CPU bottlenecking Question

[JSFLY]

Hey guys

I have a AMD opteron 165 @ 1.8 ghz 939 socket. (Can't O'C this cpu anymore... crashes windows @ anything above stock)

I'm too lazy to upgrade my system atm, but am planning on purchasing a Nvidia 9800xt, upgrading my x850xt.

Can anyone estimate for me how much bottlenecking I would expect to experience if I make this purchase?

Thanks guys.

 

[Arkaign]

That'd be a bit of overkill. Something like a 4650, 4670 or so would be a better bet (and probably consume less power).

 

[cbn]

Hey guys

I have a AMD opteron 165 @ 1.8 ghz 939 socket. (Can't O'C this cpu anymore... crashes windows @ anything above stock)

I'm too lazy to upgrade my system atm, but am planning on purchasing a Nvidia 9800xt, upgrading my x850xt.

Can anyone estimate for me how much bottlenecking I would expect to experience if I make this purchase?

Thanks guys.

Are you planning on stepping up the monitor to a higher resolution?

Otherwise the best test for maximum frame rate performance is to turn down resolution and detail settings to bare minimum (with X850xt) and see what you get. This is your maximum and no video card (no matter how strong) will be able to get you above this ceiling.

 

[happy medium]

Did you mean 9800gt?

In any event I recommend a used 8800gt for about 65$.

Edit 2:8800gt 65$ like this one...

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=331154&highlight=8800gt

 

[JSFLY]

That'd be a bit of overkill. Something like a 4650, 4670 or so would be a better bet (and probably consume less power).

How much of a step up from a x850xt would this card net me?

Did you mean 9800gt?

In any event I recommend a used 8800gt for about 65$.

Edit 2:8800gt 65$ like this one...

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=331154&highlight=8800gt

Sorry, meant a Nvidia 9800 gx

Are you planning on stepping up the monitor to a higher resolution?

Otherwise the best test for maximum frame rate performance is to turn down resolution and detail settings to bare minimum (with X850xt) and see what you get. This is your maximum and no video card (no matter how strong) will be able to get you above this ceiling.

Will try this, thanks.

Thanks for all the replies guys, much appreciated.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

The HD4670 would be a huge step up from the X850XT. It's really difficult to estimate what kind of performance gains you'll see, but it will definitely be a night and day difference.

Are you planning on stepping up the monitor to a higher resolution?

Otherwise the best test for maximum frame rate performance is to turn down resolution and detail settings to bare minimum (with X850xt) and see what you get. This is your maximum and no video card (no matter how strong) will be able to get you above this ceiling.

This is an unnecessary test. There is no doubt he has a lot more room for improvement with his current processor, even if it is considered weak by today's standards and would hold back even mid-range cards a bit.

I think these are his two best options:

1. Buy a cheaper card (than the 9800GTX) like the HD4670/50 or 9500GT and save up for a complete system overhaul (intent on replacing everything) at some point.

2. Buy a bit more powerful card (9800GT, HD4850, GTS250/9800GTX, HD5750), and save up some money to upgrade the rest of the system, with intent to reuse the video card until a new one can be afforded.

The Opteron 165 at stock is getting pretty damn long in the tooth. It won't have much more life left except for being relegated to a light gaming machine or use with older titles.

 

[Arkaign]

Abe there has good advice ^^. And yes, the 4670 would be a massive upgrade from the 850, you'll certainly be CPU limited in that scenario.

On another note, if you do decide to do a cheap system upgrade (and feel comfortable swapping boards, loading windows, etc), those S939 Opteron 165s still sell for $50+ all the time on feebay, which would take some of the bite out of upgrading to a better platform.

Even a cheapish PhII X3 and basic AM2+ mobo / DDR2 memory would be a monumental upgrade in performance.

 

[cbn]

The HD4670 would be a huge step up from the X850XT.

That is true.

But when people say "bottleneck"....I think "bottleneck" to what?

Frame rates? IQ settings? Resolution?

"Bottleneck" is too broad of a term.

 

[cbn]

I think these are his two best options:

1. Buy a cheaper card (than the 9800GTX) like the HD4670/50 or 9500GT and save up for a complete system overhaul (intent on replacing everything) at some point.

2. Buy a bit more powerful card (9800GT, HD4850, GTS250/9800GTX, HD5750), and save up some money to upgrade the rest of the system, with intent to reuse the video card until a new one can be afforded.

That is a good way of looking at things.

 

[Arkaign]

That is true.

But when people say "bottleneck"....I think "bottleneck" to what?

Frame rates? IQ settings? Resolution?

"Bottleneck" is too broad of a term.

In terms of the OP, it should be seen as the CPU bottlenecking him as the maximum framerate. In other words, there will be an FPS cap that won't differ much even between 800x600 low quality settings and 1680x1050 high quality settings. The video card will take care of as much as it can, but the CPU will still hold him back. In that way, the difference for the OP between a 4670 and a 5870 crossfire setup would be almost nil, as the 1.8ghz Opty won't be able to keep up.

 

[cbn]

In other words, there will be an FPS cap that won't differ much even between 800x600 low quality settings and 1680x1050 high quality settings.

Well yeah.....If he puts in a really strong video card this can happen.

The maximum frame rate cap is always based on the CPU...not the video card.

Caps related to video cards are things like resolution, detail settings, and IQ. (Ultimately these things can affect frame rates indirectly if the GPU is not strong enough to handle them)

 

[JSFLY]

Thanks for the thoughtful replies once again.

I think what I'll do is just upgrade my system in a bit, instead of going for just a GPU upgrade now.

Consider this case closed.

 

[cbn]

Thanks for the thoughtful replies once again.

I think what I'll do is just upgrade my system in a bit, instead of going for just a GPU upgrade now.

Consider this case closed.

Did you ever tell us the resolution of your monitor? Take a look at this thread--->http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2023890 (lopri's answer was the best)

 

[toyota]

Did you ever tell us the resolution of your monitor? Take a look at this thread--->http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2023890 (lopri's answer was the best)

with a 1.8 Athlon 64 X2 it wont really matter. that cpu is just too big of limiting factor to use any fast card with it.

 

[cbn]

with a 1.8 Athlon 64 X2 it wont really matter. that cpu is just too big of limiting factor to use any fast card with it.

Depends on what games he wants to play.

RTS= CPU intensive

Crysis= GPU intensive.

The real wild card is what resolution he wants to use. Worst case scenario is he likes RTS and plays on a 1280x1024....then he might as well keep his X850xt.

 

[JSFLY]

Did you ever tell us the resolution of your monitor? Take a look at this thread--->http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2023890 (lopri's answer was the best)

19" monitor 1280x1040 :-(

Hoping to play mass effect, gta4, and maybe even mw2 + other shader 3.0 fps games that my x850xt can't play atm.

Btw, isn't crysis cpu intensive as well given the elaborate physics engine present in the game?

 

[toyota]

Depends on what games he wants to play.

RTS= CPU intensive

Crysis= GPU intensive.

The real wild card is what resolution he wants to use. Worst case scenario is he likes RTS and plays on a 1280x1024....then he might as well keep his X850xt.

it doesnt matter overall because that cpu is too darn slow to pair up with a fast graphics card. that cpu will be the overall bottleneck when using a decent card regardless of res. a lower res or more cpu intensive game will just make it even more of a waste thats all.

 

[cbn]

it doesnt matter overall because that cpu is too darn slow to pair up with a fast graphics card.

Main thing the OP needs to do is try playing games at very low resolution. If his CPU still gives decent frame rates....then a GPU upgrade is not a bad idea if he wants higher IQ settings.

Is a Opty 165 really that bad of a CPU? Most software these days doesn't even use a quad core yet.

 

[toyota]

But does the OP like high IQ and detail settings?

I recently bought a HD4870 1GB and I have been quite pleased with using Higher AA/AF/detail settings at 1680x1050. But at the same time I really don't care about super high frame rates either.

Everyone is different.

what does that matter? a 4870 will provide zero improvement over a 4850 with an 1.8 Athlon 64 X2. I dont think you understand just how slow that cpu is for modern games. in many cases a 4870 would not even be 50% utilized with that cpu.

 

[cbn]

what does that matter? a 4870 will provide zero improvement over a 4850 with an 1.8 Athlon 64 X2. I dont think you understand just how slow that cpu is for modern games. in many cases a 4870 would not even be 50% utilized with that cpu.

I see your point regarding graphics card utilization.

If the CPU is providing slow processing times....then cranking up AA/AF/detail settings to match that time is going to drop frame rates from low to even lower.

Still we don't know the size of his monitor. If he has 1920x1200....this will eat up more GPU utilization.

Trouble is graphics cards are so cheap now. In some cases purposely buying a weaker card is actually worse (from a value standpoint) than buying slightly overkill.

 

[toyota]

I see your point regarding graphics card utilization.

If the CPU is providing slow processing times....then cranking up AA/AF/detail settings to match that time is going to drop frame rates from low to even lower.

Still we don't know the size of his monitor. If he has 1920x1200....this will eat up more GPU utilization.

Trouble is graphics cards are so cheap now. In some cases purposely buying a weaker card is actually worse (from a value standpoint) than buying slightly overkill.

you still are not realizing how slow that cpu is for modern games. a 1.8 A64 X2 will not even provide playable framerates in some games like GTA 4, Ghostbusters, Red Faction Guerrilla, RE 5 and plenty others especially RTS games. almost any game that can get by with a cpu that slow can also get by with a gpu MUCH slower than a 4870. 1920 doesnt change the fact that he would be very very cpu limited in modern games.

 

[cbn]

you still are not realizing how slow that cpu is for modern games. a 1.8 A64 X2 will not even provide playable framerates in some games like GTA 4, Ghostbusters, Red Faction Guerrilla, RE 5 and plenty others especially RTS games. almost any game that can get by with a cpu that slow can also get by with a gpu MUCH slower than a 4870. 1920 doesnt change the fact that he would be very very cpu limited in modern games.

I think people ask these questions after popping a new game into their system....and seeing that game run like crap.

The easiest way to figure out the problem is to lower resolution/detail settings/AA/AF to absolute minimums and see what happens.

If frame rates rise to a good level the person knows a new video card could help. On the other hand, if the game still runs like crap the person knows its the CPU/memory bottlenecking them.

Opty 165 was a strong CPU from 2006. Even with densities doubling every two years I don't thinking pairing it up with a value card from this era is such a bad idea (especially with high resolution monitors upgrades happening so frequently now).

 

[happy medium]

I was curious about this debate between just learning and toyota.

I underclock my cpu to 1.8 ,ran memory at 500,and fsb I think was set at 140.

I ran the Far Cry 2 bench because I believe it needs a good balance of cpu, gpu and memory speed.


- Benchmark Report -
11/15/2009 11:33:43 AM

You cannot view SVG files if you do not have an SVG viewer installed or if your browser doesn't have native SVG support!
Download an SVG Viewer for free from Adobe

Run 1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Settings: Demo(Ranch Small), 1024x768 (85Hz), D3D9, Fixed Time Step(No), Disable Artificial Intelligence(No), Full Screen, Anti-Aliasing(None), VSync(Yes), Overall Quality(Low), Vegetation(Low), Shading(Low), Terrain(Low), Geometry(Low), Post FX(Low), Texture(Low), Shadow(Off), Ambient(Low), Hdr(No), Bloom(No), Fire(Low), Physics(Low), RealTrees(Low)
Loop 1
Total Frames: 2522, Total Time: 51.01s
Average Framerate: 49.44
Max. Framerate: 68.45 (Frame:596, 9.91s)
Min. Framerate: 35.12 (Frame:2057, 41.22s)
SVG not loaded!
View larger version
Loop 2
Total Frames: 2381, Total Time: 51.01s
Average Framerate: 46.67
Max. Framerate: 67.34 (Frame:606, 10.35s)
Min. Framerate: 31.17 (Frame:1953, 41.26s)
SVG not loaded!
View larger version
Loop 3
Total Frames: 2390, Total Time: 51.01s
Average Framerate: 46.85
Max. Framerate: 64.49 (Frame:333, 5.95s)
Min. Framerate: 31.64 (Frame:1945, 41.24s)
SVG not loaded!
View larger version
Average Results
Average Framerate: 47.66
Max. Framerate: 65.87
Min. Framerate: 32.90
SVG not loaded!
View larger version




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Far Cry® 2 Copyright © 2008 Ubisoft Entertainment

I was suprised to see the nice results it returned and would now easily recommend a 8800/9800gt for the Op.
Just for kicks I'll try upping the details to med and also high at the same resolutions 1024x768 and see what happens.

All settings set to low @ 1024x768

Average Framerate: 47.66
Max. Framerate: 65.87
Min. Framerate: 32.90

All setting set to med. @1024x 768 With bloom

Average Framerate: 40.40
Max. Framerate: 56.43
Min. Framerate: 30.51

All settings set to high @1024x768 with bloom and HDR

Average Framerate: 32.21
Max. Framerate: 45.68
Min. Framerate: 23.01

The gpu stock 8800gt is the bottleneck? I'm gonna give it a go with my 8800gt overclocked as high as it will go on high settings.

Overclocked gpu...overclock in signiture

Average Framerate: 32.33
Max. Framerate: 44.86
Min. Framerate: 24.52

 

[mav451]

Yeah but remember you have a Core2 Wolfdale - your IPC is MUCH higher than his Opty165. I bet that Opty will need to be clocked alot higher to even match your performance at 1.8Ghz.

And as justlearning already mentioned the OP need only play with graphical settings. Drop or raise resolution/quality/AA/etc - if there's no change, then your are CPU-limited.

 

[happy medium]

Yeah but remember you have a Core2 Wolfdale - your IPC is MUCH higher than his Opty165. I bet that Opty will need to be clocked alot higher to even match your performance at 1.8Ghz.

And as justlearning already mentioned the OP need only play with graphical settings. Drop or raise resolution/quality/AA/etc - if there's no change, then your are CPU-limited.

well my cpu clock for clock is a little faster, but not much.

I'll try it at 1.6 all settings low and see what happens.