5850 capable of 1920 gaming?

[Mike26]

a 22" @ 1920x1080 will push your setup exactly the same as 24" @ 1920x1080 as they both have the same ammount of pixels

My point was that the 22" I would be after would be 1680x1050 instead of 1920x1080!

Core 2 quads seem to come up cheap on the online auction places, so perhaps a quad as a stop gap would be a good idea?

In reply to the guy that asked what motherboard - I have an Abit IX38 Quad GT.

 

[accod]

I ran a 5850 on an E6600 (3.4Ghz) but felt that it was bottlenecking the card. It was. I now run an i7 and it will run anything at 1920 res. Do not worry, get the 24" screen and love it! Why upgrade the screen and have to do it again later?

I did exactly the same (from a E6700 at 3.4Ghz) after I bought my 5850. As above, get the 24" screen.

 

[accod]

Core 2 quads seem to come up cheap on the online auction places, so perhaps a quad as a stop gap would be a good idea?

I say this is your best option depending on the games you play. Alternatively just leave your system as is and wait for SB.

 

[cmndr_andi]

That motherboard will run a Q6600 without any issues, so that would be a nice upgrade to make (2.13Ghz Dual core to 2.4GHz Quad core with more cache). Just make sure that you get a G0 stepping Q6600 (spec code: SLACR) as they use less power, are cooler and overclock much better than the B3 stepping (spec code:SL9UM).

However, it would be a good idea to have a go at overclocking your E6400 before spending the £80 on a Q6600. To do this you will want a decent air cooler (this one would be great and also work fine with a Q6600) and hunt down an overclocking guide for your motherboard. May I ask exactly what RAM you are currently running?

As for what you need to do to overclock- you basically increase the FSB clockspeed above stock (266MHz or 1066MHz Quad pumped). With a fixed CPU multiplier (maximum with the E6400 is 8x) this will increase the CPU clockspeed. However, to maintain stability you will need to increase the voltage provided to the CPU and the northbridge. You will also need to vary the memory divider so that the RAM frequency does not increase with the CPU frequency. The majority of the process is trial and error; you increase the settings in the BIOS, load up windows, run a stress test (such as prime95 or Intel Burn Test), if the system is stable then keep going, if the system is unstable then go back into the BIOS and increase the voltage and check whether it is now stable. If you repeat this and keep going up in small steps you will eventually reach a maximum load temperature which you don't want to go above (limited by the cooling), hit an FSB frequency which is not stable no matter what voltage used (either CPU or motherboard limited, testing with a new CPU or board would be required to determine which) or you hit a voltage level which you don't want to go over.

 

[WingZero30]

Lol I was running crysis on max settings on my 40" tv with sapphire 5850 and [email protected] and it ran smooth on 1920X1080. So no problem with 5850 running at that resolution.

 

[Mike26]

That motherboard will run a Q6600 without any issues, so that would be a nice upgrade to make (2.13Ghz Dual core to 2.4GHz Quad core with more cache). Just make sure that you get a G0 stepping Q6600 (spec code: SLACR) as they use less power, are cooler and overclock much better than the B3 stepping (spec code:SL9UM).

However, it would be a good idea to have a go at overclocking your E6400 before spending the £80 on a Q6600. To do this you will want a decent air cooler (this one would be great and also work fine with a Q6600) and hunt down an overclocking guide for your motherboard. May I ask exactly what RAM you are currently running?

As for what you need to do to overclock- you basically increase the FSB clockspeed above stock (266MHz or 1066MHz Quad pumped). With a fixed CPU multiplier (maximum with the E6400 is 8x) this will increase the CPU clockspeed. However, to maintain stability you will need to increase the voltage provided to the CPU and the northbridge. You will also need to vary the memory divider so that the RAM frequency does not increase with the CPU frequency. The majority of the process is trial and error; you increase the settings in the BIOS, load up windows, run a stress test (such as prime95 or Intel Burn Test), if the system is stable then keep going, if the system is unstable then go back into the BIOS and increase the voltage and check whether it is now stable. If you repeat this and keep going up in small steps you will eventually reach a maximum load temperature which you don't want to go above (limited by the cooling), hit an FSB frequency which is not stable no matter what voltage used (either CPU or motherboard limited, testing with a new CPU or board would be required to determine which) or you hit a voltage level which you don't want to go over.

Hi there,

Thanks for that mountain of a reply! Wasn't expecting someone to take so much time and effort!

I have 2gb of Corsair DDR2 6400 and 4gb Kingston 8500 (2x1gb) and (2x2gb) respectively. My cpu is currently running at 3200mhz on a day to day basis, it will run 3600 but is not stable at that speed and the temperatures are far too high. I currently have a scythe cooler which barely fits in my case!

Case temperatures aren't great as I have a coolermaster wavemaster and find that they are absolutely awful for airflow!

I assume that a q6600 would be a decent stop gap whilst waiting for the next generation of processors and other bits and pieces that come out?

 

[cainer]

My point was that the 22" I would be after would be 1680x1050 instead of 1920x1080!

ahh ok, i looked at some 22" screens and most wer 1920 so i thought thats what youd get, still though the 5850 @ 1920 will be fine

 

[accod]

Lol I was running crysis on max settings on my 40" tv with sapphire 5850 and [email protected] and it ran smooth on 1920X1080. So no problem with 5850 running at that resolution.

True but it varies on the game. BFBC2 for example benefits a lot from a faster cpu or one with more cores.

 

[Snooble]

Played all of them at 1920x1200 and max settings on an 8800GTX so a 5850 will destroy them no problem.

I'm afraid to tell you that you did not play COD MW2 at 1920x1200 with a 8800GTX (my card is EVGA) on max settings.

10fps and you're still on the first level now right?

But yes, to add, CS:S should be looking at 200fps plus, obviously you wouldn't max the settings anyway, HDR bloom par example has a negative in game effect (makes it harder to see players) and is fairly old now. Along with reflect all etc. Anything on the source engine will run fine.

Also slightly dubious about your fallout 3 claim. But i'll let that slip.

 

[cmndr_andi]

Ah, you already have it overclocked, brilliant. In that case you don't need to get a new CPU with the 5850 as a 3.2Ghz Core 2 Duo can cope with most modern games rather well. Performance in the games you play will be excellent at 1080p and the money saved on a CPU upgrade can be put in the bank and used in the future for a full upgrade to new tech.

One thing you may want to consider upgrading is the case. If you go for a nice new one it will help with cooling and fitting everything in and last you a good long time.

I'm afraid to tell you that you did not play COD MW2 at 1920x1200 with a 8800GTX (my card is EVGA) on max settings.

10fps and you're still on the first level now right?

May i ask what CPU you are running? I ask because this review shows the 9800GT (very similar performance to an 8800GTX) running MW2 @1920x1200 at 63fps with AA and AF off, and 46fps with AA x4. This test uses an overclocked i7 CPU so that the CPU does not limit performance.

 

[Mike26]

Ah, you already have it overclocked, brilliant. In that case you don't need to get a new CPU with the 5850 as a 3.2Ghz Core 2 Duo can cope with most modern games rather well. Performance in the games you play will be excellent at 1080p and the money saved on a CPU upgrade can be put in the bank and used in the future for a full upgrade to new tech.

One thing you may want to consider upgrading is the case. If you go for a nice new one it will help with cooling and fitting everything in and last you a good long time.

I'm going way off topic for a graphics card forum I think, and hope I'm not going to get in trouble for this - but something like the HAF 932 tempts me currently!

 

[accod]

May i ask what CPU you are running? I ask because this review shows the 9800GT (very similar performance to an 8800GTX) running MW2 @1920x1200 at 63fps with AA and AF off, and 46fps with AA x4. This test uses an overclocked i7 CPU so that the CPU does not limit performance.

Erm so not max settings then.

 

[Bleek]

I've just upgraded from a 4870 512MB, my native 2048x1152 and I run max settings on every game, the only one that has cause me a problem is Metro 2033 and so I just this week upgraded to a 5850.

My CPU is a tri-core Phenom II at 3.5GHz (used to run at 3.9 max volts but seemed OTT).

I can't see it being a problem.

 

[Mike26]

I've just upgraded from a 4870 512MB, my native 2048x1152 and I run max settings on every game, the only one that has cause me a problem is Metro 2033 and so I just this week upgraded to a 5850.

My CPU is a tri-core Phenom II at 3.5GHz (used to run at 3.9 max volts but seemed OTT).

I can't see it being a problem.

Hey mate,

Is the phenom tri significantly better than my core 2 though?

 

[cmndr_andi]

I'm going way off topic for a graphics card forum I think, and hope I'm not going to get in trouble for this - but something like the HAF 932 tempts me currently!

Lol, its all good - a nice case makes installing and running a graphics card much better, so technically its relevant

As for the HAF 932 - I have a fair bit of experience with it as I help my old flatmate build his PC using this case. I gotta say - it is one nice bit of kit. It is MASSIVE and its cooling is really good. The styling is not to everyone's tastes- but if you like the look of it then it is one of the best cases available. Here and here are a set of in-depth reviews of the 932 - they both seem to be rather happy with it.

Erm so not max settings then.

Well they did say:

As mentioned previously, we only tested using maximum graphics quality settings, but doubled our tests with AA/AF settings enabled and disabled. The latest official drivers were used for all graphics cards, which saw both Crossfire and SLI working correctly.

So AA and AF may not have been set to x16 or whatever, but they did use the maximum graphics quality option. If you want to run your 8800GTX @16xAA or whetever that is your decision, but at the settings shown in that review your card will run the game well and look good.

 

[Freddie1980]

I'm just concerned that I won't be able to play the few games I do play in the screens native resolution -

Fallout 3
CS:S
All HL varieties
Call of duty MW2

I realise they overclock well, but have never tried. Can anyone suggest me some settings to try (mhz voltage etc)?

Thanks

You could see a bottleneck around about the 300 Fps mark in CS: S so yeah becareful.

 

[Bleek]

Hey mate,

Is the phenom tri significantly better than my core 2 though?

Is your cpu running stock speeds? If so it is definitely on the low side, anything >3GHz should be enough so if you can overclock I'd do so.

Also the games you mention aren't that heavy, my system runs Fallout3, MW2 and HL like silk.

 

[Snooble]

=
Well they did say:


So AA and AF may not have been set to x16 or whatever, but they did use the maximum graphics quality option. If you want to run your 8800GTX @16xAA or whetever that is your decision, but at the settings shown in that review your card will run the game well and look good.

My brother has a 9800gt, and it underperforms my card a fair bit. i have the EVGA Superclocked 8800GTX. I have a Q6600 at stock, possible cap?

Regardless, I'm talking, MAX SETTINGS, if you go on COD and press Ultra High, and you get fps past vsync (>60fps) then teach me how, even at 1680x1050.



And like the gent says above, 300fps software cap in cs:s, until we start seeing 300htz monitors :s I wouldn't worry ha.

 

[Paracelsus]

I'm afraid to tell you that you did not play COD MW2 at 1920x1200 with a 8800GTX (my card is EVGA) on max settings.

10fps and you're still on the first level now right?

Would you like to tell me what I had for breakfast this morning too?

Why would I lie about being able to max an xbox style game like MW2? Crysis or STALKER CoP would make sense, but not MW2/Fallout 3, multiplatform or ported games have never pushed my GTX too far...resi 5, bioshock 2, avp3 etc...all designed mainly with consoles with less power than an 8800GTX in mind, is it that suprising?

In fact why would I even lie at all lol...even if I misrecalled and actually played MW2 on say High instead of Very High (or whatever they call it), or perhaps just got less FPS than you'd call playable, is there a need to be an arse about it?

Either way we agree his 5870 will not have an issue

 

[Snooble]

It's a 5850.

Don't mean to sound confrontational. Just don't want him getting wrong information. More accurately it's, Source games will work perfect and the other two, just reduce the AA and you should be fine.

MW2 has high quality textures on PC's upper settings, much more demanding than consoles.

To quote a wise man:
Don’t let your victories go to your head, or your failures go to your heart