled enemies on screen, then the frame rates do drop.

I still think a quad core CPU would be a better option, but the C2D 6600 certainly isn't a massive bottleneck to the GTX 460 768MB card.
 
Based on this, i swapped the processor out for my e6700 that was lying around - which is slightly better than the e6600.

Hopefully ocuk will get some evga 768mb 460's up soon.
 
it would depend on the game really, some of the newer games might struggle with that cpu.

however, i would say its still worth getting a good GPU.
it would just mean that in some games, the CPU would hold i back so it might run at its full potential, but should still be pretty fast for most things.

at least then when u go upgrade your cpu, u'll have a good GPU to keep up with it.

perhaps getting a second hand Q6600 later down the line to help out
or a Q9500.

a GPU always gives the better performance gain, unless ur current GPU is already bottlenecked
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom