Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › AMD/ATI › What AMD CPU won't bottleneck two 6970s?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What AMD CPU won't bottleneck two 6970s? - Page 3

post #21 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by amurph0 View Post
1100T is a waste of money. It's exactly the same as a 1090T only with the default clock set 100MHz higher and the price bumped up.

A 1090T will achieve the same overclock as an 1100T
You are right, but you can never theoritcally compare 2 CPU's without testing.

No 2 chips are ever created the same always remember that.

the 1100T may well get a higher stable OC.
Thoreal
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
intel i7 7700k MSI Z270 M5 MSI GTX 1080 Armour 16GB Corsair Vengeance 3000Mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial 750GB SSD Corsair H60 2013 Windows 10 Pro 64bit & Ubuntu 15.10 27" AOC 2560x1440 144Hz IPS 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G105 XFX 650W XXX Edition Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G400 
Audio
Zero 96Khz 24Bit DAC/ AMP / Denon AH-D7000 Head... 
  hide details  
Reply
Thoreal
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
intel i7 7700k MSI Z270 M5 MSI GTX 1080 Armour 16GB Corsair Vengeance 3000Mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial 750GB SSD Corsair H60 2013 Windows 10 Pro 64bit & Ubuntu 15.10 27" AOC 2560x1440 144Hz IPS 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G105 XFX 650W XXX Edition Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G400 
Audio
Zero 96Khz 24Bit DAC/ AMP / Denon AH-D7000 Head... 
  hide details  
Reply
post #22 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grief View Post
Thubans are fail in a gaming build in the first place.
Thuban, with 4 cores enabled is the same, clock for clock, as a Deneb.

I fail to see how a Thuban is a failure in a gaming build when they barely cost any more than Denebs, overclock much higher, and have two extra cores for the future / media work.

1055t for about $150 looks good for me. Much better than a 965BE for $145, I might add.
Gaming System 3.0
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 2500K Asus Z68-V Inno3D GTX 570 8GB G.Skill Ripjaw X 2133MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
3x Seagate Barracuda 500GB 7200.12 Asus DVD/RW Drive Windows 7 Ultimate 64-Bit BenQ G2411HD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G510 Corsair VX550 CoolerMaster 690 Advanced II NVidia Razer Deathadder V2 
Mouse Pad
Razer Goliathus Speed 
  hide details  
Reply
Gaming System 3.0
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 2500K Asus Z68-V Inno3D GTX 570 8GB G.Skill Ripjaw X 2133MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
3x Seagate Barracuda 500GB 7200.12 Asus DVD/RW Drive Windows 7 Ultimate 64-Bit BenQ G2411HD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G510 Corsair VX550 CoolerMaster 690 Advanced II NVidia Razer Deathadder V2 
Mouse Pad
Razer Goliathus Speed 
  hide details  
Reply
post #23 of 32
all I can say is.. mine doesnt bottleneck ^_^
Crossfire Rig
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II 1100t Asus Crosshair IV Formula XFX HD 6970 x2 in Crossfire Corsair Vengeance (4x4GB @ 1600Mhz) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
120GB Vertex 3 x2 in Raid 0 & Samsung SP F3 Sony DVD Rewriter Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung Syncmaster 22" & Samsung 32" LED Tv 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Zboard Corsair AX850w Corsair 600t Rapoo V3 
Mouse Pad
Steelseries cloth pad 
  hide details  
Reply
Crossfire Rig
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II 1100t Asus Crosshair IV Formula XFX HD 6970 x2 in Crossfire Corsair Vengeance (4x4GB @ 1600Mhz) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
120GB Vertex 3 x2 in Raid 0 & Samsung SP F3 Sony DVD Rewriter Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung Syncmaster 22" & Samsung 32" LED Tv 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Zboard Corsair AX850w Corsair 600t Rapoo V3 
Mouse Pad
Steelseries cloth pad 
  hide details  
Reply
post #24 of 32
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by smorg View Post
all I can say is.. mine doesnt bottleneck ^_^
I've decided to push my limits of waiting more and go for a 2500k.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 860 Lapped@4GHz/201x20/1.392VHTON/1.372VHTOFF ASrock extreme p55 Powercolour 6970s in CF@950C/1500M@1.175(stock V) Kingston HyperX T1 4GB 2133MHz 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 ultimate x64 ELETT221 @ 1920x1080 Microsoft curve Antec High Current Gamer 750w 
Mouse
iHome Fast Track Laser 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 860 Lapped@4GHz/201x20/1.392VHTON/1.372VHTOFF ASrock extreme p55 Powercolour 6970s in CF@950C/1500M@1.175(stock V) Kingston HyperX T1 4GB 2133MHz 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 ultimate x64 ELETT221 @ 1920x1080 Microsoft curve Antec High Current Gamer 750w 
Mouse
iHome Fast Track Laser 
  hide details  
Reply
post #25 of 32
The answer to this question is, and will always be: it depends on the application you run, and the settings you run it at.

The settings matter because they play a role in determining how fast the GPU is going to be able to run application. The lower the settings, the faster the GPU can run the game. The higher the FPS, the more likely it becomes that the CPU will be a limiting factor to performance, as it's being asked to do more work in a shorter timeframe.

Hence: Lower settings (AA, Res, etc) = Higher FPS = More work for CPU to do in less time = Higher chance of CPU becoming the limiting factor to performance.

The application matters because it is what determines the amount of work required of the CPU per frame rendered by the GPU, i.e. the level of cpu-dependency.

Some games require a lot of CPU work per frame, like GTAIV, Crysis, and BFBC2, all of which could start to exhibit BN'ing at FPS as low as 30 if you ran them with a really weak CPU.

However, most other games will happily cook along at 80+ fps without your needing all that much in the way of CPU power. Older games especially, since they were designed for slower CPU's.

It also depends on your definition of the word 'bottleneck'.

Technically, if a given game, at given settings, would run at 110FPS (average) on your GPU if you had unlimited CPU power, but it actually only runs at 105FPS with your current CPU, then your CPU IS bottlenecking (on that game, at those settings). If it was NOT, then your FPS would be 110FPS.

But ... most people wouldn't care about that scenario, so this is where one's own definition of the term comes into play.

Personally, if I was running 6970 crossfire, I wouldn't want to do so on any currently available AMD platform/chip. I mean, a 1090t at 4.0GHz is going to do perfectly fine and you'll certainly end up with the exact same 'max playable settings' as someone running a Sandy at 5.0GHz, BUT ... I would be bugged knowing that my cards are capable of FPS that I'm not receiving due to my CPU. But that's just me ... and I'm a little crazy
Edited by brettjv - 6/1/11 at 10:59am
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
xeon X5675 6-core @ 4.1ghz (1.29v, 20x205 +ht ) rampage iii extreme msi rx470 gaming X (the $159 budget king) 3 x 2gb corsair xms3 pc12800 (9-9-9-24-1T@1600MHz) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
hynix 250gb ssd (boot), 2tb deskstar (apps),1tb... plextor px-712sa - still the best optical drive... corsair h8o v2 aio W10 home 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
asus vw266h 25.5" (1920x1200) abs sl (enermax revolution) * single 70A rail 850w silverstone rv-03 XFi Titanium 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
xeon X5675 6-core @ 4.1ghz (1.29v, 20x205 +ht ) rampage iii extreme msi rx470 gaming X (the $159 budget king) 3 x 2gb corsair xms3 pc12800 (9-9-9-24-1T@1600MHz) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
hynix 250gb ssd (boot), 2tb deskstar (apps),1tb... plextor px-712sa - still the best optical drive... corsair h8o v2 aio W10 home 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
asus vw266h 25.5" (1920x1200) abs sl (enermax revolution) * single 70A rail 850w silverstone rv-03 XFi Titanium 
  hide details  
Reply
post #26 of 32
I will CF 6950 2GB by mid-aug, and then get a BD a month later

I will definitely post the before and after of that

But if I had to, I still think I'd get a 1090 over the 965, just because it should OC higher on both CPU and CPU-NB
Car replacement
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
pII x4 40 @ 3.72GHz NB @ 2.79GHz M4A89gtd PRO/USB3 Sapphire 6950 2GB nonRef 950/1520 @1.2V 4GB Gskill DDR3 CL7eco @1656 6-8-6-20-24-1T 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
WD Black 640GB SATA3 Windows 7 Ultimate BenQ 24" G2420HD 1920x1080 SeaSonic M12II 520W 
Case
TV stand on wheels + cardboard door 
  hide details  
Reply
Car replacement
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
pII x4 40 @ 3.72GHz NB @ 2.79GHz M4A89gtd PRO/USB3 Sapphire 6950 2GB nonRef 950/1520 @1.2V 4GB Gskill DDR3 CL7eco @1656 6-8-6-20-24-1T 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
WD Black 640GB SATA3 Windows 7 Ultimate BenQ 24" G2420HD 1920x1080 SeaSonic M12II 520W 
Case
TV stand on wheels + cardboard door 
  hide details  
Reply
post #27 of 32
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by brettjv View Post
The answer to this question is, and will always be: it depends on the application you run, and the settings you run it at.

The settings matter because they play a role in determining how fast the GPU is going to be able to run application. The lower the settings, the faster the GPU can run the game. The higher the FPS, the more likely it becomes that the CPU will be a limiting factor to performance, as it's being asked to do more work in a shorter timeframe.

Hence: Lower settings (AA, Res, etc) = Higher FPS = More work for CPU to do in less time = Higher chance of CPU becoming the limiting factor to performance.

The application matters because it is what determines the amount of work required of the CPU per frame rendered by the GPU, i.e. the level of cpu-dependency.

Some games require a lot of CPU work per frame, like GTAIV, Crysis, and BFBC2, all of which could start to exhibit BN'ing at FPS as low as 30 if you ran them with a really weak CPU.

However, most other games will happily cook along at 80+ fps without your needing all that much in the way of CPU power. Older games especially, since they were designed for slower CPU's.

It also depends on your definition of the word 'bottleneck'.

Technically, if a given game, at given settings, would run at 110FPS (average) on your GPU if you had unlimited CPU power, but it actually only runs at 105FPS with your current CPU, then your CPU IS bottlenecking (on that game, at those settings). If it was NOT, then your FPS would be 110FPS.

But ... most people wouldn't care about that scenario, so this is where one's own definition of the term comes into play.

Personally, if I was running 6970 crossfire, I wouldn't want to do so on any currently available AMD platform/chip. I mean, a 1090t at 4.0GHz is going to do perfectly fine and you'll certainly end up with the exact same 'max playable settings' as someone running a Sandy at 5.0GHz, BUT ... I would be bugged knowing that my cards are capable of FPS that I'm not receiving due to my CPU. But that's just me ... and I'm a little crazy
Yeah. I found out after this trade and newegg refunding my DOA motherboard I can have sandy bridge while only being outed 50 bucks and losing two gigs of RAM. I wanted this 920 but I've gotten 3 DOA MoBos from newegg and I'm just gonna go 2500k as it can OC nice on an h70 and can power my two cards no problem. As always, if I was able to +rep you I would!
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 860 Lapped@4GHz/201x20/1.392VHTON/1.372VHTOFF ASrock extreme p55 Powercolour 6970s in CF@950C/1500M@1.175(stock V) Kingston HyperX T1 4GB 2133MHz 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 ultimate x64 ELETT221 @ 1920x1080 Microsoft curve Antec High Current Gamer 750w 
Mouse
iHome Fast Track Laser 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 860 Lapped@4GHz/201x20/1.392VHTON/1.372VHTOFF ASrock extreme p55 Powercolour 6970s in CF@950C/1500M@1.175(stock V) Kingston HyperX T1 4GB 2133MHz 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 ultimate x64 ELETT221 @ 1920x1080 Microsoft curve Antec High Current Gamer 750w 
Mouse
iHome Fast Track Laser 
  hide details  
Reply
post #28 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by trulsrohk View Post
I are bottlenecked

and bulldozer delayed

That being said, x4 phenom II still works great and should be ok for crossfire 6970
holy bajesus two ares
Puny Power!
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 860 [4.0GHz @ 1.34v] Asus Maximus III Gene GTX 460 SE 12 GB GSkill ECO 1600 CL7 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Seagate Barracuda 1.5 TB, Intel 120GB 520 Windows 7 Ultimate 64 LG Flatron 22' & LG Flatron 21' Logitech G15 
PowerCaseMouse
Cougar CMX 750 NZXT Vulcan Microsoft Optical 
  hide details  
Reply
Puny Power!
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 860 [4.0GHz @ 1.34v] Asus Maximus III Gene GTX 460 SE 12 GB GSkill ECO 1600 CL7 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Seagate Barracuda 1.5 TB, Intel 120GB 520 Windows 7 Ultimate 64 LG Flatron 22' & LG Flatron 21' Logitech G15 
PowerCaseMouse
Cougar CMX 750 NZXT Vulcan Microsoft Optical 
  hide details  
Reply
post #29 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by amurph0 View Post
1100T is a waste of money. It's exactly the same as a 1090T only with the default clock set 100MHz higher and the price bumped up.

A 1090T will achieve the same overclock as an 1100T
It's most likely an increased CPU Multiplier, not a higher FSB. As such, there is more headroom for an OC, and if the FSB is the limiting factor of your OC, then the CPU with the higher Multiplier will clock higher, so it's not necessarily a waste. Lots of guys will opt for the lower Multiplier, though.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4790k @ 4.7GHz Asus Z97 Pro Gaming EVGA 1080 Ti FTW3 @ 2050 MHz 32GB G Skill Sniper DDR3-2133 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Intel 600p m.2 512GB Crucial M500 SSD 960GB Toshiba X300 HDD 3TB LG Blu Ray Burner 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Cooler Master Nepton 240m Windows 10 Pro Samsung 34" Curved Ultrawide (3440x1440) Samsung 22" Portrait (1080x1920) 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Poker II Cherry MX Brown, KBParadise V80 Cherry... EVGA G2 650W Cooler Master Silencio 652s Steelseries Sensei Wireless 
Mouse PadAudioAudio
Tekmat SIG 556 SMSL Q5 Pro DAC Bowers & Wilkins DM601 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4790k @ 4.7GHz Asus Z97 Pro Gaming EVGA 1080 Ti FTW3 @ 2050 MHz 32GB G Skill Sniper DDR3-2133 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Intel 600p m.2 512GB Crucial M500 SSD 960GB Toshiba X300 HDD 3TB LG Blu Ray Burner 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Cooler Master Nepton 240m Windows 10 Pro Samsung 34" Curved Ultrawide (3440x1440) Samsung 22" Portrait (1080x1920) 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Poker II Cherry MX Brown, KBParadise V80 Cherry... EVGA G2 650W Cooler Master Silencio 652s Steelseries Sensei Wireless 
Mouse PadAudioAudio
Tekmat SIG 556 SMSL Q5 Pro DAC Bowers & Wilkins DM601 
  hide details  
Reply
post #30 of 32
I have a 1055t @ 4.0Ghz completely stable on an H50. Max temp I've ever had is 43c in Prime95 where room temp was around 27c.

I run 2x 6950's in Crossfire and haven't yet seen a bottleneck.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD 1055t Asus Crosshair IV Formula 2x Asus 6950(70) 4GB G.Skill Trident 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
64GB Corsair Force + Random rotating things Asus DVD Burner Win 7 64-bit Asus 27" LED 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saitek Cyborg Cooler Master 1000w Bronze HAF X Logitech MX518 
Mouse Pad
Razer Pro|Pad 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD 1055t Asus Crosshair IV Formula 2x Asus 6950(70) 4GB G.Skill Trident 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
64GB Corsair Force + Random rotating things Asus DVD Burner Win 7 64-bit Asus 27" LED 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saitek Cyborg Cooler Master 1000w Bronze HAF X Logitech MX518 
Mouse Pad
Razer Pro|Pad 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD/ATI
Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › AMD/ATI › What AMD CPU won't bottleneck two 6970s?