Is an overclocked phenom II X2 550 going to bottleneck a 5850 or 5870?

[pleshy]

I was also wondering whether a 550 (overclocked at 3.9G) would be able to handle an overclocked 5850 or 5870. Which GPU is better for that CPU? Thanks in advance.

P.S. If is matters the rest of the configuration is 785 motherboard, 2x2 DDR3 1300.

[IPlayNaked]

Depends on your game. Crysis, GTA4, Supreme commander, yes.

Most games, no.

[Xendance]

But it's still faster than any older gpus with that processor

[ice445]

Originally Posted by IPlayNaked

Depends on your game. Crysis, GTA4, Supreme commander, yes.

Most games, no.

Agreed, very rarely is it ever going to be a bottleneck, especially at 4Ghz.

[zx81]

Really 3.9 and cpu limited?

Even though its AMD thats still like a 3.6 intel (pulled number out of the air)


good article here, and theres a follow up too.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...u,2280-11.html

Ive got both intel and AMD (q9450 @ 3.6 and also an X3 720 unleashed to X4 at 3.1)

[pleshy]

Thank you for your help.

I'm disappointed tough. If the X2 550 is a bottleneck for some games now I could only imagine that it wouldn't be able to support more and more games in the future. It'd like to go a bit more future proof.

In that case, is an overcloked X3 720 going to do or should I just get a X4 955? I'm on a tight budget. I could get a better CPU but I'd like to do so only if necessary. What would you advise me?

[Mega_Death]

955 and 965 achive similar overclocks on air.

[IPlayNaked]

Tight budget, the triple cores are very nice. I can play large games of Supreme Commander, no problem. mix that with the fact that they are easier to OC because they are easier to cool and you have a clear winner.

[laka]

you should buy the x3 720 and try ton unlock it to x4

[pleshy]

Thanks a lot for the advice!

The X3 sounds really nice. I'll most probably buy a 720. That being the case I was wondering whether it could handle a second 5850 which I might buy later on when they get cheaper.

[Mega_Death]

Yes, it will.

[Psychlone]

IMPORTANT!!!

You should *never* buy a dual or triple-core processor thinking you're going to have a quad for the price of a dual or tri...it doesn't work that way.

AMD has made a lot of progress in the way they fab their processors, allowing them to make triple and dual cored CPUs from the same exact platters that the Quads come from.
But, here's the hitch: there are only 2 reasons that AMD has disabled a core or two on dual and triple core CPUS
1) AMD needed to meet market demand for dual and triple core CPUs (not likely considering #2)
2) A Quad that doesn't pass QA for one core or more gets that core disabled via firmware - because it was shown to be unstable at stock speeds (this is the most likely scenario, and accounts for the ~80% of Dual and Tri cores that CANT be unlocked)

All in all, this is a gamble, with the odds stacked against you. Currently, ~80% of dual or triple core CPUs fail at stock speeds with their disabled cores re-enabled, while ~20% have no issues whatsoever.
Unfortunately, most of the ones we all hear about being unlocked are the people that have successfully unlocked their cores and not all the ones that can't.

In any case, I say if you need a Quad (which would definitely give your gaming a boost!), then purchase a Quad...don't take a chance on hoping you can unlock (probably) unstable cores from a Dual or Triple core CPU.

Good luck!

Psychlone

[heliman41]

The only positive of the 550 BE over a tri-core is the GHZ, its hard to get a 2.8 tri to 3.9GHZ. Its far easier to get a 550 BE 3.1 to 3.9 however. Do you absolutly HAVE to utilize 3 cores to game ............thats debatable. 2 cores yes min. If they ever put out a 3.5 tri core ill certainy buy one. A dumbed down 955 tri would be nice!

[IPlayNaked]

Originally Posted by heliman41

The only positive of the 550 BE over a tri-core is the GHZ, its hard to get a 2.8 tri to 3.9GHZ. Its far easier to get a 550 BE 3.1 to 3.9 however. Do you absolutly HAVE to utilize 3 cores to game ............thats debatable. 2 cores yes min. If they ever put out a 3.5 tri core ill certainy buy one. A dumbed down 955 tri would be nice!

Supreme Commander, GTA 4, Dragon age. These NEED 3+ cores for all their effects, there's no two ways about it that games are moving up in the world of cores.

[3T3RN4L]

most modern cpus will not bottleneck most modern gpus. people always get the misconception of cpus and think clock speed is what not causes the bottleneck all the time. overall architecture is more important you know.

with that cpu you should be fine but if you want to upgrade to the 720 or 955 that be fantasic too.there both grerat cpus for the money.

and thoes 2 cpus won't bottleneck a 5870 or even a 5870 in crossfire. only time you might notice a slight bottleneck is going beyound 3 gpu configurations due to optimization of the drivers and what-not,also some games are more cpu dependent such as RTS and simulation games.they tend to stress out the cpu more whice causing your gpu the bottleneck instead.

if you get the 5870.just make sure your case has enough space and your psu is good.

also good airflow too,but the 5870 is very energy effeciate and stays really cool on both idle and full load

[rone]

Originally Posted by 3T3RN4L

... most modern cpus will not bottleneck most modern gpus.

For sure, but only if overclocked. On stock CPU speeds(2.5-3.0GHz) GPU potential is wasted.

[!H'Guru]

And what if I would combine my old E6600 @ 3.6 GHz on a P5B Deluxe 4 GB Corsair Dominator 1066 @ donno, on Vista64, with a 5870 OC? Would the rest of my system be a bottleneck for the card when I play the latest games? Crysis likes CPU and so does Supreme Commander.

[rone]

It will be OK. Sometimes Nvidia games do bottleneck my HD5870.

[heliman41]

Originally Posted by IPlayNaked

Supreme Commander, GTA 4, Dragon age. These NEED 3+ cores for all their effects, there's no two ways about it that games are moving up in the world of cores.

Im not quite sure what your speaking about concerning my 2 core bottleneck running at 3.7GHZ no games I play ever stagger in slow frames or run slow & or anything visually unusual. I dont have the fastest quad I7 on the market or the best tri-core monster GPU setup but Ill be totally honest here I think a lot of those setups as far as gaming goes are over rated, Anything over 40-50FPS is awfully hard to argue about when gaming. Ive owned older systems that used AGP GPUs & a slow 1 core CPU & yes it was obvious a game would stagger & run really badly especially when the game grew to a large stage. But I have not found a single game yet that gags my duel core CPU at 3.7 GHZ. I have a 9850 quad I used to run & the FPS now on this "downgrade 2 core" is higher then on the quad. Simply put the lowly 2.5 old hot running quad was a bottleneck. This cool running 3.7 is blowing that CPU away. I tested several games before switching out my processors & FPS numbers dont lie. Now ask Vista (microsoft) who they like better as the windows multiu-tasking CPU rating & I get a 5.8 instead of a 5.9, like I got on the quad but: thats windows software looking for a particular pattern of computing... not a game demand. If AMD really wants a lions share of the market they need a hi speed tri core to replace the 550BE, go to newegg.com & read the results most users are saying about the OCed 550BE its not Toms Hardware or from anywebsite that one maybe dosent trust ,its straight facts from users all saying gaming improved & some as I said its better then their older slower quads. Run a 9850 @ 2.5 with a game at all hi settings then run a 550BE @3.7 or higher & all game settings then Ill listen to your statement otherwise its all heresay as ive done this test myself. Yes, Ill agree eventually games will demand quads but at the moment thats not a necessary requirement read the box requirements on the games from the designers..... I have.................Running a tri-GPU & using a monster monitor at a rediculess res isnt the normal users setup thats when a duel core would be a bottleneck at this stage. Yes some guys have such setups kudos to them but the average user isnt blowing such wads for a few more FPS isnt worth it from a % viewpoint kinda like who has the highest benchmarks, most could care less in daily use. I know bottlenecks believe me I remember when games would actually slow down so badly they would slur & stagger to a pitiful few FPS thats a bad bottleneck. Today I have no games that play under 40FPS no matter what it is. When the day comes that I run a game that runs bad on a 3.7 duel core Ill be the first to admit it. It may also be I dont care for the games you play so Ill never know also Ill contend that. I play all the Crysis series, all the Company of Heroes series, World in Conflict, Farcry2, Call of Duty 4(awsome visuals there) and none call for anything more then a 1.8GHZ duel core so @ 3.7 im whizzing way faster then is necessary for great gameplay on a 19" monitor.

[Mega_Death]

Ok, my eyes started bleeding after the first few sentences

[IPlayNaked]

Yeah mine too. Space it out a little.

And you didn't mention any CPU intensive games. If you try playing SupCom with any respectable unit size against CPU opponents you will have FPS in the teens or worse. GTA4 is definitely playable on a dual core, but you have to turn down a lot of CPU options.

I'm not sure how Dragon age works, but it seems to me that the game uses all of whatever kind of CPU you have, my tri core is used to 90% at almost all times. That alone tells me a dual core is not enough for the game. Will it still run beautifully? Absolutely, are you missing some of the effects I have? Yes you are.

And as I said, the fact that some games recommend quad cores now means a dual core is a bad investment. It's only going to get more and more common that quad cores be recommended and even required in the very near future.

[heliman41]

Originally Posted by IPlayNaked

Yeah mine too. Space it out a little.

And you didn't mention any CPU intensive games. If you try playing SupCom with any respectable unit size against CPU opponents you will have FPS in the teens or worse. GTA4 is definitely playable on a dual core, but you have to turn down a lot of CPU options.

I'm not sure how Dragon age works, but it seems to me that the game uses all of whatever kind of CPU you have, my tri core is used to 90% at almost all times. That alone tells me a dual core is not enough for the game. Will it still run beautifully? Absolutely, are you missing some of the effects I have? Yes you are.

And as I said, the fact that some games recommend quad cores now means a dual core is a bad investment. It's only going to get more and more common that quad cores be recommended and even required in the very near future.

Yes,
I hear what your saying BUT look at the CPU your running. I was talking about my 9850 quad that was running @ 2.5GHZ turn down your tri-core to 2.5GHZ & then tell me your game dosent suck just a tad...............I have no prob with a tri core but the 550 BE does beat out an old 9850 quad because its clock is so slow. & it dosent OC at all unless its one of the ones with a special stepping which mine wasnt. I have the worst 9850 quad one could own for OCing so it had to stay @ 2.5GHZ. So please dont cry instead understand what im saying here. Id trade my dual core for a tri-core in a heartbeat if I had one. Id still like to see AMD sell 955s as a tri core if they had any. Now that would be a nice upgrade especially a 125W model. It may happen yet. With AMD you never know what they are thinking sometimes. To be honest ive never even heard or seen any of the games you mention, if they are fantasy type games then I probably looked right past them. If all my games are GPU intensive then im safe which is fine to me. Must be the games im playing because I hear a lot of moaning but I see no problems visually. My next upgrade will be a min tri-core but more likely a quad BUT it will have to be at least 3.5GHZ stock first.I can wait AMD out another yr. if I have to since I obviously dont run the programs you do.

[chispy]

Originally Posted by 3T3RN4L

most modern cpus will not bottleneck most modern gpus. people always get the misconception of cpus and think clock speed is what not causes the bottleneck all the time. overall architecture is more important you know.

with that cpu you should be fine but if you want to upgrade to the 720 or 955 that be fantasic too.there both grerat cpus for the money.

and thoes 2 cpus won't bottleneck a 5870 or even a 5870 in crossfire.

Wrong , even a core i7 cpu at 4Ghz will bottleneck a Crossfire 5850 or 5870 set up , its been prove many times including myself deep testing on Crossfire 5870s with only 2 out of my 3 cards , please read Hilberts article and review of 5870 in Crossfire X with 2 cards so you can understand a little bit more about real bottleneck issues.

I will recommend the OP to buy only one 5870 card , its fast enough for all the games out there and the ones to come in the future , This cards love high cpu Mhz in order for them to strectch their legs , my 2 cents .
Good Luck.


Regards: chispy.