Gtx 570 and cpu q6600 how big bottleneck

[ClocK92]

i want to bay gtx 570
my pc is
CPU:q6600 2.4 Ghz
RAM:8gb 800 mhz
MOTHERBOARD: GIGABYTE GA-EP35-DS3P
PSU:COOLER MASTER SILENT PRO 600W (on 12+ have 40a)
OS windows 7 ultimate 64-bit
i am useing 1920x1080 res
how big cpu or any other bottleneck
have anyone traed this cpu and gpu togeder if did tell me your exspiriance
and witch brand of gtx 570 is better MSI,GIGAYTE,palit or inno3d

 

[lucuis]

Huge, i had a major bottleneck with my q6600 and a gtx 470.

 

[wh3resmycar]

you could oc it a bit, that would lessen the bottleneck.

 

[baddad]

Well I have 2 580's and a q9450 that was not giving me any different benchmarks then my 3 8800's in SLI so I OC the 9450 to 3.5 GHz and saw a big improvement, but no where close to where it should be. So I'm going to a X58 Platform with a 950 OC to 3.8 GHz on Monday.

 

[Ford75chero]

Q6600 clocked at 2.62 GTX470 Ocd from 607 to 770mhzgpu and 1674 to 1850mhz mem clock and got p4046 in 3d mark 11. I run 45-70fps in everything CODBO and NFSHP run awesome at 1920x1200 max everything. I seem to get as good of scores at 2.62 as people at 3.0+. I think according to Tom's building a balanced gaming pc references a similar performance chip in the first article I think it was q9550. It seemed to think a gtx 470 was a balanced card for our power. Hope this helps.

 

[johnnyq8]

buy a decent cooler i recommend you with corsair H:50 or 70 and overclock your cpu to 4.0 GHZ it will be good as and overclocked i7 to 4.0 GHZ and disabled HT function the only diffrence that the i7 uses the QPI link or DMI for i7'8 series and the C2Q uses FSB link its not big deal for you but believe me it will work as the i7 have 8 MB of cache as your cpu have 8 mb of cache
good luck

 

[Petey1013]

buy a decent cooler i recommend you with corsair H:50 or 70 and overclock your cpu to 4.0 GHZ it will be good as and overclocked i7 to 4.0 GHZ and disabled HT function the only diffrence that the i7 uses the QPI link or DMI for i7'8 series and the C2Q uses FSB link its not big deal for you but believe me it will work as the i7 have 8 MB of cache as your cpu have 8 mb of cache
good luck

Your kiddng right?

You think a C2Q will match clock for clock with an i7??

 

[g00fysmiley]

corsair H:50 or 70 ... yea thats all i need to know to discredit the rest.. he thinks a h50 or h70 is a good cooler... its like the bastard child of water cooling, its quiet... btu you get better performance from air cooling or REAL water cooling...

and if C2Q matched i7 clock for clock nobody woukld have gotten it... i don't even think you could cherrypick benchmarks to try to pull off that claim unless they were done in an unfair test... ie an i7 with 1 gig ram single chanel and stock heatsink and a 8500gt against a C2Q with 8 gigs ram and a gtx 580 .. even then it wouldn't win everything >_<

 

[beltzy]

Hope to shed a little light on the conversation (easy on the jabs folks). To answer the questions that you asked:

1) Bottlenecking- if you OC your processor you should be just fine. You may squeeze out some additional performance by upgrading your platform, but the additonal performance per dollar compared to a graphics upgrade is most likely going to disappoint you. Rather than speak in generalities, take a look at this Tom's Article about building a balanced PC. It's a little older, but it uses some cards that are still relevant like the 5870 and 5970 paired with a range of older two and four core OC'ed processors alongside an OC'ed i7-920. What you see is an OC'ed Q9550 putting up the same framerates as an OC'ed i7-920 at 1920x1200 and above.

Now, the i7's do perform better. But the point is that you are not going to get drastically different gaming performance from an i7 platform than you are by OC'ing your current processor.

In this scenario you are looking at spending $350 on a GTX 570 graphics card. This is not such an insane amount of GPU muscle that will be wasted on your OC'ed processor. There are compelling reasons to upgrade to an X58 platform from your current one, but potentially squeezing a tiny bit of additional performance out of a single card probably isn't one of them. I built an i7-950 system coming from a Q6600 but I had a locked down Dell without a lot of OC option that didn't support Crossfire/SLI so it made sense.

2) The reference cards are what you have available right now so they are all nearly identical. You really aren't going to get a significantly better product from any of the brands. That being said, a lot of folks like to stick with brands they're comfortable with or that have reputations for good customer support.

Note:
Corsair H50 and H70 coolers sound great, but don't peform any better than high end air cooling and a lot of reviews actually show them as running louder than some of the quieter high-end air coolers out there. Not to get off topic but check some actual reviews for more info. They're not bad products, just not outstanding- many people prefer a solid air cooler.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/corsair-h70-liquid-cooling-radiator,2757-8.html
http://www.guru3d.com/article/corsair-h70-review/10
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/corsair_h70/4.htm

 

[jerreece]

I used to have a Q6600 @ 3.2Ghz with a GTX 260 (later in SLI). When I upgraded to my i5-750 and OC'd it to 4Ghz I saw improvements. Let alone when I later went to SLI. Now, two GTX 260's in SLI equals (literally) a single GTX 470. And the GTX 570 is faster than that.

So yes, I could see the Q6600 (especially if not OC'd) causing a limitation to the GTX 570. If you can OC the Q6600 it could get you by, however you need a good aftermarket cooler as that chip runs fairly hot.

Forget the H50 cooler, as beltzy pointed out they really don't do any better than good air coolers but cost more money. My old Xigmatek HDT-S1283 does every bit as good as the H50 reviews I've seen, and it costs less! Though it is big. Used that cooler on my old Q6600 @ 3.2Ghz and it did very well (although my chip wasn't that great and required pretty high voltage).

In order to do a CPU upgrade, you ought to replace your Motherboard, CPU, and RAM as there isn't really anything in the Socket 775 line-up worth upgrading to in your situation.

 

[johnnyq8]

Hope to shed a little light on the conversation (easy on the jabs folks). To answer the questions that you asked:

1) Bottlenecking- if you OC your processor you should be just fine. You may squeeze out some additional performance by upgrading your platform, but the additonal performance per dollar compared to a graphics upgrade is most likely going to disappoint you. Rather than speak in generalities, take a look at this Tom's Article about building a balanced PC. It's a little older, but it uses some cards that are still relevant like the 5870 and 5970 paired with a range of older two and four core OC'ed processors alongside an OC'ed i7-920. What you see is an OC'ed Q9550 putting up the same framerates as an OC'ed i7-920 at 1920x1200 and above.

Now, the i7's do perform better. But the point is that you are not going to get drastically different gaming performance from an i7 platform than you are by OC'ing your current processor.

In this scenario you are looking at spending $350 on a GTX 570 graphics card. This is not such an insane amount of GPU muscle that will be wasted on your OC'ed processor. There are compelling reasons to upgrade to an X58 platform from your current one, but potentially squeezing a tiny bit of additional performance out of a single card probably isn't one of them. I built an i7-950 system coming from a Q6600 but I had a locked down Dell without a lot of OC option that didn't support Crossfire/SLI so it made sense.

2) The reference cards are what you have available right now so they are all nearly identical. You really aren't going to get a significantly better product from any of the brands. That being said, a lot of folks like to stick with brands they're comfortable with or that have reputations for good customer support.

Note:
Corsair H50 and H70 coolers sound great, but don't peform any better than high end air cooling and a lot of reviews actually show them as running louder than some of the quieter high-end air coolers out there. Not to get off topic but check some actual reviews for more info. They're not bad products, just not outstanding- many people prefer a solid air cooler.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/corsair-h70-liquid-cooling-radiator,2757-8.html
http://www.guru3d.com/article/corsair-h70-review/10
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/corsair_h70/4.htm

thats what im meaning but the fools have attacked me before thinking of what i was saying
but h:50 or 70 is great for mid-tower case's im using Dark fleet 85 full tower case and i cant fit thermaltake frio in it so h50 or 70 is good option for me if @clock sayed what case he is using it will be easier to say wich cooler to go by the way h50 and 70 are great if your case dont have good airflow

 

[wh3resmycar]

managing a 4.0ghz q6600 would be an amazing feat. pulling that kind of clock with non ln2 solutions with a 65nm chip. i doubt so.

 

[Ford75chero]

q6600 doesnt run terribly hot until it gets past 3.2ghz Plenty out there run that at stock voltge. That said I only run at 2.6 ghz (stupid dell BTX motherboard xps 720) with a 470. I can oc my 470 to 770mhz gpu and 1860mhz mem. I see huge gains when doing so in vantage and 3d mark11. If my cpu was maxed I would see little to no improvement through oc. I managed to beat my friends stock clocked i-7 920 with radeon 6870 at stock clock in 3d mark 11. He posted 3700 I got p4046. GTX 470 was recommended by toms in building a balanced pc and they were right on (q9550 not too far off of q6600). For what its worth my Pc never stutters or slow in any game out currently, constant 40+ fps min and exceeding 80fps at most times even at stock clocks on gpu and cpu.

 

[lucuis]

Synthetics are one thing but i didn't notice much difference in fps switching my 8800gts to a gtx 470. I could change as many settings as i wanted in BFBC2 and i always got the same fps. My Q6600 was at 3.2ghz.

The i7 made a big difference in BFBC2, SC2, and Wow for me.

 

[ClocK92]

I bought the gtx 570 it is BIG improvment over my old 9800 gtx even at 2.4 ghz cpu
i am very setesffaid with performance gain
Thank you so manch for all your respanses

 

[jerreece]

I bought the gtx 570 it is BIG improvment over my old 9800 gtx even at 2.4 ghz cpu
i am very setesffaid with performance gain
Thank you so manch for all your respanses

What CPU? Because a 2.4Ghz Q6600 will be slower than a 2.4Ghz Core i processor for example. It's not all about 'Clock Speed' but also the architecture design of the chip itself. So making a blanket "my 2.4hz does fine with my 570" doesn't necessarily tell the whole picture.

 

[nforce4max]

The 775 platform never really had it good when it came to system i/o most do point out and are right in part about clocks but that isn't the whole picture. It is both sure you can nuke the cpu and see gains but that is the same on any platform new or old. However when there isn't enough bandwidth to and from the cpu it isn't going to help much to overclock when devices installed are waiting for work or to submit their data and the latency is killing what ever edge there may be. In short 775 isn't what it used to be and for newer cards that require ever more resources much like our increasingly bloated games you are left with a few choices. You can stick with what you have and try to make the most of it and tweak your os and games the best you can to cut down on the bloat while changing out this or that but there is always a time ware a machine isn't going to be enough. You can act like those who are still getting by on a old ppc apple or p3/4 machine and maybe get by but to use the latest hardware mainly gpus think twice when expecting decent results. As for bandwith on all platforms out there it isn't much compared to my needs.

 

[iam2thecrowe]

the hardest thing about getting a q6600 to over 3ghs is motherboard stability. at 3ghz its at 1333fsb which is max rated on many motherboards. push past 1380fsb and things get very unstable without NB and SB heatsink/fan upgrades and voltage increases. id say aim for 3ghz for a start, you should be able to get that on stock cooler with AS5 thermal paste and good case cooling and lowish ambient temps. im at 3ghz now on a core 2 e6600 with slight voltage increase and wont go higher without cooler etc, but rather than spare the expense on a cooler to get .5 more ghz its probably more worth while to change up platforms to core i5 or something.

 

[nforce4max]

the hardest thing about getting a q6600 to over 3ghs is motherboard stability. at 3ghz its at 1333fsb which is max rated on many motherboards. push past 1380fsb and things get very unstable without NB and SB heatsink/fan upgrades and voltage increases. id say aim for 3ghz for a start, you should be able to get that on stock cooler with AS5 thermal paste and good case cooling and lowish ambient temps. im at 3ghz now on a core 2 e6600 with slight voltage increase and wont go higher without cooler etc, but rather than spare the expense on a cooler to get .5 more ghz its probably more worth while to change up platforms to core i5 or something.

Physically 1333GSB is 333mhz physical clock on the chepset, 3x and 4x Intel chipsets often were and are able to break 400mhz easily with decent cooling. On VIA, SIS, and Nvidia chipsets that can be different the first two gens of the nforce4 couldn't manage 300mhz except for a few that had decent cooling and the third gen I manged 341mhz (1364 fsb) but that took a lot of effort. The 650i on up did much better than previous chipsets and on my 780i 400mhz is easy and I have yet to max it out. VIA and SIS very rarely ever reach any ware near 333mhz except on high volts and plenty of cooling. The most that one can get though is around 500mhz on any and only a small few every reach those speeds. The instability is the result of the ram not being able to handle the high clocks and the power vrm on the boards not being able to meet the increased needs of the cpu. A stock q6600 uses 95w and the same for all but a few 775 quads and by 3ghz the load figures are much higher compared to stock and others that have a much higher default clock. AM 1 and AM2 had it's own issues but mainly power consumption and low clocks. The 1156 and 1356 have much better i/o but the clocks on some are not that great while power consumption on the i7 9xx samples is typically 130w making it rough for most boards except for the few high quality high end models that can support much higher load than your typical board.

 

[grimmjow naito]

Your kiddng right?

You think a C2Q will match clock for clock with an i7??

Yes actually it may not beat it but it will indeed give it a huge run for its money see l2 cache is actually faster then l3 but l3 cache actually has a higher FSB so the higher the FSB the more stuff you can push through that memory even though its slower then l2 l3 is actually better but l2 is faster but I have my Q6600 overclocked to about 4.0ghz and it runs stable never gets above 30c to 40c load

 

[Mousemonkey]

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey