Prepping my older system for a 7970..

Howdy! My specs are in my sig but I have a few question! (No I'm not buying a new MB or CPU)! I have 4 gigs of 1066, should I spend the extra mula and get another 4 gigs (2x2) or should I jump down to ddr2 800 and get 8GB and save money? DDR2 is stupid pricey. I ordered the a 212+ for my 940 @ 3.0 I was hoping to bump that somewhere within 3.5 maybe 3.6 GHZ any thoughts on that as well. I'm looking for anything that could battleneck the 7970 and if you think of anything please let me know. Windows 7 Pre is on its way

Honestly that is kind of a mismatch unless you are planning on getting a new cpu/mobo/ram setup in about 6-9 months.

Howdy! My specs are in my sig but I have a few question! (No I'm not buying a new MB or CPU)! I have 4 gigs of 1066, should I spend the extra mula and get another 4 gigs (2x2) or should I jump down to ddr2 800 and get 8GB and save money? DDR2 is stupid pricey. I ordered the a 212+ for my 940 @ 3.0 I was hoping to bump that somewhere within 3.5 maybe 3.6 GHZ any thoughts on that as well. I'm looking for anything that could battleneck the 7970 and if you think of anything please let me know. Windows 7 Pre is on its way

dabigsiebowski

Looks to be a OK.

My $500 USD proposed PC build spec...

CPU:AMD Phenom II X4 830 2.8GHz Quad-Core Processor ($89.99 @ Newegg)
Motherboard:Asus M5A78L-M LX Micro ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($49.99 @ NCIX US)
Memory:Corsair XMS3 4GB (2 x 2GB) DDR3-1333 Memory ($17.99 @ Newegg)
Hard Drive:Western Digital Caviar Blue 250GB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($43.98 @ NCIX US)
Video Card:XFX Radeon HD 6950 1GB Video Card ($209.99 @ Newegg)
Case:Apex SK-393-C ATX Mid Tower Case ($19.99 @ NCIX US)
Power Supply:OCZ 600W ATX12V / EPS12V Power Supply ($59.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive:LG GH22NS90B DVD/CD Writer ($16.98 @ Newegg)
Total: $508.90
(Prices include shipping and discounts when available.)
(Generated 2012-01-08 19:36 EST-0500)

Honestly that is kind of a mismatch unless you are planning on getting a new cpu/mobo/ram setup in about 6-9 months.

GummiRaccoon

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

Honestly that is kind of a mismatch unless you are planning on getting a new cpu/mobo/ram setup in about 6-9 months.

whitey_rolls

Honestly that is kind of a mismatch unless you are planning on getting a new cpu/mobo/ram setup in about 6-9 months.

GummiRaccoon

[QUOTE="whitey_rolls"]

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

Honestly that is kind of a mismatch unless you are planning on getting a new cpu/mobo/ram setup in about 6-9 months.

ronvalencia

Think of it this way. Clock for clock your PH2 is no faster than a Core 2 Quad. Even at 3.4 or 3.5 your cpu will hold back a 7970. Another way of looking at it is this way. A SB CORE I3 2100 at stock would smoke your cpu at 3.5ghz. Would you really want to pair a Core i3 with a 7970? Don't think so....... The max I'd pair up with that cpu would be a 6950 or gtx 570 and that's pushing it. If you are going to purchase a 7970 then you should be able to upgrade the whole platform, if not, then you have no business getting a 7970.

well looks like you started another thread just to announce the fact that you bought it. Tell me....why start another thread asking what you should do to ready your system when you already ordered the card? I hate to be harsh but you just wasted 600.00 bucks.:( Your current setup will bottleneck the crap of that gpu, and I don't like to use the term bottleneck due to it's being abused all the time, but in this case it applies properly. Why not spend 300.00 to 350.00 and buy a gtx 570 or 6950 for even less and pocket the rest? Well at least you can brag to people who don't know better that you have the newest, fastest card on the market. ;)

Think of it this way. Clock for clock your PH2 is no faster than a Core 2 Quad. Even at 3.4 or 3.5 your cpu will hold back a 7970. Another way of looking at it is this way. A SB CORE I3 2100 at stock would smoke your cpu at 3.5ghz. Would you really want to pair a Core i3 with a 7970? Don't think so....... The max I'd pair up with that cpu would be a 6950 or gtx 570 and that's pushing it. If you are going to purchase a 7970 then you should be able to upgrade the whole platform, if not, then you have no business getting a 7970.

well looks like you started another thread just to announce the fact that you bought it. Tell me....why start another thread asking what you should do to ready your system when you already ordered the card? I hate to be harsh but you just wasted 600.00 bucks.:( Your current setup will bottleneck the crap of that gpu, and I don't like to use the term bottleneck due to it's being abused all the time, but in this case it applies properly. Why not spend 300.00 to 350.00 and buy a gtx 570 or 6950 for even less and pocket the rest? Well at least you can brag to people who don't know better that you have the newest, fastest card on the market. ;)

retrogamer1971

Believe it or not, there was a review done some time ago where GTX 580 SLI was bottlenecked by a Nehalem at very high resolutions. Pairing with a heavily OC'ed Sandy Bridge gave it an extraordinary boost.

A decent clocked phenom II might slightly bottleneck a 7970, but not much.

A decent clocked phenom II might slightly bottleneck a 7970, but not much.

kraken2109

Yes it will. Understand that clock for clock a Phenom 2 is slower than a Core 2 Quad. If you were around when the Phenom 2 was released you would have read this in all the reviews. The Phenom 2 only beats a Core 2 Quad when it is overclocked at least .5 ghz beyond a similar Core 2 Quad. Example: Q9550@ 2.83GHZ vs a X4 955@ 3.2 GHZ. Believe it or not even overclocked the x4 955 still loses in most benches to the q9550@ stock. Would you really pair a q9550@ 2.8ghz with a hd7970? No, because it would severely bottleneck the card. Then why woudl you pair it with the even slower Phneom 2 X4 overclocked or not? sigh

[QUOTE="kraken2109"]

A decent clocked phenom II might slightly bottleneck a 7970, but not much.

retrogamer1971

Yes it will. Understand that clock for clock a Phenom 2 is slower than a Core 2 Quad. If you were around when the Phenom 2 was released you would have read this in all the reviews. The Phenom 2 only beats a Core 2 Quad when it is overclocked at least .5 ghz beyond a similar Core 2 Quad. Example: Q9550@ 2.83GHZ vs a X4 955@ 3.2 GHZ. Believe it or not even overclocked the x4 955 still loses in most benches to the q9550@ stock. Would you really pair a q9550@ 2.8ghz with a hd7970? No, because it would severely bottleneck the card. Then why woudl you pair it with the even slower Phneom 2 X4 overclocked or not? sigh

[QUOTE="retrogamer1971"]

[QUOTE="kraken2109"]

A decent clocked phenom II might slightly bottleneck a 7970, but not much.

kraken2109

Yes it will. Understand that clock for clock a Phenom 2 is slower than a Core 2 Quad. If you were around when the Phenom 2 was released you would have read this in all the reviews. The Phenom 2 only beats a Core 2 Quad when it is overclocked at least .5 ghz beyond a similar Core 2 Quad. Example: Q9550@ 2.83GHZ vs a X4 955@ 3.2 GHZ. Believe it or not even overclocked the x4 955 still loses in most benches to the q9550@ stock. Would you really pair a q9550@ 2.8ghz with a hd7970? No, because it would severely bottleneck the card. Then why woudl you pair it with the even slower Phneom 2 X4 overclocked or not? sigh

If I have to explain this stuff to you? I don't have time to track down specifics for every noob who needs education. And yes you are a noob if you actually can't understand what I'm saying here. THERE IS PROOF ALL OVER THE INTERNET....GOOGLE IS YOUR FRIEND, LOOK IT UP!

edit:

I can't believe you are trying to justify pairing a single card that when OC can beat 6950's in tril sli in gaming and synthetic benchmarks. Ask yourself, why would anyone in their right mind pair a single Phenom 2 X4 @ 3.4-3.5 ghz with three 6950's? Remember that same cpu is beaten by the six year old q9550 as show in the Anandtech benchmark results. Would you ever pair a 7970 with a Q9550? No you would not. Now slowly go over in your head this simple logic and maybe you will begin to understand what I'm trying to tell you.

^Ill avoid name callings here, this isnt SW. If you want to prove your point than provide links so can all see, ty.

^Ill avoid name callings here, this isnt SW. If you want to prove your point than provide links so can all see, ty.

Bikouchu35

I agree. If you're trying to convince somebody, you should be the one providing the evidence.

^Ill avoid name callings here, this isnt SW. If you want to prove your point than provide links so can all see, ty.

Bikouchu35

I apologize for the noob statement but geez are you guys really that dense? Do I actually have to provide links for something so obvious? Do you no understand the simple logic here?

Anyone with any knowledge of current hardware knows that the Phenom 2 line clock for clock is weaker than the Core 2 Quads. S you really believe that a Q9550@ 3.4ghz would not singnificantly bottleneck a HD 7970? Knowing that a Q9550@ 3.4 ghz would be faster than a Phenom 2 at the same speed, then why would the OP want to pair it with a HD7970? Geez! I now know why this forum is looked at with ridicule by the rest of the hardware community. It's ridiculous that I've even got to explain this stuff.

I'm going to call it a day and bid adeiu. If this is the best this site has to offer in terms of knowledge then no sense in hanging around. I guess you guys can continue to "educate" 16 year olds on how to build PC's? Good luc:)

Believe it or not, there was a review done some time ago where GTX 580 SLI was bottlenecked by a Nehalem at very high resolutions. Pairing with a heavily OC'ed Sandy Bridge gave it an extraordinary boost.

kaitanuvax

[QUOTE="Bikouchu35"]

^Ill avoid name callings here, this isnt SW. If you want to prove your point than provide links so can all see, ty.

retrogamer1971

I apologize for the noob statement but geez are you guys really that dense? Do I actually have to provide links for something so obvious? Do you no understand the simple logic here?

Anyone with any knowledge of current hardware knows that the Phenom 2 line clock for clock is weaker than the Core 2 Quads. S you really believe that a Q9550@ 3.4ghz would not singnificantly bottleneck a HD 7970? Knowing that a Q9550@ 3.4 ghz would be faster than a Phenom 2 at the same speed, then why would the OP want to pair it with a HD7970? Geez! I now know why this forum is looked at with ridicule by the rest of the hardware community. It's ridiculous that I've even got to explain this stuff.

I'm going to call it a day and bid adeiu. If this is the best this site has to offer in terms of knowledge then no sense in hanging around. I guess you guys can continue to "educate" 16 year olds on how to build PC's? Good luc:)

Reason why we ask proof is because guru3d provides evidence that says the opposite. Here's the link:

http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-7970-cpu-scaling-performance-review/9

You are right that the Phenom II will bottleneck the 7970 to some extent. There are a select few games that do demonstrate the severe bottleneck that a Phenom II will render compared to a typical Sandy Bridge processor, such as Civilization V and Starcraft II (refer to Techpowerup's article on it). However, these are only rare cases in which the CPU is depended on so heavily to render the application. If you refer to the Guru3d article studying the bottleneck, you will see that this bottleneck in the majority of games tested are minimal at most at resolutions >1680x1050. If anyone is looking at the 7970 for a resolution below that, then yes, they will see a noticeable bottleneck; however, one must consider why they would even buy the 7970 in the first place for such a low resolution.

In summary, yes you are right; however, for the majority of users looking to buy the product, the bottleneck won't be so drastic so as to render the 7970 a wasted purchase compared to other cards out there.

I really want to agree with your statement as you seem to be somewhat knowledgable and mature in your answers, but unfortunately I cannot concur with your conclusion. The bottleneck with a Phenom 2 940@ 3.4ghz paired with a 7970 would be huge. You make it seem as if the bottleneck would be acceptable therefore spending 600.00 would be justifiable for the OP when he can just save a few benjamins and grab a 560ti and be done with it. I'm sorry I appreciate your answer but you are wrong.

BTW, i appreciate the link to that 3d article. I am going to read it and get back to you.

I really want to agree with your statement as you seem to be somewhat knowledgable and mature in your answers, but unfortunately I cannot concur with your conclusion. The bottleneck with a Phenom 2 940@ 3.4ghz paired with a 7970 would be huge. You make it seem as if the bottleneck would be acceptable therefore spending 600.00 would be justifiable for the OP when he can just save a few benjamins and grab a 560ti and be done with it. I'm sorry I appreciate your answer but you are wrong.

BTW, i appreciate the link to that 3d article. I am going to read it and get back to you.

retrogamer1971

It really depends on the resolution.

At a resolution like 2560x1600 the GPU will be the bottleneck over any C2Q/phII/i5/i7, even a 7970

I tend to agree with Hilberts conclusions for the most part and within the parameters of his testing would agree with his results. Yet, the test is using primarily gpu limited games, except Dawn Of Discovery which clearly shows the weaker cpus getting smoked by the stronger ones. Also, and this is key, he clearly states that he is quoting average framerates rather than minimum. I have personally tested all of the games he uses with X4 955 and I5 2500K's and can tell you that the data he presents is correct in terms of average FPS, but the articlle fails to mention about how much choppier an experience the gameplay is when using a weaker cpu. This experience quite frankly can make or break the gameplay. I think what you will see as this article starts getting forum comments is many posters disagreeing with Hilbert's findings. Pay attention in the forums and then make a decision after seeing what the general community says. I'd like to stress that while on the surface there is nothing wrong with his results, I'm surprised by his closing statement that any current quad core will be fine for a 7970, even with his disclaimer that he was only quoting average fps.

edit- I did not realize this article was older so I'll go back and check the forum comments to confirm my suspicions in terms of reactions.

edit- Well after searching for the relevent thread to his review it seems he never allowed comments on it. Therefore I stand by my own opinion and can't really agree in total with his findings when my personal experience says otherwise.

I tend to agree with Hilberts conclusions for the most part and within the parameters of his testing would agree with his results. Yet, the test is using primarily gpu limited games, except Dawn Of Discovery which clearly shows the weaker cpus getting smoked by the stronger ones. Also, and this is key, he clearly states that he is quoting average framerates rather than minimum. I have personally tested all of the games he uses with X4 955 and I5 2500K's and can tell you that the data he presents is correct in terms of average FPS, but the articlle fails to mention about how much choppier an experience the gameplay is when using a weaker cpu. This experience quite frankly can make or break the gameplay. I think what you will see as this article starts getting forum comments is many posters disagreeing with Hilbert's findings. Pay attention in the forums and then make a decision after seeing what the general community says. I'd like to stress that while on the surface there is nothing wrong with his results, I'm surprised by his closing statement that any current quad core will be fine for a 7970, even with his disclaimer that he was only quoting average fps.

edit- I did not realize this article was older so I'll go back and check the forum comments to confirm my suspicions in terms of reactions.

edit- Well after searching for the relevent thread to his review it seems he never allowed comments on it. Therefore I stand by my own opinion and can't really agree in total with his findings when my personal experience says otherwise.

retrogamer1971

We already had a discussion on why anecdotes are not strong enough to contradict actual data.

[QUOTE="Bikouchu35"]

^Ill avoid name callings here, this isnt SW. If you want to prove your point than provide links so can all see, ty.

retrogamer1971

I apologize for the noob statement but geez are you guys really that dense? Do I actually have to provide links for something so obvious? Do you no understand the simple logic here?

Anyone with any knowledge of current hardware knows that the Phenom 2 line clock for clock is weaker than the Core 2 Quads. S you really believe that a Q9550@ 3.4ghz would not singnificantly bottleneck a HD 7970? Knowing that a Q9550@ 3.4 ghz would be faster than a Phenom 2 at the same speed, then why would the OP want to pair it with a HD7970? Geez! I now know why this forum is looked at with ridicule by the rest of the hardware community. It's ridiculous that I've even got to explain this stuff.

I'm going to call it a day and bid adeiu. If this is the best this site has to offer in terms of knowledge then no sense in hanging around. I guess you guys can continue to "educate" 16 year olds on how to build PC's? Good luc:)

Yeah even my old Q9650 was a bottleneck in lots of games. Dirt 3, framedrops/GPU usage went down when racing the rallyecross events with 8 cars at once, same in F1 2011, Skyrim was running only at 15-30 fps in the cities, and that was with draw distance slider set to half, and the GPU usage barely reaching 50%.

GTA 4 ran like ass on maximum view distance, i had to set it to 30 our of 100 to be halfway playable.

Dead Rising 2, lots of framedops on the strip.

Fallout New Vegas also ran really bad in Vegas.

All performance problems are pretty much gone with my new rig and the Sandy Bridge processor.

[QUOTE="retrogamer1971"]

[QUOTE="Bikouchu35"]

^Ill avoid name callings here, this isnt SW. If you want to prove your point than provide links so can all see, ty.

Ben-Buja

I apologize for the noob statement but geez are you guys really that dense? Do I actually have to provide links for something so obvious? Do you no understand the simple logic here?

Anyone with any knowledge of current hardware knows that the Phenom 2 line clock for clock is weaker than the Core 2 Quads. S you really believe that a Q9550@ 3.4ghz would not singnificantly bottleneck a HD 7970? Knowing that a Q9550@ 3.4 ghz would be faster than a Phenom 2 at the same speed, then why would the OP want to pair it with a HD7970? Geez! I now know why this forum is looked at with ridicule by the rest of the hardware community. It's ridiculous that I've even got to explain this stuff.

I'm going to call it a day and bid adeiu. If this is the best this site has to offer in terms of knowledge then no sense in hanging around. I guess you guys can continue to "educate" 16 year olds on how to build PC's? Good luc:)

Yeah even my old Q9650 was a bottleneck in lots of games. Dirt 3, framedrops/GPU usage went down when racing the rallyecross events with 8 cars at once, same in F1 2011, Skyrim was running only at 15-30 fps in the cities, and that was with draw distance slider set to half, and the GPU usage barely reaching 50%.

GTA 4 ran like ass on maximum view distance, i had to set it to 30 our of 100 to be halfway playable.

Dead Rising 2, lots of framedops on the strip.

Fallout New Vegas also ran really bad in Vegas.

All performance problems are pretty much gone with my new rig and the Sandy Bridge processor.

That's the problem here. All the people downplaying the bottleneck issue with the OP's rig probably don't have SB cpu's therefore have no point of reference. Every scenario I've seen where a person went from a Core 2 Quad or Phenom 2 to a SB always ended up the same way. " OMG! ALL OF A SUDDEN MY CARD IS GETTING DOUBLE THE FPS!" Sure he'll be able to increase image settings and raise resolution but his actual FPS will be much lower than if he'd paired that card with a better cpu. In other words he could have gotten a GTX 560ti and had the same performance but instead he wasted a few hundred bucks just for bragging rights. To the OP, there is no "hatin" on my part. I just tried to help you save some money by buying a card that would be a better fit for your system. I could care less what GPU you have in comparison to my own personal rig. It's your money and your rig. i just think it's a shame that so much misinformation is put out on these boards and tried to make it stop. One things for sure, if you go to any serious hardware site and try braggin about your new rig, you will hear the same thing you heard from me.

[QUOTE="retrogamer1971"]

I tend to agree with Hilberts conclusions for the most part and within the parameters of his testing would agree with his results. Yet, the test is using primarily gpu limited games, except Dawn Of Discovery which clearly shows the weaker cpus getting smoked by the stronger ones. Also, and this is key, he clearly states that he is quoting average framerates rather than minimum. I have personally tested all of the games he uses with X4 955 and I5 2500K's and can tell you that the data he presents is correct in terms of average FPS, but the articlle fails to mention about how much choppier an experience the gameplay is when using a weaker cpu. This experience quite frankly can make or break the gameplay. I think what you will see as this article starts getting forum comments is many posters disagreeing with Hilbert's findings. Pay attention in the forums and then make a decision after seeing what the general community says. I'd like to stress that while on the surface there is nothing wrong with his results, I'm surprised by his closing statement that any current quad core will be fine for a 7970, even with his disclaimer that he was only quoting average fps.

edit- I did not realize this article was older so I'll go back and check the forum comments to confirm my suspicions in terms of reactions.

edit- Well after searching for the relevent thread to his review it seems he never allowed comments on it. Therefore I stand by my own opinion and can't really agree in total with his findings when my personal experience says otherwise.

GummiRaccoon

We already had a discussion on why anecdotes are not strong enough to contradict actual data.

SIGH! I'm tired of trying to talk sense to you so I will let it go.

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="retrogamer1971"]

I tend to agree with Hilberts conclusions for the most part and within the parameters of his testing would agree with his results. Yet, the test is using primarily gpu limited games, except Dawn Of Discovery which clearly shows the weaker cpus getting smoked by the stronger ones. Also, and this is key, he clearly states that he is quoting average framerates rather than minimum. I have personally tested all of the games he uses with X4 955 and I5 2500K's and can tell you that the data he presents is correct in terms of average FPS, but the articlle fails to mention about how much choppier an experience the gameplay is when using a weaker cpu. This experience quite frankly can make or break the gameplay. I think what you will see as this article starts getting forum comments is many posters disagreeing with Hilbert's findings. Pay attention in the forums and then make a decision after seeing what the general community says. I'd like to stress that while on the surface there is nothing wrong with his results, I'm surprised by his closing statement that any current quad core will be fine for a 7970, even with his disclaimer that he was only quoting average fps.

edit- I did not realize this article was older so I'll go back and check the forum comments to confirm my suspicions in terms of reactions.

edit- Well after searching for the relevent thread to his review it seems he never allowed comments on it. Therefore I stand by my own opinion and can't really agree in total with his findings when my personal experience says otherwise.

retrogamer1971

We already had a discussion on why anecdotes are not strong enough to contradict actual data.

SIGH! I'm tired of trying to talk sense to you so I will let it go.

So you don't look at people's avatars or screen name when you post or what?

hey gummi bear....let it go. I know you have been at this forum a long time and have many thousands of posts. I also realize that many of the people here probably look up to you as the resident old timer or guru if you will, but I have been at this for almost twenty years and if I had a dollar for every "forum big fish" I 've had to listen to I'd be rich. I've been down this road many a time and just don't feel like traveling it with you again. So, let's agree that you are the big man on campus and I'll just pop in every so often and visit. I promise I'll be nice and quiet and won't break any dishes OK....:D

hey gummi bear....let it go. I know you have been at this forum a long time and have many thousands of posts. I also realize that many of the people here probably look up to you as the resident old timer or guru if you will, but I have been at this for almost twenty years and if I had a dollar for every "forum big fish" I 've had to listen to I'd be rich. I've been down this road many a time and just don't feel like traveling it with you again. So, let's agree that you are the big man on campus and I'll just pop in every so often and visit. I promise I'll be nice and quiet and won't break any dishes OK....:D

retrogamer1971

Hey old man, I was implying that you were talking as if we had an exchange yet we did not actually have an exchange. Thus "You don't even look at who you are talking to"

Do you just join mid conversations with random strangers on the street?

EDIT: Also I have been doing this for 16 years, like I care that you've been doing this for 20.

.

.

tequilasunriser

Even using the low res of 1280x1024 to highlight CPU differences there's no extreme bottlenecks.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-7970-cpu-scaling-performance-review/6

Metro: 3fps between a phenomII and an i7 2600k

http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-7970-cpu-scaling-performance-review/9

1fps in BF3

A decent clocked phenom II might slightly bottleneck a 7970, but not much.

kraken2109

Jeeze. I remember when people could have civilized discussions here in PC hardware without flamewars. gmaster456