CPU bottleneck

[Nem2k]

im thinking of purchasing a 6950 (2gb version) and a i3-2100 for my new computer

will the cpu bottleneck the gpu? I am reluctant to upgrade to the i5 so I want to know if I can get away with the i3 (money issues)

this rig will be used for heavy gaming (i.e. 1920 resolution, everything on max details), games like crysis 2, starcraft 2, upcoming battlefield 3 etc

 

[cusideabelincoln]

The 2100 is good for the money.

But I do think BF3 will be pretty hard on the CPU. Of course I also think it will be rough on the GPU as well. The proposed system does not seem too out of balance to me, although I would not suggest going much higher than the 6950 without having more CPU power. Overall I don't think there will be a big bottleneck as is.

But if you grab a quad core i5 now that will be more conducive to video card upgrades down the road. If you think or plan on upgrading the card and keep the rest of the system in tact, you have the option of dropping down a GTX 560, 6950 1GB, or 5870 and picking up an i5 2300, 2400, or 2500. You can overclock these cards to match the performance of the 6950 2GB.

 

[Nem2k]

will BF3 be doable on an i3?

also, I keep hearing about "native resolutions". my monitors native resolution is 1920, does this mean i HAVE to run my games at this res? for example with BF3 I might have to run it at a lower res due to hardware limits

 

[hawtdawg]

CPU bottlenecking is a myth.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/game-performance-bottleneck,2737.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/game-performance-bottleneck,2738.html

 

[cusideabelincoln]

BF3 should be doable on an i3-2100. But we don't know for sure; no specs have been released.

LCDs have the best picture quality when displaying in their native resolution. They can run at lower resolutions, though. But the image won't look as good. Different monitors handle it differently, though, so some monitors will look better than others when running at lower resolutions.

You'll get more jaggies when running below native res, and the image could also be blurry. YMMV.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

CPU bottlenecking is a myth.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...neck,2737.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...neck,2738.html

This test seems misleading. It's really more about core count performance scaling.

But notes:

1. Not sure why they test a 768MB card at 1920x1200 with max details and 4-8xAA.

2. Looks like most tests show 2 cores performing the same as 4 cores. However there should be an asterisk here because the 2 cores have access to a full 8MB of L3 cache. Real world dual cores either do not have this much cache or simply don't have anywhere near the IPC of this simulated chip.

3. Combined 1+2 and you can see why their conclusion should be taken with an asterisk. It would have been more realistic to test real-world processors with at least 3 different video cards (video cards in different performance brackets).

 

[TurtleCrusher]

CPU bottlenecking is a myth.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/game-performance-bottleneck,2737.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/game-performance-bottleneck,2738.html

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/...core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/20

Adjusted for clock speed, the (45.4x1.06...=x, 64.9/x=1.34...

The quad core is 34% faster per clock than the dual core in a game that usually only uses two cores. Since it is real world, the Quad core is 43% faster than the dual core. This is also the most CPU dependent game out at the moment. You are really going to tell us CPU bottlenecking doesn't exist?

It most certainly does exist.

 

[1h4x4s3x]

Indeed, the test is misleading.
tomshardware is actually provoking a GPU bottleneck by cranking up AA & AF at that resolution.
Though, a similar test with a 6950(6970) 2GB - which is roughly twice as fast - would be interesting.

Scholzpdx
That's almost the opposite approach. No AA & AF at low resolution.
Though, closer to real world than tom's.

 

[Termie]

will BF3 be doable on an i3?

also, I keep hearing about "native resolutions". my monitors native resolution is 1920, does this mean i HAVE to run my games at this res? for example with BF3 I might have to run it at a lower res due to hardware limits

BF3 will likely be bottlenecked pretty badly on the i3. If you're most interested in that game, just wait a few months until you can afford a 2400. The 2400 is $65 more. Not waiting to save up that money would be shooting yourself in the foot when it comes to BF3.

BF3 will be much more CPU-intensive than BC2, and here's what BC2 looks like on the 2100 versus the quad cores at relatively low settings: http://techreport.com/articles.x/20486/5. The CPU can support 67fps in this game. The quad cores have way more headroom, and that will be required in BF3.

If you're really strapped for cash and need a computer right now, buy a 2400 with a 6870 and then upgrade later. That's your $65 right there.

Oh, and Crysis 2 won't get much more out of 6950 over a 6870: http://www.techspot.com/review/379-crysis-2-performance/page4.html.

Starcraft needs CPU, not GPU: http://www.techspot.com/review/305-starcraft2-performance/page13.html. The FPS is equal on anything above an HD5850: http://www.techspot.com/review/305-starcraft2-performance/page7.html

Running at 1680x1050 on a 1920 screen is fine - it might not be quite as sharp, but it won't keep you from playing. But this won't help you one bit if you have a CPU bottleneck - lowering resolution to increase performance only works if you're low on GPU power.

 

[betasub]

for example with BF3 I might have to run it at a lower res due to hardware limits

What "hardware limits" are these that would prevent you from running at 1080p? When you are worried about a CPU bottleneck?

 

[bryanW1995]

CPU bottlenecking is a myth.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/game-performance-bottleneck,2737.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/game-performance-bottleneck,2738.html

I encourage you to go play DAO or civ5 with an i7 @ 1.5. then, clock it at 3.5. Report back to us immediately. Maybe throw in some Flight Simulator X as well.


A better suggestion would have been to say that MOST cpu bottlenecking is minor, with a few AAA titles that are highly affected by it. And maybe quote somebody more reputable than a website that sold its soul to the online devil 4 years ago.

 

[toyota]

CPU bottlenecking is a myth.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/game-performance-bottleneck,2737.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/game-performance-bottleneck,2738.html

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...System-Requirements-and-Screenshots/Practice/

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...ead-of-Core-2-Quad-in-CPU-benchmarks/Reviews/

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...rks-75-percent-boost-for-quad-cores/Practice/

http://www.techspot.com/review/379-crysis-2-performance/page8.html



OP, an i3 2100 is a very good cpu but I would spend a bit more and get a sandy bridge i5 quad. an i3 2100 will already slightly limit a 6950 and will not be as good for handling future gpu upgrades as well as the sandy bridge i5 quad.