Q6600/GTX580 Bottleneck

vorticalspace · 23 Nov 2010 at 15:07

Hudzy said:
Received my 580 today and I'm not noticing a bottleneck with an overclocked Q6600 at 3.6. Massive performance increase from the 285.

Hi Hudzy
That is reassuring to know

What the GPU loads looking like in afterburner?

Thanks

koooowweeee · 23 Nov 2010 at 15:10

my q9550 clocked 2 4ghz bottle necked my gtx480. i put it on a friends i7 and i got 2000 more in vantage on the gpu score. so you will get a little one but not much to be bothered

arc@css · 23 Nov 2010 at 15:12

koooowweeee said:
my q9550 clocked 2 4ghz bottle necked my gtx480. i put it on a friends i7 and i got 2000 more in vantage on the gpu score. so you will get a little one but not much to be bothered

What about 'real' performance in games though?

arc@css · 23 Nov 2010 at 15:15

vorticalspace said:
Hi
At 3.2,(8 x 400) all voltages are normal with ram at 1.8v (5-5-5-18)

At 3.6 (9 x 400) I up Vcore to 1.4 but keep all other volts normal.

I don't really like running at 3.6 as temps ramp up to 70+ although it does add 1000 points to my Vantage CPU score.

As the article I linked to in the first post states, I could chuck a 4Ghz I7 at my system but in gaming my GTX 260 would hold it back, although I have no doubt I would bench higher

I can't wait to get the 580 & put it through it's paces

Thanks, vorticalspace.

Seems like you alter the normal sort of settings to gain an overclock, so I guess it is my mobo that is holding me back, more so than the cpu itself anyway. Hmmm gotta feeling it might well be the main rig and not the gpu I'll be upgrading first.

koooowweeee · 23 Nov 2010 at 15:17

arc@css said:
What about 'real' performance in games though?

ive not benched that so i cant say. but thats how things are in vantage. 2000 is not by any means a BIGGY you could clock the card a little and get that.

Hudzy · 23 Nov 2010 at 15:18

vorticalspace said:
Hi Hudzy
That is reassuring to know

What the GPU loads looking like in afterburner?

Thanks

98-99% in everything I've tried so far. Which is Vantage and AvP in dx11. Both with and without anti-aliasing.

vorticalspace · 23 Nov 2010 at 20:53

Hudzy said:
98-99% in everything I've tried so far. Which is Vantage and AvP in dx11. Both with and without anti-aliasing.

So no apparent bottleneck there

Is that on 1080P res?

JTrickle · 23 Nov 2010 at 22:11

Greebo said:
Depends on the game but certain releases like Black Ops, the cpu is crucial.

The difference between an i7 at 4Ghz and a q6600 at 3Ghz is almost a halving of framerates at 1920 x 1200.

That looks to be a slight exaggeration. Stock i7920 (with turbo - those benches wont have it on) normally equates to a 3.6ghz Q6600 on cpu heavy RTS gaming in my experience. Much less in other stuff.

easyrider · 24 Nov 2010 at 01:22

Scougar said:
. It won't "max" it, .

BS post

Hudzy · 24 Nov 2010 at 04:08

vorticalspace said:
So no apparent bottleneck there

Is that on 1080P res?

It is. Same results now on Crysis too

MooMoo444 · 24 Nov 2010 at 08:06

Will post benchmarks in this thread tonite comparing [email protected] and an i7 920 @ 4.0.

So you can see how big of a diff it is.

nWovance · 24 Nov 2010 at 09:01

MooMoo444 said:
Will post benchmarks in this thread tonite comparing [email protected] and an i7 920 @ 4.0.

So you can see how big of a diff it is.

why dont you post benchmarks of a q6600 3.3ghz & a i7 3.3ghz.

Greebo · 24 Nov 2010 at 09:12

JTrickle said:
That looks to be a slight exaggeration. Stock i7920 (with turbo - those benches wont have it on) normally equates to a 3.6ghz Q6600 on cpu heavy RTS gaming in my experience. Much less in other stuff.

Shame you didn't list the direct comparison page?

http://www.techspot.com/review/336-cod-black-ops-performance/page8.html

i7 @ 2.66Ghz has 92 fps av and 65 fps min compared to Q6600 at 2.4Ghz with 53 fps av and 30 fps min.

I know Black ops is a bad port but it really does love multi cores with lots of L3 cache and high speeds.

The link you used shows that an i7 is still scaling pretty linear all the way to 4Ghz, so the same difference will still be there when comparing to a 4ghz q6600.

I agree, in most games the drop in fps will be slight but it is worth pointing out that in at least one major game, the drop is 50%.

Greebo · 24 Nov 2010 at 09:15

nWovance said:
why dont you post benchmarks of a q6600 3.3ghz & a i7 3.3ghz.

Because an i7 at 4ghz is pretty much a 99% certainty nowadays whereas q6600 above 3.3Ghz were rareitys. In fact, the 4ghz q6600 is a very,very small club indeed.

But would still be useful as a direct comparison I suppose.

MooMoo444 · 24 Nov 2010 at 09:27

Greebo said:
Because an i7 at 4ghz is pretty much a 99% certainty nowadays whereas q6600 above 3.3Ghz were rareitys. In fact, the 4ghz q6600 is a very,very small club indeed.

But would still be useful as a direct comparison I suppose.

I can do that if you really want, but the main reason was that a 3.3 Q6600 is a bottleneck, and a 3.3 i7 will probably still wont max a 580.

tom91x91 · 24 Nov 2010 at 09:27

lol a q6600 will be fine, cpu bottlenecking is a myth, im only got a 3ghz dual core with my gtx 460 and i notice no bottlenecking at all, runs everything maxed and smoothly.

mrk · 24 Nov 2010 at 09:41

My Q9550 is at 4GHz (air) if that helps although I have a GTX460. I'm actually GPU limited on games like Bad Company 2 at 1920x1200 in DX11 although I still get 50-60fps, slightly less with HBAO enabled.

nWovance · 24 Nov 2010 at 13:37

Greebo said:
Because an i7 at 4ghz is pretty much a 99% certainty nowadays whereas q6600 above 3.3Ghz were rareitys. In fact, the 4ghz q6600 is a very,very small club indeed.

But would still be useful as a direct comparison I suppose.

Well, I'm just interested in a fair comparison if indeed you can obtain a 4ghz on the q6600, then do so by all means.

JTrickle · 24 Nov 2010 at 13:43

Greebo said:
Shame you didn't list the direct comparison page?

Because I missed it when I tried to navigate their site. You were right.

A 69% figure (after extrapolation) of a 3.6ghz vs a stock I7 is quite worrying for q6600 fans.

vorticalspace · 24 Nov 2010 at 13:57

JTrickle said:
Because I missed it when I tried to navigate their site. You were right.

A 69% figure (after extrapolation) of a 3.6ghz vs a stock I7 is quite worrying for q6600 fans.

Wouldn't say i'm a fan, just living in denial

I just don't want to upgrade the main rig which would entail spending £500+ on an I7 setup if i'm getting good frames in the games I play.

Other than gaming, my current setup is more than adequate 100% of the time for the things I do.

Pretty sure the GTX580(when it arrives) will be still good this time next year with Sandy/Ivy bridge well and truly on the map.

I will update benchies/loads etc as soon as card arrives