7970 CPU Bottleneck

[TheCanadianGamer16]

ok, so im looking to upgrade to a 7970 from my crossfire 7770's, and im wondering if my FX-6100 @4.2Ghz would bottleneck it at all, i can go with a 7950, but would rather get the top card if i can, i don't need to worry about my PSU, its a 600W 80+. any info would be great.

[iSuzak]

it won't, or just a little. Most of games are more Gpu demanding than cpu, you won't feel the bottleneck (if there is, depending of the game you're playing). So yeah you can go with a 7970 and overclock it you won't have any problems.

[TheCanadianGamer16]

it won't, or just a little. Most of games are more Gpu demanding than cpu, you won't feel the bottleneck (if there is, depending of the game you're playing). So yeah you can go with a 7970 and overclock it you won't have any problems.

ok, i went to a psu calculator and it said being 4.2Ghz had my cpu pull like 142W, will i have enough headroom with 600W 80+, here's my system in-case your wondering http://ca.pcpartpicker.com/p/SlnN

[That Norwegian Guy]

it won't, or just a little. Most of games are more Gpu demanding than cpu, you won't feel the bottleneck (if there is, depending of the game you're playing). So yeah you can go with a 7970 and overclock it you won't have any problems.

Out of relevant 'mainstream' or 'mainstream competitive' games relevant right now, only Hawken and Natural Selection 2 are extremely CPU-bound.

[TheCanadianGamer16]

it won't, or just a little. Most of games are more Gpu demanding than cpu, you won't feel the bottleneck (if there is, depending of the game you're playing). So yeah you can go with a 7970 and overclock it you won't have any problems.

well, im able to run hawken at 1920x1200 at ultra with advanced particles (stuff falling off things, destroying walls) at above 60fps (V-sync is on though) also FC3 at high at the same resolution, though it seems to use all 6 cores quite heavily?

[SnypeUXD]

There are CPUs that WILL give you better performance like pretty much any Ivy Bridge CPU WILL give you better performance per thread than a FX-6100. Don't argue because it's true. But you wouldn't see a huge boost from upgrading to anything this moment. If you went to a 3770k you probably would see anywhere from a 5-15 FPS improvement but its not that big of a deal. there are other games that depend a decent amount on your CPU though like BF3, Planetside 2, Crysis 3, games like that.

[TheCanadianGamer16]

There are CPUs that WILL give you better performance like pretty much any Ivy Bridge CPU WILL give you better performance per thread than a FX-6100. Don't argue because it's true. But you wouldn't see a huge boost from upgrading to anything this moment. If you went to a 3770k you probably would see anywhere from a 5-15 FPS improvement but its not that big of a deal. there are other games that depend a decent amount on your CPU though like BF3, Planetside 2, Crysis 3, games like that.

yeah, im not arguing, its just the architecture of the CPU, but i was on a budget when i first built m system, then prices dropped, i sold my APU, and bought the 6100, and now the 7770's aren't keeping up, so im upgrading again, but im not going intel until i really need to, il get an 8350 before i get a 3570K or 3770K

[HEXiT]

the 8350 is the only cpu that wont bottleneck a 7970 especially on lesser threaded games. the 6100 has very poor single and dual threaded performance and does choke when you get up to the 7850 on games like starcraft 2 and black ops. so unless you can get that 6100 up to 4.5 i would say upgrade the cpu as well.

[TheCanadianGamer16]

the 8350 is the only cpu that wont bottleneck a 7970 especially on lesser threaded games. the 6100 has very poor single and dual threaded performance and does choke when you get up to the 7850 on games like starcraft 2 and black ops. so unless you can get that 6100 up to 4.5 i would say upgrade the cpu as well.

i can get it easy stable at 4.6, even 4.8, but the heat is getting too much for my H100

[iSuzak]

The 6100 IS enough if it's just for gaming, there will surely have bottleneck on specific games but you will be able to play with really good framerates. At least for now. With that said you don't need to upgrate your cpu right now. it will do the job

[TheCanadianGamer16]

The 6100 IS enough if it's just for gaming, there will surely have bottleneck on specific games but you will be able to play with really good framerates. At least for now. With that said you don't need to upgrate your cpu right now. it will do the job

i know, im going to try and see if i can keep it cool at 4.4 just so it isn't as noticeable...

[IPCharger]

I have the 6100 and a GTX 670 and I can run pretty much any game at the highest setting (except Crysis 3).

[TheCanadianGamer16]

I have the 6100 and a GTX 670 and I can run pretty much any game at the highest setting (except Crysis 3).

im going amd cause of the bundle, also 3GB vs 2GB, and i just like it more and its the top end card, so yeah :P

[TechFan@ic]

I would personally recommend selling your FX 6100 and getting an FX 6300.

You can get 100$ for your CPU, add 30$ more and get the FX 6300.

The FX 6300 has significantly better single threaded performance, it consumes less power & overclocks better.

FX6300 performance & FX6100 performance.

http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/crysis-3-test-gpu/graficheskaya-chast.html

[TheCanadianGamer16]

I would personally recommend selling your FX 6100 and getting an FX 6300.

You can get 100$ for your CPU, add 30$ more and get the FX 6300.

The FX 6300 has significantly better single threaded performance, it consumes less power & overclocks better.

FX6300 performance & FX6100 performance.

http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/crysis-3-test-gpu/graficheskaya-chast.html

right now, being clocked at 4.6, it would be about a 2500K or 8150, so il stick with my 6100 for now, thanks though

[HEXiT]

the 8350 is the only cpu that wont bottleneck a 7970 especially on lesser threaded games. the 6100 has very poor single and dual threaded performance and does choke when you get up to the 7850 on games like starcraft 2 and black ops. so unless you can get that 6100 up to 4.5 i would say upgrade the cpu as well.

you can overclock it past that and you wont get much more performance. all chips have a performance curve mine for instance is a socket 1366 i7 stock 2.66 i get a nice performance per watt increase up to 3.6 ghz which gives me a 20% performance increase for a 30% oc but at 3.7 that performance hits its peak and starts leveling off and at 4.2 it drops off a cliff.

the problem your seeing is that performance per clock doesnt increase at the same rate so even with a 50% oc your still only likely to get between 25 and 30% cpu performance increase and 1s you get past a certain point you will add more speed and get even less return for your effort.. so find where your speed to power performance curve is and set your oc to the peak of it and thats the best your cpu can manage... this is why i run my cpu at 3.6 ghz instead of 4.2 like pretty much every overclocker did.

if you can i would say sell it and use the money towards an 8350 which has much better single and dual threaded performance. its a shame really a lot of amd owners got lulled into the same boat for the fx cpus and its only now after a serious revision is that series starting to deliver. it seems the early adopters have been stung pretty badly...

[TheCanadianGamer16]

the 8350 is the only cpu that wont bottleneck a 7970 especially on lesser threaded games. the 6100 has very poor single and dual threaded performance and does choke when you get up to the 7850 on games like starcraft 2 and black ops. so unless you can get that 6100 up to 4.5 i would say upgrade the cpu as well.

im not an early adopter, i got it in january.... honestly, it does the job fine, and anyways, most games i play use all 6 cores, so single threaded and dual threaded performance doesn't mean anything to me