and again just because a cpu is not fully topped out does not mean a faster one would not be better. and nobody is telling to buy a new rig.
Define better
Trust me, you will understand the meaning of a CPU limitation when you pop that new GTX460 in your stock-clocked e8400 and run BC2. By "better" Toyota means that you would get significantly higher frame rates than you do with your 4870, which I'm fairly certain you will not. You will, however, get higher quality images, if that's what you're looking for.
From my experience, going from an X3 to an X4, the difference is in minimum framerates.
. . .
In BC2 the average fps was around 40, but jumped to 60 with a quad.
. . .
A faster CPU will generally give you better minimums.
See what stands out here? While I agree that in many games, a better CPU affects minimums, in BC2 it doesn't work that way, as you've just noted. There's no way an e8400/GTX460 combo will ever touch 60fps, and you're getting that on a 5770.
I actually feel pretty capped on my e8400 in Dirt 2 actually, which you didn't notice in your tests. I get about 45fps regardless of settings, although I should be able to hit 60fps with my GTX460: http://www.anandtech.com/show/3909/nvidias-geforce-gts-450-pushing-fermi-in-to-the-mainstream/12.
I should mention that in BC2 some of my settings were turned down, like AA and HBAO. I did note Dirt2 in my tests. The average FPS in that I was GPU limited but unlocking a 4th core raised my minimums.
even my E8500 does pretty good for minimums in Dirt 2.I can't get 60fps on my e8400/GTX460 with 0AA at 1280x720, let alone at higher settings.
As for Dirt 2, it could be that a triple-core was closer to handling the demands of that game than a dual-core, so you just got the improvement in minimums.
even my E8500 does pretty good for minimums in Dirt 2.
Windows 7 64bit
E8500
GTX260 192sp
4gb
1920x1080 highest settings and 8x AA
E8500 @ 3.16 GTX260 @ 666/1392/2200
avg 64.1
min 46.8
E8500 @ 3.80 GTX260 @ 666/1392/2200
avg 65.5
min 50.5
even my E8500 does pretty good for minimums in Dirt 2.
Windows 7 64bit
E8500
GTX260 192sp
4gb
1920x1080 highest settings and 8x AA
E8500 @ 3.16 GTX260 @ 666/1392/2200
avg 64.1
min 46.8
E8500 @ 3.80 GTX260 @ 666/1392/2200
avg 65.5
min 50.5
Dirt 2 becomes much more gpu limited in DX11. http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...1-Phenom-doing-well-quad-cores-rule/Practice/I did the tests in DX11 if that makes any difference. Can't do them now as I'm away from my pc atm.
yes BUT games can take advantage of the higher IPC of the newer quads. an i7/i5 beats the crap out of a typical dual core cpu in a game like Starcraft 2.There are like 5-6 games out there that really take advantage of more than 2 cores at the moment. Even brand-new games like SC2 are still only utilizing 2 cores.
the Metro 2033 is a flyby bench so the minimums can vary from run to run. and yes a single minimum framerate score is meaningless. anybody with the least bit of knowledge knows you need a graph to have a true representation of actual framerates.Here's a good example of how useless minimums can be: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sandy-bridge-core-i7-2600k-core-i5-2500k,2833-18.html
At 2560x1600 the 2600K has a lowest minimum (4.4 FPS) while the Phenom II X4 970 has the highest minimum (14.5 FPS). How can anyone treat those scores as reliable given the actual pecking order of those processors?
the Metro 2033 is a flyby bench so the minimums can vary from run to run. and yes a single minimum framerate score is meaningless. anybody with the least bit of knowledge knows you need a graph to have a true representation of actual framerates.
do you expect a pop up to tell you that you could be getting better performance? a game isn't going to necessarily bog down just because the cpu is limiting its performance. just because you dont notice something does not mean it isn't there. so is a 412 horsepower Mustang no faster than a 315 horsepower Mustang since I never notice the 315 horsepower one feeling slow?I never quite bought the CPU limitation theory. I never noticed it with my E6750 @ 3.4 using my 4870x2 nor with my new 6950 moded to 6970.
do you expect a pop up to tell you that you could be getting better performance? just because you dont notice something does not mean it isn't there. so is a 412 horsepower Mustang no faster than a 315 horsepower Mustang since I never notice it feeling slow?
that has nothing to do with what I said. I am saying that just because you dont "notice" your cpu limiting your gpu does not mean it isnt.If your objective is to go from point A to B and the road only allows 60 km/h or mph (choose your favourite) and both can achieve that, it doesn't really matter.
The core count variable arises when you have to deliver 4 packages and A has 4 vans and B only has 2 vans.
that has nothing to do with what I said. I am saying that just because you dont "notice" your cpu limiting your gpu does not mean it isnt.
what does that mean? an older Core 2 would most certainly limit a 6970 but again it may not be noticeable in most games. if you actually think your cpu is coming closing to fully pushing a 6970 in all games then you are delusional.Nor does it mean it is limiting it.
that has nothing to do with what I said. I am saying that just because you dont "notice" your cpu limiting your gpu does not mean it isnt.
I never quite bought the CPU limitation theory. I never noticed it with my E6750 @ 3.4 using my 4870x2 nor with my new 6950 moded to 6970.
yes that is what I was saying. just because he doesnt notice that getting 35 fps where he could be getting 50 doesn't mean his Core 2 cpu is not limiting him. there are several games such as GTA 4, Prototype, Red Faction Guerrilla, Ghostbusters and few others where his 6970 would be barley getting over 50% of what it could with an i7/i5 quad and in some of those it would be noticeable.Of course if the processor is the bottleneck then giving it more graphics power, at same IQ setting, it should have no effect in the speed of the game.
In 5 years we can pick those future processors and pair them with today GPUs and conclude that those 5 GHz water cooled i7-980X were actually bottlenecking current GPUs.
So in fact this "limiting" just means relative performance to the fastest available hardware.
exactlyYour cpu is enough to keep most games above 30fps, so you might not notice.