| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 129495 | 2013-02-25 07:15:00 | Radeon HD 7770 vs GeForce GTX650Ti OC | daffyduckNZ (17019) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1329830 | 2013-02-26 03:10:00 | pricespy.co.nz There are various 2gb 7850's under $300. |
icow (15313) | ||
| 1329831 | 2013-02-26 03:31:00 | While it's an interesting discussion sol I fear we are veering off topic and not helping but I'll make 1 more attempt to explain why I disagree. The cpu in question can supply data fast enough in that graph to allow 200 fps ( near enough). If you pair it with a graphics card that can for example only manage 100 fps then that's what you'll get no matter whether you use the i5 or the 6300 or 6 core i7 because the graphics card has become the bottleneck, not the cpu. You won't get 100 fps with the i5 and 75 fps with the 6300 because both are more tha fast enough to handle 100 fps. The i5 will just be using a lower percentage of its potential. |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1329832 | 2013-02-26 04:16:00 | I'd pick a nVidia Geforce over a ATI Radeon any day. I've had far more luck and stability with nVidia cards, and they're just awesome. | goodiesguy (15316) | ||
| 1329833 | 2013-02-26 06:31:00 | I would avoid the powercolour cards. A few of my friends have had problems with them and they get bad reviews often on the internet. | jonovw (16835) | ||
| 1329834 | 2013-02-26 23:35:00 | While it's an interesting discussion sol I fear we are veering off topic and not helping but I'll make 1 more attempt to explain why I disagree. The cpu in question can supply data fast enough in that graph to allow 200 fps ( near enough). If you pair it with a graphics card that can for example only manage 100 fps then that's what you'll get no matter whether you use the i5 or the 6300 or 6 core i7 because the graphics card has become the bottleneck, not the cpu. You won't get 100 fps with the i5 and 75 fps with the 6300 because both are more tha fast enough to handle 100 fps. The i5 will just be using a lower percentage of its potential. What?..LOL.....FPS are created by a combo of CPU & GPU, the chart I showed takes the GPU out of the equation to show the difference in game speed with different CPU. Raise the quality, and resolution and we are not talking 200 FPS, the difference in CPU could mean playable frame or not, period....If you dont understand fine, but dont argue it, thats the fact Jake! |
SolMiester (139) | ||
| 1329835 | 2013-02-27 02:13:00 | No I'm sure of myself this time, The system will run at the framerate enabled by the slowest contributing piece of hardware. Be that GPU, CPU, or some other component. Yes your chart shows a comparison of CPU performance as independantly of graphics as possible, That doesn't mean there will be the same performance difference on a machine with lesser graphics. If you drop below the threshold where the CPU has to run at 100% to keep the graphics card working at 100% also then the graphics card becomes the bottleneck and CPU usage starts to drop below 100%. To make an extreme case if you run a game on an i7 with a entry level GPU and get 5-10 fps and then put the same graphics card in an AMD 6300 system you will still get 5-10 fps because the CPU is not limiting the framerate. See if this explains what I'm getting at. Say you have a game that in order to run at 60 FPS with everything cranked up requires a minimum of (randomly chosen) a 2 GHz core 2 Duo and a GTX560Ti - both running at 100% capacity and just managing not to bottleneck each other (purely theoretical one will always be the bottleneck in practice). If you then upgrade either component you will still get 60 fps - because the remaining hardware can't go any faster no matter what the system is capable of. If you upgrade the CPU to a 3Ghz version it'll run at 66% (approx) capacity because the graphics cards is still maxed at 100% to do the 60 fps - graphics card is the bottleneck. Similarly if you upgrade the Graphics card you will still be stuck at 60 fps because the old CPU is at 100% to manage 60 fps and can't go any faster just because you have a better graphics card - CPU has become the bottleneck. For any given game at a given set of settings it's either the Graphics card or the CPU that bottlenecks the system, not both together. (with RAM also sometimes playing a part) One or the other will always be the limiting factor. It's like a river (CPU) feeding a Dam (GPU) - either the river has more water available than required and the Dam stays full (graphics card bottleneck), or it doesn't and the dam starts to empty (CPU bottleneck). Yes both are involved and both effect the flow rate, but one is always more of a limiting factor than the other. Which all leads me back to my original points. 1. As long as the CPU he has can keep up with the maximum framerate possible with the graphics card he chooses at the resolution and settings he uses it will not bottleneck anything. 2. Even if it did bottleneck the system it still offers more than playable framerates, he already has it, and was asking about Graphics cards not CPUs Buy a 7850, it's the best performance at the price. Otherwise spend a bit more and get the equivalent Nvidia card or better if you don't like AMD. |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||