GTX 970 With Phenom II Not So Bad

[scirishman76]

Running A Phenom II 955 @3.8Ghz and just upgraded from a GTX 480 To a GTX 970 and did some test along the way. I tried to read up before hand but mixed bag of opinions some saying bad CPU bottleneck and others saying not really. Watched several video's of the Phenom II and 970 where GPU would not drop below 99% and none of the CPU cores were pinned at 90% or above so decided to give it a go.
I ran several test's both synthetics and in game fraps tests right before I put in the 970 and right After. I"ll list results in two columns one below 480 and one below 970. Hope this helps seemed to be alot of confusion when I was trying to read on it.


Heaven 4.0 1920x1200 dx 11 GTX480 score: 559 :: GTX 970 1192
ultra/extreme tess/8XAA min/max/av:480- 12/43/22:: 970- 19/99/46

Unigine Valley score: GTX480 1037 :: GTX 970 2001
min/max/av: 480-14/45/25 :: 970- 21/95/48

Firestrike Score: 480- 3183 :: 970- 8154

Farcry 4 min/max/av:480- 27/42/35:: 970- 57/104/78

Metro LL min/max/av:480- 28/45/36 :: 970- 47/96/80

BF4 Bench Av FPS 3 runs GTX480- 38-38-40:: GTX970- 69-69-71

Warthunder min/max/av:480- 32/69/46:: 970- 67/107/86

All Game tests were done @1920X1200 with settings that stressed my 480 left them alone for testing to get an accurate performance increase Keep in mind also my 480 had a huge OC and the 970 is stock.
Most tests I saw right around double the performance when switching to the GTX 970 I would say if your running a gtx 480/570/660 or AMD 6970/7850/R9 270 or 270X with a Phenom II don't be afraid of this upgrade. Also searched results databases in benches that allowed me and found that this upgrade scaled the same as it does with an I7 Haswell meaning that an I7 upgrading from a 480 to a 970 sees about the same 90% to 120% increase that my Phenom II did.

Sorry for the long post but when I searched for this seemed to be alot of confusion and no real results.

 

[Mousemonkey]

Don't bother with this Link guy. Nobody was saying anything about the Phenom cpu the OP had. I was stating that fact that you cannot determine that it is a cpu bottleneck if the GPU is not working at 100% percent. Period. End of story.

Actually...

When running Sli'd 8800GT's the CPU was @ 100% but the cards weren't but there was a definite bottle neck as the fps became a slideshow.

At the time I was running Rivatuner (now MSI Afterburner) and the trace showed the GPU's usage going up and down with two cards but a single card ran quite smoothly.

 

[scirishman76]

And none of those games will perform as good with an I7 and gtx 480 or 7850 as they will with My Phenom II and gtx 970 not even close. Seems like you keep missing that point.

 

[scirishman76]

Link K we determined that you don't know what bottleneck is yet you keep using the word. My co-worker has an I7 4770K (quite a bit more powerful than your I5) and a GtX570 (real close to the 7850) and overall would see about equal or slightly better gaming performance than your setup and we have been comparing in about 20 games now and he has not even come close to my performance in any of them. I don't know how to say it any more clearly.
Considering you and I had very similar systems before we upgraded and you spent more money and ended up up with way less performance stop trying to justify it plz. You clearly don't know what your talking about.

 

[scirishman76]

Considering you and I had very similar systems before we upgraded and you spent more money and ended up up with way less performance stop trying to justify it plz. You clearly don't know what your talking about.

No I ended up with a proper gaming rig because now all games actually run properly. Heck Max Payne 3 was unplayable on the Phenom II x4 CPU. I think you fudged your numbers to be honest.

My Phenom II played Max Payne 3 just fine even before I upgraded. Probably your system was just extremely poorly tuned

http://www.3dmark.com/search?_ga=1.35666848.1618838193.1423114766#/?mode=advanced&url=/proxycon/ajax/search/cpu/fs/P/917/500000?minScore=0&cpuName=AMD Phenom II X4 955&gpuName=gtx 970

My Firestrike was actually a bit low cause I didn't OC much and thats one of the most stressing benches around I would say my numbers look to be right on par. Also don't appriciate being called a liar

 

[scirishman76]

Here a some furturemark results comparing systems similar to ours. These are close to best case for you cause Futuremark uses regular CPU and CPU physics test in their gaming benches that actually give intel a bigger edge. Guess what you still got smoked.
FIRESTRIKE:
http://www.3dmark.com/search?_ga=1.35666848.1618838193.1423114766#/?mode=advanced&url=/proxycon/ajax/search/cpu/fs/P/917/500000?minScore=0&cpuName=AMD Phenom II X4 955&gpuName=gtx 970
http://www.3dmark.com/search?_ga=1.35666848.1618838193.1423114766#/?mode=advanced&url=/proxycon/ajax/search/cpugpu/fs/P/1613/764/500000?minScore=0&cpuName=Intel Core i5-4670K&gpuName=AMD Radeon HD 7850
SKYDIVER:
http://www.3dmark.com/search?_ga=1.35666848.1618838193.1423114766#/?mode=advanced&url=/proxycon/ajax/search/cpugpu/sd/P/917/982/17829?minScore=0&cpuName=AMD Phenom II X4 965&gpuName=NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
http://www.3dmark.com/search?_ga=1.35666848.1618838193.1423114766#/?mode=advanced&url=/proxycon/ajax/search/cpugpu/sd/P/1613/764/?minScore=0&cpuName=Intel Core i5-4670K&gpuName=AMD Radeon HD 7850
3DMARK11:
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/8846062
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/8320834

Here you go and How come I can't find any with you ahead HMMMMM. Search Unigine results also they are harder to link cause they are all mixed up but if you search you will see that you lose alot worse in all those benches.

 

[scirishman76]

Considering you and I had very similar systems before we upgraded and you spent more money and ended up up with way less performance stop trying to justify it plz. You clearly don't know what your talking about.

No I ended up with a proper gaming rig because now all games actually run properly. Heck Max Payne 3 was unplayable on the Phenom II x4 CPU. I think you fudged your numbers to be honest.

My Phenom II played Max Payne 3 just fine even before I upgraded. Probably your system was just extremely poorly tuned

http://www.3dmark.com/search?_ga=1.35666848.1618838193.1423114766#/?mode=advanced&url=/proxycon/ajax/search/cpu/fs/P/917/500000?minScore=0&cpuName=AMD Phenom II X4 955&gpuName=gtx 970

My Firestrike was actually a bit low cause I didn't OC much and thats one of the most stressing benches around I would say my numbers look to be right on par. Also don't appriciate being called a liar

Synthetics mean nothing. If I remember correctly Firestrike is a GPU stress test so the CPU is redundant. That's why AMD pushed firestrik numbers when they were releasing the AMD FX cpus which are slow per core and bad IPC. Also I remember when I ran 2x HD 7850s on my Phenom II CPU and the performance in most games was worse than a single card cause of massive CPU bottleneck. Metro 2033 scaled perfectly though which is the only game that did I remember.

You just make stuff up lol. Firestrike has a specific CPU test built in and the combined test is made to stress both. And with similar GPU's Intel crushes AMD but Ill continue saying what I have all along still not enough(or even close) to allow a 7850 to keep up with a 970.

 

[scirishman76]

Here you go and How come I can't find any with you ahead HMMMMM. Search Unigine results also they are harder to link cause they are all mixed up but if you search you will see that you lose alot worse in all those benches.

I don't know why you insist to use GPU stress tests that don't represent real world gameplay. If you want to synthetically benchmark the CPU then use something like Cinibench.

Those are all considered gaming benches not GPU stress test man you really do make up alot of nonsense. Furmark and MSI Komustor are GPU stress tests not 3dmark and unigine.

 

[scirishman76]

Keep in mind the Phenom II 955 and up all OC to about the same level and are basically the same CPU with different factory clocks. These CPU's pushing a GTX680 which is right on par with the one used in your link. Seems Tom's kinda contradicted themselves in the two reviews. I think they just got a faulty Phenom 2 in the review you linked.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-processor-frame-rate-performance,3427-5.html

 

[AlmightySofa]

Don't bother with this Link guy. Nobody was saying anything about the Phenom cpu the OP had. I was stating that fact that you cannot determine that it is a cpu bottleneck if the GPU is not working at 100% percent. Period. End of story.

Actually...

When running Sli'd 8800GT's the CPU was @ 100% but the cards weren't but there was a definite bottle neck as the fps became a slideshow.

At the time I was running Rivatuner (now MSI Afterburner) and the trace showed the GPU's usage going up and down with two cards but a single card ran quite smoothly.

Exactly, if cpu is at 100% and gpu is not, then that is a bottleneck. What I was trying to state is exactly that.

 

[Raiin]

Hmm, I wonder what a 970 and an E8400 might run like?

Don't bother with this Link guy. Nobody was saying anything about the Phenom cpu the OP had. I was stating that fact that you cannot determine that it is a cpu bottleneck if the GPU is not working at 100% percent. Period. End of story.

Actually...

When running Sli'd 8800GT's the CPU was @ 100% but the cards weren't but there was a definite bottle neck as the fps became a slideshow.

At the time I was running Rivatuner (now MSI Afterburner) and the trace showed the GPU's usage going up and down with two cards but a single card ran quite smoothly.

Exactly, if cpu is at 100% and gpu is not, then that is a bottleneck. What I was trying to state is exactly that.

by your definition of bottleneck then everything is fine, since even a x4 9750 can use a gtx 970 at 100%, but is still gets shitty as performance in most games, even if the GPu is at 100%.

 

[AlmightySofa]

Hmm, I wonder what a 970 and an E8400 might run like?

Don't bother with this Link guy. Nobody was saying anything about the Phenom cpu the OP had. I was stating that fact that you cannot determine that it is a cpu bottleneck if the GPU is not working at 100% percent. Period. End of story.

Actually...

When running Sli'd 8800GT's the CPU was @ 100% but the cards weren't but there was a definite bottle neck as the fps became a slideshow.

At the time I was running Rivatuner (now MSI Afterburner) and the trace showed the GPU's usage going up and down with two cards but a single card ran quite smoothly.

Exactly, if cpu is at 100% and gpu is not, then that is a bottleneck. What I was trying to state is exactly that.

by your definition of bottleneck then everything is fine, since even a x4 9750 can use a gtx 970 at 100%, but is still gets shitty as performance in most games, even if the GPu is at 100%.

Yes, that is not a bottleneck, a bottleneck has nothing to do with overall performance, a bottleneck is when one component limits the performance of another, THAT IS IT. period. Now is a x4 gonna perform worse than a higher end proc like a 4690k? Yes... well, cause the 4690k is a better cpu... For example, if you have a car with a small i4 and a car with a big v8, and you put high performance tires on it, of course the v8 is going to be faster than the i4, but it is not because the i4 is bottlenecking the high performane tires, it is simply because the v8 is faster... what does all this mean?


IF A CPU IS RUNNING AT 100% WHILE A GPU IS NOT ABLE TO, then that IS a bottleneck, if that is NOT the case, then it is NOT a bottleneck.

 

[scirishman76]

For whoever was asking about Dying Light and CPU usage its stays between 60 and 80% mostly with all 4 core seemingly working in unisen.

 

[Mousemonkey]

Hmm, I wonder what a 970 and an E8400 might run like?

Don't bother with this Link guy. Nobody was saying anything about the Phenom cpu the OP had. I was stating that fact that you cannot determine that it is a cpu bottleneck if the GPU is not working at 100% percent. Period. End of story.

Actually...

When running Sli'd 8800GT's the CPU was @ 100% but the cards weren't but there was a definite bottle neck as the fps became a slideshow.

At the time I was running Rivatuner (now MSI Afterburner) and the trace showed the GPU's usage going up and down with two cards but a single card ran quite smoothly.

Exactly, if cpu is at 100% and gpu is not, then that is a bottleneck. What I was trying to state is exactly that.

by your definition of bottleneck then everything is fine, since even a x4 9750 can use a gtx 970 at 100%, but is still gets shitty as performance in most games, even if the GPu is at 100%.

Yes, that is not a bottleneck, a bottleneck has nothing to do with overall performance, a bottleneck is when one component limits the performance of another, THAT IS IT. period. Now is a x4 gonna perform worse than a higher end proc like a 4690k? Yes... well, cause the 4690k is a better cpu... For example, if you have a car with a small i4 and a car with a big v8, and you put high performance tires on it, of course the v8 is going to be faster than the i4, but it is not because the i4 is bottlenecking the high performane tires, it is simply because the v8 is faster... what does all this mean?


IF A CPU IS RUNNING AT 100% WHILE A GPU IS NOT ABLE TO, then that IS a bottleneck, if that is NOT the case, then it is NOT a bottleneck.

OK no need to get upset! :lol:

"I was stating that fact that you cannot determine that it is a cpu bottleneck if the GPU is not working at 100% percent. Period. End of story. "

Is still incorrect because it is possible to determine that it is a CPU bottleneck BECAUSE the GPU is not working @ 100%

 

[AlmightySofa]

Hmm, I wonder what a 970 and an E8400 might run like?

Don't bother with this Link guy. Nobody was saying anything about the Phenom cpu the OP had. I was stating that fact that you cannot determine that it is a cpu bottleneck if the GPU is not working at 100% percent. Period. End of story.

Actually...

When running Sli'd 8800GT's the CPU was @ 100% but the cards weren't but there was a definite bottle neck as the fps became a slideshow.

At the time I was running Rivatuner (now MSI Afterburner) and the trace showed the GPU's usage going up and down with two cards but a single card ran quite smoothly.

Exactly, if cpu is at 100% and gpu is not, then that is a bottleneck. What I was trying to state is exactly that.

by your definition of bottleneck then everything is fine, since even a x4 9750 can use a gtx 970 at 100%, but is still gets shitty as performance in most games, even if the GPu is at 100%.

Yes, that is not a bottleneck, a bottleneck has nothing to do with overall performance, a bottleneck is when one component limits the performance of another, THAT IS IT. period. Now is a x4 gonna perform worse than a higher end proc like a 4690k? Yes... well, cause the 4690k is a better cpu... For example, if you have a car with a small i4 and a car with a big v8, and you put high performance tires on it, of course the v8 is going to be faster than the i4, but it is not because the i4 is bottlenecking the high performane tires, it is simply because the v8 is faster... what does all this mean?


IF A CPU IS RUNNING AT 100% WHILE A GPU IS NOT ABLE TO, then that IS a bottleneck, if that is NOT the case, then it is NOT a bottleneck.

OK no need to get upset! :lol:

"I was stating that fact that you cannot determine that it is a cpu bottleneck if the GPU is not working at 100% percent. Period. End of story. "

Is still incorrect because it is possible to determine that it is a CPU bottleneck BECAUSE the GPU is not working @ 100%

No upsetness over here lolol. Had to capitalize to emphasize it... but no even in that case. Again, it is only a bottleneck if the CPU is at 100% and the GPU is not.

If both are not at 100% then the task is simply not demanding the gpu to be working at 100%. For example, if you run Counter Strike Source on an i5 4960k and a gtx 980, neither are going to be at 100%. The term bottleneck refers to a situation when the max output of a component is the limiting factor of another component. So therefore, if a component is not outputting at it's maximum, then it cannot be considered a bottleneck. The difference you may see between two cpus is simply the performance difference between them. I guarantee you that if you cannot get a gpu to 100% load with a lower end cpu that is NOT working at 100%, then switching to a higher end cpu will make no difference because the lower end cpu was not even being fully utilized in the first place.

 

[Raiin]

Hmm, I wonder what a 970 and an E8400 might run like?

Don't bother with this Link guy. Nobody was saying anything about the Phenom cpu the OP had. I was stating that fact that you cannot determine that it is a cpu bottleneck if the GPU is not working at 100% percent. Period. End of story.

Actually...

When running Sli'd 8800GT's the CPU was @ 100% but the cards weren't but there was a definite bottle neck as the fps became a slideshow.

At the time I was running Rivatuner (now MSI Afterburner) and the trace showed the GPU's usage going up and down with two cards but a single card ran quite smoothly.

Exactly, if cpu is at 100% and gpu is not, then that is a bottleneck. What I was trying to state is exactly that.

by your definition of bottleneck then everything is fine, since even a x4 9750 can use a gtx 970 at 100%, but is still gets shitty as performance in most games, even if the GPu is at 100%.

Yes, that is not a bottleneck, a bottleneck has nothing to do with overall performance, a bottleneck is when one component limits the performance of another, THAT IS IT. period. Now is a x4 gonna perform worse than a higher end proc like a 4690k? Yes... well, cause the 4690k is a better cpu... For example, if you have a car with a small i4 and a car with a big v8, and you put high performance tires on it, of course the v8 is going to be faster than the i4, but it is not because the i4 is bottlenecking the high performane tires, it is simply because the v8 is faster... what does all this mean?


IF A CPU IS RUNNING AT 100% WHILE A GPU IS NOT ABLE TO, then that IS a bottleneck, if that is NOT the case, then it is NOT a bottleneck.

Hmm, I wonder what a 970 and an E8400 might run like?

Don't bother with this Link guy. Nobody was saying anything about the Phenom cpu the OP had. I was stating that fact that you cannot determine that it is a cpu bottleneck if the GPU is not working at 100% percent. Period. End of story.

Actually...

When running Sli'd 8800GT's the CPU was @ 100% but the cards weren't but there was a definite bottle neck as the fps became a slideshow.

At the time I was running Rivatuner (now MSI Afterburner) and the trace showed the GPU's usage going up and down with two cards but a single card ran quite smoothly.

Exactly, if cpu is at 100% and gpu is not, then that is a bottleneck. What I was trying to state is exactly that.

by your definition of bottleneck then everything is fine, since even a x4 9750 can use a gtx 970 at 100%, but is still gets shitty as performance in most games, even if the GPu is at 100%.

Yes, that is not a bottleneck, a bottleneck has nothing to do with overall performance, a bottleneck is when one component limits the performance of another, THAT IS IT. period. Now is a x4 gonna perform worse than a higher end proc like a 4690k? Yes... well, cause the 4690k is a better cpu... For example, if you have a car with a small i4 and a car with a big v8, and you put high performance tires on it, of course the v8 is going to be faster than the i4, but it is not because the i4 is bottlenecking the high performane tires, it is simply because the v8 is faster... what does all this mean?


IF A CPU IS RUNNING AT 100% WHILE A GPU IS NOT ABLE TO, then that IS a bottleneck, if that is NOT the case, then it is NOT a bottleneck.

OK no need to get upset! :lol:

"I was stating that fact that you cannot determine that it is a cpu bottleneck if the GPU is not working at 100% percent. Period. End of story. "

Is still incorrect because it is possible to determine that it is a CPU bottleneck BECAUSE the GPU is not working @ 100%

No upsetness over here lolol. Had to capitalize to emphasize it... but no even in that case. Again, it is only a bottleneck if the CPU is at 100% and the GPU is not.

If both are not at 100% then the task is simply not demanding the gpu to be working at 100%. For example, if you run Counter Strike Source on an i5 4960k and a gtx 980, neither are going to be at 100%. The term bottleneck refers to a situation when the max output of a component is the limiting factor of another component. So therefore, if a component is not outputting at it's maximum, then it cannot be considered a bottleneck. The difference you may see between two cpus is simply the performance difference between them. I guarantee you that if you cannot get a gpu to 100% load with a lower end cpu that is NOT working at 100%, then switching to a higher end cpu will make no difference because the lower end cpu was not even being fully utilized in the first place.

sigh, this thread is going nowhere, but here is some info

I tested a G3258 4.5ghz and a r9 270 against a i7 4790k using the same GPU on 10games.
they both scored within the margin of error in all 10 games using the r9 270, now i change the GPU to a r9 290 and the g3258 went to shit and got 20-40FPS lower on average in the same games against the i7 even tho the GPU usage was at 100%, when it was clearly a tie using a much lower GPU like a 270, now what does this tell you?

 

[AlmightySofa]

Good job. You found the performance difference between the pentium and the i5, with the i5 20-40 fps faster than the pentium. Bottleneck is when a component limits the abilities of another component. If r9 290 was at 100% during both then it obviously wasn't limited by neither lol. You just showed the i5 is faster lol. Get it through your head.

 

[Mousemonkey]

Hmm, I wonder what a 970 and an E8400 might run like?

Don't bother with this Link guy. Nobody was saying anything about the Phenom cpu the OP had. I was stating that fact that you cannot determine that it is a cpu bottleneck if the GPU is not working at 100% percent. Period. End of story.

Actually...

When running Sli'd 8800GT's the CPU was @ 100% but the cards weren't but there was a definite bottle neck as the fps became a slideshow.

At the time I was running Rivatuner (now MSI Afterburner) and the trace showed the GPU's usage going up and down with two cards but a single card ran quite smoothly.

Exactly, if cpu is at 100% and gpu is not, then that is a bottleneck. What I was trying to state is exactly that.

by your definition of bottleneck then everything is fine, since even a x4 9750 can use a gtx 970 at 100%, but is still gets shitty as performance in most games, even if the GPu is at 100%.

Yes, that is not a bottleneck, a bottleneck has nothing to do with overall performance, a bottleneck is when one component limits the performance of another, THAT IS IT. period. Now is a x4 gonna perform worse than a higher end proc like a 4690k? Yes... well, cause the 4690k is a better cpu... For example, if you have a car with a small i4 and a car with a big v8, and you put high performance tires on it, of course the v8 is going to be faster than the i4, but it is not because the i4 is bottlenecking the high performane tires, it is simply because the v8 is faster... what does all this mean?


IF A CPU IS RUNNING AT 100% WHILE A GPU IS NOT ABLE TO, then that IS a bottleneck, if that is NOT the case, then it is NOT a bottleneck.

Hmm, I wonder what a 970 and an E8400 might run like?

Don't bother with this Link guy. Nobody was saying anything about the Phenom cpu the OP had. I was stating that fact that you cannot determine that it is a cpu bottleneck if the GPU is not working at 100% percent. Period. End of story.

Actually...

When running Sli'd 8800GT's the CPU was @ 100% but the cards weren't but there was a definite bottle neck as the fps became a slideshow.

At the time I was running Rivatuner (now MSI Afterburner) and the trace showed the GPU's usage going up and down with two cards but a single card ran quite smoothly.

Exactly, if cpu is at 100% and gpu is not, then that is a bottleneck. What I was trying to state is exactly that.

by your definition of bottleneck then everything is fine, since even a x4 9750 can use a gtx 970 at 100%, but is still gets shitty as performance in most games, even if the GPu is at 100%.

Yes, that is not a bottleneck, a bottleneck has nothing to do with overall performance, a bottleneck is when one component limits the performance of another, THAT IS IT. period. Now is a x4 gonna perform worse than a higher end proc like a 4690k? Yes... well, cause the 4690k is a better cpu... For example, if you have a car with a small i4 and a car with a big v8, and you put high performance tires on it, of course the v8 is going to be faster than the i4, but it is not because the i4 is bottlenecking the high performane tires, it is simply because the v8 is faster... what does all this mean?


IF A CPU IS RUNNING AT 100% WHILE A GPU IS NOT ABLE TO, then that IS a bottleneck, if that is NOT the case, then it is NOT a bottleneck.

OK no need to get upset! :lol:

"I was stating that fact that you cannot determine that it is a cpu bottleneck if the GPU is not working at 100% percent. Period. End of story. "

Is still incorrect because it is possible to determine that it is a CPU bottleneck BECAUSE the GPU is not working @ 100%

No upsetness over here lolol. Had to capitalize to emphasize it... but no even in that case. Again, it is only a bottleneck if the CPU is at 100% and the GPU is not.

If both are not at 100% then the task is simply not demanding the gpu to be working at 100%. For example, if you run Counter Strike Source on an i5 4960k and a gtx 980, neither are going to be at 100%. The term bottleneck refers to a situation when the max output of a component is the limiting factor of another component. So therefore, if a component is not outputting at it's maximum, then it cannot be considered a bottleneck. The difference you may see between two cpus is simply the performance difference between them. I guarantee you that if you cannot get a gpu to 100% load with a lower end cpu that is NOT working at 100%, then switching to a higher end cpu will make no difference because the lower end cpu was not even being fully utilized in the first place.

sigh, this thread is going nowhere, but here is some info

I tested a G3258 4.5ghz and a r9 270 against a i7 4790k using the same GPU on 10games.
they both scored within the margin of error in all 10 games using the r9 270, now i change the GPU to a r9 290 and the g3258 went to shit and got 20-40FPS lower on average in the same games against the i7 even tho the GPU usage was at 100%, when it was clearly a tie using a much lower GPU like a 270, now what does this tell you?

I think that's because the point of the OP has been missed by those who would rather try and rain on the parade.

 

[scirishman76]

Yes my point was completely missed cause as usual people wanted to turn this into a my Intel is better. People my point was that for people who have phenom II cpu's and a similar gpu to my old gtx 480 don't be afraid to upgrade gpu I saw over a 100% increase on average.

 

[AlmightySofa]

I understand that and I was defending you because others such as Link want to insist your system has a cpu bottleneck.